New for 2006- a Question. Why are you on my homepage? Are you interested in me as a poster? Or are you simply looking for anything to use in a personal attack because our exchange isn't going well for you on a particular topic? Wouldn't you rather go back and debate whatever issue we are talking about on it's merits? Personal attacks simply show weakness. Plus it is easy to be nasty on a computer. But it is still bad manners. Anyway... In case you are interested:

I believe character counts.

You are what your actions say you are.

The Romans had an expression "He is worth his salt" The Roman soldier was sometimes paid in salt. To be worth your salt meant you pulled your weight.

I have met people from all walks of life that are worth their salt. I have met many that were not worth the air they breathed.
I belived in what I heard in church, the boy scouts, and from my parents.
Be careful what you wish for. When I was little I wished for wisdom. It turns out wisdom means you know how little you know. I have been trying to make up for it ever since.
I will rarely post or reply. But I read the Free Republic everyday. In fact, I get most of the news from here. Whatever did I do before FR? Thanks Mr. Robinson!

In 2006 there is a new wave of Freeper even more annoying than the NeoConfederates. They are the evolutionists. Not since Kerry and Pelosi have there been people so impressed with themselves and so convinced of their intellectual superiority. From their comments it soon became evident that evolution is to them a religion no less fiercely held than the Jihadists. And no more tolerant. Check their threads for links to information from reputable sources if you wish to learn about the topic like me, but take a word of caution in taking what they say at face value. They are rude fanatics and will attack anyone that doesn't worship their way or questions them on ideas.

To update this for 2004: I seem to be posting more than I thought because of three points of view that irritate me: 1. The civil war wasn't about slavery. 2.Anti-Catholic hatred. 3. Anti-police hatred.

So, for #1: The civil war was about slavery. Sorry. The Confederacy was based on it and so was the Southern economy. You cannot rewrite history no matter how much you want to. This effort started at the end of the war and I was shocked to find it still going on today. So for this pathetic revisionism, that rears it's ugly head here occaisionally, I will enshrine the following from the message to the Confederate Congress April 29th 1861 from Jefferson Davis:

" As soon as the Northern States that prohibited African slavery within their limits had reached a number sufficient to give their representation a controlling voice in the Congress, a persistent and organized system of hostile measures against the rights of the owners of slaves in the Southern States was inaugurated and gradually extended. A continuous series of measures was devised and prosecuted for the purpose of rendering insecure the tenure of property in slaves... Senators and Representatives were sent to the common councils of the nation, whose chief title to this distinction consisted in the display of a spirit of ultra-fanaticicsm and whose business was... to awaken the bitterest hatred against the citizens of sister states, by violent deunciation of their institutions; the transaction of public affairs was impeded by repeated efforts to usurp pairing the security of property in slaves, and reducing those States which held slaves to a condition of inferiority. Finally a great party was organized for the purpose of obtaining the administration of the Government, which the avowed object of using its power for the total exclusion of the slave States from all participation in the benefits of the public comain acquired by all the States in common, whether by conquest or purchase; of surrounding them entirely by States in which slavery should be prohibited; of thus rendering the property in slaves so insecure as to be comparatively worthless, and thereby annihilating in effect property worth thousands of millions of dollars. This party, thus organized, succeeded in the month of November last in the election of its candidate for the Presidency of the United States. In the meantime the African slaves had augmented in number from about 600,000 at the date of the adoption of the constitutional compact to upward of 4,000,000. In moral and social condition they had been elevated from brutal savages into docile, intelligent, and civilized agricultural laborers, and supplied not only with bodily comforts but with careful religious instruction. Under the supervision of a superior race, their labor had been so directed as not only to allow a gradual and marked amelioration of thier own condition, but to convert hundreds of thourands of squrare miles of the wilderness into cultivated lands covered with a prosperous people; towns and cities had sprung into existence, and had rapidly increased in wealth and population under the social system of the South;... and the productions in the South of cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, for the full development and continuance of which the labor of African slaves was and is indispensable had swollen to an amount which formed nearly three-fourths of the exports of the whole United States and had become absolutely necessary to the wants of civilized man. With interests of such overwhelming magnitude imperiled, the people of the Southern States were driven by the conduct of the North to the adoption of some course of action to avert the danger with which they were openly menaced."
GAME. SET. MATCH.

This is for extra credit. It comes from a speech in Savannah on March 21st 1861 by Alexander Stephens, VP of the Condederacy.

" The (Confederate) Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions- African slavery as it exists among us- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split" He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old Constitution were, that the enslavement fo the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with; but the general opinion of the men of that day was, that, somehow or other, in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away...Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the idea of a Government built upon it- when the "Storm came and the wind blew, it fell." Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition. This, our new Government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth......It is the first government ever instituted upon principles in strict comformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many Governments have been founded upon the pronciples of certain classes; but the classes thus enslaved were of the same race, and in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. The negro by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material- the granite- then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is the best, not only for the superior but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed in conformity with the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of His ordinances or to question them.

I like to think of them both as leading liberals of their time.



For the anti-Catholics out there I find an almost universal ignorance of the role of the Virgin Mary, prayer,tradition, mass, saints, the role of confession and communion, and the role of the church. Often you are fed misinformation by petty twisted people filled with hatred. Please access the Catechism of the Catholic Church and educate yourself. If you don't agree with what you read, fine. You don't find it in your heart to do so. But regardless, it speaks poorly of you to denigrate another's faith. I wouldn't do it to someone who is of a Protestant denomination. Whoever weakens faith in Jesus hurts themselves by hurting others. Plus it is just plain bad manners. But I have seen plenty of that from the Catholic bashers here. Over time it seems to be the same characters doing it too. They post attack posts on Catholics and their comments are exceedingly vile. I can excuse lack of knowledge but these same posters have been corrected over and over again. Therefore, they lie. They are not honest people. They are not good people. They do these things with hatred in their hearts. There is nothing Christian in their acts and you know there is no love or goodness in their souls. Pity them but brand them for what they are. Should Christ himself come back and reveal himself, and declare the Catholic Church he founded on earth is his one true church, they would be the first to nail him to the cross again in fury. Pray they let the hatred for Christ and his Church go and they find Christ's love before it is too late. I will never try and turn a protestant away from Christ or his way of believing even if I think it is lacking in the fullness intended by Christ. I will explain my beliefs and then leave it up to that person.


For the anti-police, all I can ask is what is the alternative in society? I think the second ammendment is great. But it won't help you with identity theft or to solve the murder of your loved one. It won't keep public order. We don't all live in compounds and the people we hire to keep the peace are no less worthy, and serve freedom no less, than our armed forces. But when I see on the threads the "Jack Booted Thug" comments I can only feel contempt for the lack of character you have. Oh well, how about getting to know your local agency by asking to do their ride along program? Go sit in court and hear some cases. Maybe you will grow in your understanding and leave some prejuidices behind. If not, then I pity you for your lack of reason.