America is two nations
68There are two cultural nations in America today
The cultural nation with the power now has banished prayer from our schools and would like to banish God from public life altogether. Through their control of the universities, the public school system and media, they have worked to diminish the authority of churches and weaken the foundation of human society—the family. This nation has replaced our national culture of virtue; civility; traditional morality; self-restraint; self-reliance; self-sacrifice; and patriotism with a culture of death; hedonism; instant gratification; pornography; dependence on the state; unfettered bureaucracy; and contempt for the good, the true and the beautiful of our existence on earth. We are sick.
I can remember when my family did not lock their doors at night; when we would leave the keys in the car when parked in the driveway; when profanity, nudity, "sex scenes" and violent gore were taboo in film; when history books taught that America was the greatest nation in the history of the earth—because it was true. Now, the United States has 50 times more sexually transmitted disease than other developed countries and 1500 times more than we had 50 years ago. This is a serious issue because 99.7% of cervical cancers in women are caused by STDs, which are caused primarily from promiscuity, which is promoted in film, television and advertising to the extreme that now even preteen girls are sexualized.
Promulgation of the false
The public schools teach our children that all cultures are equal—as if putting a bone through one's nose is equal to putting a man on the moon. Miss California is excoriated for her thoughts—consider that carefully; all of you who have read George Orwell's "1984." Jon Stewart can claim on television that Harry S. Truman was a war criminal—to the approval of the "mainstream media" and our universities—for dropping the bombs on Japan and claim Truman should have just dropped one in the ocean when anybody with the slightest education in history knows the Japanese planned to fight to the last man after the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and to conquer Japan would have cost a million lives at the least.
Our schools attempt to inculcate a phony self-esteem into the children but fail to teach them to perform basic arithmetic. They do not teach them how damned lucky they are to have been born here. God is banned from school but homosexual indoctrination by the third grade is in, as is condom distribution by middle school. The left claims abstinence is impossible—that would be big news to the billions of human beings who preceded us for whom it was not only possible but expected. Our schools teach relativism to our children—that there is no such thing as objective truth! Preposterous! Each of us depends on objective truth every time we board an aircraft.
Rampant Anti-Americanism
The schools teach that America has always been, and is, an oppressive society that causes much of the trouble in the world. That is news to the millions upon millions who come here on homemade rafts across shark-infested oceans; the tens of millions who were once behind the iron curtain; and the tens of millions of our ancestors who either died for our freedoms or built this nation into what it is or at least once was—the greatest nation in the history of the earth.
One would hope it is noticed that never have millions of our citizens tried to sneak across the border to Mexico to escape our horrible country and people do not leave here on rafts attempting to emigrate to Cuba or Venezuela—where the darlings of the left, Castro and Chavez hold absolute power. This is nothing new. While Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao were murdering 50,000,000 human beings, the Left in the United States routinely praised them, too. Because that is their plan for us: to create a Godless State in absolute control over each of us from cradle to grave including our income, property, families, speech and our very thoughts.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
marinealways24- You are spot on. More kids know the finalists for American Idol than know the name of our first President. Thank you for your fine analysis.
In th 1960's when Madeline Murray O'Hare decided that her oldest son should not have to endure sitting through a moment of silence at his school, she took it upon herself to explain to the principal that prayer should not be allowed in school since her son was as atheist. The principal, (God Bless Him), explained to her that her son was more than welcome to sit out in the hall during that time, but he could not just stop prayer because one student was against it. Her son was a new student at this school and that day was his first day there. His mother just so happened to hear the students praying as she walked her son to his classroom. MMO'H continued to argue with the principal that her rights as an atheist were being trod upon, and she would not stand for it! Well, after many minutes of debate, the principal finaly told her that if she didn't like what was going on in the school that she should just sue them. And the rest of course is history...Fighting all the way to the supreme court, MMO'H won her battle and christians everywhere had their prayer banned from schools. I think that it is time that Christians stand up and fight for what rightfully belong to them!!! Our rights are being infringed on also, and I for one am totally fed up with it!!! You can tell a christian he can't pray in public, but you cannot control what goes on inside his head. If christians took to the battle with as much zeal as one stupid atheist did, them imagine what we might be able to accomplish...By the way MMO'H was murdered and her sorry carcass buried in the desert!!!! Score one for the Lord!!! Loved your hub Jimmy it was one of your best...Johnnie
Johnnie- Fascinating story! I had not heard the details of how that came about before. I do that the ACLU has sued many little towns because they had a cross on the city seal for 100 years and the cities don't have the money to fight (legal fees).
I agree with everything you said. Thank you very much for saying them. And for the nice compliment.
Very well written, but many would object to what you write. Keep on writing for the love of God and He will reward you. You will not be popular for sure, but we fight for truth, not popularity. Eventually, the ways of God will overcome evil. God bless.
einron- Thank you very much. I appreciate your comments and I agree with you.
Jimmy, For more info on MMO'H read the book, America's Most Hated Woman: The Life and Gruesome Death of Madeline Murray O'Hare, very very interesting stuff...I think you will enjoy it... Johnnie
Johnnie- Thanks! I will order that one.
Thanks James! I always enjoy reading what's on your mind!
James, you are popular in my book and in my heart. Thanks.
I too enjoy what you write - it's honest, heartfelt and your own opinion which, I do believe, you are free to express.
John- You are welcome. My mind is full of Love!
Vladimir- You are welcome and thank you for the encouragement!
Nemingha- I am glad you enjoy it. And it is heartfelt. I do love my country because I am so grateful that I have been placed here to live my life. To quote Lou Gehrig—as he knew he was dying—I am the luckiest man in the world.
"when anybody with the slightest education in history knows the Japanese planned to fight to the last man after the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and to conquer Japan would have cost a million lives at the least."
I think you should learn your history better, and not rely on mainstream media and school textbooks for that. The main reason for A-bombs was to capture Japan faster than Russians, which were ready for that and quite capable of it at that time...
The Japanese were given an ultimatum before and after the Hiroshima bomb and they refused to "Unconditionally Surrender" both occasions.
We tried to get the Russians to attack Japan for quite a long time but Stalin would not do it. We wanted them to and we repeatedly asked them to.
I was not born yet so I was not there. But that is my understanding of what went down.
Now tell me that Americans won WWII, and we are done with history :D
Misha— My understanding it what we were the winners, yes. Thank you for your comment and for reading. I like your hubs, BTW.
Great Hub.
Misha wrote “Now tell me that Americans won WWII, and we are done with history :D”
For the first time ever I am siding with Misha :D
How many Americans, being ahead in many things are still so ignorant in world history, seeing only one side of the story. Russia lost 20 millions lives in WWII, pushed Nazis from the middle of Russia through Eastern Europe back to Germany. America entered the war field openly with volunteering soldiers, not with draft as other countries and it was done only at the end, when the outcome was clear and America actually just prevented socialistic Russia from conquering Europe, from spreading communistic ideas (haha, alas, it is happening any way and not only there).
America helped the war tremendously by weapons, but most of the fighting did European countries such as Russia, France, and Great Britain.
In other points I mostly agree with you, James, especially about school and schooling, but I have my own opinion. It is easy to blame the country, the government. What about a family? Real values come from families.
Also, if parents want their kids to pray in school, they can send them to Catholic, Lutheran, Jewish, etc schools. America is a country of freedom and choices, unlike any other country. People can educate themselves by self-education and mind training.
I agree with you that nobody is trying to escape from America to other countries and this is a hope.
Thank you for your article.
moonlake— Thank you!
ReuVera— You certainly know your history! Thank you for your well-thought-out commentary. Perhaps I misunderstood what Misha was saying when he said, "Tell me Americans won . . . " I assumed he was saying America was on the winning SIDE. If America didn't win then they lost. And they did not lose. If he was asking me if America won the war all by themselves then of course my answer would have been, "No."
I most certainly do not only see one side of the war. I have studied the war extensively. Russia suffered as no country ever has in that war. Russia's army certainly beat Hitler's army on the Eastern Front. And Russia did engage the Japanese in Manchuria, finally. There was never any plan in place for Russia to invade the Japanese mainland. The United States was to have that daunting task. The point is, the dropping of the bomb was accepted as absolutely necessary at the time and now the Hate-America crowd is trying to revise history to make Harry Truman a war criminal—that is what we were talking about.
The Americans were not a volunteer force, there was conscription in WWII. I have never heard anyone else express that when the Allies landed at D-Day on Normandy the war was over already. The United States, however easy they got off compared to Russia—who after all had to fight much of the war on their own land—sent over 3,000,000 soldiers to fight in Europe, where our country was hardly in any danger, and hundreds of thousands sacrificed their lives to help liberate Western Europe.
To say we sent them there to prevent Russia from dropping the Iron Curtain over Europe is not true, in my opinion. Stalin promised free elections, even in Eastern Europe after the war was over. We believed him—he lied. I do not believe we foresaw history developing as it did in Eastern Europe. In fact, I don't think we ever foresee history at all.
I agree with you totally that values need to come from family. But the family is being destroyed by the nanny state—or I should say the Daddy state. We could get into the marginalization of fathers in the US by family court but that would be a whole nother story.
You are welcome and thank you!
My friend Misha, you are wrong. You are quoting Soviet propaganda (I am sure by mistake). Japanese did not fight Soviets, but Americans. Fanatics Japanese fought in remote islands after war was long time over. It was not American news, but Czechoslovakian, when I lived there.
Another point is that this country was better when prayers were in the schools, weather others religion like it or not. It was that from the faundation of this country.
James, I like word "nanny socialists" better.
Vladimir— Thank you for your words. I agree with everything you said. "Nanny Socialists?" I never heard that expression but I like it!
Yep James, I guess I was not clear enough :) I definitely did not mean to say that America lost the war, and thanks Vera for clarifying my point - sometimes brevity is not that good you know :)
Still, I maintain my main point - I think A-bombs were dropped exclusively to win the race for Japan mainland against Stalin. At that time American leaders did understand the dangers of communism quite well, and rightly worried about Stalin capturing Japan - which he was just weeks away at that point.
I agree to Vera, American troops got involved in Europe only after the outcome of the war became clear, and saving as much of Europe as possible from capturing by communists became the prime goal. And no James, I don't think your leaders believed Stalin a tiny bit - and rightly so. :)
And no Vladimir, it is not Soviet propaganda, I am long freed myself of it, and I did devote some serious time to studying many sources about the WWII :)
Good Hub James! This is why I support you as I do I feel that almost everything you write about is write on target!! Keep standing on the promises that were given to us!!!!
Misha— You may be correct. I have long thought Stalin duped poor, old, sick FDR to the dismay of Churchill (who was in no position to affect the outcome more than marginally). I also think many in FDR's cabinet were communist sympathizers and therefore not only did not fear a Soviet takeover but might have welcomed it. After losing over 20 million people on the Eastern Front, I just can't wrap my arms around the idea that Stalin was about to invade the Japanese mainland but maybe he was.
So, does this mean the European Theatre would have been won even if we stayed at home? If so, FDR's hagios reputation may be very undeserved.
Thank you for continuing the stimulating conversation.
mdawson— I depend on you for encouragement. Thanks for providing it for me.
FDR was definitely gullible enough to allow Stalin to enlist him (and America) as an ally. Yet looks like he was pretty clear by the end of the WWII that communists are not the type of guys one wants to have in friends :)
Talking about 20 millions (or whatever the exact number is, nobody really knows), the most part of those lives were lost in 41-43, and by 45 Soviet Union recovered and re-adjusted pretty good, transforming itself into well-oiled war machine. This wiki article gives a decent description of what happened in Manchuria IMO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchurian_Strategic_
Just try to ponder about the size of the territory captured and the time it took to capture.
As for winning European theatre - it depends on how you define "win". If you define it strictly as defeating Germany - yes, there was no need for USA to join the land opeartions, Russians could have done it all by themselves at that point. More, they would have captured the whole Europe and it would have became communist - this is what American invasion prevented, and this is what America actually won I think :)
Misha— This is an interesting theory and news to me.
I think it is clear the Japs intended to fight to the last man and since roughly a quarter of a million souls were killed in Okinawa it is safe to say the death in Japan proper would have been horrendous had not the bomb dropped when it did. At the time, Japanese leaders said they surrendered because of the bomb and were unaware what was happening in Manchuria. I believe Truman made the right decision.
To simplify: we dropped the bomb and the war ended immediately. What would have happened if we had not is Monday-Morning Quarterbacking so we will never know.
As history is revised to make America look bad moreso each year (if one wonders why, take a look at the political beliefs of the tenured professors in our universities) these issues have gone from clear to turbid. Several of your points that surprised me are accurate, so thank you for illuminating my understanding of this history.
Thank you James, I am glad we found mutual understanding here :) Actually I can go that far as to say that Stalin lost this war, and Hitler won it and saved Europe (and may be whole Western Civilization) from becoming a communist camp. But this is a topic for a series of hubs I don't have enough guts to start yet :)
Now you're steppin' out!
LOL sorry my ESL, I kind for a life of me figure out what stepping out means in this context :)
I meant "can't" not "kind", sorry, just noticed it :)
As in steppin out of the line or like the day I was at a parade and the marching band came by with all the kids in lockstep, left right left right . . . except for one. This kid was marching right left right left! I heard a woman standing near me say, "Look! They are all out of step except my boy!"
I find it really wierd that you talk about people trying to create 'a godless state with absolute control over us..' cos it if you have a state that is associated with a single religion then that is much more controlling that a state where no particular belief is insitutionally 'better' than the others.
kephira— You are right that a theocracy, such as Iran, is very repressive. When I contemplate history, I see the Soviet Union and China (under Mao) as two of the most oppressive states ever created because they were godless. With an avowed atheism as the national religion people have no inherent value. They are simply matter—animals. Butcher them? Why not!? We butcher chickens!
In a state such as the United States was from 1776 until about 1964—nearly 200 years—with a balance between state power and a Judeo-Christian values a nation can be built that is the envy of the world and that millions upon millions of people will do anything to get here to live.
I am surprised how nonchalantly we have thrown it away but I do see how it happened and that is what I am trying to explain in the hopes that I can be another William Wilberforce.
Ah, OK, now I understand :)
Yep, this is definitely a non-conventional point of view, but if I ever get to writing about it you'll see where I come from. The basic thesis being that if Hitler did not strike USSR on June 22nd, Stalin was determined to hit Germany two weeks later, and then things would have been pretty much mirrored, with communists "liberating" all the Europe and Nothern Africa, with consequent moves down to capture the whole Africa, Middle East, and continental Asia...
So, by seemingly stupid assault on Russia Hitler won several years for himself, and in the process saved quite a few countries from becoming parts of communist tyranny. Sometimes the ways of destiny are soooo perverted...
keep telling it like it is ok
James I agree with a person's freedom to pray,silently at school,or any public place as well as in any religious institution ,seperate from the secular or civil government ,as in the seperation of church and state. the right of societies families right to choose what they want to teach their children but not to make a particular belief manditory,of the general public. That would take away personal freedom.I believe in freedom of choice in schools as well.But when it comes to forced civil or religious teaching ,Im opposed. Just look at all of the wars we've had in the name of religion as well as secular Greed for power in general.
I agree we need a balance between being prudes and sexual devients though.
You make a good point about having a bone through the nose lol !
However many people don't appreciate the fact that we are all dependent on each other and nature to survive. We are getting the wrong idea that we can destroy are natural soroundings with impunity. We need balance in everything.I agree with you about truman and the atom bomb,in fact to illistrate my point concerning the evironment,we poison our water supply with flouride claiming it is good for our health,namely our teeth.When in fact ,the only reason we do that is it is a toxin ,and it's cheaper to just dump it in our water than to store it somewhere all in one place,where if it could leech into the ground resulting in the government being sued.If,we go the conspiracy route you could say they are trying to kill us off slowly,for the purpose of population control as well as making money off the illness that will insue.They put flouride in rat poison.The Atom bomb would never have been built without flouride.
I also agree that our schools are being used to promalgate negative action's on the part of the children ,wihout reguard to the parents consent.
As for the schools teaching anti-Americanism,in America that is something I personally haven't experianced,but then I have no children and haven't been in a public school for at least 30 years.
As for reasons of immigrants comming to America
when I was 16 I met someone who came to America because she was told America was so rich the streets were paved with Gold.If I were told that I probably do the same.The reason for people coming to America is money as well as what they see as more personal freedom,which by now has been overated for a lack of courage on the part of our leadership.My response to people who say we are the most free people on earth,is If that's the case things must be getting pretty bad elsewhere from what I see it's like comparing a worse situation with one that is not as, bad. But can be vastly improved Like picking between the better of two spoiled fruit,you pick the one less bruised.
The differnce between a slave who knows he is and one that thinks he's free,it's an illusion.
I don't live in America, but I am aware that the country was not founded as a Christian state. Specifically, church and state were intended to be separate. That way, no one religious group should have the privilege of patronage and dispensation. All are treated equally. And I'm afraid that means that organised religious services and prayers have no place in a public school. So I have to disagree with the main premise of your hub.
someonewho knows— You are right: no coercion to pray but religious freedom of expression. And I agree with you school choice should be the American way.
I did not know flouride was so dangerous and I appreciate you bringing that to my attention. I will have to investigate that further.
We are all slaves to something or someone.
Thanks for your thoughtful commentary. And for reading.
The moral decline of society is inevitable when we allow free and unimpeded access to television and films showing depravity and violence. Personally I'm sad that children are no longer taught manners, and I would also like to see all children join in a daily meditation, not necessarily in the form of an act of worship, but just a moments reflection on the good things in their lives, and a brief reminder that there are others less fortunate who deserve our consideration.
I'm not in any way in favour of 'mind control' via the media, but I believe that in time, censorship can and must come back into fashion. The old saying 'monkey see, monkey do,' could not be more accurate.
Paraglider— Thank you for reading and commenting. You are correct that America was not founded as a Christian state and that religious services have no place in a public school.
The First Amendment declares that the United States Congress cannot establish a national religion—such as they had at that time in many European countries (in these countries they also persecuted members of minority denominations and the Founding Fathers wanted to preclude that). This did not mean that individual states could not have a state religion and in fact nine of the original thirteen states did.
The Christian Bible was read in Public Schools all over America for 300 years every day. It was thought that moral instruction was as important as learning the three Rs. The Supreme Court outlawed praying in school in 1962 and the Bible in 1963 over the vehement objections of the People (big P) and Congress, even though the First Amendment guarantees free expression of religion—and that would include teachers, school administrators and students because they are Americans.
What I am saying is, take a look at the society we have created since 1963 and tell me this change has been for the better. I mean, the proof is in the pudding. What has been the outcome, the results?
The "Separation of Church and State" is not in our Constitution at all. That comes from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote assuring a Pastor that the State would not interfere with Religion—not the otherway around as it was twisted to mean in about the 1940s by those Deceivers of men.
Ms. Severn— Are you named after a river perchance?
Thank you for reading and writing. Every word you wrote makes me nod me head in agreement with you. It is a terrible state of affairs.
James ;Do you think children should only go to schools that teach combined religious and secular classes ? Personally I don't have anything against any particular religion with the exception of one that exists for the purpose of control over peoples beliefs.Although ,the first organised schools on a large scale such as universities were probably started by a church ,I find it strange how that same church charged individuals with heresy when their secular activities seemed to point to opposite views of the offical viewpoint of the church.For example the Idea that the earth was the center of the universe.If the church was moraly pure I don't see they felt the need to persecute those who spoke what they saw as a contradiction.After all we should all have the freedom of speech.The fact that those in the church are intolerate when it came to their beliefs,only lends itself to show their insecurity in their own beliefs.Which reminds me of scientists with a financial interest in competing scientific theories for the very same funding. coinidence or conspiracy?I'm refering to the contraversy around cold fusion and hot fusion in scientific circles.It appears to me those who got trillions in funding for hot fusion were desperate to demonise the cold fusion idea for fear of being defunded as a result.In my mind there is no difference between the battle of ideas in religion as there is in science.Personal and financial security and control over both.
The truly sad thing is that while we were attempting to resist the Communists in the Cold War, we were gradually becoming the same thing they were: Godless, no family values, and authoritarian. It makes me realize that America "winning" the Cold War really hasn't made much of a difference for the world's values.
someonewhoknows— I think what was taught to American children in school before the 1960s was vastly superior, yes. The object was to teach them about the world, make them think and—this is the missing ingredient today—teach what they need to know to become good, upright citizens as adults such as Civics and why the American Experiment has been the best thing that ever happened to the human race politically. To deny or shun our Christian heritage is ridiculous and has proven to be dangerous.
The schools mold the beliefs of children now. They teach them the religion of Secular Humanism. Everyone has a worldview—even believing in nothing is a worldview. All children are taught a worldview—even teaching them to believe in nothing except Scientism is a worldview.
The Catholic Church was brutal on heretics but I don't think it was because of insecurity. It was because a learned, eloquent heretic allowed to spout off esoteric gnosticism that sounds highly intelligent to a simple peasant could endanger the souls of innumerable people and the Church felt responsible for those souls. Sort of like a Shepherd seeing a cunning wolf stalking his flock.
Abodos— Very sharp perceptions. Thank you for your comments. It is a shame that, with the commies gone, our incredible technologies and ingenuity—if only the country had the moral spine it had in 1959—could have made us the marvel of history.
Under God, was added to "One Nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" in the 50's. This is not "God's country". The founding fathers, as well as "The People" came to this country, mostly from England, to escape The curch being imposed upon us. They still belived that every one had a right to their religious beliefs. So do not impose your religion on others using the government. It has no place. Just as I will not impose mine. Do not allow our religions to be outlawed, but they have no place in our government.
The trouble is, James, that you are not differentiating between morality and religion. You say - "The Christian Bible was read in Public Schools all over America for 300 years every day. It was thought that moral instruction was as important as learning the three Rs." Moral instruction does not require, or stem from, the Christian Bible. I think children should be taught how to behave as responsible members of society. That does not require them to be told about a God who very probably does not exist.
Freedom writer— I am not trying to impose anything. The people who founded this nation came here (primarily) to worship God as Christians without state interference. So you are correct.
Paraglider— The basis for our laws and government is English Law and Judeo-Christian Values, both of which are derived from the Bible. We have examples of godless states and we can see the results, can't we? My hub page is about the results.
As far as God not existing. You will have to find that out for yourself.
James - I think the people who founded your nation went there not to worship God but to make a living for their families. What big guys write (for posterity) and what small guys do have never been in sync, from Homer's time onward.
Godless states? - the most Godfull state in the world is Saudi Arabia. Nice place? Oh, but that's a different God. Sorry I spoke ;)
Paraglider— You have a point there. I do not disagree with your second sentence. Your first sentence . . . the Pilgrims, the Puritans left hundreds of writings, diaries. But surely you are right that the pursuit of prosperity drove many, many people to America.
What I talking about here is a huge shift in the past 50 years caused by the Supreme Court in cahoots with Liberal Intelligentsia, academics and media types over and against the will of the People and their Representatives, and the effects on our culture and society as a result.
I am all for trying new ideas but what if your new ideas have damaging results?
Paraglider— I am not sorry you spoke at all. I respect your right to express whatever opinion you want.
But, of course, Saudi Arabia is not an example of the free exercise of religious freedom. It is religious oppression. I am not suggesteing chopping anybody's head off for converting to Islam and proclaiming themselves to avowed Atheists. At what period of the history of the United States did it remind you of modern day Saudi Arabia?
James What you say has the ring of truth to some extent,but we all have personal frailities even the leaders of the churches ,need I remind you of the Catholic churches pedifile scandal.
A True leader would never do that. Then there is the contraversy over priests getting married
What is it about marrage the Catholic church is afraid of? Could be they were afraid of an adulterous priest ,being caught and putting the churches leadership in danger?
I'm sure they still had brutel preachers and pastors,even in the 1950's,like nun's who hit their students on the back of their hands,namely their knuckles,for any percieved infraction of their rules.Human nature is alive and well,even in the 1800's
I have heard though that the secular schools did teach children better,but the student to teacher ratio was maybe ten to one,not double or triple that like we have now.Plus there were less distractions and the older children and their parents were probably helping to teach the younger ones.
Paraglider ,I have to disagree about your comment concerning religion ,some people did come here to escape religious persecution.
someonewhoknows— We all have personal frailties, that is a fact.
I think the pederasty in the Catholic Church was an enormous scandal that greatly damaged that Body. You may have noticed that it was extremely rare for any little girls to be victims. This is a deep subject but I'll just say that I see a link between the 1973 decision by the APA to declare—under intense pressure from activists—that it no longer considered homosexuality as a perversion and the pederastry among Priests.
The purpose of having an unmarried priesthood vowed to a life of celibacy is not fear of marriage. It is to dedicate one's life to God and His flock, denying one's self, giving up one's self for the Lord. Part of the idea is that an unmarried priest has no wife or children to look after and so may devote his entire days to caring for the Flock. He can accept reassignments or mission trips to dangerous places on a moment's notice without disrupting a family. All the people in his care become his family; men, women and children. It is not an easy path but it is a beautiful idea of a life of selfless service to mankind in my view. And I am not even a Catholic.
James, What you say may be true,all can say is I would like to know what percentage are pedifiles.Considering your comments here,what are your thoughts concerning a Cathoiic priest in the news recently who was photographed at a beach with a woman he is supposed to have been intimate with seeing as he took a vow to be celebate.I see your point about two priests who might be homosexuals ,but not when they allow their sexual activity to stray ,just as it might with a heterosexual.
This is a very well written Hub.
With that said, I disagree with just about everything you said. I would consider myself as leaning Left, but I certiainly am nothing like that picture you posted at the beginning of the Hub, nor do I share the views of what you describe as Left.
This country does have its problems, but it has nothing to do with taking God out of the picture.
The good thing about this country is that we are free; which means we are free to leave...so if you are this angry about the state of our nation...then you are free to go! No one will stop you.
someonewhoknows— I hadn't heard about that priest so I checked it out and what struck me was his contrition. All of us miss the mark. One big difference between people in the world today I see is that many who sin are contrite and confess and ask for forgiveness while others actually celebrate their sinfullness and stridently insist we applaud them as well.
Mr. Ferreira— You look completely different without your makeup. I'm just kidding. :-)
Seriously though, thanks for reading and for posting your observations. I appreciate the compliment. As far as leaving the country I am no Alec Baldwin. If I said I was leaving I would do it. I am a little angry at seeing my nation destroyed but my chief emotion is a deep abiding sadness. My page was created because I love this country and what we need is a modern day William Wilberforce.
James? Let me guess: you're a Republican, right?
May I remind you of how this country got started? Slaughter of native population, Transatlantic Slave Trade. Do those historic events ring a bell? What cultural, national virtues? It takes about as long for a nation to purge itself of the evil that accompanied its inception as America has existed to become a nation of "virtue," and some of the same "Christian" values you wish to see promulgated were held by the very perpetrators of the worst wrongs of this country. This STILL seems to be the case, since virtually everyone on the right who calls himself or herself a Christian is all for tortue and war and, domestically, letting the poor do for themselves, i.e., fall by the wayside.
This country was founded on being a godless state. STATE being the word. Religion has no place in our government. Religion has all the place in your home, your church, your writing, your speech and actions, but not in our government. If you want a church state, this is not the country for you. I agree that the media goes way too far in what it shows for my children, so I monitor them. We are an oppressive society when we allow our government to do evil things around the world, and our back yards. Freedom is not evil, freedom of religion is not evil, freedom from your religion is my inherent right as a citizen of this great country. Talk like that incites me. I hope that you do not mind that I have linked to your hub on the one that I have written.
i'm sorry, when you you say Godless state, that is not the same as saying, without religion.Anyone can believe in a Supreme intellegence without believing in religion.For example putting "In God we trust" on our money is, not and, does not represent any religion.
I didn't know who William Wilberforce was until I just looked him up, but who is to say that Obama will not play that role?
People on the right have not given him the opportunity yet. He has definitely made mistakes, and he has definitely not held up all of his promises, but its been less than half a year. With a little support from all around, he could do great things...just was Wilber did.
Nadia— I describe my political philosophy as Conservative so I do not have much choice but to be a Republican. I could never vote for a person who believed the wholesale slaughter of babies was acceptable.
I am 1/4 Cherokee. The Indians were treated terribly. Even though my post is not about Indian Affairs, I will note the Indians killed each other long before Europeans got here. The Noble Savage is a myth. And more of them were killed by disease Europeans carried over here but that was not intentional.
It is true that slavery used to exist in America—and every place on this planet, too. The Europeans got rid of slavery before anyone else. There has been slavery as long as there have been people. There is slavery today in Africa and Asia. But my topic is not slavery.
You must be a product of our public school system if you do not know of any virtues that ever existed in America. Your comments themselves prove my case. How about the fact that our Founding Fathers created a government that was a brand new idea at the time and has since been modeled the world over. How about the virtues that created the highest standard of living for its citizens in the history of the world and made America the wealthiest country by far in the history of the world. What about the virtues of America that made it the hope of the world as evidenced by the number of immigrants who get here any way they can. What country besides America has a history you would be more proud of?
Regarding war, surely the schools still teach that the four major wars of the 20th Century were declared by Democrats—Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and John Kennedy.
Republicans are not for torture. They dunked three guys heads into the water. Our enemy cut the heads off thousands of people with butcher knives. Not a peep from you about that? In WWII we had soldiers who murdered prisoners of war—I am sure they would have preferred a dunking. Did that make Democrats of that time "for murder?" (They ran the whole country at the time.)
Your denigration of Christians is baseless. I am sure you have heard of Charities, Hospitals and Universities? All invented by Christians. Today, Christians give more to feed, clothe and house people around the world—in money and time—than any other religion or government by a long, long way. Certainly dwarfing that of atheists.
Thank you for reading and for your comments.
Paper Moon— America was founding as a Godless State? On the contrary, our Declaration of Independence declares that any rights you or I have come from God—not from the State. The State is there to make sure I get my God-given rights—rights that are not the State's to give or take away. This is not my opinion—this is what it says in plain English. I don't have time to get into the Founders or the Federalist Papers. The Soviet Union was founded as a godless state.
No place for religion in our State? My goodness (another word derived from God by the way), where to begin. How about the thousands upon thousands of buildings constructed by our State all over this nation with religious quotes and writings engraved on them such as the Ten Commandments including nearly every major building in our nation's capital. Religion on our money, on virtually every state seal and state constitution; all of the chaplains employed by the State for official functions.
I never said I wanted a Church State—unless . . . are you saying that America was a Church State before 1962? No, you're not because you already said we were a godless state. My page is about the changes in our country regarding God since 1962 and the outcome.
The First Amendment of our Bill of Rights is this and I quote word for word: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" What does this mean to you? Read the words. The first word is the most important.
And sure, it's cool to link from your page. I do appreciate you reading and expressing your thoughts.
someonewhoknows— True, true. Thanks for the input.
Mr. Ferreira— It is possible. I hope Obama is the greatest President in history. That could only be a good thing for me and my loved ones. You have a positive outlook and you are hopeful. That is good. Thanks for expressing yourself on this Hub.
James
That is the one thing that really bugs me is having a Chaplin leading prayers in a government building. I Don't see why they need a chaplin in government.
I take that back,maybe they do need to pray for themselves . lol
Hi,
You have written a hub on offbeat topic. However is it not true that modern America became instrumental to many unnecessary wars like Vietnam and Iraq?
Thanks,
Jyoti Kothari
Well, I've worked in both Saudi and US and can honestly say that in both countries I'm very conscious of being 'dumbed down' as the trite phrase goes. In Saudi I'm much safer on the streets (far less personal crime) while in US I'm freer to speak my mind. To be honest, I think neither regime quite measures up to the Social Democracies of Western Europe, but such perspectives are bound to be personal.
Well I'll tell you paraglider I've lived in the unitedstates all my life and it is most definitely a paternalistic society for the most part.In the work place,definitely.In Government too.It seems the people are predisposed to go along to get along if they have enough money,benefits and priviligeges.Union's too,if they get what they want,not that they doing well now ,but in the recent past,before the car companies and many other businesses started to move their jobs over seas.Those who have enough ,or more than enough,with the most to lose in the form of taxes ,have disdain for the less fortunate,who they feel are responsable for their high taxes,when ,the fact is there are private buinesses that work with HUD-housing and urban development and privately owned prisons that make money as a result of people living in public housing,and those who go to private prisons as a result of collusion with some judges who knowingly put children under 18 who are first offenders in prison for up to a year or more,while privately making money by having an unethical financial interest in those same privately owned prisons.
someonewhoknows— Christian Chaplains go back to 742 and have been used in America by militias since 1607 and our government since its founding. Once again, this is an issue that the left falsely paints as "The Religious Right trying to force their values on us" when in reality it is another of the countless examples of the Left trying to dispense with age-old custom and tradition if it is reverent of God.
Paraglider— Thank you for your comments. Except for your last sentence, I agree with your sentiments.
Mr. Khothari— It would require another blog post to explain the wars in Vietnam and Iraq (I & II).
As I recall from the top of my head, without research (for the sake of time, though I will research this topic if you want me to), the war in Vietnam started between the French and the Vietcong. The French left a Communist North and a Democratic South during this period when "proxy wars" were common between Democratic Societies and Communist Societies. The Soviet Union saw it in their interest to promote the takeover of South Vietnam by North Vietnam by armed force and the United States, fearing the well known "domino effect" decided to aid the South in their pursuit to keep their freedom from totalitarianism.
Mr. Kothari— Wars in Iraq? The first war there under G.H.W. Bush after the invasion of Kawait is approved of in all quarters that I am aware of, so you presumably are referring to the most recent Iraq conflict. That one would take several hundred pages to explain. Is that what you would wish me to do? I am capable. I will say that history will not make its conclusions on this most recent war until far into the future.
someonewhoknows— Thank you for your wide-ranging commentary. I shall have to respond in bits. Should not success grant benefits? If I invent Microsoft Windows, for instance, and it benefits all mankind (or refrigeration, electricity, the cure for cancer, should I and my descendants not benefit personally?
someonewhoknows— A Paternalistic Society? I do not know the exact metaphysical reasons why the great events of history, the great scientific discoveries, the great advances in technology, the greatest music, literature, philosophy, laws, governments and religions have been put forth by men. Do you?
someonewhoknows— Unions? I am from Michigan my friend and therefore well disposed to tell you all about them to the extent that I shall create a future Hub just for that topic. For now, I will greatly simplify the concept for you thus: I open a grocery store in my village and I decide I need someone to sweep the floor for me to make things more pleasant for my customers. I post an ad and five people want the job. I judge their qualifications and decide on my best candidate. We agree on six dollars an hour and the person goes to work. Eventually, I have fifty floor sweepers and they decide to unionize and demand ten dollars an hour. In Michigan, they have the power to close my store until I acquiese to their demands (and I know that this will price my products higher than my competitors). In most other parts of the country and the world, I can replace them IF I figure that other folks desiring of work will do this particular work just as well as they do, with minimal training, for the six dollars an hour that I, as a business owner, have decided fits within my overhead for this task to be accomplished, to make my concern profitable and therefore a going concern benefiting the entire community with my services and the jobs I provide with my capital. If the unions gain ultimate power through the state and through the mafia these jobs will eventually evaporate in Michigan and go elsewhere—as they should.
James A Watkins thank you for a great hub ! America Is so far off the path and I hope by now this Is apparent to everybody . We have educators nowadays who have poisoned young minds particularly at the University level . And I say we were a nation founded on Christain principles , and a subset of liberals who really do not like god so they hide behind the constitution as they try to be righteous . They are cowards why do they not just tell the truth and say they can,t stand the Idea of a supreme being and are the center of their own universe , so If they do not like the Idea of a God they do not want anybody to have one . They say they do not want religion shoved down their throats and I agree.
However I say who Is trying to shove what down whose throat ?
tony0724— Thank you for reading and for your gracious comments. I am going to check out your hubs now that I am aware of you.
I agree with your sentiments completely. I do not know how the Radical Liberals get away with the "shoving your values down our throats" comments when Moderate Conservatives are defending something like say, marriage, which involves the changing of the meaning of a WORD in the English language that has a meaning going back at least 6000 years. You are right: Who is doing the shoving?
Great hub! I've been reading through your comments and those of your readers. I find the same general attitude from your Liberal readers that I usually find--great tolerance for anything not related in any way to Christianity, but no tolerance for Christians or their faith; absolute acceptance of anti-American views of history, but no tolerance for pro-American views of history; and an attitude that if you want to express Christian or pro-American views you are politically incorrect and need to keep your views to yourself or only express them in church or amongst fellow Conservatives.
You do a great job in keeping up with your readers and defending your views. Thanks!!
xyzwriter— You have made my day! I appreciate the compliments and I agree with everything you say. Those who constantly harp with that word "Tolerance" need to bust out their dictionaries!
And you are most welcome.
James ----My concern of having a chaplin practicing in a government building is if they are promoting a particular religion.I have no problem with it otherwise,since I believe we should revere God.
I'm not against anyone making money in a moral and legal manner.
The only reason we have unions in the first place is,a history of big corporations exploiting labor to the extreme in,the past.The union's have been exploited by certain political factions for their votes and the power the unions used to hold in this country,in sheer numbers prior to the loss of jobs in the last twenty to thirthy years when jobs have shipped elsewhere as a result of corporations way of fighting back. If we had price and wage controls ,which is, a paternalistic view ,though it be a Government view ,during Nixion's adminitration that is, contrary to an opposite paternalistic view to what the big corporations want to be able to do,pay extremely low wages. So,what you have is Government run by a group of corporations through their funding of political candidates willing to do their bidding.If that's not paternalistic ,I don't know what is?
There is no agreement and never has been as to a wage scale for a particular job across the board for all job skill levels and the fact that we have interest payments to make on loans.
someonewhoknows— You make solid points. I appreciate the conversation and your point of view. I misunderstood what you meant earlier when you said "paternalistic." I thought you were going off on a feminist tangent.
Of course any company would not want to overpay their employees, e.g., pay somebody $22 an hour to do something that an unemployed person could and would do just as well for $11. Henry Ford put people to work who were picking cotton out in the hot sun, cutting their hands to pieces. He gave them the best job they ever had. That is what caused the mass migration from the South to the North back in those days—that my family was involved in. But the power given to the unions in Michigan produced strikes every other year, closing down production, costing billions of dollars and left us vulnerable to Japanese car makers. Even worse were the workplace rules that made it impossible to fire anybody who slept on the job and to where everybody got the same pay no matter how hard they worked and human nature being what is is . . .
GM workers cost the company $75 an hour to do jobs one could do with a Kintergarden education. Not extremely low wages in my book. Not to mention lifetime pensions and benefits.
Like that what goes around comes around.It's "Karma"
As in "My Name Is Earl"
James - {{GM workers cost the company $75 an hour to do jobs one could do with a Kintergarden education. Not extremely low wages in my book. Not to mention lifetime pensions and benefits.}}
My understanding (from reading hubs by pgrundy et al) is that the $75/hr figure is the press's extrapolation of a special case, and that most GM workers do not approach that figure and do not have the security of continuous employment. But that, of course, would spoil your case ;)
James ---Come to think of it your hair lokks a like his. "just kidding"
I take it you don't believe that what we do doesn't back to us ,either good or bad.
someonewhoknows— Oh no, I do believe that it does.
Paraglider— I can't say I have the facts on that one. That number has been bandied about in the press as the reason GM is bankrupt. I'll have to research it.
i dont think religion should be premoted
Awhinina— OK. Thanks for chiming in. The Hub is about the effects of religion having been demoted—not promoted—in the 1960s. I respect your right to your own views.
James
If when you say there are two cultural nations in America today,do you mean political parties?If so I agree with you.If you mean people in general I'm not so sure I don't think all the people of either political party are all moral or religious,if that's what you mean.If you mean people in general what percentage do you think are moral or religious.
I just re-read this hub,and I find Johnnies so called Christian attitude about Madilin Muerry Ohair ,not at all a christian or moral attitude I must say. Quote"Score one for the lord" when speaking of her murder.If that is considered a true religious attitude I'm afraid he's not a good example or representative of any religion worth it's salt morally
I'm not sure what you mean be Anti-Americanism.You say the schools teach a liberal point of view,and that our society is oppressive.Is it your view is that the liberal's control the schools,and the rest of society is controlled by what is viewed by the liberals as the oppressive conservatives?
Almost None of us today have any knowledge of what it means to be one of the founding fathers.
Our political system may not be as bad as others around the world,but let me assure you ,we put many of those political leaders in charge of those very same dictatorships.In fact in we paid to keep them in power for our own selfish reasons.Don't fool yourself or any of us.
As for religious and civil matters
I think there should be a balance between a practicing a religious moral view and a public moral view of life where they can co-exist without one view overpowering the other.However I have reservations concerning restraint or tolerance on the part of either side.I think we should insist sepreration between the two viewpoints religious and civil matters We should revere intelligent design and moral views publicly while at the same time have religious and moral values in our private lives,if we desire it.It's my contention that we can have both,but I "religiously" believe that government and religion need to be be tolerant of each other's views and come to a mutually satisfying agreement as to how everyone in general should conduct themselves in public and private in general. Wheather they practice religion or not.We cannot force anyone to pray in public schools.Just as we can't force government employees to pray in public buildings You wouldn't propose a state religion to be forced on everyone.would you?Especially if it wasn't your religion.Not that it would make any difference to me,since I have a different view of how the people should govern themselves than you seem to. We seperate religion from government and government from religion is to keep them from being in direct conflict with each other.If goverment and religion were to agree on evertything there would be no difference between the two .which seems to be to your liking. It is my opinion that what people do in their private lives within their own families for the most part is their own business.I Just don't want them to push their personal views on me or anyone Unless there is reasonable cause to do so ,such as the breaking of a law that everyone agrees to through public interaction that someone needs some assistance for whatever reason .But I don't believe in force coming from a radical viewpoint See what I'm getting at?What happens at home should stay at home.What happens at work should stay at work.What happens in our personal life verses what happens in our public life.If that's what you mean by two America's
I say your wrong to think we have a right to interfere in the privacy of others,in thought or deed as long as we they don't break any moral or civil laws in the publics view We should challange a law when we disagree, wheather we are in the right or not.We may need moral guildance ,but collectively we are the ones that decide what we think is moral and what is not.God knows that we have to choose one way or another.I'm sure God wants us to follow the right path.But we have to do it voluntarily.Not be forced if it is going to be lasting on us,in our hearts and minds .If a law is broken we are challenged as to wheather it is a moral law,and hopeffully we made the law a moral law.There should be recourse if we think it is not,and correct the party that is at fault either way.
someonewhoknows— When I say two cultural nations I mean there is polarization between the half of the country that believes in abortion on demand under all possible circumstances as a means to escape responsibility for rampant promiscuity—which they also believe is harmless fun; homosexual marriage; unfettered pornography; the removal of any mention of God in public life despite 300 years of tradition and custom; multiculturalism; the removal of the influence of fathers in their children's lives; guarantee of equal outcomes for all people that they describe as "fairness" because that is a word that is hard to disagree with; use of the word "tolerance" in a deceitful way when they in fact practice open bigotry against Christians and/or Conservatives (extreme intolerance); political correctness; having all citizens dependent on the state; public funding of sacrilegious art; brainwashing children from K-12 and in college; and yes, Anti-Americanism . . . AND half the country is against every one of these things. While people are not completely monolithic, the majority of Americans line up on one side or the other on most of these issues. What I am saying is that the list the former group favors is a complete change from the values that made America a great nation in the first place—and that the latter group wants to defend—and these changes happened gradually over the past 50 first and what I am asking is this—when YOU look across the cultural landscape: has this experiment been a good idea?
What I mean by Anti-Americanism is the revision of our history books in the past 50 years—gradually—making America the villian instead of the hero in the story of the world.
I am not aware of anyone being forced to pray nor do I know anyone who thinks that should be the case. I have never proposed a state religion.
All the things I listed above right at the start ARE being forced down the throats of those who disagree—by people who falsely claim to be doing it so that no one's personal views are forced on anybody.
I have to agree there are government forces,as well as corporatations that fund lobbyists to make laws that promote a lot of what you talk about abortion pornography,gaming,single parent families etc...What gets me is The American civil liberties union.Although I agree with keepimg religious displays off of public property.I recall there being a case where a Muslim woman was told that she had to remove her religious head covering in order for her to recieve a drivers license or state ID.She went to court to appeal to a judge. I think the judge upheld the secretary of states decision to require her to do so.even though it was against her relgious tradition.I happen to agree with his decision.Now there are some religons out there like the Satinists.I don't know if they are recognised offically as a religion. But I recall a case where a satinist who was in a military prison I believe who was demanding the right to perform some kind of satanic religious practice.To my amasement it was granted by the military courts.
When you say the liberals in government are practicing extreme intolerance or bigotry towards christian conservatives,Do you mean people like George W. Bush .I hope not !
I'm with you on them when it comes funding There are sharpsters on the liberal side that cheat when it comes to federal funding of public housing and other types of porkbarrell funding.
Unfortunately the conservatives had done the same when it xomes to their special interest lobbyists.like Halliburton and the oil companies and the banks and the drug companies ,should I continue? I think you get the picture.Both sides are ro blame.We might as well have one party the way things have been done by both liberals and so called conservatives.Who claimed to be the christian party.The Democrats claimed the same thing ,but it was the black christians churches that they fooled.into voting for them.The experiment has been hijacked by the Bankers.
someonewhoknows— You make excellent points in your commentary. And I am not opposed to anything you said in this post with the exception of religious displays on public property and I will explain that. It ties into your comment about the ACLU—the one organization that raises my hackles like no other. If a small town in America has had a cross on their city seal since 1822 or a plaque of the Ten Commandments for 100 years in the courthouse or has had a nativity scene on the village green since 1650, I see nothing wrong with it at all—and my main point is that nobody else objected either until Radical Liberals began their Crusade to replace Christianity with Secular Humanism (a state religion—just a godless one). It is part of the cultural history of that place. Who does it really hurt? No one. It is like complaining about a plaque about the Koran in Saudi Arabia. That is their cultural heritage. If I moved there I should respect that. The ACLU, with billions of dollars behind them, will sue this small town and the small town does not have the money to fight the case so they capitulate. It is financial intimidation and in most cases one offended person out of population of 1000 ruins the cultural heritage of 999. And why? What exactly is so offensive about a baby in a manger?
I have to agree with you! It would or should be covered by something called Grand fathering in. Where any new law having to do with property that was built before that law was passed is exempt due to an unreasonable financial burden placed on the owners who would have to spend an outragious amount to remove it.May be even the destruction of an Historic building.
I t would be no different than seeing antiquites in the old world.A tourest attraction. lol
I personally believe in separation of church and state. I want the state to leave my personal religious views alone. I do not believe that the state is an arm of God, but rather that the leaders of the early church, Paul, Peter, John, Andrew, etc, were the arm of God. In fact, Jesus said that his kingdom was not of this world. That is a lesson for all of us. Merging church and state is a sure recipe for abuse and holy war.
bgamall— I agree that we don't want a theocracy.
My actual topic was the removal (not the merging) of religion from the public square over the past 50 years and how it is being replaced by Secular Humanism—which is a religion itself.
I appreciate your comments and the Kingdom is not of this world, that's a fact. Thanks for reading and posting your thoughts on it.
Come on now "James" secular Humanism ,a religion? As poposed to religious Humanism?Humanism is no religion no more than communism or socialism.I hope your not claiming they are all Humanists.Definitely not if they are "run" by Dictators.What about Monarchists,I know they can be Humanists,but they can also be dictators.
bgsmall My view on Jesus Christ statement "My Kingdom is not of this world" It's my belief that he included his Aposiles as well as the Churches in general.Remember when at the last supper he made the statement to his Aposiles,knowing that he would be disowned by them at the time of his crusifixion and denied by the Aposile 'Peter" three times.That is proof that his Kingdom is not of this earth! Not that they later died in his name.They left this earth in defense of their belief in his kingdom.
Well yes. A religion as defined by Webster's dictionary is set of beliefs and a worldview that is agreed upon by a large number of people. I know some of them describe it as a philosophical system but it meets the definition.
JAMES
All I have to say is Where is my publistist !
I want to change the definition of religion !
There you go again!
Too many comments to read in one sitting! Great article, really sheds some light on the contrast of a nation with God versus a nation with no god at all.First I wanted to comment on Johnnie Hennessee's comment. I like the history lesson, but I reared back in revulsion: "By the way MMO'H was murdered and her sorry carcass buried in the desert!!!! Score one for the Lord!!!" As awful as her crime may be, murder is NOT Christian behavior, and something we would expect from radicals like Muslim terrorists. We need to always take the battle to the battlefield or we lose our legitimacy.
I love the de-comparison of tribal culture vs sending men to the moon, terrific. It's the same for the obsession over native American culture. I have seen this bumper sticker: Love, Peace and Sharing - the Indian Way. I want one that says, Rape, Scalping and War - the Indian Way. My point is that every culture has its good points and bad points, but the more civilized ones are usually the more advanced ones and its values will align more with the Bible than with a general tribal culture.
Thanks for the statistics, very sobering. I too was taught homosexuality instead of the Bible, and evolution instead of Creationism. My question to you is this: I have always maintained that the very concept of school in America was started by Christians. Now the state runs it and liberals have shoved God aside in favor of something "nuetral" like sex education and love your self principles. When did it go wrong?
Alexander Mark— Thank you for your comments, which are excellently insightful. Christians did invent schools—and the modern university—but things went wrong via the Supreme Court.
Little by little, starting in the 1950s, the Supreme Court has taken away the rights of local people to run their community schools according to local standards, and made every issue a Federal issue. The most obvious examples are the decisions in 1962 and 1963 to outlaw the Bible and Prayer in public schools. These decisions were extremely unpopular but the will of Radical Liberals was forced on the citizenry against its will. So much for Government of the People, by the People.
I appreciate you for reading and commenting. ciao
I'm starting to understand the dangers of the nanny state James, thanks!
Alexander Mark— You are welcome! And thank you for participating in the commentary.
And yet... there is hope. A remnant of sorts.
R Burow— Yes, a remnant of Hope. Good way of putting it. Thanks for taking the time to read and leave a comment.
It's difficult to answer everything said in such long thought provoking thread. Nevertheless, I'd like to have this point out of the way: I don't understand that you could agree with Johnnie when he rejoiced in such macabre way about the murder of a woman.
This is the United States of America, James, where diversity is the norm. I would like to know what prayers you would like to see recited in schools where you have kids coming from so many different Christian faiths: Protestant, Evangelist, Catholic, Orthodox, and also from non-Cristian faiths: Animism, Islam of radically diverse views, Judaism, Buddhism of different schools, Shintoism, not to mention atheists and what not.
I personally would be delighted to have our kids praying every day, but I love freedom for myself and others. How are you going to create a prayer so universal that satisfies them all? I suggest that we create one in this hub and it's not going to be easy. Imagine Buddhists, for instance. They don't even talk of a Creator God. They do have a profound, deep sense of what we call the divine but they don't accept the idea that things ever started. It's a subtle point to grasp but I'm sure that you would be more than pleased if society upheld Buddhist moral values ... and strictly speaking they are Godless. How to promote a prayer that takes their faith into account, in schools who have Buddhist kids like I know my County has, for instance?
There are many subjects here. About war. Jesus never promoted war, never tried to participate in politics, he refused to do it. Knowing the injustices of the Roman Empire, instead of promoting a war of liberation he just said: "Give to Cesar what belongs to Cesar".
I want a complete separation of Church and State but I want schools with moral values we all have to agree upon.
I do agree with you that there has been some sort of subtle tyranny of the "politically correct". Today I read a hub where the author had very gently defended the baby to be born. She receives one comment about the right of women to choose and she confessed to be very nervous about the reactions to her hub and of course she has good reasons to be nervous about it. This is the world upside down. I think prolifers in certain cases have become criminals and many of them are just a bunch of fanatics. But give me a break, since when to gently suggest to women to try and keep their baby no matter the inconveniencies is something wrong?
So, we have a lot to think together, but let me tell you, things are never as clear cut as you seem to suggest. You do make an effort at tolerance, though, even if you don't like the word. Keep on with it.
rosariomontenegro— I was wrong to agree with that part of Johnnie's commentary (I think she's a woman). I cannot agree with the murder of anybody. So, thanks for correcting me about that.
I am not advocating any particular prayers. I am looking mostly at the results. There was prayer in public schools for 200 years. Then they were outlawed. I am focused on the result. Is it good?
Before 1963 prayers in a local school followed the vastly held beliefs of the majority of those in that particular community, I imagine. So, a town of 90% Dutch Reformed in Minnesota; a village of Hassidic Jews; a hamlet of Hindus; a city of Baptists; a burg of Buddhists; and local school in a largely Catholic part of town, I am sure, prayed differently. Though all residents were not monolithic, the handful of outliers had to go along with the custom of the place where they had decided to live. That is actually the polite thing to do. My point is, the local folks were FREE to pray—and that freedom was taken away. And what has become of society since?
I know I have oversimplified and generalized. With 600 words or so to work with, there is only so much one can do. But I thank you for your wise contribution to the conversation.
Ýou are right, James, it's difficult to talk about a complex subject in a few lines. Happily we have this medium, this extraordinary medium to communicate and to find those who --how to say this?-- no necessarily those who think alike but those who wish to think, analyze, reflect, and have in their hearts at least the broad common purpose of creating a better world.
Back to your subject, we need to build bridges. Probably America is more than just two nations. No matter what, may be it would be useful to approach your subject not focusing only on the prayer at school but on the broader topic of values and morality.
There we can observe something indeniable: many parents have lost or given up their capacity for educating their children. Nowadays a big chunk of the input of values in the mind of kids originates not from the family but from things that parents mostly cannot control or don't have the time to control: television and the internet. And the general indefinable, all pervading weight of a society where the focus on how to make money and obtain material goods or mundaine goals like social status and such, quite often is more important than higher values and practices, the ones that put meaning in the life of persons --the respect of universal morality and the service to others, so old fashioned but for ever irreplaceable.
Let's go on thinking, and for those who are lucky enough to have it in their lives, let's keep on praying!
rosariomontenegro— You are very wise. I cannot disagree with any of your words. Bridges are certainly far better than walls. Your next to the last paragraph, about the lack of parenting, is awesome. You should write a Hub on that very subject. Because it is true. Of course, the general collapse of morality, which to me clearly coincides with the banning of God from the public sphere—just look at the timeline—has left 70% of black children born outside of wedlock. It is hard to be good parents when their are two of you. Rare to pull off if there is only one. And it has an enormous public cost. In dollars, three trillion spent in the past decade on free social services to single mother head of households. More than that, take a look at the statistics of how these kids turn out as citizens—and I use that word loosely—compared to children reared with both their natural father and mother. But according to the Radical Left—Fathers are superfluous. They live in an infantile dream world in my opinion. I don't say that to be insulting. I say it because it is true and the truth should always be sought and revealed. Because . . . it is good for us.
Thank you for your excellence in commentary.
Two points to be made for now.
1. It might be good just to contemplate how much both American productivity and American moral leadership has meant to the world. In addition to creating a nation that is a desirable place to come and live, we have generously shared our knowledge and wealth for generations. Many nations on earth would be far worse off today if we had not been so successful and so giving.
2. Paraglider, it makes no sense to suggest that God does not exist and then to endorse moral education. If there is no personal, caring, creator who has designed us and given us guidelines for how to best live, the idea of morality is just silly. Without such a creator (who in English we call God), there is no purpose, no meaning to life, no way to judge right and wrong. Hitler is no worse than Mother Theresa. If something feels good, do it. A person may do what he thinks is "good," but there can be no standard that he can expect others to adhere to.
John Juneau— Your commentary here could not be more appreciated. You are absolutely in the right on both of the points you have made. The contributions to the world made by America are beyond measure and would take a Hub 3000 pages long to delineate. At least you know and I know—even if nobody else does. Thank you my wise friend.
Excellent work. And yes, the rats under the floorboards are eating away at out foundation. They are unfortunately close to sealing the deal. And if they do it's gonna get real ugly here. keep up the good work.
Amen!!
James, you defend your point of view with much eloquence; I applaud you for that. While I agree with some of your ideas, particularly about the decline in morality, I have some disagreement.
I must say that I take some exception to your reference to equality of country and your referene to "...putting a bone through one's nose is equal to putting a man on the moon" What do you mean by equal? and by whose standard? God's or man's? As a person who talks about Godliness, I wonder what standard you are using to measure equality... and what is the basis of your comparision? Is one country more valuable because they have more scientists than another? Putting a bone through your nose might not be valuable to you as an American, but it may be valuable to someone else from a place that considers this an important social activity. Tolerance my brother!
I do agree with you about the decline of our school system over the last 50 years. I attended schools and colleges that had "assembly" first thing everyday. That didn't mean that we had better morals or tolerance for others. We were merely doing a ritual.
I grew up in a Christian home and felt oppressed as I had to repress my individuality. Religion, as you know, can be a source of perpetuating the status quo as in the missionaries who indoctrinated the slaves to accept slavery as their earthly burden in order to receive their gift of going to heaven when they die. These people were indoctrinated to inactivity and not resist against slavery.
On the other hand, religion was used as a driving force against said slavery- The Quakers, for instance.
My point is that morality is not akin to religious belief and so we should be concerned about teaching our children about morality and values of respect of self and others as well as tolerance and hard work. This is the role of the family, first and foremost, the schools and the community.
Some argue that morality changes as a society transforms, maybe that is what is happening in America and the rest of the world...
You do raise some important points...
DynamicS— I am sorry that I didn't make clearer what I meant in that section. I was certainly not trying to say that any person is more valuable in God's eyes than any other, Him being no respecter of persons. Therefore, all people are of equal value to me, too. I was not referring to individual human beings.
Thank you for your wise words and adding to the conversation. I appreciate what you wrote.
I was talking about culture, or in particular the movement in the past 30 years to teach children that all cultures are equal (multi-culturalism) when obviously, that is a lie, told to supposedly improve the self-esteem of some folks at the expense of the truth. Before this kids were taught that they should be grateful and proud to be Americans because we had a superior culture. It is obvious to me that wanting to eat your neighbor for dinner does not have the same value for the human race as the astounding technologies American Culture has produced in the past 200 years, capped by putting a man on the moon, while some folks only howl at it. Multiculturalism is tinged by anti-Americanism. It has to be to make it believable to kids. The teacher has to focus on the terrible oppressive America to knock it down to the level of the third world because there is no way to raise those cultures up to its level. Hell, they still defecate in the street in half the world. My point is that this backfires. It teaches some kids they are victims and others they are guilty when in fact all of them are damned lucky to be here. That's what I meant. Is that bad?
James,
Of the multitude of points I took issue with in this post, there is one theme I found particularly...well...offensive. You made the statement that "all cultures are not equal," which is fair to state when you base it on your own understanding. But you go on to compare putting "bones through one's nose" to sending man to the moon and then offer a photo of what appears to be an indigenous tribe in New Guinea to illustrate this point just opposite a photo of a man in a moon suit.
Putting man on the moon was/is a pivotal point in the story of humankind. As this was an American effort, this is deemed by history a defining American moment. It is reprehensible to then exploit this glorious milestone in order to denigrate cultures whose value to the world at large has not been determined by their dependence upon or love for modernistic or technological contrivances, such as the Huli tribesmen you have displayed above in an apparent attempt to insult.
I believe that this is either arrogance or ignorance on your part...or maybe even both.
You also misquote whom you refer to simply as "the left" by writing that they "claim abstinence is impossible." They don't. They only recognize the reality that in abstinence for (naturally) sexually curious children in a media saturated society, with unlimited access to any and all imagery and information is improbable.
In this world of unlocked doors you so fondly remember, it was once enough to simply forbid children to have sex. This was however, a hit or miss proposition, because they sometimes would seek education in the wrong places. This information would circulate amongst them (whether accurate or not) and consequences were STD's, teen pregnancy, and loss of innocence (not necessarily in that order).
This world then evolved into something more. The consequences became more dire. We found out that kids weren't just having babies, but that they could die from what it was we don't tell them, or deemed was innapropriate discussion at the time. I do believe in saving souls, but part of one's spiritual mandate is to preserve God's creation (part of which is human life, as you referenced in your passage about abortion) and condoms and education are helping to save lives...daily.
BP9— I appreciate why you took umbrage with the juxtaposition of the man on the moon and the cannibals. My intention was not to insult the tribesmen. I don't figure they have internet access. My intent was to show how utterly ludicrous is the teaching to millions of American children that all cultures are equal—multiculturalism. I am involved with a lot of young people, in the 20s mostly, and I can tell you this teaching, meant to bolster self esteem of the down trodden—and in opposition to those who are proud patriots of our country's accomplishments—has been severely damaging to an entire generation. And it is a teaching of the Left, who as you know, controls the Teachers Union and the curriculum.
Your commentary is very thoughtful and insightful. While there is no way to go back, we can create a better future and not lying to children in public schools would, in my opinion, be a huge first step. Thank you for reading and posting your thoughts.
Hey James, good hub! I agree with a few of the things you say, but are liberals the only ones to blame? Conservatives have been in office roughly as much as liberals have and nothing seems to get better. In fact over the years just about all the negative things you have mentioned continually get worse. I think rather than pointing the finger at just liberals the finger needs to be pointed at everyone! Everyone in america reguardless of their political position needs to be held accountable for their acts so we can all help restore our great nation!
MattyJ9999— You are right. There is blame to go all around. Both political parties may have shared office but the blame cannot be spread evenly in the schools, universities and the media where admittedly, 90% of all of them vote Liberal. And they control the minds of children from 5 to 22. With no parents at home this becomes the authority by which children form their view of the world they live in and it is not Conservative by any means. Only if they are homeschooled, restricted on their access to television and the internet, and have involved parents, do they have a chance to learn the Truth about where they are in universe and how they came to be here. And that might represent 10% of the children?
I appreciate your insights. You make good points and I appreciate you for doing so.
When these people below are loosed upon our country, the wicked will scatter like so many rats!!! And many will want to kill these ones below.
But please read this first...thank you :-)
If small minded believers would stop whining about how we need more rights, more laws for this and against that, how we need more Christians in the government and school system and Jack-in-the Box and bla, bla, bla blabber blabber, snivel, piss and moan about it all....enough already!!!
Let me remind you that the first followers of Messiah had no rights, no Roman Government friendly men to do their bidding, no "marketing manager for their churches", no big fat budget, no mass media, no freedom of speech and they made no demands!!!
WHAT THEY DID DO WAS SPEAK WITH A LOUD VOICE!!!!!...HEAVEN IS A LOUD PLACE AS IT IS WRITTEN, and they were not afraid to tell it like it was and is, they had no concern for their own lives and comforts and entertainment...NO, they were soldiers who wore armor and who did not look to some idiot in the government to "stand up for them"...what a joke that would be. Believers today need to do exactly what our first Apostles did, they were told to shut up and they said...
"But Peter and John replied, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God."..."But Peter and John replied, "Do you think God wants us to obey you rather than Him?"These followed every law of the authority but that one...this is how they set the world on fire and spread the good news....not by means of men.They did not shut up, they stood in the face of angry men and kept right on teaching and preaching Yahshua / Jesus!!! We have to many "Christians" walking around in chicken suits and clucking today, they are FULL OF FEAR and will do exactly what the school system tells them instead of just keep praying openly and boldly, taking the heat, the arrests, beating and the bitter persecution that will come and rejoicing about it all. Not stand around and cry about it to the people in charge or the spineless leadership in the churches or gossip about it while they have coffee and cake in the courtyard of the comfy church they attend.ENOGUH ALREADY!!!!!! Give it a rest and get yourself persecuted, take off your diapers, put down the milk bottle and be a soldier for once!!!
THESE ARE THE DAYS IN WHICH ALMIGHTY ABBA IS RAISING UP SONS AND DAUGHTERS THAT HE HAS CREATED TO BE JUST LIKE THE SCRIPTURES BELOW TESTIFIES OF!!!
THESE ARE THOSE OF WHOM ABBA HAS PUT THE SPIRIT OF EL-EE-YA-HOO (Elijah) UPON BY HIS OWN SOVEREIGN POWER, SOME HAVING EVEN A DOUBLE PORTION OF THE ANOINTING AND THESE SONS AND DAUGHTERS CANNOT BE QUENCHED FOR THEIR MIND IS LIKE AN ADAMANT FLINT AND WAS MADE TO STRIKE AGAINST THE MIND OF EVERY LOFTY THOUGHT THAT WOULD DARE EXALT ITSELF AGAINST THE MIND OF THE MESHIACH (Messiah) AND THEY CAST DOWN ALL LIES AND IMAGINATIONS; EVEN FROM LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD THAT ARE CONTRARY TO DIVINE WISDOM, UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWLEDGE THAT LEADS TO SALVATION AND THE RESURRECTION FOR THOSE WHO SHALL RULE WITH MESSIAH!!! THEY ARE BITTERLY PERSECUTED SONS AND DAUGHTERS WHO ROAM THE EARTH CARRYING WORDS OF CELESTIAL FIRE FROM ON HIGH, WORDS THAT CANNOT BE CONFOUNDED BY ANY MAN AND THEY HAVE BEEN SENT TO SHUT THE MOUTHS OF THE EVIL TONGUE OF OUR DAY!!!
“And He has made my mouth like a SHARP SWORD; in the shadow of His hand has He hid me: and He has made me a polished arrow; in his quiver has he kept me close”"Behold, I have made your face hard against their faces, and your forehead hard against their foreheads."“Like emery harder than flint have I made your forehead. Fear them not, nor be dismayed at their looks, for they are a rebellious house.”"Because the Sovereign LORD helps me, I will not be dismayed. Therefore, I have set my face like a FLINT, determined to do His will. And I know that I will triumph.""He who gives me justice is near. Who will dare to oppose me now? SO NOW, WHERE ARE MY ENEMIES? Let them appear!""See, The Sovereign LORD is on my side! Who will declare me guilty? All my enemies will be destroyed like old clothes that have been eaten by moths!"
Then HE added, "Son of man, let all My words sink deep into your own heart first. Listen to them carefully for yourself.
"Stephen"Adamant Sharp Sworded Flint"
***I am nothing special, just a vessel.
Find it here and please read more of my hubs...
If you like THE SHARP SWORD.
To continue from my above comments...this may turn into a hub LOL!!!
This is how the first believers set the world on fire, sent demons and devils packing, confounded governments and SPREAD THE GOOD NEWS OF MESSIAH.
They did not use the "means of men"...they had an anointing that was astonishing and struck utter terror and fear into the hearts of the wicked, some of those wicked even repented...imagine that.
THE GOOD NEWS was not spread by ballots and votes, so get over it, get off your duff and proclaim THE TRUTH with a loud voice and let whatever comes your way not let you cut and run!!!
THERE...IS...NOTHING...TO...FEAR...AT...ALL!!!
SO EITHER GIVE IT YOUR ALL OR GET OUT OF THE WAY SOLDIER!!!
AMEN AND AMEN...BLESSED BE THE HOLY ONE HIS MAJESTY
quietnessandtrust— WOW! Brother, you are so right. I bookmarked your page. Not much I can add except every Word you wrote is True and I am grateful you added this inspired commentary. We are David against Goliath here. And we all know how that one turned out. :D
quietnessandtrust— I hear you. I just published a new Hub this morning.
Yep...THE ROCK THAT HIT GOLIATH IN THE HEAD WAS MESSIAH...HE IS THE ROCK AN AIN'T NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
I CARRY A SHARP SWORD, SLING AND 5 SMOOTH STONES WHERE EVER I AM SENT...AMEN? LOL!!!
I like collecting the bulletins from the churches I get tossed out of!!!
I will read you new ones......become a fan.
quietnessandtrust— You are a mighty warrior for the Lord, Brother. I'll line them up and you can knock them down. :-)
Thank you. I appreciate that.
I am in total agreement with your take on our present cultural disintegration...Family values must be restored, and that means parental responsibility, educational discipline, and personal accountability..
I guess Misha forgot about the Lend-Lease program that allowed Russia to defeat the Nazi's...America did a lot more than send men into battle..
maven101— Thank you for the fan mail, reading this piece and for your words above. You are right. We certainly supplied the USSR with a lot of material in WWII. That could be what swung things their way because Hitler was close to Moscow and as we all know—their manufacturing was not much good over there.
I believe everyone has said, what I wanted to say, so the only thing I can say is we will prevail and we should bring God back into our schools. Our world appeared less violent when God prevailed. :)
I believe everyone has said, what I wanted to say, so the only thing I can say is we will prevail and we should bring God back into our schools. Our world appeared less violent when God prevailed. :)
AEvans— I am honored to receive a visit from such revered member of the Hub Pages Community. Thank you very much! I agree with your assessment. We might have to split the country in half to make it happen. And that's OK with me. Nice to hear from you.
Wow, this took much of the morning to read (amidst a few interruptions). Coming from the generation that grew up with unlocked doors and open windows and having attended a parochial school for part of my early education, all I can say is that times were much better then for the vast majority of people.
People who needed help got it from their local communities, churches, neighbors, etc.
Teen pregnancy was not a common thing as compared to statistics today. No daycares in schools. Also no financial aid to make it possible for those "kids" to have apartments of their own. The babies were raised in the nuclear family (teen and child with her original family) or given out for adoption to be raised by others who wanted a baby in most cases. In fact, during the pregnancy (before the pregnancy was obvious) some girls were shipped off to an aunt and uncle or some other safe haven until she had her baby (if it was being given up for adoption) before she would then return to her school and family. You see...getting pregnant out of wedlock used to be a shameful thing!
Drugs were not rampant...in fact, I (personally) knew no one that took drugs...the street version (not prescription...just to be clear).
James, I think you have the time line correct. Things have been going in the wrong direction since the 1960's.
When people think that government will "take care of them" and that they are no longer personally responsible for their own lives...we are definitely headed in the wrong direction.
Not to say government has no role. Of course it does. Limited government at the Federal level with more State and Local government control would be the ideal and ( I believe ) original intent of our Founding Fathers. At the local level, the people who live and work there KNOW what the needs are better than at the Federal level. Just makes sense.
The more we are taxed and wealth is redistributed to fit someone's idea of "how things should be" the less productive we become.
And yes.......for centuries we have had Christian symbols on most of our public buildings, etc. To try and erase that is erasing our history.
We have no children so do not know what they are being taught in schools today. We can just judge from the results of what we are witnessing.
Enjoyed the parlaying between you and Misha. Always learn something from your hubs. Good work, James.
Peggy W— There is not much I can add to your comments. I will say you see clearly. Maybe you should write a Hub on this topic. You explain the situation as well as I do. :-)
I agree with every word you wrote. Thank you so much for adding another voice of reason to this thread.
Madeline Murray O'Hare, that name makes my skin crawl! It is ok to take the Koran, the Torah, any other Religious literature to schools and hold campus gatherings but not a Bible or Bible studies. How is that fair? Seriously wrong! Write the wrong, you do it so well!
Kebennett1— Christianity is the only religion discriminated against. Even witchcraft is allowed. And I sense a lot of apathy amongst regular folks who ought to give a hoot. At least you do and I do! Thanks!
i just want to say u have a loy comment on that hub
mchebli72— Yes! :-) A lot of comments. Welcome to the Hub Pages Community to the man from Dearborn!
Hi James, I believe that the following set of comments you've made are brilliant but I know that we are supposed to be giving God the glory -- ever notice though how so many "Christians" say, "To God be the glory" so much though that it almost sounds fake.
I believe that which you've said bares repeating, "One would hope it is noticed that never have millions of our citizens tried to sneak across the border to Mexico to escape our horrible country and people do not leave here on rafts attempting to emigrate to Cuba or Venezuela—where the darlings of the left, Castro and Chavez hold absolute power. This is nothing new. While Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao were murdering 50,000,000 human beings, the Left in the United States routinely praised them, too. Because that is their plan for us: to create a Godless State in absolute control over each of us from cradle to grave including our income, property, families, speech and our very thoughts."
Keep writing brother.
Tackle
Tackle This— WOW! When you repeated my words there even I was struck by their power as if I didn't write them. Well, I can't claim the credit. I do have a Counselor who advises me on what I should say on many occasions. I thank you very much for visiting this Hub and offering your encouragement.
Welcome to the Hub Pages Community!
marinealways24 says:
6 months ago
James, you do not sound very optimistic. The reason we are in the state we are in is because the majority "does not care". What kid cares about these things when their favorite show is on or their friends or on messenger. We are based on the dollar. What kid in school now doesn't have a cell phone? The more freedom we have, the more we become lazy, the more we become lazy, the less we care. Our freedom is our destruction. Our lack of freedom results in the same thing.