|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Dear Editor -- The approach of the Bush administration to funding religious social service organizations (the so-called "Faith-Based Initiative") contradicts one of the key arguments used to justify tax cuts and reduced government spending. You may recall Bush's frequent statements during his campaigns, echoing a fundamental belief of anti-tax conservative activists, to wit: "We believe that you know how to spend your money better than the government does."
But if he really believed that, then the government would not be taking money from citizens and redistributing it to church groups of its own choice. Rather, taxpayers would give to whatever faith-based group their conscience calls them to support, and then the government would allow them to take those donations as full-fledged tax credits, not merely deductions against taxable income.
For example: I am a Quaker, a member of the Religious Society of Friends, and we have a fine service organization, the American Friends Service Committee (www.afsc.org), that does immensely worthwhile work around the world. All other things being equal, I'm far more likely to send money to AFSC rather than groups associated with other denominations, who have large constituencies of their own. But the present policy takes my tax money and sends it to those other groups instead, some of which may promote policies that contradict my own beliefs. I am sure that were the roles reversed, and the government were sending funds to AFSC, certain conservative groups would raise considerable objections - and I believe they would be within their rights to do so. No one should be forced to provide funding for activities that violate their religious beliefs. So not only is this policy a contradiction of the "you know better" line mentioned above, it is in fact a violation of religious liberties, masquerading as an attempt to promote them. The Bush regime can't have it two ways. Either they should abandon the "you know better than we do" rhetoric, and admit that their actual goal is to force Americans to support religious groups more closely allied with Administration policies, or they should restructure the tax laws as I have suggested above. Otherwise, they stand accused of some fairly blatant hypocrisy - and you know how Christ felt about hypocrites.
| | |
| Y'all might have seen this:
----------------
For ExxonMobil Record Profits, for Consumers Soaring Costs
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/013006T.shtml
ExxonMobil Corporation said today that its 2005 earnings totaled $36.13 billion, an increase of 42 percent from the previous year. The amount is the largest annual profit ever for an American company. The earnings come at a time of high gasoline and heating fuel prices that have prompted some political leaders to call for a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
-----------------
So here's a little action to try:
1. CALL YOUR LOCAL EXXON/MOBIL....
2. Ask to speak to the manager. Be polite.
3. Find out if the station is company-owned. Chances are it isn't, and the manager is an independent contractor who could actually switch brands if
he/she wanted.
4. Ask, "How much of that profit trickled down to *you*?" The answer will probably be "None" or "Damn little, now that you mention it."
5. Encourage the manager to consider switching to selling a different brand of gas.
5a. Let the manager know that the ExxonMobil boycott is growing, and it would be smart for them to switch. To Citgo, say. Or Sunoco or BP (who aren't perfect, but they're much less SCUZZY than ExxonMobil!!) --
5b. Suggest that they check out the ExxposeExxon website (www.exxposeexxon.org).
6. Thank the manager for their time.
7. Find another ExxonMobil station, and go to step #1. Repeat as desired, until no one is selling ExxonMobil product anymore.
7a. Spread this idea around.
| | |
| TOP ANAGRAMS FOR
"HOMELAND SECURITY"
THE RUNNERS-UP:
Schedule into army.
Modestly ruin each.
Each tiny smoulder.
Oh, lunatics' remedy.
Launched to misery.
Demolish a century.
Loudest machinery.
Amend it, holy curse.
So humanely direct.
Honestly! I am crude.
THE TOP TEN ANAGRAMS FOR "HOMELAND SECURITY":
10. Oh, my insulted race.
9. Loud, hysteric "Amen!"
8. Columned hysteria.
7. Nicely routed sham.
6. Do search minutely.
5. Hey, damn it, closure!
4. Hey! Liar documents.
3. Lynch me, o dear suit.
2. Or deem this -- lunacy!
AND THE NUMBER ONE ANAGRAM FOR "HOMELAND SECURITY":
1. I'm the only crusade! | | |
| A couple of the things I've been up to:
- The Book Report Project -- "If they want to know what we read, let's tell them!" This project encourages folks to send brief book reports to the FBI, Attorney General Gonzalez, etc. etc., as a means of commenting on the USA PATRIOT Act and the provisions that allow for snooping of library and bookstore records. Hopefully, if the idea catches on, they'll have more information than they'll be able to handle. The project also encourages folks to read subversive literature, which is always fun.
- A Medal for Marla -- Recognizing the sacrifices of humanitarians
We (i.e., society in general) need to start according folks like Rachel Corrie and Marla Ruzicka the same level of respect and honor that we give to fallen soldiers.
| | |
| I have to get more in the habit of putting things that I write up on this site as soon as I come up with them. I have such a backlog...
Herewith, some comments I sent to the 700 Club:
Once again, Rev. Pat Robertson's tongue has been possessed by something very un-Christian. His statement condemning Dover PA because of the results of the school board election was not only heartless but un-Biblical. First, I doubt that our marvelous, merciful God is so petty that he would smite the believers in Dover because of the deeds of others. But I also take issue with the implication that those who voted against the conservative school board members were ipso facto going against the will of God. Indeed, has Pat considered the possibility that by this defeat God means to tell us that the "intelligent design" strategem is not the way He wants us to try to promote the faith?
Furthermore, I am very troubled by the general tendency to use the Lord's power to threaten people with dire consequences when they exercise their God-given constitutional freedoms. Such comments put the underpinnings of our democracy at risk.
I think it would be prudent at this time for Pat to go on an extended retreat and reflect on some of the trouble he's been getting into lately. He lets his fear and anger overwhelm his faith, and every time he does, he says something that discredits the faith, makes it easier for nonbelievers to ridicule Christians, and generally knocks the cause of the Gospel back years. | | |
|