"Skip, you can't say that. You are an AGNOSTIC."
Yes, I amand the phrase may nbot have the same heartfelt meaning coming from me, as it would coming from someone who is a believing Christian (which leaves President Obama out, as Bill Maher and I agree). If God exists, and it is certainly possible He does, then I DO want God to "bless" America. The difference between me, and leftists such as Maher and teh peole of CNN (The Anti-Christian Network) is that they are INTOLERANT and INSECXURE. I am "comfortable in my own skin" (to use the owrds of the commercial. I am not THREATENED by mere exposure to the majority religion of the ocuntry. Nor am I threatened by the idea of my CHILDREN being "exposed" to religion (in school or elsewhere). In fact, my wife and I sent my two daughters to a CATHOLIC SCHOOL for a couple of years, before TLHEY insisted on going to ublic schol. It did not hurt them. In fact, I wish they had taken some of the "lessons" more to heart. Both of them, by the way, turned out at least as skeptical of religion as I am (my older duaghter turning ut too much like Bill Maher, with an actual intolerance for relifion, for my taste). I am a true SKEPTIC, in the mode oof the Roman philosopher Lucian: I am skeptical of EVERYTHING, including my6 won skepticism.
I think one of the msot telling moments recently abut the LEFT was that school principal who refused to let a group of young schoolchildren sing "God Blless the USA" on school grounds. Even more telling ere the leftists who HECKLED the children, when they sang the sog off of school grounds. Nope. It does NOT create a "theocracy" to let a group of schoolchildren sing "God Bless the USA" (or post the Ten Commandments) on school grounds. I know the MEANING of "theocracy". The left does not, or pretends not to because they are so INTOLERANT, and such HYPOCRITES.
"But, Skip, young children don't even know what they are singing, and they are being INDOCTRINATED in a religion that may be contrary to that of their parents." Give me a break. You leftists really are INTOLERANT BOOBS, aren't lyou? Children in this country do not have a "right' not to ever "encounter" the Christian religion. Unless the INTOLERANT LEFT has their way, children in this country ARE gong to encunter the Christian religin. Despite the ACLU (which really does want to BAN it, if only they could manage it), CHRISTIAMAS is swtill a NTAINAL HOLIDLAY (a RELITIOUS holiday) . in fact, although we have almsot succeeded in denying it, THANKSGIVING is a RELIGIUS hoiday. The idea that children in pubic schools should be "protected" from any "contact" with the Christian religin is simply absurd. I knew I was an agnostic from the age of 12 (I am notw almoast 65). I can't tell you how many times I have said the Pledge of Allegiance, INCLUDING "under God". Why should that bother m? If God, as an omnipotent being, exists, then we are certainly "under God'. If He doe nto exist, the phrase is simply MEANINGLESS. As I have said repeatedly in this blog, I have NO problem being present at a PRAYER. As a matter of COURTESY and TOLEANCE to the beliefs of others, which would be true if I were a guest where a MUSLIM prayer was said, I merely bow my head and DO NOT PRAY. As stated, n the USA you WILL encunter the Christian relgiion, and I see no reason for CHRISTIANS to be GUILTY about expressing their religion in public (when it is natural to do so, which is MUCH more often than leftists think it is natural to do so).
What prompted this article? My daughter in New York City called me today, and she (along with two friends of hers) SERENATED me with a verse of Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA." Now my daughter, as stated above, is not religious, but SHE had NO problem with that. And she KNOWS that she is not catering to MY religion (lack thereof--again, like President Obama). To her, it was jsut a PATRIOTIC song. She is absolutely right. Whether you believe in God, or do not believe in God, there is nothing wrong with the song as a patriotic song.
I regard this as an opportunity for a teaching moment: a chance to agin explain the difference between myself and INTOLERANT, anti-Christian leftist like Bill Maher. Remember when school children, and young children, SANG THE PRAISES OF OBAMA? Leftists generallyl had no problem with that. That is because leftists are generally the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth,on two legs or four. I would actualy have had no problem with "God bless Obama", as someting said in a lppublic school as a matter of respect for the OFFICE of the Presidency. Don't we, again, WANT God to "bless" and "guide" (good luck on that one, God) our President, if God exists? I certainly hope we want that.
But this idea that it is LESS OFFENSIVE to "praise Obama" (in a "scripted" way) than it is to "priase God is INSANE. Iknow. For leftist, AND for Obama himself, Obaqma IS God. But I don't want to be too critical of the religion of others here, and will let that lie. Did young children rally knw what they were singing when signing the praises of Obama? To some small degree, maybe they did. But mainly they did not. COLLEGE students don't even know what they are saying on public issues, or have you not listened to some of those interviews with "Occupy" "protesters?" I am serious here. Do children know MORE about what they are saing when they talk about "God" (relatively absract, remote, all-powerful figure) than they do talking aobut current politicla figures? I believe you are a FOOL if you do not realize the truth here: it is SAHAMEFUL to USE children to "promote" a current political figure, while you can hardly take the same positoin abut 'God". I know. The LEFT wants to make God "plitical", because the LEFT wants to run against HRISTIANS who really believe in their religion. Oh, I am perfectly aware that "Chistian" organizatins (religious right") have made their "religion" into an "issue" against the left. But have they not generally been reacting to the LEFT turning againt religion? in other owrds, is not the INTOLERANCE of te left towward religin not a legitimate issue? Of course it is. Sure, there is something wrong with "teacing" Areligon as the "truth" in a public shcool, but there is equally something wrong with BANNING the mere MENTION of God and relign in a ublic school. That was actualy the stated positin of the "skeptic" in the movie about the "Scopes Monkey Trial in 2925, titled "Inherit the Wind": "How woululd you feel if the BIBLE, and metninon of the Bible, was BANNED from public schols? " that was the questin that the "skeptic" (Spencer Tracy, plaing, I think, Clarence Darrow) asked of William Jennings Bryan (I think), the defender of the BAN on teacing evolution in the public shcools of Arkansas. The movvie was made at abut the time that we started down this indefensible road: BANNING almost any MENTION of religon in the public shcools, ecept in some "neutral" class on comparative religion.
No. I have no tolerance for this Bill Maher/CNN/leftist intolerance. Therefore, I make no apology at al for saying "God Bless the USA." It is not me who is the hypocrite here. It is the intolerant hypocrites on the left.
Anyway, I hope you had a happy 4th of July, even if yu are on the left and a hypocrite.
Oh. Maybe I will do an article someday about the absolute absurdity of the media suddenly makng a big "pont" aobut this NOT being 'Independence Day", because the actual "vote" for independence was on July 2 instead of July 4 (when the offical Declaratin of Independence" wa adopted. Oh, relevant to the article above is that the OFFICIAL Delcaratin of Independence credits the "rights" of the "people" as coming from "their Creator". Can we rEAD the Declaratin of Independence in shcool? It is no accident that Prfesident Obama TWIE deleted the wrods "by their Creator" when he "quoted" the Declaratin (a year or two ago, although I would not put it past him to have repreated the same "mistake" again TODAY.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checkng (bad eyesight).