BAPTIST, CATHOLIC, JEW (Joke #1)

A Baptist, a Catholic and a Jew are in a lifeboat.
The ship has sunk and the seas are raging all around, and the lifeboat is almost swamped.
The Baptist prays, "Wash me of my sins, Lord, and deliver me from this peril!"
The Catholic prays, "I now confess my sins, Lord; please deliver me from this peril!"
The Jew says, "Oy! Haven't I been punished enough, already?"

Alpha & Omega (2 poems)

exquisite

Breath, oh so hard coming; my

Chest is thick with anticipation.

Sleep is a dear experience; time

Crawls, as in a cannabine fog.

Defining this exquisite excruciation,

Opining as to its "very real sense."

Nonsense! I can no more than babble--

Consequence eludes consciousness.

"UNDERSTAND, NOW, one can't be too hasty in such matters-

On first and second date, stay cool, don't

Drool all over her,

Fool!" Restraint escapes discipline.

She is almost here; I clock her course,

Breezing, breathing, closer in my mind.

Let her presence be as thrilling as her image;

Yet her memorized features hide from my straining brain.

A car door's muffled thud:

Ardor's racing past uncertainty.

Passion jolts my heart as I see her,

Dashing into my arms' tight embrace.

(November 6, 1987)

exit

Breath, oh so hard coming; my

Chest is thick with pain and dread.

Sleep is a dear experience; time

Crawls, as in a cannabine fog.

Defining this exit excruciation,

Opining as to its "very real sense."

Nonsense! I can no more than babble--

Consequence eludes consciousness.

"UNDERSTAND, NOW, one can't be too hasty in such matters-

No first or second dates; don't fret,

Time yet for tears, fears;

Opine as to what happened. Knowledge escapes consciousness.

She is gone now; I clock her course,

Leaving, fading, farther from my mind.

Oh, how her presence was so thrilling, so reassuring;

Now her memorized features hide from my straining brain.

A car door's muffled thud:

Ardor's racing past uncertainty.

Fear and sadness jolt my heart; it is not she,

No longer in my arms' tight embrace.

(May 18, 2006)

"Creator" vs. "creator"

Many folks these days are citing Thomas Jefferson’s references in the Declaration of Independence to “Creator” and to “Nature’s God” as “proof” that the Founders intended for the United States government to be a dedicated Christian government. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration in 1776, and he was also the primary author of a lesser-known document that is memorialized on his tombstone, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom.

The Statute is still codified in Virginia law as Section 57-1. I would describe its language as “sternly separationist,” but others might be of a different opinion. The Statute is spread below in the "February" chapter of this Blogsite, so you readers may draw your own conclusions.

One of the more interesting aspects of the Statute is the explicit warning from Jefferson that pseudo-moralistic do-gooders would subsequently try to modify the Statute and destroy the strict separation of religion and government contained in it. My delegate, Bill Janis, a self-righteous, disingenuous, pompous Republican ass, attempted to modify the underlying separationist language in the Virginia Constitution by introducing an overt religion-promoting amendment in 2006 that was fortunately killed in a Virginia Senate committee after passing the House of Delegates. He vehemently argued the fraudulent pretext that he was merely trying to promote religious liberty thereby. Most Republicans in the Virginia House of Delegates do not respect history. His attempted dirty work is also recited below.

It is simply inconceivable to me that the same person who authored the strict separation found in the Virginia Statute intended to manifest an overt Christian purpose to the American Revolution. That is illogical and also disregards Jefferson’s clear self-description as a “Deist,” not a Christian. Nevertheless, the “Jesus crowd” desperately insists on the foregoing citations as their “proof.”

Keep in mind the following facts:

Modern German capitalizes ALL nouns. Routinely.

Written English was not "standardized" until the advent of public schools and widely distributed texts (like the "McGuffey Reader") beginning in the late 1800's.

Writers of English in the 1700's ROUTINELY capitalized all nouns. This is reflected in the script copies of both the Declaration and of the Constitution, at least the first reference to any noun is capitalized.

I have always believed this was a habitual holdover from ancient Anglo-Saxon which is /was a Germanic language. Perhaps that is just a coincidence, but I think not.

Now, as noted above, American religionists make much of Jefferson's capitalized use of "Creator" endowing the "unalienable Rights" granted by "Nature and Nature's God" etc. as evidence that Jefferson was a practicing Christian who INTENDED to establish a Christian theocracy here with special references to Yahweh. How anyone could assume that the author of the Va. Statute for Religious Freedom could have intended a Christian theocracy is abusurd in the extreme! Obviously, those who so argue have never read Jefferson's Statute. The Statute is unambiguously and viciously secular in its reach and intent!

I happen to think that Jefferson's Declaratory references to "Creator" and "Nature's God" would be routinely written under modern grammar rules as "creator" and "nature's god," but I cannot prove it. I doubt very seriously if Jefferson was referring to the Judeo-Christian Yahweh in the Declaration. I think he'd be stunned to hear the modern religionist arguments to the contrary!

In any event, the religionists can't prove their theories, either! We will likely never know for sure.

There are some other “sacred cows” that need some attention:

In Article VI in the main body of the Constitution there is a specific prohibition of religious tests for public office. Never mind the First Amendment. It also prohibits oaths and affirmations for public officials for ANYTHING other than to support the Constitution. No pledges of loyalty to "graven images" like flags and crosses and swastikas may be demanded of public officials.

Thus, I think professions of religious faith by political candidates are unethical and unconstitutional, and I think journalistic prurience therefor is also unethical!! A journalist may only legitimately raise the issue if a hypocritical situation presents itself. Of course, the First Amendment protects these sorts of utterances, but that does not satisfy the ethical dilemma.

So, I would also submit that the Virginia law requiring public-school students to pledge and their teachers to lead allegiance to a flag is unconstitutional, regardless of the "under God" stuff. In my opinion, Michael Newdow was an arrogant idiot! He set constitutional law back seriously with a very bad precedent.

True patriots should not stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance, nor should they tolerate candidate professions of religious belief nor the journalists who make such inquiries. Our loyalties as citizens should be strictly to the Constitution.