Sharron Angle, another wacko who wants to run the country

NPR news, from Associated Press, reports that Sharron Angle [emphasized text mine]

... who has called for dissolving some federal agencies and shifting their powers to states, including the Department of Education, warned of growing dependency on Washington. "We know that once we have a majority that are dependent upon the government, we will lose our freedom," she said. "That's the next stage. Our Founders warned against this."

What???!!! How do we know this? Where does that come from?

The only people losing freedom would be us:

• She wants to completely prohibit abortion
• She wants to prevent gays from marrying
• She wants to eliminate Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance

How is this freedom? Sharron Angle believes this is more freedom, not less? I'd be really afraid that someone with such a ridiculous perspective on human life could actually make it through a primary election and be nominated for one of the highest offices in our country.

"The Lord shows me daily where he wants me to walk," she said.

Really? He talks to you? Did you get that on your Blackberry or does he appear in your bedroom with a PowerPoint presentation explaining his latest edicts? How can anyone take a person like this seriously?

... Angle said, "We're at war in this country, for our freedom, our culture, for our liberty, our Constitution."

Yes, we are at war in this country -- with insane, delusional, fairy-worshippers who want to make everyone else as insane as them. It just won't do if only they are insane. They have to force everyone else to accept their insanity, too. If she wins her Senate race, I don't give our civilization much chance of surviving past this century.

Tiger Woods and the idea of marriage

What does Tiger Woods have to do with religion and politics? Not much directly, but in the light of his recent "transgressions", as he put it, I think we can reflect on the self-righteousness of the anti-gay marriage fanatics. This just puts another nail in the coffin of marriage's exaulted postion as the religious fanatics see it.

Why do I say this? Because this incident continues to highlight the mental gymnastics the religious fanatics have to go through to justify their bigotry and hatred against homosexuals. The claim that heterosexual marriage is crucial to the survival of the family is silly. Clearly the biggest threat to families is the behavior and attitudes of those who committed to the relationship in the first place. If one or both parties doesn't feel that extra-marital activities is a breach of the marriage contract, then regardless of whether the parties are heterosexual or homosexual, the marriage will fail. Marriage is dependent upon a personal commitment between two partners to remain faithful to each other and to care for each other. When either party violates that trust, the marriage is threatened. It doesn't matter what sex the parties are, just the violation of trust.

When I see so many public figures breaking their marriage vows while expecting forgiveness, I have to laugh at the relgious fanatics who are restricting such a "sacred" institution as marriage to only "one man and one woman". Marriage is a contract, plain and simple. Whatever special significance the partners want to ascribe to it is up to them. The bottom line is that marriage conveys certain civil rights to the parties not available to unmarried couples. It is a violation of our constitution to deny equal rights to anyone. When the religious fanatics insist that marriage is sacred, I would tell them that's between them and their supreme being, but I am pretty sure that any disagreement between married partners in today's world will be settled by a court of law and not an imaginary fairy in the sky.

I'm guessing Tiger is more concerned about losing millions in a divorce settlement along with lost endorsements than he is in what the sky fairy thinks of his moral behavior.

This is a good reason to stop faith-based government services

The Washington Post reported today that the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington has threatened to pull out of running social service programs for the District if the DC Council goes ahead with a same-sex marriage law. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111116943.html

Apparently the District is giving the Catholic Church funds to support service programs it offers. So, now we have the Catholic Church dictating what the citizens of the District should believe and how they should live. This is what happens when the Government allows religion to become part of the Government, as in delivering services that should be provided by the secular government.

Can we be any more stupid than allowing a religious organization to dictate how our government should be run? This may sound innocent on the surface. All they are doing is providing social services funded by the District. However, they get to decide to whom to provide the services and whom gets to work for them. If you don't fit their model for beliefs and profession of faith, you don't get services or work. Is that how our tax dollars should be spent?

What next, soup kitchens only for those who profess a belief in their deity? Jobs only for Catholics?

So, if they oppose GLBT rights, shouldn't they dismiss the priests who have been living "alternative lifestyles". Surely they don't believe there are no gay priests? It's OK to be hypocritical if it's for Jesus? If you "don't ask, don't tell", then is it OK? Seriously, who are they fooling?

That's just the Catholic Church. Don't forget the many Protestant denominations, Islamic sects, Jewish sects, and thousands of other relgions. How does the Government decide which one's tenets should be accepted so as not to offend them in our civil laws and government? It can't be done. That's why we have separation of Church and State!

New Health Care Plan to restrict abortion. Religion sticking its nose in private matters..

The latest from Congress has the Health Care bill moving through the House with an amendment to prevent the use of funds to cover abortion services -- even when the woman is not using Government subsidies to pay for her insurance! If people believe abortion is against their religious views, that's fine. Don't have abortions. However, when you decide what my beliefs are for me, you've crossed the line.

Teach your own children about birth control, and they might not need abortions. This is going too far in controlling what people can do with their own bodies. A fertilized egg is not a person. It won't be a person for a long time. If you try to throw in the ridiculous belief that a "soul" is placed in the zygote by some fairy in the sky, you are really going beyond your beliefs and trampling my personal life and beliefs.

Now, for the spineless idiots elected as our leaders, how can you walk away from a core principle most were elected to support -- the respect for individual freedoms? The Health Care bill is bad enough, but now you have to gum it up with religious nonsense? It's amazing how people can take such a simple idea as universal health care and turn it into a universal goat rope! There are so many conditions, exceptions, and exclusions in the proposed plan that they make it even worse than what it is replacing. There is so much baggage attached that the cost of the program is going to skyrocket just to oversee all of the rules!

I believe that in today's world universal health care is an obligation any civilized society owes its citizens. We have moved beyond the premise that health care is an option. Just as we provide for the common defense, public education, and protection of free speech, we now much realize that universal health care is a necessary part of our society. Without adequate health care for all, we will have to deal with the many problems that result, draining our abilities to pursue the improvement of our lives and defend our freedoms.

At this point, it looks like the opponents of universal health care and health insurance reform are going to win. A bill with such a serious flaw as the abortion restrictions is not worth passing.