given2Christ's Blog

         Does anyone really think that the GOP is more ethical than the Democratic party or vice-versa? Certainly, Bill Clinton and others on the Democratic side have a poor track record, but so do many Republicans. Neither party can or should hold ethics against the other for it is by no means justified.

         Democrats claim to be the ethical party because most party members don't actually commit to many crimes (or we don't hear about it when they do). They do, however, support abortion rights, giving taxpayer money to drug addicts, gay marriage, illegal immigration, eliminating the death penalty, and handing out condoms and birh control in schools to name a few. They then brush under the carpet the crimes of their fellow party members when they do commt them and believe that being "progressive" exempts them from acting ethical. They ignore the Bible saying, "to whom much is entrusted much more will be asked". A better policy when it comes to morality is to examine each individual seperately and not the party as a whole.

         Republicans are no better. Sure, their policies are more well thought out and ethical but not many of their actions. Larry Craig has a wide stance for more reasons than one. Tom DeLay took campaign contribution which were literally bribes. Many other candidates have commited many more crimes than what I have mentioned, but there's not enough room for me to mention them (lump Democrats in with that). I say, to liberals especially, that in this case to, examine the individual.

          No politician is sincere (except a select few). This is  widely excepted but normally when members of one party look at politicians of another. There is always a celebrity in everyone in this over-glorified servitude called politics. They only worry about getting reelected to continue their career, though it shouldn't be a career, often at the expense of the people. No matter what side of the party lines you're on the hypocrisy of politicians is not moral. Since neither side has anything all the other, ethics has no place in the political arena. For the last time, looking at the individual is key.

        So arguing about morality is fruitless, it doesn't solve anything. Ethics does not define party lines but blurs them, changing opposing sides from the apparent black and white to shades of grey. The only place to look for morals is in the policies of each individual and even then it may not be clear. Leave ethics out GOP/leftist debates and you'll be standing by the maxim "there are no ethics in politics".

     Dear, American People,

      It seams that today the central fovernment has far exceeded the boundries of this nations longstanding Constitution. The fears of an elected despotism that so plagued the minds of my contemporaries has, unfortunately, come to be. I'm not writing, however, to discuss such a broad topic, but to tell of the "freedom of religion" clause that has been sadly misinterpreted as "freedom from religion".

          Some fellow Americans have called it to my attention that the common analysis of Ammendment I by many Republicans involves viewing only one segment, so lets examine the whole.  "Congress shall make no law respecting  an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;",  the an establishment  of religion meaning a previously existing religious institution or one coming into existence. With this definition in mind, we determine the Congress may not legislate restrictions on churches, mosques, or tabernacles and the observance of the practices regarding spiritual beliefs (the latter part due to it being part of religous establishments). The previous statement is further supported by the 'prohibiting the free exercise thereof:", clause since prohibiting is simply the most extreme embodiment of restricting.

     Now for the more practical discussion pertaining to legislatures and other government bodies virtually eliminating any inkling of open expression of Christianity. I know many of the liberal mindset will bound on my arguement in support of Christianity, accusing me of being biased. Rest assured, my debates will only consist of the content of our Constitution.  Elimination of rights such as praying and evangelising freely in institutions is blatantly in violation of the 1st Ammendent. This is clearly prohibiting free exercise along with freedom of speach, hence evangelising. Victims of such restrictions not only include our children, but the government employees and teachers who may no longer express spirituallality due to threat of puplic outcry and loss of  employment. Such division was intended to be destroyed by the Constitution, not created by it's misenterpretation.

      In conclusion, legislating away our freedom of religion is a common occurance today. It violates the original powers layed out by my fellow founding fathers. We are falling into a great pit leading to the despotism of the Church of England that has been dug by the very people that are attempting to prevent history from repeating itself. We're slowly beginning to follow the document formed from the opinions of our represenative's. Wakeup and be watchful America and fight for your God given liberies in the days ahead.

                                                   
     Sincerely yours, Thomas Jefferson.