... We've been friends to the unions for a long time, but can we count on the manufacturing unions going forward? Our righteous press for green energy and energy efficiency has hurt the UMW and UAW types. However, they were never real democrats anyway, and opposed much of what the country needs. ...
Yes! Please! Keep telling voting union members what crap they are! How the Ds want to destroy their livelihoods!
The RW evangelicals are now saying they want power. 1.) That means banning evolution teaching, prayer in schools, 2.) more charters that are run by their churches, 3.) prayer in public places, 4.) suppression of non Christian beliefs. 5.) It also means marriage between church and state with laws actually based on the Bible. They also will put an end to the law that stops churches from being political. They also want to keep their tax exempt status and 6.) WANT federal money for their charitable programs.
1.) I travel in Evangelical and Creationist circles (so to speak). In the 5 or 6 decades I can remember, I have
never heard this proposed.
Literally. NEVER. Maybe by searching long enough one could find some one who advocates banning the teaching of evolution, but they are far distant from the Evangelical mainstream.
2.) There are charter schools run by Evangelical churches? If so, it would be news to me. Probably
annoymorous "anonymous" is ignorantly confusing private schools and charter schools. Many Evangelical churches do operate private schools; likewise Catholics, of course. So parents of students pay the local, state, and Federal taxes that fund public schools, and then pay private school tuition for their children's education.
[sarcasm] What horrible A-holes!
[/sarcasm] An, on average, graduates of private schools kick the academic-asses of public school graduates. What
annoymorous "anonymous" would probably find utterly horrifying is that parents' right to control the education of their children, to send them to private schools, was recognized by a US Supreme Court decision, Pierce vs. Society of Sisters, almost 100 years ago.
3.) I wonder if
annoymorous "anonymous" realizes that "prayer in public places" is a right recognized by the First Amendment "Free Exercise" clause. Within the traffic and noise laws that apply to everyone, I can stop on any random street corner and pray as loudly as I choose. Within the access and group reservations rules that apply to everyone, I can hold a church prayer meeting or picnic in any public park of my choosing. Within the rules that apply to every nonprofit, churches can rent and use a school auditorium on a Saturday or Sunday for church services. If
annoymorous "anonymous" doesn't like this, (s)he can get the US Constitution changed, or at least try.
4.) and
5.) Those claims are so
monumentally STOOOOOOOOOOO-pid that no further comment is necessary or merited.
6.) Personally, give our modern political context, I think religious groups that intertwine themselves financially with government are playing with fire, and not a few have gotten burned over the past decade or two (e.g. the Catholic adoption agency in MA that withdrew from a state-funded adoption program). It's sad, though, for two reasons: the various charities who participate in government-paid programs are careful to use that $$ for the charitable purpose(s), not for overtly religious activities; where government social programs have about a 75% overhead rate, religious charities doing humanitarian work typically have overhead rates under 30% (IOW, for the same budget, those religious charities deliver 3 times the benefits to people in need as do government agencies).
