View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

Keith Smith: Restoring a sense of responsibility

Posted: July 25, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: July 25, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

Gary Horton’s op-ed in The Signal (“Something to which we can all agree,” July 9) was on the mark. Yes, this is something to which we can all agree.

We all have responsibilities, even if we don’t realize them or accept them. Knowing what our responsibilities are and being responsible are a part of being a good American.

Being irresponsible is being a bad American. However, how does one learn to “be responsible?”

Back in my day, learning consisted of the three Rs: reading, (w)riting and (a)rithmetic.

However, that wasn’t really all of it; included were two more Rs: respect and responsibility. We learned these both at home and in school.

We were taught to respect our teachers. They weren’t our pals; they were authority figures and they were the first to let us know this.

Their dress, their language and their demeanor put us on notice that we were under their control, but that they meant only the best for us. If we were told to do something and we defied them, we could expect, and generally got, punishment to match the offense — at school and at home.

We were in a disciplined and learning environment. And one of the things we learned was responsibility. We were responsible to be at school on time. We were responsible to do our homework,

We were responsible for being dressed properly. We were responsible for preserving our books (our parents had to buy them), our school supplies (ditto) and all the school property.

Some might have thought about writing on a school wall, but few dared the action.

Respect begins with having self-respect. If one lacks this quality, then why in the world would he or she respect anything?

One is not apt to have self-respect unless he or she has some sense of moral values. Without a standard of measure how can one know the quantity or the quality of anything?

In my time, the standard was set by the church and synagogue. The home and school were on the same page.

Even the homes that were secular shared these common values.

Fast forward to the 21st century: My observations of the current home and educational system informs me that such is not the case today.

In fact, it is almost devoid of any hint of respect and most in the system can’t even spell “responsibility,” let alone act like they understand the concept.

You might disagree, but I think that the “Greatest Generation” fell flat on its face in bringing up the baby boomers.

Now we have citizens with a hazy idea of what America used to be lacking a moral scale and with no sense of responsibility or respect for themselves or any one else.

Parents and grandparents today can’t turn back the clock easily and redo all that has been left undone.

We can’t teach or counsel our children that marriage is something that is worth working at when they see so many that appear happy, but have never accepted the responsibility of marriage nor have they stepped up to being a good parent.

And what are the chances that children from such homes will grow up to be respectable and responsible?

Yes, Gary, we can agree with what you said, but where we differ is in our assessment of how we got to such a sorry state of affairs and, more importantly, how to reverse course and get back to a society that values respectability and responsibility.

Keith R. Smith Jr. is a Canyon Country resident.

Comments

ricketzz: Posted: July 25, 2014 9:55 a.m.

That's what you get when you erase the culture in pursuit of a few extra bucks. When I was a kid I learned my ethics from the guys in the white hats. Saturday was cowboy movies in the morning, along with a few cartoons. Now, every second on TV is sponsored; infomercials have crowded out old movies; we have no sense of continuity with the past. We have no idea of how crude things were 100 years ago.


therightstuff: Posted: July 25, 2014 10:20 a.m.

Well said Kevin. When folks say these things we're told we are just a bunch of old white guys whose time has past and that we need to embrace a new culture. All the problems you cited in your column are the consequences of this new culture which some actually celebrate and others mourn who remember a far different America.


Indy: Posted: July 25, 2014 9:16 p.m.

Keith,

You may want to touch base with your conservative friends that constantly bastardize teachers in their politics.

I’m sure their kids hear this nonsense and mimic the behavior.

Likewise, kids are a lot smarter they you think . . . many times the education being given them is outdated.

Having taught in high school, I saw firsthand what kids are facing . . .

You might also like to communicate with the people grandstanding the recent child migration to the US. When did blaming children become responsible?

I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality.

And when they the kids realize you are there to ‘help them’, you don’t have any classroom management issues.

Finally, when working out here in SCV-land . . . I had far more student issues with behavior than when I worked in a semi-inner city school.


therightstuff: Posted: July 26, 2014 11:41 a.m.

"""You might also like to communicate with the people grandstanding the recent child migration to the US. When did blaming children become responsible?"""

"""I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality."""

This guys's irony is only surpassed by his hypocrisy.


tech: Posted: July 26, 2014 8:54 p.m.

"I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality." - Indy

Based on your postings in this forum, not credible.


Indy: Posted: July 26, 2014 9:05 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: """You might also like to communicate with the people grandstanding the recent child migration to the US. When did blaming children become responsible?"""

"""I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality."""

This guys's irony is only surpassed by his hypocrisy.

Indy: The poster’s jealousy is exhibited by his envy to make intelligent remarks versus the tired and word out partisan quick quip . . .


therightstuff: Posted: July 26, 2014 11:33 p.m.

That's not it, Indy. I'm just bummed because our focus group couldn't meet last week to test any new slogans, my fax machine is broken so I have no new GOP talking points, the Order of Religious Conservatives to Destroy the Poor is on vacation hiatus, and my TV is on the fritz so I can't watch Fox News. Without them I'm lost.


ricketzz: Posted: July 27, 2014 10:32 a.m.

What would help people understand responsibility a whole bunch would be to arrest the CEOs of the banks that have recently paid $Billions in Criminal penalties; Holder refuses to frog-march Obama's golfing buddies for drug cartel money laundering while Private Manning does a year naked in solitary for showing us what we do when we do war. (now that is a sentence!)


emheilbrun: Posted: July 27, 2014 12:31 p.m.

From Indy, "I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality.

And when they the kids realize you are there to ‘help them’, you don’t have any classroom management issues.

Finally, when working out here in SCV-land . . . I had far more student issues with behavior than when I worked in a semi-inner city school.

Sounds like you were a great teacher. How long did you teach? What did you teach? And why did you stop?


Indy: Posted: July 27, 2014 6:56 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: That's not it, Indy. I'm just bummed because our focus group couldn't meet last week to test any new slogans, my fax machine is broken so I have no new GOP talking points, the Order of Religious Conservatives to Destroy the Poor is on vacation hiatus, and my TV is on the fritz so I can't watch Fox News. Without them I'm lost.

Indy: One of the problems with lacking knowledge in different areas and being unwilling to read about same is that you’re the ‘subject’ the marketing companies doing the ‘focus group testing’ are looking for to get political support for a given position whether it solves anything or is even remotely connected to the solution.

The talking points are also well formatted to ‘fire up the base’ (we’ll see thread after thread after thread of the 2nd Amendment issue as we get close to the November election . . . ).

The problem I see with religious conservatives in general is their lack of willingness to even be curious of their closely held beliefs that no longer map to the modern world.

This gets to your biblical scripture written thousands of years ago by people with no conception of the world we live in today.

Likewise, the same folks didn’t understand ‘economic scracity’ and how that would conflict their ‘virtues’ that sadly today only end up enslaving people to poverty . . .

And while your charity work is commendable, it doesn’t address the bigger economic issues like the minimum wage, long tern unemployment, or even food stamps to the poor who are put then as the wealth concentrates in the US.

Finally, listening to Fox is just wasting your time . . . I’d rather see their viewers doing their own independent investigations rather than being ‘herded’ into failing ideology positions that only benefit the owner of Fox.

Being ‘lost’ can be a temporary condition provided you’re willing to see the bigger picture that exists . . . then if you’re lucky, you can even get your own TV show!


chefgirl358: Posted: July 27, 2014 9:36 p.m.

Excellent column, I completely agree. Today's youth are an absolute disaster. I've never seen so many lazy, entitled, helpless, irresponsible, over indulged, people in my life...the sad part is, most of them have very little on the skill set spectrum, and almost all of them can't write a solitary paragraph that isn't riddled with spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors; they write like they're a few small steps from being illiterate.

Of course I know that there are some VERY bright, skilled young folks out there that are polite, gracious, etc., but I'm just telling you what I and most people I know believe, observe and in my case, read about in the news.


ricketzz: Posted: July 28, 2014 9:22 a.m.

The kids are doing what they see other people doing. Examples of responsible government are non-existent because of pervasive corruption. They now see the older kids coming back from Irakistan with thousand yard stares. They know who stole their futures.

I'd say the true Millenials are a sleeping giant (like we called China before Nixon). When they cohere and act they will be formidable. Be careful for what you wish.


therightstuff: Posted: July 28, 2014 12:01 p.m.

Indy: """Indy: One of the problems with lacking knowledge in different areas and being unwilling to read about same..."""

No one questions this poster's authority on this issue. His latest gaffe was hawking a 99 cent pamphlet by hyper-partisan David Brock as the 'expert' on Benghazi ---- only to find out that Indy has never read it. What a dunce!


More Indy: """This gets to your biblical scripture written thousands of years ago by people with no conception of the world we live in today."""

These principles worked for the Founding Fathers to form this great nation and they worked for Lincoln's day to keep our nation together. Today we see the results of America abandoning these principles from jug heads who insist they no longer apply.


Wait...Indy's not done digging: """Finally, listening to Fox is just wasting your time . . ."""

Fox News is DRIVING HIM CRAZY. He can't complete a single post without mentioning Fox. Creepy. We also notice that he cannot give an example of how Fox News is reporting something that is factually inaccurate.

Sadly...this fact doesn't seem to cure his Foxophobia. Poor hapless Indy.


chefgirl358: Posted: July 28, 2014 1:21 p.m.

Ricketzz, "they know who stole their futures", wth are you talking about?

The millennials are too stoned and lazy to act on anything.


Indy: Posted: July 28, 2014 3:38 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """Indy: One of the problems with lacking knowledge in different areas and being unwilling to read about same..."""

No one questions this poster's authority on this issue. His latest gaffe was hawking a 99 cent pamphlet by hyper-partisan David Brock as the 'expert' on Benghazi ---- only to find out that Indy has never read it. What a dunce!

Indy: It’s been instructional here to gain insight into the mind of a religious conservative.

I now see this poster has being very typical of people that discount the ‘information’ in lieu of the ‘character assassination’ of those presenting the knowledge that debunks conservative ideology.

Again, I can’ recommend highly enough the accounts of the Libya incident that debunks his condemnations from this poster in this eBook: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)

The book removes the falicious ‘innuendo and speculative’ arguments presented by Fox and promoted by this poster.

Also, the poster can help us with the conservative view on these events that occurred during the Bush W Administration:

“Like in 2002 when the US Consulate in the Karachi, Pakistan, was attacked and 10 were killed?

Or in 2004 when the US embassy in Uzbekistan was attacked and two were killed and another
nine injured?

How about in 2004, when the US Consulate in Saudi Arabia was stormed and 8 lost their lives?

There is more: In 2006, armed men attacked the US Embassy in Syria and one was murdered.

Then in 2007 a grenade was thrown at the US Embassy in Athens.

In 2008, the US Embassy in Serbia was set on fire.

In 2008, bombings in the US Embassy in Yemen killed 10.”

Indy: Perhaps the poster can display his outrage of Bush W of these events . . . as we see him criticize Obama.


Indy: Posted: July 28, 2014 3:44 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: More Indy: """This gets to your biblical scripture written thousands of years ago by people with no conception of the world we live in today."""

These principles worked for the Founding Fathers to form this great nation and they worked for Lincoln's day to keep our nation together. Today we see the results of America abandoning these principles from jug heads who insist they no longer apply.

Indy: I think we all realize that the religious conservative movement has been trying to ‘rewrite’ the Constitution favoring a more theocratic form of government.

This exposes us to the trappings of intolerant religion which the Founding Fathers were escaping from when they formed this nation.

Let’s use their wisdom to maintain a ‘separation of church and state’. We can already see the harm as religious conservatives in the House use biblical scripture to defeat raising the minimum wage, denying ‘hard working Americans’ who lost their job from the 2007 Bush W crash long term unemployment insurance to keep them from going homeless, or the cutting of food stamps to the poor.


Therightstuff wrote:: """Finally, listening to Fox is just wasting your time . . ."""

Fox News is DRIVING HIM CRAZY. He can't complete a single post without mentioning Fox. Creepy. We also notice that he cannot give an example of how Fox News is reporting something that is factually inaccurate. Sadly...this fact doesn't seem to cure his Foxophobia. Poor hapless Indy.

Indy: I can understand the frustration of the poster as his source for conservative thought is jeopardized by Fox propaganda that is founded in ‘focus group tested’ slogans that are used to ‘control’ the simple minded.

Sadly, the propagation of the Fox nonsense here at this forum must be continually addressed to discredit same and advise guest readers to look beyond “GOP TV” and see the news in its entirety versus the ‘out of context’ . . . ‘conservative framed’ ideology recitals that Fox ‘news’ anchors are ‘required’ to put forth.

But please, watch Fox . . . and report back . . . you’ll ‘see and hear’ the nonsense . . . start with ‘Fox and Friends’ . . .


Indy: Posted: July 28, 2014 3:47 p.m.

Emheilbrun wrote: From Indy, "I found the greatest thing you could do as a teacher was simply telling the kids ‘the truth’ based on the reality.

And when they the kids realize you are there to ‘help them’, you don’t have any classroom management issues.

Finally, when working out here in SCV-land . . . I had far more student issues with behavior than when I worked in a semi-inner city school.

Sounds like you were a great teacher. How long did you teach? What did you teach? And why did you stop?

Indy: Are you looking for ‘real answers’ or just fodder for some more quick quips?

I just don’t take you seriously . . . but indeed teaching was valuable and gave me great insights into what young people think.

I recommend the opportunity to teach your experience along with the subject matter.

The kids were amazed that I ran a business for 20+ years and my professional engineering efforts for a similar time.


17trillion: Posted: July 28, 2014 4:27 p.m.

"The millennials are too stoned and lazy to act on anything."

Don't know how old you are Chefgirl, but I'm a late boomer and they said the same thing about our generation. Lighten up. If they screw it up we'll be dead anyway so why sweat it?


therightstuff: Posted: July 28, 2014 7:00 p.m.

Indy...you keep regurgitating the same crap over and over and over again.

Fox News....baaaaad....though you can't give an example of where they are being factually inaccurate. Please...take something for your hysteria with Fox News.

David Brock....gooooood...though you've never read his 99 cent pamphlet on Benghazi. Of course, you're known for promoting things you know nothing about. Dude...stop embarrassing yourself. Seriously.

Religious conservatives....baaaad....though America was founded on the same principles as the one's I still cherish. Sadly, we're seeing the consequences of the values you cherish.

George Bush....baaaad....let's ignore the corruption and incompetence of the last five years and focus on 2001. You're a good little Obama wh0re.

Wake me up when you've got a new schtick.


emheilbrun: Posted: July 28, 2014 8:36 p.m.

Indy: "Are you looking for ‘real answers’ or just fodder for some more quick quips?"

Ooops. Busted. Just fodder.

From Indy, "The kids were amazed that I ran a business for 20+ years..."

Hey Indy, when a mature adult can stand before a class and tell them he ran a business for 20+ years and their reaction is "amazed"...that's not a compliment.

Trust me Indy...we're all amazed.


Indy: Posted: July 28, 2014 9:54 p.m.

Emheilbrun wrote: From Indy, "The kids were amazed that I ran a business for 20+ years..."

Hey Indy, when a mature adult can stand before a class and tell them he ran a business for 20+ years and their reaction is "amazed"...that's not a compliment.

Trust me Indy...we're all amazed.

Indy: Yes, you responded as I expected . . . nit picking words, condescending attitude . . . typical . . . but in fairness to you, you've clearly disclosed you're just here for the entertainment.

In any event, for anyone reading this that wants to really help kids, teaching is a great avenue especially if you’ve got ‘real world’ experience to contrast with the students on the educational topic content you’re teaching.

This adds great credibility to the content as well as excellent connection to the students.

In any event, I’ll ignore your posts in the future unless you’ve actually ‘thought’ something through and I need to explain whether that ‘thought’ meets up with reality or not . . . otherwise continue on with the entertaining . . .


Indy: Posted: July 28, 2014 10:10 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy...you keep regurgitating the same crap over and over and over again.

Indy: LOL . . . I’m just taking conservative recital example and copying that strategy . . .

Therightstuff wrote: Fox New bad . . .though you can't give an example of where they are being factually inaccurate.

Indy: Fox has demonstrated their ability to distort ‘news’ events consistent with the ideology bias. Thus, I don’t watch it . . . but occasionally when I hear about one of their ‘anchors’ that is blatantly distorting the news . . . I'll take a look . . . I don't need 'repeated' exposure to unprofessional news presenters.

Therightstuff wrote: David Brock....gooooood...though you've never read his 99 cent pamphlet on Benghazi. Of course, you're known for promoting things you know nothing about. Dude...stop embarrassing yourself. Seriously.

Indy: I also find that religious conservatives who don’t understand the topic stay fixated on the character assassination of the ‘bringer of bad news’ that blows up your ideology or in this case, your beliefs on the events regarding the Libyan consultant.

In any event, I’ll recommend again this eBook for an accurate timeline of the events: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)

If you’re really interested in this ‘non-scandal’, you can at least find accurate information that counters the ‘innuendo and speculation’ found on Fox . . .

Therightstuff wrote: Religious conservatives....baaaad....though America was founded on the same principles as the one's I still cherish. Sadly, we're seeing the consequences of the values you cherish.

Indy: Sadly, old people with deeply religious views are impeding the nation’s progress with outdated beliefs that don’t map to the current reality especially with respect to economics.

Then you have the subset of libertarian market fundamentalist that are advocates for ‘wealth concentration’ that likewise ignores basic economics and fairness with respect to the minimum wage, long term unemployment and cutting food stamps for the poor.

Combined, the old people that are majority ‘shareholders’ of the tea party are simply out of touch and demonstrate the ignorance that now dominates our political discourse.

Therightstuff wrote: George Bush....baaaad....let's ignore the corruption and incompetence
of the last five years and focus on 2001.

Indy: It’s perhaps the hardest thing to add up the missteps and failures of the Bush W administration but suffice to say, we saw the ‘results’ or lack of same for the first six years that Bush had both houses of congress . . and essentially did very little. The only real thing that I commend Bush was his efforts to combat HIV in Africa.

Even the GOP leadership has properly advised Bush W to ‘stay on the ranch’ . . .

Therightstuff wrote: You're a good little Obama wh0re.

Indy: Again, real ‘Christian like’, no?


emheilbrun: Posted: July 28, 2014 10:19 p.m.

From Indy: "Yes, you responded as I expected . . . nit picking words,..."

Me, nitpicking? Aren't you the one that has repeatedly offered to "explain what the words mean when strung together".

And you never did reveal what subject you taught. Why is that? You constantly ask tech about his education, yet you refuse to state what you taught, where, for how long, and the name of your principal. What are you hiding?


therightstuff: Posted: July 29, 2014 12:10 a.m.

Indy: """In any event, I’ll ignore your posts in the future..."""

Lucky you, emheilbrun. Responding to the same thing over and over and over and over again is getting tiresome. Facts bounce off this hardcore ideologue. Somehow Indy thinks if he keeps repeating stuff that it must be true. How can I get him to ignore me?


tech: Posted: July 29, 2014 1:47 a.m.

"How can I get him to ignore me?"

No doubt you've noticed there's no pretense of debate, only repetitive cut and paste.

Trolls require feeding.


ricketzz: Posted: July 29, 2014 8:53 a.m.

The USA was not founded on any religious principles. We were founded as an autonomous authority that derives all power from the consent of the governed. No gods. No kings.


emheilbrun: Posted: July 29, 2014 11:47 a.m.

TRS..I gave up along time ago. I realized that Indy is not nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is. He is more bigoted than he realizes. And if taken in the right context, way funnier than he realizes.


therightstuff: Posted: July 29, 2014 12:34 p.m.

I try to ignore Indy but debunking his lies and exposing his hypocrisy is so easy that it's hard to resist.


Indy: Posted: July 29, 2014 4:23 p.m.

Ricketzz wrote: The USA was not founded on any religious principles. We were founded as an autonomous authority that derives all power from the consent of the governed. No gods. No kings.

Indy: Yep.


Indy: Posted: July 29, 2014 4:33 p.m.

Emheilbrun wrote: RRS..I gave up along time ago. I realized that Indy is not nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is. He is more bigoted than he realizes. And if taken in the right context, way funnier than he realizes.

Indy: I won’t respond to your entertainment posts but when you criticize me then I feel a response is necessary.

It’s unfortunate that so many people are afraid to criticize the failings of religious conservatism . . . but there needs to be a recognition of where such thinking is failing Americans.

We saw this with the refusal to adjust the minimum wage even for inflation citing Hegg's 'virtues of work' recitals that ignore the economics in play here . . . much of which you can't grasp.

We also saw religious conservatives citing ancient biblical scripture in the House to cut food stamps from the poor.

We finally see republicans in the House refusing to extending long term employment for the ‘hard working’ Americans laid off from the 2007 market crash and now the ramifications of globalization that is off shoring US jobs leaving many Americans out of luck.

You, in your contorted manner, see these recognitions as being ‘bigoted’ . . . but that’s a comment I’d expect from the simple minded, one unable to see the economics in front of us and willing to hold onto ancient beliefs that don’t map to the modern world . . . and sadly threaten the future of tens of millions of Americans. That's unacceptable to me.

Your shortsightedness isn’t entertaining to me . . . but I guess it does fulfill the ‘wants’ of your fellow religious conservatives here . . .

And of course, the basic strategy of character assassination is all well in the mouth of Rush that uses the same vale of entertainment to hurt Americans using his ignorance as a proxy for real intelligence.

That’s truly pathetic . . . and a burden you carry and share with your fellow religious conservatives here in SCV-land . . . sad, truly sad.


Indy: Posted: July 29, 2014 5:09 p.m.

Tech wrote: No doubt you've noticed there's no pretense of debate, only repetitive cut and paste.

Indy: Get ready . . . we’re going to go through your ‘Public choice theory’ as thought by libertarians . . .

I saw this late in another thread but want to fully address it.

I will be caution you that I will ‘cut and paste’ each sentence as we go through this ‘theory’.

Stand ready . . .


emheilbrun: Posted: July 29, 2014 5:31 p.m.

Indy, I knew you couldn't ignore me. No willpower. Didn't even last 24 hours. Weak. Very weak.

Simple minded? Let me remind you I have two degrees from CSUN! What do you have?

P.S. Who's Rush?


therightstuff: Posted: July 29, 2014 6:37 p.m.

Ricketzz wrote: The USA was not founded on any religious principles. We were founded as an autonomous authority that derives all power from the consent of the governed. No gods. No kings.

Indy: Yep.

ahhh...the 'cut and paste' bandits are at it again. You both are getting your perverted ideology from THIS statement:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

BUT...you purposely omitted the first part of that sentence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

And WHO wrote this statement about 'self-evident truths that are endowed by our Creator?' Thomas Jefferson. The same guy that illiterate revisionists try to misquote from some letter to a bunch of Baptists.

It was the roots of religious conservatism that inspired the founding of America and made it the greatest nation in the history of the world. Only as we abandon these proven values do we decline as a nation.

Only a true fool would deny these facts.


ricketzz: Posted: July 30, 2014 10:46 a.m.

So Creator is the same thing as the Abrahamic God? I think not. Deism was the fad among the Founders, including Jefferson (a few Freemasons among them and they have a non Abrahamic God too, as I understand). In Deism the Creator is passive in the present. All the creating is finished, the rest is in our court.

The Revolution was given a big kick in the butt by an English atheist named Paine, whom the Founders held in high esteem. They certainly regarded religion as something to be tolerated, not venerated.

Responsibility means understanding that you are in charge.


Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 4:16 p.m.

Emheilbrun wrote: Indy, I knew you couldn't ignore me. No willpower. Didn't even last 24 hours. Weak. Very weak.

Indy: Emheilbrun wrote: RRS..I gave up along time ago. I realized that Indy is not nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is. He is more bigoted than he realizes. And if taken in the right context, way funnier than he realizes.

Indy: I won’t respond to your entertainment posts but when you criticize me then I feel a response is necessary.


Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 4:25 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Ricketzz wrote: The USA was not founded on any religious principles. We were founded as an autonomous authority that derives all power from the consent of the governed. No gods. No kings.

Indy: Yep.

ahhh...the 'cut and paste' bandits are at it again. You both are getting your perverted ideology from THIS statement:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

BUT...you purposely omitted the first part of that sentence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Indy: Yes, the D of I isn’t the ‘law of the land’ and indeed the Founding Fathers created a ‘nation under law’ in the Constitution and specifically ‘separated church and state’. They even prohibited a ‘religious test’ for holding public office.

You deny their intent . . . but that’s a burden you have to carry . . .

Therightstuff wrote: `And WHO wrote this statement about 'self-evident truths that are endowed by our Creator?' Thomas Jefferson. The same guy that illiterate revisionists try to misquote from some letter to a bunch of Baptists.

Indy: Jefferson and Madison were motivated to put into the Constitution a Bill of Rights . . . something you might like to read someday.

The Founding Fathers even at their time were confronted with many religions and thus chose to keep their religious beliefs ‘personal’ to the individual as Jefferson clarified:

“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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”


Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 4:26 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: It was the roots of religious conservatism that inspired the founding of America and made it the greatest nation in the history of the world. Only as we abandon these proven values do we decline as a nation. Only a true fool would deny these facts.

Indy: Only religious conservatives belief in your narrow view of the nation’s founding . . . and many Americans are seeing that religious conservatism as practiced today is failing all Americans including republicans.

We’ll be having more to say about your ‘beliefs’ as we move to November . . . but please, try reading the Bill of Rights.

And also the preamble of the Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Notice, God isn’t referenced in the Constitution . . . a point you continue to ignore.


tech: Posted: July 30, 2014 8:23 p.m.

Notice, God isn’t referenced in the Constitution . . . a point you continue to ignore. - Indy

Nor are the words "separated church and state", a point you equally ignore.


Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 8:37 p.m.

Tech wrote: Notice, God isn’t referenced in the Constitution . . . a point you continue to ignore. - Indy

Nor are the words "separated church and state", a point you equally ignore.

Indy: Interestingly the Founding Fathers did ‘separate’ church and state in the 1st Amendment using the ‘establishment’ clause:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, . . . )

Then Jefferson went on to succinctly explain same clause here:

“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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”

And while this isn’t in the Constitution either, I’m sure Jefferson was clear to clarify the ‘separation’ by referencing said establishment clause: “ . . . , 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.”

Denying this is just evidence that many religious conservatives continue to fight for a US theocracy . . . going against the very intent of the Founding Fathers.

But the real capper is that the Constitution ‘forbids’ a religious test for holding office . . . and again, make no mention of God . . . confirming this is a nation ‘under law’ and not any given religion.

This is wisdom that confirms what we see today in religious theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran . . . where ‘minority’ believers civil rights are threatened and in some case, you’re ‘executed’ for non-belief.

Who in their right mind would want that here in the US?


tech: Posted: July 30, 2014 11:10 p.m.

"This is wisdom that confirms what we see today in religious theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran…"

LOL! Your contortions are hilarious, Indy. The USA becoming like Iran or Saudi Arabia is absurd on its face.

Facts require affirming the words "separation of church and state" aren't part of the Constitution.

Congress was prohibited from establishing a state religion as was the common practice in Europe. Inhibiting the free exercise of a citizen's religious belief was proscribed as well due again to European history. That's it and the words have simple clarity.

Christians aren't fighting for a U.S. theocracy and an elimination of our secular government. Document a mainstream denomination that has made a policy statement to that effect.

Your obsessions with those you perceive as political enemies defines you, Indy. --edited.


therightstuff: Posted: July 31, 2014 1:01 a.m.

"""Only a true fool would deny these facts."""

Thank you for proving my point, Indy. If nothing else, you're predictable.


emheilbrun: Posted: July 31, 2014 8:44 a.m.

Indy proclaimed to me: "I won’t respond to your entertainment posts but when you criticize me then I feel a response is necessary."

Indy, if I came across as though I was criticizing you, I'm very sorry. That is not what I intended at all. It was more of an attempt at ridicule. Not criticism.


ricketzz: Posted: July 31, 2014 9:22 a.m.

We the People...do ordain and establish..."

What does "ordain" mean? What does "we do ordain" mean? It means the People are the Government. It means God is subservient to the Constitution (ordained by real things: people).


tech: Posted: July 31, 2014 11:26 a.m.

"What does "ordain" mean? What does "we do ordain" mean? It means the People are the Government." - ricketzz

No, it doesn't. Ordain in this usage means order or decree officially.


Indy: Posted: July 31, 2014 8:16 p.m.

Tech wrote: "This is wisdom that confirms what we see today in religious theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran…"

LOL! Your contortions are hilarious, Indy. The USA becoming like Iran or Saudi Arabia is absurd on its face.

Indy: Well, the actions by religious conservatives to continually push more religion into government is the exact manner theocracies are created.

Then the degrading of women by threatening their civil rights and liberties is a hallmark of men dominated theocracies.

And denying this is a nation ‘under law’ goes against the very intent of the Founding Fathers.

Sadly, as rights are eroded slowly by republicans, the public doesn’t see the ‘long term’ total effects.

Looking at Saudi Arabia and Iran can give the public a ‘look down the road’ where religious conservatism is headed in America . . . important we ‘see’ the future clearly to avoid making our nation something the Founding Fathers didn’t want.

Try rereading the 1st Amendment several times to get the clue . . .

Tech wrote: Facts require affirming the words "separation of church and state" aren't part of the Constitution.

Indy: This is one of the main talking points religious conservatives like to blind side people with but interestingly, Thomas Jefferson, one of the key players in getting the Bill of Rights into the Constitution helped us with a succient explanation of the ‘separation’ of church and state:

““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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”

He directly references the establishment clause and even uses the words ‘,” thus building a wall of separation between church and State’.


Indy: Posted: July 31, 2014 8:24 p.m.

Tech wrote: Congress was prohibited from establishing a state religion as was the common practice in Europe. Inhibiting the free exercise of a citizen's religious belief was proscribed as well due again to European history. That's it and the words have simple clarity.

Indy: Yes, the Founding Fathers protected your freedom to believe whatever religion you want but not use government to promote it . . . that would a theocracy.

When Jefferson wrote: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God”, he was clearly noting that religion is a ‘private and personal’ thing between a person and their God if you will . . . not something government gets involved with . . . thus the ‘establishment’ provision in the 1st Amendment.

It’s vitally important that I keep reciting this so the guest readers are alerted to the proposed ‘rewrite’ of the Constitution by theocratic leaning religious conservatives like yourself.

It’s one of the reasons the Founding Fathers included the protections for ‘freedom of speech’ so any self-directed folks like yourself can have their assertions properly vetted and understood before defeating the original intent of the Founding Fathers. They got it right!

Tech wrote: Christians aren't fighting for a U.S. theocracy and an elimination of our secular government. Document a mainstream denomination that has made a policy statement to that effect. Your obsessions with those you perceive as political enemies defines you, Indy. --edited.

Indy: Again, the ‘intent’ of religious conservatives is important as I’ve outlined.

And many of the religious conservative’s leaders keep asserting this is a nation under ‘God’ not under ‘law’ as the Founding Fathers set forth.

In any event, as I see religious conservative leaders pop off about this, I’ll document as we go forward toward November . . .


Indy: Posted: July 31, 2014 8:41 p.m.

Tech wrote: "What does "ordain" mean? What does "we do ordain" mean? It means the People are the Government." - ricketzz

No, it doesn't. Ordain in this usage means order or decree officially.

Indy: Again, the Founding Fathers didn’t include ‘God’ in the Constitution and even went on to prohibit a religious test for holding public office.

So most Americans aren’t going to buy into the religious conservative idea that ‘we the people’ means anything other than that.

You’re assertion is putting our government back into the format that the Founding Fathers were escaping from . . . where the ‘elite’ call the shots . . . often being religious leaders of the time that held the ‘power’ if you will.

The Founding Fathers came here not to build a new nation ‘under religion’, they were escaping that travesty . . . they wanted a ‘nation under law’ that respected people’s beliefs, that as ‘we the people’, all the people if you will . . . not just those of the ‘dominate religion’.

I still find it puzzling you can’t grasp that . . . especially considering the Constitution itself.

Finally, I always fascinated by your revulsion of the ‘promote the general welfare’ that that the Founding Fathers ‘opening’ the Constitution with: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Seems crystal clear that the Founding Fathers were setting up the new nation of ‘we the people’ . . . including this declaration as the opening three words of the Constitution . . . except interestingly rejected by religious conservatives like you . . . hmmmm . . .


tech: Posted: July 31, 2014 8:50 p.m.

Tech: "Christians aren't fighting for a U.S. theocracy and an elimination of our secular government. Document a mainstream denomination that has made a policy statement to that effect. Your obsessions with those you perceive as political enemies defines you, Indy."

"In any event, as I see religious conservative leaders pop off about this, I’ll document as we go forward toward November . . ." - Indy

It's hardly a surprise you have zero facts to support your farcical assertion. :-)


therightstuff: Posted: August 1, 2014 1:37 a.m.

Indy: """I’ll document. . ."""

Considering the source, this is a contradiction of terms.


ricketzz: Posted: August 1, 2014 10:44 a.m.

The Founders wanted The People to share the plunder of the continent, and not let the usual gang of leeches get their teeth into our prosperity, if you will. It was working exactly as planned (more or less) when Governor Reagan was installed to reverse the Revolution of 1776 and return control to the Entrenched Elites of Old Europe and Russia. Our Founding was a direct reaction to a multinational company getting cozy with government so the rule of law could try to legitimize their larceny. We rejected that violently 240 years ago. Why should we blindly accept it now?


ricketzz: Posted: August 2, 2014 10:28 a.m.

Do a little research on pending trade deals, if you want something IMPORTANT to get all in a tiff about.



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...