Second State Looking to Pass Proof of Citizenship Requirement

It would appear that a second state, Oklahoma, is set to pass a bill already being considered in Arizona that would require Obama to release his long-form birth certificate (example above). In fact, there are a total of 10 states currently considering such legislation. While it may not dawn on Kool Aid drinking Obama supporters to even question why he won't release a simple document and clear up this entire contraversy and instead state legislators are meeting to force his hand to do so, writer Jack Cashill is weighing in on the decision by billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump to make the birth certificate question an ever present nightmare for the Obama team...

"Word to Donald Trump: Nothing scares our Lilliputian media like facts. Each fact you present makes them rethink their petty little mission to whittle you down to size. When asked why you don't take President Obama's word that he was born in America, simply reply, "Why should I? The story he has been telling America about the first two years of his life is provably and profoundly untrue."

This will sting. The Lilliputians have invested great emotional equity in what Obama-friendly biographer David Remnick calls his "signature appeal: the use of the details of his own life as a reflection of a kind of multicultural ideal." From the beginning, Team Obama has worked hard to protect the investment. This has meant shielding the world from all salient documentation about Obama's life, his long-form birth certificate included. In the last few years, Obama's nativity story has been told almost as often as Jesus' but with nowhere near the accuracy."

If even one state passes such legislation, Obama is through. If the original long form certificate exposes his entire nativity story as a sham, then he should have admitted so long ago. The American people are largely forgiving and a slick, Madison Avenue approach might have even been able to garner some sympathy for him. But I think we're past that point now and this is going to just get uglier for Obama.

On Atheists, the 6th Commandment and that 'other' Hitchens

Columnist Peter Hitchens (above, right), younger brother of arch-atheist Peter Hitchens (left) weighs in on one of the more common criticisms raised by atheists. One that they preceive to be an supposed inconsistency in the conservative Christian worldview, as to how one could support the death penalty and and still adhere to the 6th of the 10 Commandments Thou shalt not kill..

"This is annoying because the atheists themselves couldn't care less what scripture says, and are trying to catch Christians out - and because they so seldom seem to realise that the matter has many times been dealt with before, and is not as they think it is. This should now go into the index under 'Capital Punishment' or 'the Death penalty', and so should be easily found. Not that this will stop them...

On the question of the Commandment 'Thou Shalt do no Murder', it is so rendered by Christ himself (Gospel according to St Matthew, Chapter 19, 18th verse, Authorised or 'King James' version). This is why it is also so rendered in the service of The Lord's Supper in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer.

Now, as this dispute is supposed to be about what Christians believe the Commandment to mean, and Christians believe that Christ is God himself, or they would not be Christians, this rather closes the debate. If God himself in his most recent appearance among us (as believed by Christians) says 'Thou shalt do no murder', then that is what the Commandment is, superseding and overriding any previous version, or clarifying it if you prefer.

Atheists can believe what they like. I cannot see why they should care one way or the other. But they really need to be better-informed before trying to tell Christians how to interpret their own scriptures, don't you think?

I might add that Christ himself was subject to the death penalty, and his sayings were recorded when sentence was passed on him and while it was being carried out, and He did not take the opportunities offered to condemn it in principle. I agree that arguments from silence are not always reliable. But in this case, the silence is pretty eloquent. He did say much on other subjects during this event. What is more, one of the two thieves stated from his cross that they were justly punished for their crimes, and Christ did not contradict him.

I might add that both the 39 Articles of the Church of England (Article 37) , and the Roman Catholic Catechism, both conclude that the death penalty is justified in certain circumstances. Those who compile these documents do not do so without much study of scriptural texts, or without much thought. Non-religious persons trying to make trouble will just have to accept that mainstream Christianity somehow manages to distinguish between lawless murder and lawful execution - even if Atheists appear to be unable to do so.

Likewise it manages to observe that the destruction of a baby in the womb is the wrongful taking of life, which atheists also seem unable to perceive."

Kudos to Hitchens for being able to relate quite effectively that there are people who can distinguish between life that is totally innocent and someone's life that has been tried and convicted by a jury of their peers.

Is Failure to Support Gay Marriage Immoral?

I recall last week that a certain blogger named Justin seemed to think that opposition to same-sex marraige is immoral. I don't recall how they laid out exactly how such opposition is "immoral" or even if he tried to at all, but as with other commenters in the blogosphere, perhaps he thought that just saying that it was just made it so.

Robert Knight's recent article mentions a couple of reasons that may suggest to the average reader, that a case could be made that gay marraige could be viewed as "immoral".

"Utah, which had a Mormon population that advocated polygamous unions, was denied statehood until it passed a law ensuring that only one man, one woman marriages would be legally recognized.

The key case was Murphy v. Ramsey (1885), in which the Supreme Court upheld Congress' right to make polygamy and bigamy illegal in U.S. territories and a requirement for statehood. The court said:

"For certainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth, fit to take rank as one of the coordinate states of the Union, than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guarantee of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement."

WORLD magazine culture critic Gene Edward Veith notes that the homosexual drive to gain marital benefits is destroying marriage itself as people abandon commitment and embrace the "gay" notion of serial monogamy with "sex partners": "This sort of reductionism -- a spouse is nothing more than a sex partner, so a sex partner is the same as a spouse -- misses the point of what marriage is and what its role in society amounts to....Marriage is being defined down..."

Hoover Institute research fellow Stanley Kurtz has chronicled the acceleration of societal uncoupling from marriage in Sweden:

"Marriage is slowly dying in Scandinavia. A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock....Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood."

Knight links to a report by the group Mass Resistance which chronicles an extensive list of questionable outcomes since gay marraige was instituted in the state of Massachusetts. Some examples from the list might be debatable insofar as if they're "immoral" or not. However, who among us could possibly argue with the following?

"Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000. As the homosexual lobby group MassEquality wrote to their supporters after successfully persuading the Legislature to spend that money: "With the rate of HIV infections rising dramatically in Massachusetts, it's clear the fight against AIDS is far from over."

Citing “the right to marry” as one of the “important challenges” in a place where “it’s a great time to be gay”, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century, a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at Brookline High School on April 30, 2005. Among other things, it gives “tips” to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate other males, and how to “safely” have someone urinate on you for sexual pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young men meet for anonymous sex.

Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year."

I don"t mean to throw too much information out there at this time, so I'll stop right there. I believe that a good starting point would be to entertain explanations as to why the opposition to a practice that has seen AIDS cases rise in it's wake, increased domestic violence, increased levels of illegitimacy in countries where it was adopted and has led to questionable subject matter to students that is arguably not age appropriate could in any way be considered "immoral. What are your thoughts on the matter?





And please, I don't want this discussion to devolve into an accusation that those who are not supportive of the idea of gay marraige are trying to keep people who love each other apart from one another. We're talking about the effects of such a sweeping change as it relates to society. For example, what are some of the benefits to a society that redefines monogamous marraige to that of the "notion of serial monogamy "?

Romney: On jobs, where's Obama?

Republican front-runner for 2012 Mitt Romney criticized President Obama earlier this week when he pointed out...

"President Obama didn't cause the recession, but he made it worse and caused it to last longer. From the outset, he inaugurated the most anti-investment, anti-business, anti-jobs policies we have seen since Jimmy Carter. Further, the White House has still not crafted any discernible plan to put Americans back to work. Creating good, lasting jobs will require the following:

•A tax policy that rewards savings, investment, entrepreneurial risk-taking and exports.

•Free, open and fair access to foreign markets, with a focus on constructive trade reform with China.

•Elimination of the federal bureaucratic and regulatory stranglehold on business.

•A market-driven energy policy that encourages investment in America and reduces our dependence on foreign oil.

•A commitment to fiscal responsibility through budget restraints and entitlement reform."

All of these above steps are needed if we are to stave off the upcoming economic disaster. You know things are getting pretty bad when fairly non-partisan Congressional Budget Office tells you that they "can’t conceive of any way in which the economy can continue past the year 2037 because of debt burdens" Link

Romney's campaign was the unexpected recipient of an unexpected gift from 2008 Republican runner-up to the nomination, Mike Huckabee who it seems, is also testing the waters for 2012. Quote...

"As you'll remember, in early January 2007, as his tenure as governor ran out, Huckabee ordered his staff to electronically wipe and then crush the hard drives of almost 100 laptop and desktop computers in the governor's office (soon after taking office, incoming governor Mike Beebe had to allocate $335,000 from his operating fund to buy new hard drives and computers to replace those crushed by his successor). At the time, Huckabee said that the decision to crush the hard drives was made in order to protect the privacy of those who had personal information on the drives. Critics, however, recalled that early in Huckabee's term as governor, documents, e-mails and memos stored on hard drives just like the ones that were destroyed formed the basis of embarrassing stories about Huckabee, including a 1998 story in the Arkansas Times detailing how Huckabee and his family were using the $60,000-a-year Governor's Mansion fund as their personal piggy bank. As revealed in documents provided to the Times by a former governor's office employee, the Huckabee family had used the mansion fund — which was supposed to be used only for purchases related to official state business — to buy everything from pantyhose and dog houses to meals out and loaves of Velveeta cheese."

It's shaping up to be an interesting election season folks.

Fighting Intolerance in Tennessee

The contraversy in Tennessee over whether to pass House Bill 368 is beginning to heat up. The bill would encourage...

"The state board of education, public elementary and secondary school governing authorities, directors of schools, school system administrators, and public elementary and secondary school principals and administrators shall endeavor to create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues."

What could be wrong with that? A whole host of things if the reaction by some people is any indication. Robin D. Zimmer Ph.D. weighs in and spells out why such a bill is a good idea..

"Those who oppose the bill seem to be focused on the teaching of evolution as a non-controversial fact. But are there controversies associated with theories such as full Darwinian macroevolution? Sure there are. Michael Behe, a biochemist from Lehigh University, recently published a book entitled: The Edge of Evolution, the Search for the Limits of Darwinism. In it he notes that plasmodium bacteria, which cause malaria, have developed resistance to new drugs. This is indeed a form of evolutionary change through adaptation. But why is it that these bugs have not evolved significantly in other ways? Why is it that malaria is still confined to the tropics and has not evolved to thrive in more temperate regions? He then argues that there are limitations or boundaries to classic Darwinian evolution. Dr. Behe is not alone in questioning apparent boundaries.

I am not writing to argue for or against macroevolution or any other scientific theory. But the bottom line is that critical thinking and analysis fosters good science. For high schoolers, their love of science and acumen for it will not come from memorizing and repeating textbook prose, but rather by diving into the strengths and weaknesses of theories such as evolution."

Zimmer is exactly right. Why not present arguments from both sides? What could it hurt? It would only enable the students to sharpen their skills in critical examination of competeing theories. This segues neatly into a cute comment on the recent Myth of Horse Evolution thread from GS...

"The split between any two of those species may be farther back than previously thought, but that doesn't kill the principle behind the theory. Real scientists work hard to sort that shit out and advance our understanding. Of course, if creationist observers insist on limiting their evidence to fossils-only, it kind of looks like they have a case to make."

Although not rightfully defined as "Creationism" there are Intelligent Design theorists who are having papers reviewed all the time. Such as the "work of Douglas Axe who published articles in 2000 and 2004 in the Journal of Molecular Biology, Michael Behe and David Snoke who published in 2004 in Protein Science, and Axe again in 2010 in BIO-Complexity, a peer reviewed journal for testing ID claims. From my reading, all these papers cast doubt on natural selection acting on random mutations as a source of new information." Link

Here's an even more extensive list with various links that includes not only peer-reviewed papers but entire peer-reviewed books on the topic of Intelligent Design. And given the past treatment of evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg, one can clearly see the prevailing prejudices that currently exist in academia at this time. It's really no wonder that there aren't even more such papers in the public domain. In short, we can see this issue is far from settled and a little debate can be a healthy thing for young learners in Tennessee and elsewhere.

UPDATE: Whoever had 19 in the office pool as to how many days it would take for some rigid Darwinist to make a comparison to the psuedo-history of the Scopes Trial with House Bill 368, you're the winner.

"Even John Washington Butler would be disturbed by this bill. He was the Tennessee state representative who, in 1925, introduced the Butler Act, which criminalized the teaching of evolution or any other principle than the creation story given in the Bible. That act led to the arrest of biology teacher John Scopes and what became known as the "Scopes Monkey Trial,'' one of the more infamous moments in Tennessee's history."

Such is one's lifeview when they allow their perceptions to be affected by a biased and error-filled Hollywood movie like Inherit the Wind (pictured above). Does anyone want to give odds on how long it will be before the obligatory Taliban comparisons are foolishly spouted off?

042 part II

It seems that the debate over whether Obama is actually eligible for the office he currently holds is beginning to heat up. One well known blogger put it thusly...

"..while it is still possible that Obama is Constitutionally eligible, you have to be an ignorant fool to believe that he has offered any conclusive evidence on his own behalf. And when one considers all the actual evidence that has been amassed along with the mass of information being hidden from the public, the logical conclusion is that there is something very unusual about the man that likely goes well beyond his probable lack of Constitutional eligibility."

And what is some of this "conclusive evidence" that has been amassed? Day goes on to cite an debate between two San Diego area columnists, one of whom posits an interesting, fact-filled entry that neatly summarizes the following...

"Recent documents substantiate that Obama only attended Columbia University for 9 months in 1982-1983, contrary to official accounts.

FOIA and other requests have been submitted to the State Department for passport and travel records. The Selective Service and Social Security Administrations have been asked for documentation regarding Obama’s Connecticut-based social security number 042-68-4425.

Investigators have traced the number prior to Obama’s [ending in 4424] to Newington, Conn. resident Thomas Wood, deceased at age 19. To date no government agency can explain how Obama obtained the Connecticut number when at no point in his child or early adult years was he a resident of the state.

Investigations continue into Hawaiian infant-death records for sequential relationships with Obama’s COLB record number 151 01961 010641. The Nordyke twins have made public their long-form certificates with numbers ending in 37 and 38.

There are several infant-death candidates that may have had birth certificate numbers issued during the August 1961 time frame. These efforts hope to yield more information now kept from the public."

Feel free to check out the other columnists response which basically boils down to 'I don't care, this is stupid'. Nice moron. Why don't you make a paper airplane out of the Constitution while youre at it? Last May when I posted the original installment of 042, one Obama lackey,lapdog,water carrier apologist offered up this possible explanation as to why someone who was living in Indonesia at the time was issued a Connecticut Social Security Number...

"the president "got his SSN as a child living in Indonesia and the application was just processed in Connecticut."

Seems a bit plausible. Especially when one considers that his alleged father went to school in New England (Harvard) and might have applied for little Barry's SSN while living there. It so happens that writer Jack Cashill has chimed in to cast serious doubts upon such a hypothesis...

"[Social Security] Numbers are assigned based on the return address on the request envelope, not residency," crowed Jason Linkins in the Huffington Post as though he had said something meaningful. [Jason] Linkins (of the Huffington Post) suggested two possible explanations, both preposterous. One is that Obama applied for his SSN as a little boy in Indonesia for no known reason, and the application just happened to be processed in Connecticut for no known reason either.

For the second, Linkins cited the argument of Carole Glibert, in the Yahoo-related "Associated Content." Said Gilbert, presumably with a straight face, "In fact, Barack Obama's dad attended college in Connecticut and in 1977, Obama was college aged; is it beyond reason to consider that he might have checked out his father's alma mater?"

Last time I checked, Harvard was in Massachusetts. The closest town to Harvard in Connecticut is about 90 minutes away, and there is no record that Obama Sr. lived there, let alone that Obama visited his imaginary alma mater and just happened to apply for a Social Security card while visiting."

While it is becoming increasingly obvious that Obama lied about his attendance at Columbia, is it then reasonable to ask questions as to whether there are other fabrications about parts of his history as well? As WND has announced that they will be beginning a concentrated advertising campaign utilizing both radio and television ads to prompt Obama to release his long-form birth certificate, this, the most easily avoidable contraversy of the Obama presidency is only now just beginning to heat up.

UPDATE: If there is anyone who doubts even for the slightest moment that the MSM is completely in the tank for Obama, then click here to read a recent article from the Daily Mail asserting in the strongest terms possible that Obama has already released hi birth certificate when the document that they cite is the certification of live birth and either they don't know the difference between the two documents in which they shouldnt be commenting on the matter, or they are only mere lackeys who wrote this article and they are just taking their orders from other, more well positioned liberals who are above them.

To the friend I never met

It would seem that Belfast Cabby (Jonny) whose blog I link to on the right, has passed on. My condolences to Mrs. Cabbie and their young son. I enjoyed his blog immensely and always liked reading about the perspective of a taxi driver in Northern Ireland whose wonderful personality shined through in his words. May God comfort you in this time of sorrow.