Let’s play ball!

It is incredible how many people are still protesting against the Health Care Reform Act and carrying big signs denouncing the unconstitutionality or their outrage for this bill.

I can understand up to a point that the people feel upset that they will be forced to get health insurance. What I can’t understand is their outcry that they don’t want government to get involved in their health issues… That outrage of course lasts until they reach their golden years and retire. The sad thing is, these seniors and retirees that are screaming that they don’t want government “making their health care decisions” have Medicare, and God forbid that someone takes that away from them! What do these people think Medicare is? Medicare is what all of us would have been entitled to if it wasn’t for all the morons that were against single payer or public option. The stigma of the government involved in our health issues was greater than the benefits we could have enjoyed.

Since we couldn’t get the public option or single payer because of all the false allegations that the political liars used to instill fear on the elderly and the gullible, we now have to pay for private insurance… because the rights of the health insurance companies were far more important than our own personal interests.  We have the Tea Party and Republicans to thank for that one. The same people that didn’t want to have a single payer or public option and don’t want to be forced to get health insurance claiming it is unconstitutional. Why is health insurance unconstitutional and not, let’s say, automobile insurance? Why is it that health insurance is an evil thing that government shouldn’t mandate or impose on all of us when not having it affects us ALL yet, it is OK to be forced to have auto insurance for every single vehicle we own?  Why is it OK for one type of enforced insurance but not the other?

When a person that doesn’t have health insurance is hospitalized and can't or won't pay the bill, we end up ‘picking up’ that tab. Every year hospitals nationwide ‘lose’ millions of dollars in unpaid balances incurred by uninsured people incapable or unwilling to pay their debt. The reality is that no hospital really loses money, they just increase the price of their services making all of us that have insurance to pay for those that didn’t. And all of us, those that incurred in the bill and those who see their premium increase pay again in the form of taxes, the government assumes a lot of those loses... kind of a bail out for hospitals.

If you have an automobile or motorcycle and you have a traffic accident, chances are that there will be two cars involved.  Usually, the person that hits pay for the repairs or medical needs of the injured through their insurance and their insurance premiums most likely will increase when they renew their policies.  Automobile insurance companies raise the premiums nationwide according to the accident ratio within that city or state.  Most of us hate them, but since it is the law to have it, we conform... Except if you live in New Hampshire where having automobile insurance it's an option, I think I will move there!

It seems that for Americans protecting an object is far more important than protecting themselves.  We hear people say all the time when their vehicles have been stolen things like "thank God I had insurance!"or "I don't worry because I'm insured."  Why don't they think the same way when it comes to their own person, their own bodies?  Once again, an object is far more important than a person.  No wonder they granted "personhood" status to corporations and we, the workers, have become the property of these corporations!

And now, here we are again fighting against the “Obamacare” as it has been "baptized". This bill has been taken to the Supreme Court to deem it unconstitutional.  It is sad that most likely they will win and repeal the law, after all the Supreme Justices enjoy having Public Option until the day they die.

I believe that is a shame. Many people that could be insured with preexisting conditions will  have no insurance and that includes babies and children. These people once again will have no insurance and perhaps due to being uninsured they may lose their lives.  We can place this injustice on those same people that are constantly yelling how precious every life is: the pro-life people. Once again they have proven that the only life they care for are the one before it passes the birth canal, once you take a breath you are on your own!

I suggest that all the judges and politicians that are fighting and claiming Obamacare as unconstitutional to have their insurance revoked. No more government insurance for them since it is so evil. We progressives and liberals are always trying to work for the people and if these people don’t want insurance especially insurance provided by the government, then we should take that burden away from them. The same can be said about all the senior citizens that have fought so vehemently against government subsidized insurance; let’s cancel their Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps. What do they think those are, manna?  I am sure they will be thrilled since in their opinion they do not use any government assistance and want government out of their lives, let’s be nice and give them what they want.

Let’s repeal Obamacare but do what I suggest above. All congressmen that are against Obamacare, revoke their insurance. Every citizen that has signed anything against Obamacare, let’s cancel his or her government provided insurance. Let’s start playing their game. Let's begin by automatically canceling health insurance of all the fat cats in Congress that have done nothing but inflict fear in their constituents and of all the seniors that claim that government should stay away from their health insurance.  When they stop getting these benefits, they will be begging for the Single Payer Option, not Obamacare which is the watered down version of what was original intended… Let the games begin!

Etch A Sketch, a Bible or a Blackberry?

Ever since Mitt Romney’s Campaign Advisor, Eric Fehrnstrom, made the analogy of Romney's campaign with an Etch A Sketch no other statement has been more accurate or prompted the other candidates to speak their minds freely for us to have a better, clearer and irrefutable idea of what the GOP principles truly are: a never-ending adjustment to fit the needs of the audience but not what they truly mean or plan to do if they win the Presidency.

To begin with and thanks to that comment, we now know for a fact what up to now we suspected but had no tangible proof:  Mitt Romney will say and do whatever you want him to.  Like the Etch A Sketch toy, he shakes up and presents the image you want if by doing so he will get your vote.  What are Romney’s own ideals and ideas? Only he knows that for sure and even then I have my doubts, it must be really difficult to maintain your own concepts after you keep changing them to please others.

Now Santorum is claiming that to have an “Etch A Sketch” President, we might as well keep the one we currently have – I like his suggestion and I do hope that all the republicans out there listen and do exactly that: Vote for Obama over Romney!

I know that there are Independents out there that are undecided – Why? Beats me!  But they are.  Some say that they don’t like the “Obamacare” that will force them to purchase health insurance.  It’s funny that no one resents being forced to buy insurance for their cars or homes, if they happen to own their homes, but if they are forced to care for what is their main source of income – themselves – then it is the end of the world as we know it.  Others think that President Obama hasn’t done enough of what he promised, and resent him for it.  There are others that are not happy that we are still fighting wars and that Gizmo still is operating.  And the many excuses they provide for their indecision is endless.  I have a question for all of them, from all the Presidents that have led this country while you have been alive… Please, can you name one President that has fulfilled ALL his promises and all OUR expectations?  I am sure that there will be none and if someone provides me with a name, they will be lying because there is no such a thing here or anywhere else, not now not ever.

Having that hurdle cleared, we can continue to analyze what we are risking if we vote for Romney or Santorum in November 2012:

Mitt Romney: Considered the less extremist of the candidates on these primaries, Mitt Romney is offering a bureaucratic and protectionist approach towards big corporations and Wall Street.    Mitt Romney is a man that was born into wealth, not having to worry about a thing since the day he was born, he is your typical 1%.  For him it is normal for a person to own 5 luxury cars, an even great number of houses and have as friends the owners of Nascar or any other multimillion-dollar corporation, and these elites are his best buddies.  The "poor guy" doesn’t even know how to talk to the working class!  It is well known that you can judge people by the way they treat animals, specially their pets and we all know the answer to that one.  How can we expect compassion from a man that didn’t care for his own dog?  No.  He is heartless!  No wonder he says that he enjoys “firing people!”  It is a known fact that he will protect and promote corporations, not people; after all, he is a corporate man with no experience whatsoever on how to be a “regular” guy.  He also has a tendency to say whatever the people that is listening to him wants to hear and even his campaign manager agrees to this.  We owe Eric Fehrnstrom a great deal for the accurate description he gave of Romney’s campaign strategy as an “Etch A Sketch."  With friends like that… who needs enemies, right?



Rick Santorum:  All the sudden I have this urge to drop to my knees and pray… and I am agnostic!   Rick Santorum is a super religious man that envisions this country as a religious country.  For him, separation of church and State means that the State has no saying on what the church does but not the other way around.  If Santorum should win the elections, very remote possibility at this point, he will implement prayers in school and in every governmental office.  He will assign judges to the Supreme Court that shares his extreme religious views.  We can rest assure that he will push for banning abortions at all stages and there will be no exceptions to the rule.  It is a known fact that his wife had an abortion, to safe her life, but that doesn’t matter for this super religious freak if it is your life or that of your wife or daughter the one that needs saving.  All he cares is that there will be no abortions for any reason, so if the women in your life die... it was meant to be and, who are you to question God’s ways?

Santorum is not for the 1% but he is certainly not for the 99% either.  He is for small numbers, the smaller the better; his main purpose for running is to pay the debt and control the budget.  Very commendable if it was plausible at the times we are living.  Are we willing to do without enough police to protect us (I know, after the fiasco we are witnessing with the Trayvon Martin’s case we have to wonder if they are worth it); are we willing to lay-off half of our fire department?  Are we ok with the potholes on our roads?  A cut in our public services which will include public transportation, street lights, food stamps for those that are unemployed, Medicare and Medicaid for the elderly, a cut in our Social Security funds, reducing the unemployment benefits (which we have contributed to), etc.?  Most likely, Santorum will privatize most of the public services in order to cut expenses.  This means that we will have to pay if we want those services, otherwise, your house can burn to the ground before the fire department would do a thing about it – we’ve seen cases like this already in towns where they are privatizing fire departments.  Santorum believes that George W. Bush was a great president; that statement alone should raise all the flags! If Santorum gets his ways, government will have a saying on what transpires in a bedroom… talk about cutting expenses!! He believes that for the good of society, there cannot be pornography, he will prohibit them even at cheap motel rooms!  He is against antithetical sexual actions that according to him go against the traditional family… if it was up to him, he would monitor how we conduct ourselves while copulating.  He would probably fine us if we are wild and enjoying a good orgasm, since he probably doesn’t know what that is and envy can be a bad advisor.  He also has compared gay sex to bestiality and pedophilia.  What can I say?  The guy is a “jewel!”

President Barack Obama: If you ask me, he is the most sensible and reasonable candidate of all.  He inherited a chaotic presidency where the banking institutions were collapsing and where all the experts were foreseeing a financial calamity similar to the Great Depression.  He prevented that from happening.  That the economy has been awful?  True, but we didn’t fall into a Depression.  That he didn’t bring the troops home?  True, but we have no idea what the Generals on the ground have confided in him, I am sure there are good reasons for President Obama to continue that war and we will know one day.  President Obama has tried tirelessly to work for the American people, he had to compromise a lot in order to get things done, but he got them done.  That it could have been better?  Perhaps, but we have ourselves to blame, not him.  I blame all of us that thought we were invincible and stayed home during the 2010 elections hoping for others to do what it was our duty to do: VOTE.  So we failed and lost the majority.  That majority we enjoyed from 2008 – 2010 was not a true majority.  There were way too many blue dogs that sided with the Republicans and didn’t allowed things to progress.  From 2010 till now, with all the Tea Party representatives in Congress plus the old geezers from the GOP that remained, things have been even slower but still things are improving and things are getting done… Imagine what we can do if we had a stronghold in Congress, no blue dogs, just a super majority of real Democrats and Progressives, image what we can accomplish then!  So, unless you want the government to tell you how to make love and to control how many kids you can have; or unless you are one of the lucky ones that belong to the 1%... What are you thinking of?  There should be no doubt, no question in your mind.  Vote for the future, vote for Obama, after all… Etch A Sketch is so passé!

Can someone pass Santorum a bucket?

----------------------

“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.”

- John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Greater Houston Ministerial Association, September 12, 1960

----------------------

Back in December 4th, 2010, Rick Santorum publicly rejected the separation of Church and State in a speech delivered at the St. Thomas More College of Liberal Art’s Symposium, referring to John F. Kennedy’s famous speech delivered on September 12, 1960. Recently when CBS host, George Stephanopoulos, asked Santorum about his speech, Santorum went as far as to say that he felt like throwing up when he first read Kennedy's famous speech script. Apparently, the reason for this repulsion was that John F. Kennedy (a Senator running for President at the time) stated in front of a Protestant congregation that his Catholicism was not going to be an impediment in his Presidency because he firmly believed in Separation of Church and State. It seems that Santorum has a "weak" stomach and even weaker intelligence.

Santorum said that “Kennedy chose not just to dispel fear, he chose to expel faith.” He went as far as to affirm that there was no separation of Church and State, “The idea of strict or absolute separation of church and state is not and never was the American model. It’s a model used in countries like France and until recently Turkey, but it found little support in America until it was introduced into the public discourse by Justice Hugo Black in the case of Everson v. The Board of Education in 1947.” It is not only sad but shameful that a person, any person, running for the highest position of the United States to be so misinformed and to know so little about the history of the country he or she is seeking to represent. It is his complete and utter ignorance about the history of this great nation that might have urged him to say that “the First Amendment was designed to protect churches from the government and nothing more.” How can a person be so ignorant and misinformed and be running for President? That is beyond my comprehension.

For those of you that might agree with his point of views, I have to implore you to read the history of this great country. I do know that most of you hate history and therefore don’t bother to read it and prefer just to repeat what others say, as long as you agree with it; but history has been written so we don’t repeat the same mistakes, for future generations to know what, why and how it happened and for all of us to understand it.

To begin with, many affirm that this nation was founded by Christians and that is not entirely true. Not all the Founding Fathers were Christians; actually, the majority were Deists. I will not try to proof or disproof this since that will lead us nowhere. However, the idea that they wanted to have religion as part of our way of government it’s completely false, quite contrary, they made sure to keep Church and State separate and I will try to prove this, not with my opinion which is just as good as yours, but with facts.

What John F. Kennedy said back in 1960 was and still is completely correct. Our Founding Fathers wanted the separation of Church and State – after all, the Separatist Pilgrims came to this country fleeing from England escaping religious persecution from the Church of England. That is the first unsubstantial proof; the Pilgrims were seeking religious freedom, from a Church not a government. When the Founding Fathers wrote Article VI of the Constitution stating that “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” I am certain that they were reinforcing that religion shouldn’t be part of or a requirement to hold a position in government. Actually, nowhere in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or any other document drafted by the Founding Fathers you will see that the Bible was needed to take the Oath or Affirmation; actually not all presidents have used a bible  when taking the oath and the above article is the only mention of religion in the Original Constitution. You will think that if religion was that important for the Founding Fathers they would have mentioned religion or God more often, but they didn’t. Further, this separation is ratified by the First Amendment (adopted on December 15, 1791 and the one Santorum mentioned and used to reinforce his opinion) which reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” It is unbelievable that Santorum interprets this Amendment as the Church being protected from government but not the other way around. This Amendment is clearly separating the two, government can’t enforce a religion because we are free to worship as we wish, hence, government can’t worship, can’t be affiliated, associated or related to any religion. It is extremely difficult for me to understand why Santorum or the extreme religious people of this country can’t understand something as simple as this, except that fanaticism blinds them. I do know that those people will argue that they do know what the Founding Fathers wanted, how Christians were they, etc. You see, they tend to interpret things their own way, just like they do with the Bible… The problem is that, unlike the Bible, there are documents from the time, LEGAL DOCUMENTS, that destroys those arguments completely and without a trace of a doubt shows that the Founding Fathers wanted the separation of Church and State. Back in November 4, 1796 the new nation of the United States entered in their first treaty, this treaty was with Tripolitania, and was signed by John Adams.  This document leaves no doubt about the religious founding of this country. In the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary, commonly known as the Treaty of Tripoli, this becomes irrefutably clear:

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

This document is never mentioned because its not a very known document, but it states in no uncertain terms that this country, the United States of America, was not founded on Christianity.

So Mr. Santorum, vomit all you want… but Religion never had and shall never have a place in government just as government has no place in religion. You want God in your life? Do all of us a favor, go to church, pray privately and adore whoever you want, just don’t force the citizens of this country, who will be paying your salary, to believe in what you believe, after all, there are Atheists and Agnostics too and they constitute the 4th largest group in this country, there are more Atheist and Agnostics than there are Jewish, Mormons and Muslims… combined!



And the Plot Thickens…

For those of you that might not remember, the stars of the show were: Michele Bachmann and her sidekick Marcus Bachmann; Herman Cain; Jon Huntsman; Rick Perry; Ron Paul; Newt Gingrich; Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.

The Republican presidential primaries are turning out to be a very, very entertaining spectacle. Like a good soap opera, we have had the Insane (Michele Bachmann); the gay (Marcus Bachmann), ok, granted… he wasn’t a candidate, but boy, didn’t we have a field day with him!!; the dumb Macho man (Rick Perry); the synister old guy (Ron Paul); the guess star (Herman Cain); the rich guy (Mitt Romney); The educated and well-traveled (Jon Huntsman); the sex-maniac, unfaithful, egocentric and “guess what my religion is” guy (Newt Gingrich); the guy that seems good but is in reality fanatical and delusional (Rick Santorum). We’ve seen it all, and apparently, they’ll keep coming!

Nothing much can be said about the guess star, Herman Cain, except that I believe he spent too long so close to a hot oven that he might have “cooked” his brains a bit and that must be why he suffers from such a chronic case of bad memory and truly does not remember the many affairs he had or the women that had to put up with his unsolicited sexual advances. Maybe, since he was so used to timing pizzas or they would be free, not being able to perform for more than 10 minutes, he thought these sexual experiences didn’t count and were “free”… Poor guy, he only lasted for a few guess appearances and on December 3rd, 2011 his “contract expired”, but not without a fight.

My favorite, kind of the salt and pepper of this charade, was Michele Bachmann. Who doesn’t remember the statements given by Michele? They were paramount! One of the most memorable was "I will tell you that I had a mother last night come up to me here in Tampa, Florida, after the debate. She told me that her little daughter took that vaccine; that injection and she suffered from mental retardation thereafter." Her pathetic lies, the wild look on her eyes, her complete and utterly denial that her husband was gay; everything about her was so absurd that we didn’t know if to laugh, cry, or pity the woman. She and Marcus brought so much entertainment into an otherwise boring event that I don’t know about you, but I for one miss her! Without much fanfare, Michele was gone from the picture on January 4th, 2012.

Next in line of drop-outs, is Jon Huntsman. He was the most educated of them all. He was a bit arrogant. Ok, ok… a lot arrogant, but at least he had reason to be, damn it… the guy even spoke Mandarin! He tried very hard to fight a clean fight but, since he wasn’t getting anywhere with this tactic he tried to show aggression and, in his first attempt to show some teeth, he failed miserably! People could see he didn’t mastered the art of hypocrisy and ill intentions which are a pre-requisite to be a GOP contender so, with a sad look on his face that could bring tears to his mother’s eyes, quietly left the scene on January 16, 2012.

The cowboy, gosh… who can forget him? He was almost the male version of Michele Bachmann with a bit of Herman Cain just to make it more interesting. This guy, who really thought he had a chance to swim in a shark infested pool and be the daddy of all sharks, was devoured pretty quickly, you see, Rick Perry was as dumb as a doorknob and owner of a memory the size of a mosquito – not very good attributes for someone running for the presidency. This is one of his most memorable quotes, where he had the opportunity to show the world how brilliant he was: "I will tell you: its three agencies of government, when I get there, that are gone: Commerce, Education and the -- what's the third one there? Let's see. ... OK. So Commerce, Education and the -- ... The third agency of government I would -- I would do away with the Education, the ... Commerce and -- let's see -- I can't. The third one, I can't. Sorry. Oops” He couldn’t even remember his own plan! It was brilliant! But as all good things do have to pass, this cowboy rode into the sunset and went back to the lone star State on January 19th, 2012.

By this time, all we have left are: Newt, Paul, Mitt and Rick. The four horsemen of the apocalypses! If any one of them by any chance – whether Americans go crazy and vote for any of them or, as it is very likely they could do, fixing the elections – it will be the end of this country and we Liberals, Progressives, Democrats and Independent know this. The vision these men have for our country and the middle class is to be feared. But I seriously doubt this will happen.

Not even the GOP seems to have much faith in any one of them and is considering bringing into the picture two of their most beloved stars: Chris Christie and Jeb Bush. Will they accept to play into this soap opera? What will they be bringing into the picture? Of course, we know that Christie will be bringing about 400 pounds of lard with him and Bush more or less the same weight in crap coming as he does from the Bush clan; but politically and most importantly, from an entertaining point of view, what will they provide us with? I can’t wait for the next episode! Who will be the first of the 4 to leave the show with his tail between the legs? Count Dracupaul? Porky Newt? Saint Orum? Or Mitt Money?

Ah… don’t miss the next episode of this very interesting saga! Stay tune!

   

Religion has no place in Washington

The last name Santorum, literally means all saints in Latin. Apparently, Rick Santorum takes his last name at heart, the only problem is that he is no saint and if he is, he certainly is playing in the wrong field.

For starters, the United States is and has always been a secular country. All these false "patriots" that keep claiming that God should be "reinstated" in all governmental buildings and included in all governmental mandates are simply lying. The Founding Fathers of this great nation made sure that religion was not part of government, after all, not of the Founding Fathers believed in God – I bring this up because these false "patriots" keep talking about what our Founding Fathers wanted, specially Santorum,  they keep talking about honoring the Constitution yet, the original Constitution says just the contrary of what they and Santorum, are so vehemently and falsely claiming.

For those of you that have never read the Constitution of the United States (the original, as written by our Founding Fathers and therefore the “holy” one) the only time that the word religion is mentioned it’s to precisely refute it, this is verbatim the only time it’s mentioned (in a few different places, but exactly the same paragraph): “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” They made sure that religion was not necessary to hold a position within the government of this country.

The original Oath or Affirmation, as given to George Washington, reads as follows: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It is said that George Washington added in his inauguration the words “So help me God”, but there is no record to confirm or deny this… Regardless of who added it, it was not in the original Oath emphasizing the separation of Church and State.

Further, we find in the original Bill of Rights, signed in December 15th, 1791, the First Amendment to the Constitution, the very first, which must have meant that it was categorically the most important amendment of all which again makes sure of this separation by affirming: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Yet, the Republicans keep insisting in bringing God into government and claiming that it is what our Founding Fathers wanted, nothing could be further from the truth. They either have never read the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or, just as it happens with the Bible, they have decided to ‘interpret’ them as best suits them. But unlike the Bible that is full of riddles and parables, these documents are written in plain English for all to understand, without a doubt, what their intentions were.

The Founding Fathers were not all Christians. When Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence, he wrote it with the Revolution in mind, making sure that the feelings of the people at the time were forever engraved in that document. He made sure that freedom, equality and self-determination was to be included. Not a word about religion can be found in it. The reason might have been that Thomas Jefferson himself was not too fond of religion; he went as far as writing a book called “The Jefferson Bible” where he compiled passes from the Bible excluding all the miracles and supernatural events that is abundantly found in it. He admired Jesus’ teachings, but didn’t believe in all the hocus-pocus that in many cases overshadows these teachings instead of exalting them. But again, Republicans keep saying the Founding Fathers were Christians and God fearing men… they weren’t, at least not all of them.

Now, we find ourselves being assaulted by the Right and their never ending pursue to bring religion (their religion) into government. Rick Santorum is talking about the devil and Christ as if he was running for the clergy instead of the most important position in the United States and the world! It amazes me that one of the best presidents we ever had, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, was also a Catholic but, unlike Santorum, Kennedy understood that his religion – or any religion for that matter – had no place in public office. Who doesn’t remember his famous words: “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.” That is what a President should be like, that is what an Americans should demand.

Santorum, a religious fanatic that is campaigning as if all Americans were Catholics or Christians – he dreams of being the President that will force all Americans to believe in what he believes in, some sort of a religious tyranny; Kennedy, a man that worshipped privately but had the decency of not mixing the divine with the mundane, not mixing God and Government, Religion and Politics. That is the difference between the Right and the Left, between the irrational and the reasonable.

Rick Santorum, do America a favor, honor the Constitution and practice your religion where you should – your church, and allow all the American citizens to practice what they belief in or not, as the case might be.

“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/charters_of_freedom_2.html

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16920600

A “pill” too hard to swallow

According to a recent article written by Jessica Yellin and Brianna Keilar, both Correspondents for CNN, the White House is trying to adjust the health care policy to appease the Catholic Church and perhaps get the vote of some Catholics. The article claims that this adjustment is due to “an avalanche of criticism.” Apparently, the White House will try to implement the same policy that is currently used in Hawaii for religion institutions, in which women that work for Catholic charities, hospitals and the church can acquire coverage directly from the insurance company at the same price their employers would pay. I do not think it’s fair that women working for Catholic enterprises and who may or may not profess that religion have to be excluded from that benefit, unless the Catholic Church increase their salary to the same amount they would have to pay out-of-pocket to acquire it. However, this modification suggested by the White House is not being accepted by the Catholic Bishops, according to the article the leaders of the Catholic Church will only accept a total reversal on the policy – which means totally removing the contraceptive clause from the health care policy. Who on earth do the Catholic Church thinks they are?

I am so tired of having any religious institution – who pay no taxes, who at no time accept government interference in ANY of their day-to-day business (as it should be), who have no government regulations set in place, to think that the government has no business in their religious matters but that they, the religious institutions of any denomination, have any right whatsoever in changing governmental policies because it does not agrees with their views! The religious groups are overstepping their boundaries interfering with politics – both at a local and national level – forcing their views onto everyone else as if the separation of church and state didn’t exist or if it does, it simply does not apply to them. While the leaders of any religious corporation (that’s what they are) enjoy a life of luxury, no taxes paid, no need to report any of their actions to the government because if the government decided to interfere in any of their business they will cry religious prosecution, they seem to think they have "divine" power and can stick their noses where it does not belong.

Of course, as expected, we have the Speaker of the House, Mr. "Cry me a River" Boehner, accusing this administration of ‘attacking religion freedom." How is that so? How it's making contraceptives accessible, not forcing any woman to take them, an attack on religion freedom? Why is not an attack to the State what religion institutions are doing? Why does this "attack" can only be applied on one direction? I am not surprised either at the holier than God comments coming from all the Republican candidates which are all up in arms about the intrusion of government in religion… Mitt Romney, as usual, is already counting his chickens before they hatch and has added another thing he would do on his first day as President, reversing this clause. Sorry Romney, but you will not be the 45^th President of the United States.

Mr. President, keep the policy as it is! Do not allow religion to change the policies that will affect thousands of women, even millions if the Catholic Church gets its way. It is time for a real separation of church and state, it is time for any religious institution to pay their fair share of taxes – no more getting rich by preaching, no more favoritism. According to their own beliefs, money is sinful… so lets help them release some of that sin, and pay taxes after all, they can’t seem to separate religion and politics so, if they want to be involved in politics they should contribute to the country, financially, as everyone else does!