Sunday, March 31, 2013

Current Events - March 31, 2013


School District Rescinds ‘Easter’ Ban

An Alabama school district has rescinded a principal’s ban on using the word ‘Easter’ to describe bunnies or eggs.

Dee Fowler, the superintendent of Madison City Schools, said all seasonal activities like Christmas and Easter are acceptable in city schools, according to a letter obtained by Fox News.

“These traditions are a part of our rich heritage and I do not see them as infringing on ones’ religious rights,” Fowler wrote in a letter to parents. “Additionally, words such as Christmas and Easter are not banned at our schools.”

Television station WHNT reported that Lydia Davenport, the principal of Heritage Elementary School told teachers that no activities related to or centered around any religious holiday would be allowed – in the interest of religious diversity.

“We had in the past a parent to question us about some of the things we do here at school,” said Davenport. “So we’re just trying to make sure we respect and honor everybody’s differences.”

The principal then stepped in and cancelled the school’s Easter Egg hunt for kindergarden and second grade students, the superintendent said.

“Kids love the bunny and we just make sure we don’t say ‘the Easter Bunny’ so that we don’t infringe on the rights of others because people relate the Easter bunny to religion,” she told the television station. “ A bunny is a bunny and a rabbit is a rabbit.”

Fowler said after meeting with the principal, the students were allowed to participate in their previously planned Easter Egg hunt — before taking off for Spring Break.

“After conversation, it was decided that the hunt was not in violation of any policies or procedures, and that it could proceed as planned,” Fowler wrote.

Charles and Cynthia Erwin are parents in Madison. They were greatly troubled by the decision to ban the word ‘Easter’.

“It’s so sad that we find our faith being challenged so often and so aggressively in America today,” Erwin said. “Having this happen in conservative Alabama is shocking to me — but unfortunately is symptomatic of what’s going on in the rest of the United States.

So the Erwins contacted the Liberty Institute, a legal firm that handles religious liberty cases.

“Clearly established Supreme Court precedent prohibits schools from censoring religious speech of students and parents,” attorney Hiram Sasser told Fox News. “In addition, there is no case that exists that bans school officials from using the word Easter to describe the Easter holiday or cultural activities that are associated with Easter.”

Sasser successfully represented a Florida Atlantic University student who was punished after he refused a professor’s order to stomp on a piece of paper with the word ‘Jesus’ written on it. The university has since apologized and cleared the student’s record. Florida’s governor has called for an investigation into the incident.
 
“Again, it only takes one person to stand against this kind of censorship and nonsense,” Sasser said of the Easter ban. “When like-minded folks around the country support them, we win.”
 Sasser said based on the school superintendent’s letter, if a principal in the district ever bans the words ‘Christmas’ or ‘Easter’, it will clearly be hostility and not for some other educational or legal reason.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/school-district-rescinds-easter-ban.html

Obama Proclaims Caesar Chavez Day(today)

As a senator, Barack Obama made a call in 2008 for a national holiday in Chávez's honor, saying: "Chávez left a legacy as an educator, environmentalist, and a civil rights leader. And his cause lives on. As farm workers and laborers across America continue to struggle for fair treatment and fair wages, we find strength in what César Chávez accomplished so many years ago. And we should honor him for what he's taught us about making America a stronger, more just, and more prosperous nation. That's why I support the call to make César Chávez's birthday a national holiday. It's time to recognize the contributions of this American icon to the ongoing efforts to perfect our union." (Senator Barack Obama March 31, 2008)[3] Grassroots organizations continue to advocate to create a national holiday. On March 30, 2011, President Obama reiterated his support for the cause: "César Chávez's legacy provides lessons from which all Americans can learn."

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary

Presidential Proclamation -- Cesar Chavez Day

CESAR CHAVEZ DAY, 2013
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 
A PROCLAMATION
 
Every year, Americans all across our country pause on March 31 to remember a man who made justice his life's calling. Growing up the son of migrant farm workers who lost everything in the Great Depression, Cesar Chavez knew hard work and hardship from an early age. He labored long hours for little pay, taking odd jobs to help his family get by and forgoing a formal education to follow the crop cycles. But where others might have given up or given in, Cesar Chavez never lost hope in the power of opportunity. He lived each day by a belief as old as America itself -- the idea that with courage and determination, any of us can reach beyond our circumstances and leave our children something better.
 
More than anything, we remember Cesar Chavez for lending voice to the voiceless. When no one seemed to care about the invisible farm workers who picked our Nation's food, beset by poverty and cheated by growers, a courageous man dedicated to dignity stood up and spoke out. Alongside Dolores Huerta and fellow organizers, he rallied a generation of workers around "La Causa," marching and fasting and boycotting for fair pay and protections on the job. They fought through decades of setbacks and fierce resistance. But through every trial, Cesar Chavez refused to curb his ambitions or scale back his hope. Step by step, march by march, he helped lead a community of farm workers to make the change they sought.
 
Cesar Chavez's legacy lives on at Nuestra Señora Reina de la Paz, his home and workplace, which I was proud to designate a National Monument last October. It also lives on in those who remember his central teaching: that when workers are treated fairly and humanely, our country grows more just, opportunity becomes more equal, and all of us do better. Because even with the strides we have made, we know there is more left to do when working men and women toil in poverty without adequate protections or simple respect. We know there is more to do when our broken immigration system forces workers into a shadow economy where companies can ignore labor laws and undermine businesses following the rules. Fixing those problems means securing what Cesar Chavez fought for at La Paz. It means taking on injustice, making sure hard work is rewarded, and bringing more Americans into a rising middle class.
 
In 1966, when Cesar Chavez was struggling to bring attention to his cause, he received a telegram from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "As brothers in the fight for equality, I extend the hand of fellowship and goodwill," he wrote. "We are with you in spirit and in determination that our dreams for a better tomorrow will be realized." It is a story that reminds us how here in America, we are bound together not by the colors of our skin or the languages we speak, but by the values we share and the brighter future we seek for our children. So today, as we honor a man who risked everything to stand up for what he believed in, let us reflect on our common cause and recommit to moving forward together -- as one Nation and one people.
 
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 31, 2013, as Cesar Chavez Day. I call upon all Americans to observe this day with appropriate service, community, and education programs to honor Cesar Chavez's enduring legacy.
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
twenty-ninth day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.
 
BARACK OBAMA

Just in case you are not familiar with Chavez, here is synopsis.  You will note that he started his organizing with Saul Alinsky!

Example: After he seized power, Che put to death five hundred “enemies” of the revolution without trial, or even much discrimination. Castro, no humanist himself, did his best to neutralize Guevara by appointing him Minister for Industry. As could be expected, Che applied Soviet policies to the Cubans: agriculture was destroyed and ghost factories dotted the landscape. He did not care about Cuba’s economy or its people: his purpose was to pursue revolution for its own sake, whatever it meant, like art for art’s sake. Indeed, without his ideology, Che would have been nothing more than another serial killer. Ideological sloganeering allowed him to kill in larger numbers than any serial killer could imagine, and all in the name of justice. Five centuries ago, Che probably would have been one of those priest/soldiers exterminating Latin America’s natives in the name of God. In the name of History, Che, too, saw murder as a necessary tool of a noble cause.

http://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=4301673:Topic:1395634&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic

Does HHS Secretary Sebelius understand the concept of insurance?

Apparently not, according to Megan McCardle writing in the Daily Beast.


This is what Sebelius said about those of us who purchase health insurance plans that don't cover routine health issues:

At a White House briefing Tuesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said some of what passes for health insurance today is so skimpy it can't be compared to the comprehensive coverage available under the law. "Some of these folks have very high catastrophic plans that don't pay for anything unless you get hit by a bus," she said. "They're really mortgage protection, not health insurance."
McCardle sets her straight:
She said this in response to a report from the American Society of Actuaries arguing that premiums are going to rise by 32% when Obamacare kicks in, as coverage gets more generous and more sick people join the insurance market.  Sebelius' response is apparently that catastrophic insurance isn't really insurance at all--which is exactly backwards. Catastrophic coverage is "true insurance".  Coverage of routine, predictable services is not insurance at all; it's a spectacularly inefficient prepayment plan.
Now, it occurred to me that Sebelius might be thinking about the scam insurance that is all too often sold to naive, mostly lower-middle-class folks who labor in the service industry.  That stuff isn't insurance at all; it's a fraud, and the people who sell it will richly deserve any justice that is meted out to them in either this life or the next.  But that stuff doesn't protect your mortgage, either; they're almost-worthless discount plans or very-limited-coverage insurance sold by fly-by-night operations who tend to evaporate as soon as claims have to be paid.  So I don't think that's what she's talking about; I think she's talking about catastrophic plans.
Nor do I think that Sebelius is responding awkwardly to a report that the administration would like to wish away.  I think she's sincerely confused about the difference between insurance, and prepayment.  Which explains a lot about the new health law. 
People our age paying for contraception coverage is loony. We don't need it, nor want it. But this is what happens when government gets into the health insurance business. And when you have a Secretary of Health and Human Services who has no clue what insurance is really for, you end up with Obamacare and a boondoggle of immense proportions.

 http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/03/does_hhs_secretary_sebelius_understand_the_concept_of_insurance.html#ixzz2P9WZbN8E

The PLO Rewrites History

Dear Leader Barack Hussein Obama visited Israel last week. While there, he took a quick trip to Ramallah ("Height of God") to hold talks with Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas. During the press conference after the meeting, Obama said: 

"Palestinians deserve an end to occupation and the indignities that come with it" [through an] "independent, viable and contiguous Palestinian state as the homeland of the Palestinian people alongside the Jewish state of Israel."
"Put simply, Palestinians deserve a state of their own." 

During the same press conference, Abbas said: 

"... Palestinians want a two-state solution, 'Palestine and Israel, [but that] peace should not be made through violence, occupation, settlements, arrests, siege,' [and the denial of the rights of refugees]."
Abbas also said that a Palestinian unity deal would be a key to peace. 

Irony of Ironies! The PA now talks "peace." While the PA is not technically the same as the Palestinian Liberation Authority (PLO), the two are tightly interwoven. The PLO is the main umbrella organization of the Palestinian national movement and a leading practitioner of terrorism. The PLO founded the PA under the terms of a series of 1990s peace pacts. So, now we have Obama supporting the PLO. 

A little history is in order here. The PLO was created on June 2, 1964 in Cairo by the Arab League. In its charter is this statement (in Article 18): "The claims of historic and spiritual ties between Jews and Palestine are not in agreement with the facts of history or with the true basis of sound statehood." [emphasis mine]

Further, you will find in the PLO's Statement of Proclamation of the Organization "... the right of the Palestinian Arab people to its sacred homeland Palestine and affirming the inevitability of the battle to liberate the usurped part from it, and its determination to bring out its effective revolutionary entity and the mobilization of the capabilities and potentialities and its material, military and spiritual forces." [emphasis mine] 

Is the PLO trying to rewrite history? YES! 

There is not, nor ever has there been, a Palestinian people, state, language, culture, or history. The present-day "Palestinians" are Arabs, with Arabic culture, history, and language. They came from Arab states into what we now know as Israel about one hundred years ago. In contrast, the Jews have been in Israel for over 5,000 years. Following the Six-Day War (June 5-10, 1967, in which Israel thoroughly routed a coalition of nine Arab states and took possession of Judea and Samaria), the Arabs in Judea and Samaria suddenly became Palestinians. Walid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist, said that overnight (June 4, 1967) he became a Palestinian. 

The concept of Palestine was a Roman invention. The Jews in Israel attempted to gain independence from the Roman Empire in the second century A.D. The attempt ended at a Masada in Judea. Roman emperor Hadrian was angry with the Jews and wanted to destroy the name of Israel and Judea so that there would be no memory of the country that belonged to the Jewish rebels. He decided to rename the Roman province, so he found in ancient history a name that appeared appropriate. Hadrian discovered that an extinct people, unknown in Roman times, called "Philistines", once lived in that area and were enemies of the Israelites. He invented the new name: "Palæstina", the Latin spelling of "Philistine." 

There is no mention of the name Palæstina in history prior to the Romans renaming the province of Judea. The name does not appear in any ancient document, is not written in the Bible, either in Hebrew Scriptures or the Christian Testament, nor in Assyrian, Persian, Macedonian, Ptolemaic, Seleucian, or other Greek sources. 

Reference to the "Palestinian" people was never mentioned, not even by the Romans that invented the term. Muslims claim that the prophet Mohammed once traveled to Jerusalem (not mentioned in the Qur'an), but there is no reference to any Palestinian people in the Qur'an. 

The PLO may try to rewrite ancient history, but it cannot rewrite recent history. 

The PLO has a long recent history of terrorism and violence. Under Yasser Arafat (1929-2004), the PLO led Palestinians into the Al-Aqsa Intifada, a war with Israel that lasted nearly five years and claimed thousands of lives on both sides. Here is a (partial) list of PLO (or its offshoots) violence: 

• Late 1950s: Arafat co-founds Fatah, whose sole purpose is to gain control of Palestine from Israel through terrorism
• March 18, 1968: Fatah terrorists in Israel set a land mine which later blew up a school bus, killing two children and injuring 28 others
• July 1968: Fatah joins the PLO and becomes its dominant member
• February 1969: Yasser Arafat becomes PLO chairman
• May 8, 1970: PLO terrorists attacked an Israeli School bus, killing nine children and three adults, and crippling nineteen for life
• September 1972: Black September attack at the Olympic Games in Munich, Germany
• October 7, 1985: four PLO terrorists hijacked the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro, demanded the release of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel, and killed one Jewish tourist
• July 2000: PLO head Yasser Arafat rejected a peace settlement that would have resulted in a Palestinian state -- it's interesting to note that in order to counter the perception that Arafat was the obstacle to peace, the PLO began to publish a "revisionist" view of what took place during the peace process
• September 2000: Arafat launched the Al-Aqsa Intifada, and continued to fund, incite, and support terrorism
• March, 2002: PLO terrorists killed five students and wounded twenty-three other people during an attack on a pre-military high school in Atzmona, Israel
• March 14, 2004: suicide bombers associated with Fatah kill nine and injure nineteen in Ashdod, Israel
• November 2012: PLO fires rockets into Israel 

Killing children. Classy bunch, the PLO. And as if the above actions weren't despicable enough, the PLO has recruited children to attack Israeli targets, with some of the attacks being suicidal. 

The PLO itself was removed from the U.S. State Department's terrorist organization in 1994, but several PLO factions are still on that list, including

• Palestine Islamic Jihad -- Shaqaqi Faction -- operating in Gaza with minimal presence in the West Bank and Israel
• Palestine Liberation Front -- Abu Abbas Faction -- based in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine -- operating in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the West Bank and Gaza
• Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command -- political Leadership headquartered in Damascus, with bases in southern Lebanon and a presence in the Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria, and a small presence in Gaza 

What's most interesting is from where these groups receive external aid: Syria and Iran. 

Right now, March 26, 2013, the PA continues to call for the destruction of Israel. Is Obama so naïve as to think a Palestinian state will stop terrorist violence? 

This is the organization Obama supports through his call for a Palestinian state. Does Obama's duplicity ever end? And, while sequestration is going on, Obama released $500 million to the PLO. 

But that's just my opinion

When Men Forsake God, Tyranny Always Follows

The prophetic words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn resonate like thunder across the history of man.  "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened."  Thus summarized the Nobel laureate, Orthodox Christian author, and Russian dissident the main reason why the communist revolution was able to enslave, terrorize, and murder tens of millions of innocent people.  An atheistic mentality and a long process of secularization gradually alienated the people from God and His moral laws.  This led them away from truth and authentic liberty and facilitated the rise of tyranny.


Godlessness is always the first step to the concentration camp.  Tragically, that same process is now at work in America and many other parts of the world.  Too many refuse to see it or believe it.


America has long been a beacon of freedom for millions of souls who came here seeking liberty and opportunity.  It achieved this unique place in history by recognizing the authority of God and his moral laws and declaring that men have the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Founded by faithful and God-fearing men who despised government tyranny and sought religious freedom and individual liberty, America incorporated these universally true principles in its Declaration of Independence and Constitution.  These ideals eventually became the bedrock upon which all our laws, government, and institutions were originally built.


America's Founding Fathers understood and proclaimed that all rights come from God alone, not governments.  They insisted that government must always serve man and that man was created by God to be free.  Their deep faith and reverence of the Almighty inspired and guided their actions and motivated their decisions.  It is this belief and trust in God's authority and wisdom that ultimately transformed America from a tiny British colony with a handful of refugees to the mighty economic and military superpower and an oasis of freedom, opportunity, and prosperity for tens of millions of immigrants.


The Founding Fathers, like Solzhenitsyn, understood the dependence of freedom on morality.  A virtuous and faithful people who placed God at the center of their lives and the foundations of their institutions helped America become that shining city on a hill "whose beacon light guides freedom-loving people everywhere," said President Ronald Reagan.  "We've staked the whole future of American civilization not on the power of government," wrote James Madison, "far from it.  We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us...to govern ourselves according to commandments of God.  The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which the Constitution is founded."


This same theme is found throughout the writings of the Founders.  John Adams clearly understood that our "Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."  "He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country," observed Samuel Adams.  Patrick Henry wrote that "virtue, morality, and religion ... is the armor that renders us invincible[.] ... [I]f we lose these, we are conquered, fallen indeed[.] ... [S]o long as our manners and principles remain sound, there is no danger."


Solzhenitsyn warned that by forgetting God, America and the West faced a "calamity of a despiritualized and irreligious humanistic consciousness" that would weaken their foundations and make them vulnerable to moral decay and internal collapse.  Only by turning back to God from the self-centered and atheistic humanism where "man is the touchstone [measure] in judging and evaluating everything on earth" would the West have any hope of escaping the destruction toward which it inevitably moves.


Unfortunately, America did not heed Solzhenitsyn's warnings.  In the last several decades, America has been rapidly transformed from a God-fearing and worshiping nation into a secularist and atheistic society, where communist and atheistic ideals are glorified and promoted, while Judeo-Christian values and morality are attacked, ridiculed, and increasingly eradicated from the public and social consciousness of our nation.  Under the decades-long assault and militant radicalism of many so-called "liberal" and "progressive" elites, God and His moral laws have been progressively erased from our public and educational institutions, to be replaced with all manner of delusion, perversion, corruption, violence, decadence, and insanity.


"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants," warned William Penn.  Throughout history, the most serious threats to man's freedom always arise when men refuse to acknowledge that God is ultimately the source and protector of real and lasting liberty and freedom.  When that timeless truth is erased from men's consciousness, when God's wisdom and laws are forgotten, when morality is no longer a virtue to be treasured and emulated, when human life is no longer sacred, and man becomes the only standard of all that is true, then genuine freedom will begin to vanish from any group, institution, community, or society.  Carnality, greed, selfishness, and worldly pleasure and power become the main goals of human existence.  The moral and ethical clarity, conviction, and courage required to defend freedom and protect genuine liberty ultimately disappear, to be replaced by the most cruel, unethical, tyrannical, and godless ideologies.


It is no coincidence that advocates and followers of Fascism, Nazism, and Communism -- all secular, immoral, atheistic, and godless ideologies -- enslaved and murdered the greatest number of people in the history of mankind.  All produced some of the most cruel, violent, and evil tyrants this world has ever known -- despots who persecuted their own citizens, slaughtered the innocent, destroyed their own people, and brought calamities to other nations.  All subjugated the liberty and property of men to the absolute power and control of the state.  All were enemies of God and blasphemers of His Holy Scriptures.  All viciously persecuted the most devout and religious members of their societies, primarily the religious Christians and Jews who righteously and faithfully followed the Lord.


This is the lesson the 20th century expended so much blood to teach us.  It appears that without a marked change in course, the Western world is going to have to learn it again.
 

Forward, and downhill

It is commonplace for liberals to sneer at “slippery slope” arguments – the fear that some infringement upon liberty will lead to further loss of freedom down the road.  (For some reason, there seems to be little fear that “slippery slopes” can lead in the other direction.)  Talk about the assault weapons ban leading to more stringent gun control, for example, and gun-control zealots will laugh at your silly concerns.  Of course they don’t have a further agenda, once they get the American people accustomed to the latest Bill of Rights haircut!  They’ll stop with a 15-round limit on magazine size, and banning rifles with two scary-looking features.  Or 10 rounds and one scary-looking feature.  Whatever.  Just rest assured that nobody’s going to be pushing anybody down any well-greased inclines toward destinations that would be politically unreachable today.

In truth, slippery-slope concerns are perfectly reasonable.  They are a standard part of the “progressive” battle plan.  A core tenet of progressivism is to take incremental, but irreversible, steps toward the total State.  They hope that each new expansion of government will swiftly acquire a dependent constituency that will fight much harder to protect their favorite programs than weary taxpayers will struggle to terminate them.  Diffuse taxation pays for specific benefits.  Who knows where each dollar paid to the tax man goes?  But everyone receiving a dollar from Uncle Sugar most certainly knows where it comes from.

Also, the Left labors very hard to push the idea that government spending and regulation are the only way society can express proper concern about any given problem.  Anyone who tries to roll back spending or regulatory power will therefore be accused of not “caring” about some vital issue, or actively “hating” some group of people.  Knowing that all motion toward a state of higher liberty will be denounced as heartless disdain or disgusting greed, why shouldn’t we be concerned that movement toward the larger State is a downhill slide that will be very difficult to slow, let alone reverse?

Our highly legalistic society is very big on the idea of building from precedent.  It happens constantly in both the courts, and political debate.  Every loss of liberty becomes a building block for the next expansion of government power.  If the State can do this, why not this?  If one thing can be forbidden, or compelled, why not the next?  This strategy has proven effective at swaying both judges and voters.

And government programs grow through failure.  The importance of this process to the psychology of Big Government cannot be underestimated.  An efficient program that delivers solid results under budget is going to find its budget cut.  An agency that “solves” whatever problem it was formed to address will find itself stripped down or eliminated.  The canny bureaucrat therefore presents his department as perpetually under-funded, while trying to grapple with ever more formidable challenges.  Every agency is a plucky underdog doing a fantastic job on a shoestring budget against insurmountable odds… and there is always so much more work to be done.  If there is any threat of a program’s original goals being met, it will suddenly contract an acute case of mission creep, discovering new problems it can address.  This is a fertile environment for slippery-slope thinking.  Government programs routinely end up exerting levels of authority, and spending sums of money, that would have astounded their original creators.

The purpose of the Constitution was to establish a set of inalienable rights that would never be infringed at all, and thus could not be rolled downhill.  There are supposed to be some aspects of individual freedom that are forever off the table, no matter how urgently benevolent politicians and super-intelligent regulators want to violate them for the “greater good.”  Once concessions have been made from an absolute right, it is no longer absolute, and its further dissolution becomes negotiable.  It is now common for these concessions to be extracted through executive action and judicial decisions, rather than using the amendment process provided by the Constitution.  But for an example of a very slippery slope that began the “right” way, with a Constitutional amendment, compare the current state of the income tax to the promises made at its inception.  How much government power grew from the concession that income could be directly taxed – just a tiny little bit, mind you, and only from the vast income of millionaires, never the hard-won paychecks of the working man?

Today it seems as though we’re surrounded by issues that would have been dismissed as the fanciful delusions of slippery-slope paranoia only a few years ago.  And of course, we are once again promised there will be no further developments, no efforts to take a political crusade in directions that today’s voters would never approve of.  There seems to be little interest in exhuming the ignored warnings of yesterday’s critics, to measure the accuracy of concerns that were waved away.  What receives less respect in today’s culture than the wisdom of previous ages?  Tradition is inertia, mindless obedience to hollow ritual!  And yet, those who insist on moving rapidly “forward” seem unable to consider the danger of racing down a decline marked with points of no return.

http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/29/forward-and-downhill/
 

No comments: