Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label constitution

The Ten Commandments and the Constitution

     I have often heard it said that the Constitution of the United States is based upon the Ten Commandments, so I finally decided to check it for myself. I suggest that individuals who think this is the case should do the same. They may be in for a surprise.      But for those who do not have the time or inclination to make such a comparison, I present the following:       Commandment I - Thou shalt have no other gods before me. The only time God is mentioned in the Constitution is at the end of Article VII: Done in convention . . . in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven . . . In fact, Amendment I expressly forbids any mention of religion.      Commandment II - Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. The Constitution is silent on this Commandment.       Commandment III - Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain. Th...

Shades of Gray

     It would be nice if there were just two sides to every question, but it's just not true. For example, if I were to ask what needs to be done to end the current recession, the answers would run the gamut from more government spending to cutting spending to the bone, from increasing taxes on the wealthy to cutting taxes for everyone, and countless other real and imaginary solutions.      Even in court the question ostensibly is guilt or innocence of the defendant, but we all know that the verdict goes to the attorney who successfully convinces the jury that his analysis of the “shades of gray” is the correct one. If it were not so, no “guilty” party would ever later be set free on the basis of better evidence.      One of the problems with growing older is that one can discern the gray shades; as a result one's judgment swings back and forth between the “sides” of the question. It can get very confusing.   ...

A Tea Party Candidate

     I think most people would agree that a candidate for U.S. Senator or Representative should have some modicum of personal responsibillity, although some of the current crop seem to be lacking in that respect. So when I saw the responses that the GOP senate nominee from Delaware, Christine O'Donnell, made on a nationally televised debate, I thought I would take a quick look into her background.      She was born on August 27, 1969, and has been a marketing consultant, worked in public relations, and appeared as a political commentator on several news media outlets including Fox News. In 2006 and 2008 she ran for Senator in the primary elections, and was soundly defeated both times.      In 2010 she scored a surprising primary upset against nine-term Representative and ex-governor Mike Castle. Her victory was due to backing by Sarah Palin and an infusion of cash in the amount of $150,000 from the Tea Party. Her campaign als...

Dr. Rand Paul and the Constitution

      The day after winning the Republican Senate primary in Kentucky, Libertarian Rand Paul suffered an attack of foot-in-mouth disease. In an interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Wednesday, he was asked whether he believed businesses should have the right to refuse service to African-Americans.       Yes,” Paul said. “I’m not in favor of any discrimination of any form. … But I think what’s important about this debate is not written into any specific ‘gotcha’ on this, but asking the question: what about freedom of speech? Should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? Should we limit racists from speaking?”       Paul has previously gone on record as favoring the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the public domain , but believes that the government has overstepped its powers by extending non-discrimination to the private sector. In other words, government can require non-discrimination in organizations tha...