We Said It Before, We’ll Say It Again

California Proposition 22 stated:

“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

Sounds clear and unequivocal to me, but apparently perversions of a sexual nature tend to affect the linguistic comprehension ability as well.

In November 2000 the measure was approved by a resounding majority of votes, 61.4%, a landslide no matter how you look at it.

I was involved in the debate over Prop 22 due in part to my participation in a debate/speech class at the local Junior College during the Fall 2000 semester.

California is often considered a Socialist state, but when you get down to serious issues, there is a significant and vocal Conservative, Classical Liberal, and Christian population which have and will be mobilized.

When the California Supreme Court swept away the true voice of the people in June by declaring the words of Prop 22 invalid, the fire was lit once again.

A ballot iniative has been submitted again, with the exact same wording as Prop 22 because it is strong and unquestionable, despite what the California Supreme Court claims.

Prop 8 has received an incredible level of support across the state, submitting nearly twice the number of signatures needed to quality for the November Ballot.

The presidential contenders have weighed in on this critical issue: Barak Hussein Obama is against it and for Homosexual Marriage, while John McCainis for Prop 8 and supports Real Marriage.

Those who would expand the government and silence the vote of the people filed a lawsuit to block this initiative, which was just denied.

JPennStar: What is your take on the pulse of the people regarding this initiative? Is it generating the buzz that existed for Prop 22?

Work hard. Pray, but don’t stop just with that. California needs to be pulled back to it’s mooring once again.

Mea Culpa: Villain Justice

His being on the 9th Circuit should have caused an irrevocable prejudice against him in me.

Cyrus may still be a bad guy, but he’s merely giving the devil his due in this case.

Apparently Judge Kozinski has been at the forefront of judicial legislation in favor of pornography in libraries and in the judicial offices. He was simply then caught in the net of his own creation, with his pants down.

Duh!?! And Other Interesting Stuff

First, the Duh!

Gay men get HIV, and they’re getting it faster. 12% faster, says a new CDC report.

And of course, to remind those hotheads whose brains have boiled out: HIV is the disease the US Government released in Africa to desimate the black population.

The rest of us know it’s transmitted by homosexual relations between men. And that it’s not bias or bigotry that caused it, but pride, willful ignorance, and the natural result of an unnatural act.

Now the Interesting Stuff

Investor’s Business Daily reports that an architect the the Canadian socialized health-care system, that one we hear is so incredible and worthy of emulation from the leftist socialist running for POTUS, has had a change of heart:

“We thought we could resolve the system’s problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it,” says (Claude) Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: “We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice.”

Counteracting the tales of woe and terror which are peppering the debate south of our northern border, the IBD tells a tale of truth which ought to give those considering the proposed socialized utopia pause:

Sick with ovarian cancer, Sylvia de Vires, an Ontario woman afflicted with a 13-inch, fluid-filled tumor weighing 40 pounds, was unable to get timely care in Canada. She crossed the American border to Pontiac, Mich., where a surgeon removed the tumor, estimating she could not have lived longer than a few weeks more.

Because she’s a woman, and it’s her ovaries, it’s a real tear-jerker.

No, the point is that the capitalistic, profit-based system provides better care to a greater number of people with two primary reasons:

1. The costs cause people to evaluate themselves whether they really need that procedure, freeing the system from a glut of unnecessary and frivolous procedures.
2. Those same costs entice more skilled labor and research and development into medical/technological advances, enhancing quality and quantity of available care.

Read more at IBD.

Republican ‘”Obama”, Only With History And Substance’ Jindal takes the hard line

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who has actually accomplished things in his life, was outraged over the Supreme Court’s liberal judges finding the death penalty is not applicable or valid for use in extreme cases of child rape, so he signed a bill allowing chemical castration in certain specific cases of rape and sexual abuse.

Sponsored by Democrat Senator Nick Gautreaux of Meaux, LA, arguments surrounding the bill were mostly on scope and effect, rather than validity and right.

It sounds like, unlike the members state houses in many of the states, the members of the Louisiana State House are a group who actually have backbones connected to their brains.

“Lie Back And Enjoy It”

The Lady Roxanne de Luca, contributing author at Haemet, has penned this gem regarding the recent Supreme Court decision finding it illegal to sentence those guilty of raping children to the death penalty:

(L)iberals have just written a Supreme Court opinion which is the jurisprudential equivalent of “If rape is inevitable, lie back and enjoy it.”

Well put Roxanne.

Here we have one more glaring reason why this election matters so very, very much.

Is Freedom A Resource? And Is It Renewable?

Like many Americans I am concerned with the progressive growth of the federal government. However, unlike many of my fellow Americans, I don’t blame any party, business or particular person; rather I blame the American individual. From our nation’s inception the government was designed with the bottom/up model - “a government for the people and by the people.” To better assist the people the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written to specifically limit the powers of the federal government. Clearly the Founders realized a society produces the most when it has the most freedom possible and the only body that could limit this freedom was the federal government; if you read The Federalist Papers you’ll see how concerned the first thirteen states were. I think it is reasonable to argue that ‘freedom’ can be classified as an untangle resource, like truth, love, morals, etc, because where one finds freedom in abundance one will find a prosperous nation; and you’ll notice if you look back into history mankind has traded freedom for things. This also leads me to ask what has been a big contributor to the growth of the federal government and how does one take back and renew freedom?

Now surveying American history I notice a very clear link between warfare and American freedoms and the general moral/ethical condition of the nation. Beginning with the War of Independence, Congress had a very hard time funding, organizing and keeping troop levels up to supply the war. After the providential victory, Congress ensured they would be better prepared for war by expanding its power to fund and supply. America next had smaller wars with, for example, Native Americans and Mexico but none of these would compare to the inevitable Civil War over slavery. The American Civil War took some 500,000 lives and witnessed a relatively large growth of the federal government to ensure the Union stayed together; and to pay for it the federal government instituted the income tax.

The link between warfare and statism can no better be seen than in the 20th century during WWI, the Great Depression, WWII, the Cold War, Korea/Vietnam. In just 100 years America has suffered all of these wars and even today in the 21st century we are at war. Each event marks a progressive growth of the federal government to answer the war which is needed. Honestly if America did not fight in WWI or WWII surely all of Europe would be under, at the very least, some form of Nazi government; and possibly Russia. Today we don’t regret these two great wars and for all that they cost in money and life we realize it was necessary because today American see the fruits of our grandparents’ sacrifices. Europe and Japan have more freedoms today because of America. During the Great Depression FDR began the “New Deal” which funded federal programs to employee Americans and slowly bring the nation out of the hard times. Prior to and after WWII the government continued its growth by increasing federally funded programs such as social security; all with taxes. Today with the War on Terror this freedom is continuing to be exported directly to Afghanistan and Iraq. I can’t argue with the fact that the people of these nations have more freedoms now and more hope; but logically at the cost to me, my fellow American and the soldiers’ life, which is a piece of freedom. Therefore, in a real sense American “freedom” like a resource has been exported to other nations throughout history.

It is very much necessary during times of hardship (economic or war) for the people of a society to come together and pool their resources for the benefit of each other. The early Christian Church and the Plymouth colony, for example, exercised a form of socialism to ensure everyone survived; so I understand the importance of this socio-economic structure. America also had to do this during its many hardships. However, the problem is the federal government did not relinquish its power once the hardship was over and the people were capable of providing for their needs. This fact of not demanding the freedoms back I blame on the American citizen and I also believe this is where the moral/ethical condition of America plays into the growth of the “nanny state.” As people have moved away from self government they have naturally turned to the State government because they are lazy and would rather trade their freedom for security; they like the idea of not having to work as hard to pay for their living. But like what Benjamin Franklin said:

For those who are willing to trade freedom for security deserve neither.

Only freedom guarantees security. Too bad the people who are complaining about the failure and shortcomings of all these State programs don’t understand this. Therefore, the answer to turning back the wheel of socialism in America and taking our freedoms back is with self-government - with limited federal government. It is my argument that the level of socialism is determined by the level sin, therefore, we’ll always have some level of socialism, but the goal is to have the least. We will clearly always need government to protect our border, make war and treaties, deal with issues between states, standardize things such as money and food quality, check monopolies, etc. This leads me to the final question: In order to renew the resource of freedom how is one to self-govern?

I think it is very reasonable to consider our founding Fathers as a good starting point to determine this because they are the ones who best understand the ideal of self government and freedom; they lived it.

• “ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” - John Adams

• “[July 4th] ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty.” - John Adams

• “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” –John Adams in a letter written to Abigail on the day the Declaration was approved by Congress October 11, 1798

•”I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen.” December 25, 1813 letter to Thomas Jefferson

•”Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell.” John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, April 19, 1817

•”God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” – Benjamin Franklin. Constitutional Convention of 1787

“ The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.” - Jefferson

“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.” - Jefferson

“I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.” - Jefferson

Quotes of our Father

It is quite clear that self-government entailed believing in a higher power, the God, our Father, Savior, Holy One and Christ, in order to know how we should conduct ourselves; even Jefferson and Franklin believed in a higher power. Also by the Constitution it is clear the Founders wanted the people to mediate the moral/ethical standards and not the State. I’m not about to begin the debate over whether or not one religion is superior to another (although I will declare my bias of believing the Holy Bible is superior to all other works) but I will say due to history we should attribute the success of America in regard to developing a society of freedom to Christianity; broadly speaking because all of Europe was influenced by it. In contrast let us look at the fruits of humanism, atheism, pantheism, etc. The horrific events resulting from Nazism and Communism under Hitler, Stalin and Mao come to mind. Furthermore, the bloody history of Egypt, Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire come to mind. I am not dealing in absolutes but statistics and in this context Christian influenced cultures have been the least violent; even though so many ignorant people believe religion is the source of war.

Freedom is indeed a resource and it is renewable by self-governing with preferably the word of God. Now I know would have a heart attack over this and begin foaming at the mouth because they confuse the Bible with bad experiences as a child with lukewarm Christians or a bad church. What I am stating is that God’s word is the source of self-government and not the imperfect people who attempt to live it out. Is there a problem with the Ten Commandments? Which ones and why? I have many questions and there are things of which I do not have an answer for but it is not reasonable to require oneself to be omniscient (about the Bible) before accepting what is being said. I realize this is the point, as it is always, where people are not willing to do what it takes for the sake of freedom. However, mark my words this is the only means to permanent freedom.

Wars, natural disasters, economic hardships are guaranteed to happen again and again and deplete our resource of freedom, as well as others, but what will determine the future prosperity or downfall will be whether or not Americans renew this resource by self-government because the only source of limitless freedom is to follow the Holy Bible; which doesn’t mean you have to be a Jew or Christian or go to Church. At the very least just following the instructions will enable self-government; the later part, being a Christian, enables one to have a deeper understanding and eternal life. It sounds unreasonable to many but it’s more than just another book because it speaks of a rich history of people who’ve gone through fundamentally the same as we have; it is very personal and applicable.

In conclusion, I’d like to say that I realize this is hardly a thorough dissertation of history, government, morality, religion, etc and there are many premises which I presuppose - such as the very definition of ‘freedom’ (Another post maybe). I honestly don’t have the time and patients to break it down because while we’re bickering over the premises while the structures of America are falling down around us. I’m a keen observer of history and its patterns, more than a philosopher, and history points in the direction of which I am arguing for; the specifics can be figured out as we go. I just wanted to introduce the concept that freedom is a resource, America has seen the exportation and depletion of this resource, and that it is possible to renew it by obeying the Holy Bible.

Great News! Marine Lt. Chissani Case Dismissed

Here’s the link: LINK

For some two years now Lt. Chessani, who had been accused for a massacre of Iraqi innocents, has been before military court. With only 4 defense marine attorneys and one million dollars (mostly provided by Michael Savage and his radio listeners the Savage Nation) against 65 NCIS (Naval Criminal Investigative Service) agents and 36 million tax payer dollars, Lt. Chessani’s case is almost over after the military judge dismisses case. There is only 72 hours left to appeal the decision; please pray that the case is over.

This man was wrongly accused by a reporter who believed Iraqi insurgent propaganda - a make believe massacre. This disinformation was propagated during 2006 (Congress election year) by John Murtha. LINK. Over and over John Murtha, a former marine, condemned these marines who had not yet had a trial - likely for political reasons.

CNN - The Situation Room (Wolf Blitzer)

BLITZER: There’s an investigation of what happened at Haditha. …you’ve suggested this week that there in effect was a massacre. …

MURTHA: Well there was. There’s no question about it…

BLITZER: The Marines say they’re still investigating. They don’t know what happened yet. The pentagon says the same thing. How do you know what happened?

MURTHA: Wolf, you read the “Time” magazine articles. There are pictures, there are photos. You don’t have to talk to the military about the proof.

Yet it is now clear that Murtha was wrong and so was the media; but you will NOT see one iota of apologies from either of them. Nor will you see this great news in the main stream media; no you will see homosexual marriage.

Something else very interesting is Lt. Chissani is a devote Christian, married, with six homeschooled children and it has been his case that has lasted longer than nine other marines. Also this case sets a precedence over all other military trail cases since Vietnam and possibly even beyond (as told by his Chief defense agent during an interview on Michael Savage’s radio broadcast).

In 72 hours The Chief defense attorney will be back on Michael’s show, tune in at KSTE.com durning the hours of 3pm pst and 6pm pst for updates or his site Savage Homepage. Additionally Savage has commited to opening an education fund for Chissani’s six children to help put them through school because they will not get those two years back. Although some may disagree with some of Savage’s politics and radio approach I believe it is reasonable to say God bless him and his listeners for helping this innocent man return to his family.

ADDED: Euphoric Reality has been posting an exhaustive series on the military court cases. Here’s the latest.

It Isn’t Porn: :Villain Lawyer Smears Judge

From the decrepit pages of the LA Times comes a story of prurient interest.

In an obscenity case trying whether the “art” films of a pornographer and fetishist qualify as criminally obscene (they feature explicitly sexual bestiality and other extremely demeaning and disgusting forms of sexual perversion), the defense attorney Cyrus Sanai has called into question the presiding judges ability to preside over the case due to potential conflict of interest.

Citing the judge’s own “website” as the source of conflict and stating that said website contained sexually explicit images and others of disgusting fetishism, Cyrus has started a potentially ruining fire storm against this judge.

However, as is often the case, the story presented to us by the media is not the whole story.

Cyrus is a bad guy.

But then again, in this enlightened post-modern era of moral relativism, he is for his own good serving his own absolute deity: himself. And who can gainsay that?

Cyrus is a significant (spoken in the statistical sense) part of the 99% of lawyers who give the rest of them a bad name. His actions speak very loudly indeed.

Reading his actions we see he has no concern for integrity or honesty or recognizing actual and glaring conflict of interest when it does not benefit him.

Read these long articles to see how he and the judge he is currently smearing have tangled before (nemesis?): The Kozinski Challenge

So they’ve tangled before, and with multiple judges up and down the west coast commenting how the Lawyer Sanai is an unscrupulous and conniving villain of the court room, tying up justice hand and foot, hounding judges into recusion, and generally making a joke of the judicial system of America (not that the 9th Circuit Court has not done a lot of that itself without his help), it is little wonder Cyrus Sanai is coming back after Kozinski.

Kozinski’s wife sets forth the facts of the case from her perspective.

And that video she mentions about the man running around the field in his underwear while a donkey chases him? It was an underwear ad that played on public TV not too many year ago. It was hilarious.

Really, Scott Glover ought to be slapped, then sucker punched. The LA Times And Sanai ought to be… well, I’ll leave that up to you.

And Kazinski ought to find a different job. What he did was assume the decency of people when in his position he ought to have known better than most how ugly people can be, even the “good” ones. He deployed a technologically complex system without sufficient effort to set up even the most basic of security or authentication. And the media, while not nearly the level of smut one would assume based on the opportunistic germ Mr. Glover’s description, indicate an interest in prurient humor beyond what we expect from a solemn justice of our legal system.

Yes, the expectations for judges are different. Alex may be a brilliant mind and may be the victim of bitter jealousy and malice and yes, evil. But we expect more, and to preserve the respect of the bench he has served, he ought to recognize his best course of action is to step down.

His wife has some good arguments to make in his defense:

Mr. Frey:

My name is Marcy Tiffany. I have been married to Alex Kozinski for over thirty years and we have raised three sons together. First, let me thank you for making the effort to discover the truth about what happened, and for giving me an opportunity to respond to the stories that have been circulating about Alex.

Turning to the facts of the matter, the LA Times story, authored by Scott Glover, is riddled with half-truths, gross mischaracterizations and outright lies…

Read on at Patterico’s Pontifications…

Judicial Activism

Judicial activism is expected, feared, and welcomed, by the same people at different times. The ACLU wants judicial activism most of the time because many of their cases rely on feelings and unjust rulings. It becomes an expectation as their philosophy of law changes from the classical to the “living document”. Because they expect it they fear those who they perceive may use it against them. And welcome it whenever it works their way. Read on…

Hat tip to Melinda on the Stand To Reason blog for these thoughts.

When Is Good Enough?

Social conservative Christian leaders meetings are being trumpeted by the media. The talking heads crowing that the current crop of Republican presidential contenders are not conservative enough on certain issues and that movers and shakers such as Dr. James Dobson are planning on voting for a third party or not at all if the eventual chosen nominee of either of the two main parties does not support traditional family values such as opposing abortion and support marriage for one man and one woman exclusively.

I agree with these leaders that we desperately need strong leadership, morals and values in our President, without them we really do not have a chance as America. It has been rightly noted that the next President may very well nominate several more Justices to the Supreme Court, and with the current balance of ideology in the Court, the next Justices will direct the Court firmly in either direction.

Things we know for sure:

Hillary will appoint Ginsburg’s and similar justices. Men and women whose moral compass is screwed wrong. This is not a question or a chance, it is a known and acknowledged fact. She is not ashamed to say it. These Justices will direct the court towards the globalization of our legal authority, the affirming and legalization of abortion, the normalization of homosexual “marriage”, and the legal protection of terrorists and the aiders, abettors, and sympathizers, among other things. The Justices will practice judicial activism and will deny the will of the people and their elected representatives and the original intent of the constitution. They will hasten the destruction of America in immorality, wickedness, and the blood of our children.

The front runners of the Republican race, Guiliani and Romney, would appoint justices similar to Scalia and Thomas, who believe in the rule of law and the strong original intent of the Constitution. As such, the will of the people and their elected representatives when codified in law, is the law to them and they would not change it or define it into oblivion. They would deny the constitutionality of Roe V Wade, they would uphold the rights and protections of American citizens and the entire world by denying the supposed “rights” of enemy combatants and terrorists. They would uphold the will of the people in their laws and constitutional amendments protecting marriage between one man and one woman.

I have serious disagreements with the social ideas of Guiliani and qualms about the religious view of Romney, but when the option is Hillary, I will throw my whole weight of support behind them for our Country’s sake.

Of the two, I support Romney right now. He has changed his mind on social issues, but in the right direction.

So what of Thompson, McCain, and the others? Thompson has not done much since he announced his candidacy, wowing few and wooing fewer. He is not consistent in cutting spending or on social issues. I’d support him just as heartily if he were to be the nominee, but I will not support him in the primary. McCain is not good for America. His highest aim is his own preeminence and he can only be trusted to to what is expedient for himself. A selfish man is not a man to whom one gives authority.

Huckabee is trying too hard to be all thing to all people, the funny man, the cool man, the smart man, the right man. He is all things to all, and nothing true. This is sad. I had hoped he’d be a good man for the job, but he would be polling and focus-grouping as much as the last President from Arkansas. And with a name like Huckabee, how can he be elected?

As for Paul, to (mis)quote a bastion of English (French?) literature: “I fart in (his) general direction”. There is neither honor, honesty, nor leadership potential in that man. He tickles the ears of his listeners with good ideas mixed with bad. With false libertarianism and fake posture. His listeners and adherents are as enthusiastic as they are deluded and I pity them, and have little patience for them.

Do I wish there were a strong Christian man with history and depth, with values and strength? Yes. It is a sad commentary on the state of the lazy and bloated, idle Christianity which defines our Country that we do not have a strong man leading the way, an obvious and unimpeachable choice, a shoo in who no one can say wrong about because He is right and good.

We do not have such a man, and to search elsewhere for one is to run the risk of finding ourselves lost in history as those who forsook the good hoping to find the impossible.

Babel

This sounds like a repeat of the Tower of Babel. On September 14, Nebraska Democratic State Senator Ernie Chambers filed a lawsuit against God.  The suit asks for a “permanent injunction ordering Defendant to cease certain harmful activities and the making of terroristic threats.” Chambers alleges that the harmful activities God could stop are “fearsome floods, egregious earthquakes, horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornados, pestilential plagues, ferocious famines, devastating droughts, genocidal wars, birth defects and the like.”

Chambers has represented Omaha, Nebraska, since 1970, and after nearly 40 years in office, it sounds like it’s time for the ancient Senator to move on. Although he probably does not expect the Defendant to respond (in a legal manner of speaking), he had better prepare to argue when when he actually does face the Defendant in court… the Defendant’s court.

 Read some here and here.