Posted on 07/26/2006 1:57:34 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
I have noticed that the more liberals think they are going to get back power the worse our radical friends reveal themselves. The reverse is also true. For instance, when President Richard M. Nixon was about to take the Presidential oath of office following the close election of 1968, Senators who had pounded on him mercilessly during the campaign suddenly had a different view and began referring to Nixon as a "peace maker." One particular Senator, J. William Fulbright (D-AK), suddenly believed Nixon was open-minded and had great potential to bring the divided nation together.
It is beginning to look as though the Democrats may win this fall. Their rhetoric has become more strident and less co-operative with their Republican colleagues. Last week Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), on the Senate Floor, and had this to say about people of faith: "There is a group of people of deep faith. I respect that faith. I've been in enough inner city black churches, working class Catholic parishes, rural Methodist houses of worship and small Jewish synagogues to understand that faith is a gift. The trouble with this group, which I call the theocrats, is they want their faith to dictate what the government does. That, in a word, is un-American. That is exactly what the Founding Fathers put down their plows and took up muskets to fight."
This statement is breathtaking in its bigotry. It is part of a campaign to portray the Religious Right as a group of fanatics who want to do away with the Constitution. In one way Senator Schumer has done Evangelical Christians a great favor. He has linked them with Catholics and Orthodox Jews. If the culture wars are to be won it will take unity among all strong believers to make it happen.
To call a group of people of strong faith theocrats because they want to exercise their rights as citizens and participate in government is astounding but not surprising. Senator Schumer would like to silence his critics. He was one of the most outspoken proponents of the McCain-Feingold campaign reform legislation. That legislation included prohibitions on 501(c)4 and 527s that would not permit those types of organizations to advertise on electronic media or in the print media against a Senator's or Congressman's voting record. The courts upheld the constitutionality of the law. Therefore, it is not out of character for Senator Schumer, the Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), to make these remarks. Yet he owes an apology to all of the religious groups he mentioned.
If Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) or Majority Leader William H. Frist, M.D. (R-TN) made a similar statement about the Left to the effect that their churches are nothing but fronts fundraising for Leftist causes, there would be calls from their Senate colleagues for an immediate apology. This would be followed by numerous negative editorials. After several days of this the Senators would apologize in no uncertain terms. But the Left would say the apology was insincere and insufficient. Senator Lott, who had previously announced that he would run for re-election in the wake of Katrina, would likely be forced to resign. As for Frist, he is leaving anyway. This is a fictional scenario but I am astounded that Schumer made such a bigoted statement and yet no one has called on him to apologize.
Do voters want Senators and Members of Congress to do what is right? You bet. And do they often quote Scripture to show legislators the errors of their ways? Absolutely. Yet all of these people are genuinely committed to the democratic process. Schumer is not. Seventeen states amended their constitutions to say that marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. Others have declared that if same-sex marriage legislation is passed in one state or another they will not recognize the marriages. Still, Schumer, in his capacity as Chairman of the DSCC, has not encouraged those Senators up for re-election to follow the will of the voters on the issue of same-sex marriage. Finally, Senator Schumer's understanding of history is absolutely wrong. The Founding Fathers did not object to established religion in the several states. We had established religion in some states for a number of years after the founding of our country. But the Founders believed that there should be NO national religion.
It has been a week since Schumer made that bigoted statement. The countdown to an apology continues. Don't hold your breath.
Faith is a God given right.
bttt
I doubt it.
Chucky is, of course, a bigot ~ and a very hateful one.
No, Faith IS a gift. Lest we boast.
Chuckie is a leftist liberal democrat (the flavour now dominating that party) who believes your income belongs to the government andf they then allow you to keep a portion, and because democrats believe the government is more powerful than the sovereign individual voters (perhaps that's why democrats cheaat so much at the ballot box), the government is not to be restrained by people of faith or otherwise when the government decides how to spend tax dollars. The astonishing thing about this abject bankruptcy away from a Constitutional framework is, maniacal liberals like Schumer, et al don't realize they are in such odds with the founding principles of this Constitutional Republic!
Chucky is a brainless idiot....
"It is beginning to look as though the Democrats may win this fall."I wager that they won't... The American know that the DEM is not a series party that they can trust with national defense or their survival.
or maybe they do.
Faith should dictate what we do as a society, not the government.
This is where Schummer has lost his priorities. He does believe that the government dictates what he believes, and not his faith.
As a Catholic, he'll a lot of explaining to do to God.
If we wanted government to impose our religions we would be calling for things like confessionals, baptisms and/or mandatory sabbath keeping. Valuing life used to be seen as something valuable to everyone, not just the religious. Nature reveals the definition of family, so a society structured on that definition is not imposing one specific religion. It is recognizing reality. Atheists and homosexuals all have one mother and one father. There has never been a child born who hasn't. So, when government and society encourage marriage between a man and a woman only, it benefits all children.
Thank you.
I stand corrected.
Only if the majority of Americans think a platform consisting of 'we have a plan - we just don't know what it is yet' is sufficient.
The leftist policy toward religion is based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, which has made atheism the official doctrine of the new democratic party. Marxism and and neo-democrats has consistently advocated the control, suppression, and, ultimately, the elimination of religious beliefs. Leftists are anti-Semitic and are very hostile toward others faiths, they are even having up-to-the-minute campaigns or purges from their forms. Further persecutions and purges are like to followed because of the war. Leftists are very hateful.
Anything is possible from democraps. A political party that has depended upon defending the wholesale slaughter of alive unborn children, while spouting the demonic lie of 'for the children' is capable of any deception, any lie, and scheme to empower themselves, including the jihadesque mindset that they will destroy it if they cannot be in control over it.
Absolutely, but faith also dictates how you vote, whether as a citizen in electing people to office, or as an elected official when voting on legislation. So in that respect, faith does impact government.
Close election of 1968? Close? Humphrey v Nixon?
Please, someone assist me; I remember it as a Republican landslide, '72 was without a doubt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.