SEPARATION OF SCHOOL AND STATE

It is time to get serious about cutting back the size of government. This can only take place when the functions of government are accurately defined. What the government has done is to be vague about the functions that they should be involved in. The one thing that they have done is to define all areas as political. This means that they get to control all facets of a nation. Their tentacles reach everywhere.

The government knows the best way to control its citizens is through the school system. To do this they must get the parents to give up control of their children. The government can do this very easily because they possess the power of coercion. Each state has its laws governing education. The Federal Government has the Department of Education. The only way to rein in the government is to have a change in the law concerning education.

There are those who have taken the bold step and have taken the responsibility of education away from the government. They should be commended for their efforts in limiting the size of the government. While most may not understand the implications involved in home schooling, one effect is that the school system is not receiving any government payments for their children. It is quite clear the more children that are home schooled, the less the citizens will have to pay in taxes.

People, however, are not interested in having their taxes lowered. They may complain about their rising property taxes, but this is the extent of their actions. Here is a shocker, the Washington County, Tennessee school system needs more money. When the school’s director proposed their original budget, the school system was $1.8 million out of balance. They were able to cut approximately $1.2 million, but still had a shortfall of $665,000.

The school’s director Ron Dykes has said that he cannot make anymore cuts without it affecting the quality of education in Washington County. His statement is totally fallacious. Let him define quality of education. Since quality and education are spiritual terms, he cannot quantify them in anyway. The commissioners of Washington County are easily duped by the term quality of education. They, like Dykes, have the same operating principles. They think in anti-conceptual terms.

Rather than doing the right thing by cutting more positions to balance the budget, Dykes has convinced the commission (this was not hard to do) to pass a property tax increase of $.16. At present, the tax rate is $2.35 per $100 of assessed property value. This makes the rate $2.51 per $100. If someone has a $100,000 assessment, this means that they will pay an additional $160 in property taxes. This is on top of rising prices for all commodities.

It is time to abolish the property tax. If people want their children educated, let them pay for it. What lawful right does the government have to take money from someone that does not have children in the school system? Our citizenry have contributed to the growing government control because they do not want the responsibility of raising their own children. They prefer to let the government raise them. They will pay for it too. Next year, the school system will ask for more money. Some things in life are predictable.

WHO DETERMINES PAY?

Barbara Kramer is economically challenged. Her thinking is perceptually based. Equal work for equal pay is anti-conceptual. It is undefinable. She is a feminist. Feminists are elitists and it is the poorer women who suffer from feminism (single mothers). Feminists resent being women. They do not like their station in life.

Kramer seeks to evade market realities. First, men do not get pregnant. Employers know that if they hire a woman (child bearing years), she may get pregnant and have to take time off from work. Second, most women’s income will be supplemental to their husbands. In other words, she will work for less money. It is women accepting lower pay that has caused the pay discrepancy.

The question is who should determine how much someone is paid? There are two options, the market or the government. Kramer resents reality (the market) determining her pay. She wants the government to determine how much people get paid. This can only be accomplished at the end of a gun.

If this Fair Pay Bill gets passed, two things will result. First, unemployment will rise among women. Kramer resents that the market discriminates. Second, there will be no incentive to produce because no matter how much you produce, your pay has been determined by the government, not the market. This means the market will become a place of mediocrity, not excellence.

The Fair Pay Bill would have the opposite result of what is intended. This is because of it being based upon a falsity of economic equality. The market is a place of inequality. People have different abilities and we benefit from these inequalities. Congratulations Senators Cocker and Alexander, you should be commended for looking out for our best interests.

QUEER MARRIAGE

Many questions in life need to be answered. Every good salesman knows that when a potential customer gives a reason why he will not buy a product, the reason given is not the real reason. There is something that is deeper. A good salesman will dig deeper and find out what the real objection is and then overcome it. The reason for this is because we do not want to make it appear as though we are interested in ourselves. What is wrong with self-interest?

Why would queers want to marry each other? What is the underlying reason? It cannot to be because they want to start a family with children because they cannot reproduce. Homosexuality is death to man. It is the height of irrationality. Nothing but sickness and disease come out of homosexuality. It is completely unnatural and they were not born spiritually to be a queer. Being a queer is a choice. It is willful rebellion against God’s law.

The Supreme Court of California just overturned the law in California of marriage. How many years was marriage considered to be between a man and a woman in California? The California government has gone down a road that they will wish they never did. The only thing left is the judgment of God. For families, it is time to leave California. California is more interested in the death of the next generation. Leave the state to the queers. The queers are not interested in having equal rights but for having superiority. If they could they would outlaw heterosexuality.

The Supreme Court of California Justices should be impeached, but nothing will happen to them.

These justices have a place reserved in the lake of fire for them. They will spend eternity being tormented for this decision. They hate God and His law with all their heart. The Supreme Court of California does not have the final say in this matter, God does. God will not be mocked by these fools. These men are the biggest fools in the world, next to their master, Satan.

So why do queers want to get married? The answer is simple. They want medical and inheritance benefits for their partners. Their partners can be added to a medical plan by being married. They ultimately want the taxpayers to pay their medical bills when they contract AIDS. Most queers, especially men, are not interested in one partner. There is a lot of promiscuity among queers. There is no real love here. It is all lust.

As always, this will end up backfiring on the state of California. The queers may hail it as a victory, but really it is a defeat. When a culture accepts homosexuality, it is spiritually bankrupt. It is only a matter of time before it completely collapses. Spiritually it has already collapsed. Without true spirituality, no culture can sustain itself. God has a myriad ways of bringing judgment on a nation. However God does it, judgment will come.

NOTHING THAT STIRS

There is nothing that is really stirring me up this week. I have a self imposed deadline to post to this blog something each week. Therefore, I have to write something. There are many things that are constantly going on. Life is not static. There is always something to comment on. I am sure that there are cycles in the current events area.

The State of Tennessee is in the throes of a budget crisis. The sales tax revenues have fallen short of projection. Therefore, the Governor is proposing budget cuts. This is a good thing, as long as what is not cut is legitimate government functions of law enforcement. Everything else is fair game. There are those in the Legislature who want the Governor to tap into the rainy day reserves just to keep state jobs from being cut. What happens if the sales tax revenues continue to decline? All that would happen would be a delaying of the inevitable.

The Rev. Al Sharpton has financial problems. It seems the Reverend has a problem keeping good financial records and also has a bad habit of not paying his bills and yet he has the audacity to cry out against supposed civil rights crimes. We are not talking about paltry amounts. According to the AP story he owes $365,558 to New York City Income Tax and $931,397 for Federal Income Tax. The total amount he personally owes is $1,296,955. To have liabilities this high means that his personal income is very high for someone who operates a non-profit corporation.

The civil rights movement is not about civil rights but about money for Rev. Sharpton and his cronies. I do not know of any other Reverend that receive such high remunerations for being a Reverend. Of course, there is no taking responsibility. The blame is being put on shoddy record keeping that prompted Sharpton’s liabilities being overstated. The National Action Network did not have proper accounting personnel working for them according to insiders.

When you are a Reverend, your organization should be transparent. Everything should be done above board and keeping accurate financial records is part of that transparency. A Reverend is to set an example and Sharpton has failed to set a good example. A suggestion for the Rev. Sharpton would be to get his finances in order first. This should be his first priority. All of his energies should be focused on this situation until it is resolved.

Anyone that thinks that Rev. Sharpton has any credibility is fooling himself. His dishonesty should be obvious to all. His delinquent tax bills are proof of this. Rev. Sharpton only keeps the rules he wants and yet he wants to hold others accountable for their supposed foibles. Sharpton wants all the advantage for himself. He is corrupt and these delinquent taxes are only the tip of the iceberg. There is plenty more that is not out in the open.

NO HARM, NO FOUL

Sometimes you are not sure the way that a certain issue should be addressed. It is not clear what the right answer is, so you have to make the best decision based upon the available information. You have to rely on other principles to make the right decision. You have to look at both sides of the issue. Usually, in a clear cut situation, you already know how you would decide the issue from the outset.

Something that causes real harm needs to be resisted. However, if it is something that causes an inconvenience, then it is simply a hassle to comply, but there is no harm. Harm can be avoided by compliance. This means that it may pass the test. I believe strongly in probable cause. This is a protection to the individual against the monopoly of law enforcement possessed by the government.

The government cannot deprive me of my freedom unless they have probable cause to suspect that I have committed a crime. They must also obtain a warrant if they want to search my possessions. These are safeguards for the individual. Without these protections, the government could search me on a whim and I would have to comply with no recourse. The Miranda rights are important rights and law enforcement has to respect them. The individual is helpless against arbitrary governmental power. We need protections.

The Supreme Court on Monday, April 28, 2008 decided 6-3 in favor of upholding an Indiana law requiring voters to produce photo identification before being allowed to vote. The law was passed to prevent voter fraud. Voter fraud will always be a small number. Most people that vote do not think about defrauding the system and even if there is voter fraud, it will generally be so small as to not affect any election.

The Indiana law and all of these photo ID laws are an over reaction. There is no way that every system will be perfect. Does fraud occur in elections? I am sure there is some, but once again its magnitude is minimal. We simply cannot prevent everything. This is what the law in Indiana is designed to do. If there is evidence that a fraud has occurred, then those responsible should be prosecuted for fraud. Voter fraud should be on a case by case basis.

The question is does the State possess the right to deny an individual the right to vote unless they have a photo ID? Once again, the number of those not possessing the required photo ID is a very small number. The number would be, in general, so small as to not affect any election. We are talking about the margins, not the majority. If someone intends to vote in an election and they know that there is a requirement for a photo ID, then they would put forth effort to get the ID.

What the Democratic party and the ACLU (who are in bed together) know is that those looking for a handout usually vote for them. They know that these people are lazy and will not get the required photo ID, if they do not have one. These people are not issue oriented, only hand out oriented. It is bad when people like this are the voting base you depend on. This tells us that there must be some other basis to determine who should be allowed to vote in elections.

The Associated Press article quotes Justice John Paul Stevens as saying, "We cannot conclude that the statute imposes ‘excessively burdensome requirements’ on any class of voters." This law applies equally to all voters. A voter is an individual, not a particular class. The Democrats and the ACLU claim that the Indiana law will discourage the elderly, poor and minorities from voting. Who are the elderly, poor, and minorities? They are individuals.

As Justice Steven has pointed out, the photo ID requirement is not excessively burdensome. This is my conclusion also. It is an inconvenience to those who do not possess a photo ID, but for the vast majority, all you have to do is show your driver’s license. This takes a few seconds and your identity can be verified. This law forbids the right to vote without a voter ID, but this is easy for most people to comply with. It is an inconvenience but not overly burdensome. In other words, no harm, no foul.

You would think that the Democrats and the ACLU would be for a fair election. Their opposition gives away too much of their position. Their real opposition is not the possible discouragement of a few marginal people, it is much deeper than this. I suspect that it has to do with the motivation of their voting base. These people need things as simple as possible for them to function. Once again, these people are not issue based but handout based.