God’s work, hahhahaha.

Tim Weaver has nicely posted contact information for Goldman Sachs along with the advice “Tell them how you feel.” GO!

Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
85 Broad St.
New York, NY 10004

212.902.1000

 

Something refreshing! “Murder has no religion”

["Murder has no religion" by Arsalan Iftikhar, international human rights lawyer, founder of TheMuslimGuy.com, contributing editor for Islamica magazine in Washington]

Washington (CNN) — Most of the world’s 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy Quran states quite clearly that, “Anyone who kills a human being…it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind….If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all mankind.”

Accordingly, it should come as little surprise to any reasonable observer that when Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan recently committed his shocking acts of mass murder at Fort Hood, Texas, America’s Muslim community of over 7 million felt an added sense of horror and sadness at this senseless attack against the brave men and women of the US armed forces.

True to form, many conservative media pundits wasted little time in pointing to reports that Hasan had said “Allahu Akbar” (Arabic for “God is great”) at the start of his murderous rampage. News coverage continuously showed the looping convenience store black-and-white videotape footage of Hasan wearing traditional white Islamic garb.

First of all, someone simply saying “Allahu Akbar” while committing an act of mass murder no more makes their criminal act “Islamic” than a Christian uttering the “Hail Mary” while murdering an abortion medical provider, or someone chanting “Onward, Christian Soldiers” while bombing a gay nightclub, would make their act “Christian” in nature.

Simply put; murder is murder and has no religion whatsoever.

Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan once wrote that, “One most certainly does insult Muslims by tying their religion to movements such as terrorism or fascism. Muslims perceive a double standard in this regard: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols would never be called ‘Christian terrorists’ even though they were in close contact with the Christian Identity Movement. No one would speak of Christo-fascism or Judeo-fasicm as the Republican[s] … speak of Islamo-fascism….[Many people also] point out that [it was] persons of Christians of Christian heritage [who] invented fascism, not Muslims.”

According to Pentagon statistics, there were over 3,400 American Muslims serving in the active-duty military as of April 2008. The Wall Street Journal reported that many officials believe “the actual number of [American] Muslim soldiers may be at least 10,000 higher than the Pentagon statistics.”

Thus, with thousands of patriotic American Muslim women and men proudly serving in our United States Army in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps it would behoove our army leaders to consider sending a strong message of American unity by appointing an American Muslim to be a part of the prosecution team against Hasan.

This would help show that the mass murders allegedly committed by Hasan have nothing to do with the teachings of our religion.

The United States Army can send a resounding message to all Americans and the rest of the world that the social fabric of our country will never become unraveled by murderous (and irreligious) gun-wielding felons–whether it is a Muslim in Fort Hood, Texas, or a non-Muslim on a shooting rampage in an Orlando, Florida high-rise less than a day later.

By appointing a multicultural (and multireligious) legal prosecution team made up of military lawyers of all races and religions, we can set a good example to show the rest of the world that our American legal justice system is truly equal for all people, regardless of their race, religion or socioeconomic status.

The larger point is that Muslims in America completely disavow and wash our hands of any acts of murder (or terrorism) claimed to be performed in the name of our religion. Acts of mass murder, regardless of their time or place, are simply ungodly criminal acts that have no religion whatsoever.

“Poe properly buried, 160 years later”

On October 3, 1849, Edgar Allan Poe was found near death in a public house in Baltimore and several days later succumbed to “congestion of the brain.” There is no definitive record of his movements in the several days before he died, and there are many theories as to the cause of his death. Some say it was alcohol poisoning, some say it was some other illness or heart disease that killed him. Because it was election day in Baltimore and he was not wearing his own clothes when he died, others suspect that he was a victim of “cooping,” having been taken prisoner by a political gang, beaten and forced to vote repeatedly. He was attended by Dr. John Joseph Moran at Washington College Hospital, where he was kept a virtual prisoner and allowed no visitors, for several days slipping between consciousness and delirium. Moran reported that his final words were “Lord, help my poor soul!,” just before he expired on October 7.

Poe’s funeral was the next day, a hasty 3-minute ceremony in the damp chill, so sparsely attended that the minister declined to give a sermon. He was buried without a headstone, because the monument his cousin had ordered was accidentally destroyed by a derailed train. He was exhumed and reburied, with a new tomb monument, in 1875, at a ceremony to which several leading poets were invited, but only Walt Whitman attended.

Now, 160 years after his death, Edgar Allan Poe has been given a proper send-off in Baltimore—a “viewing” of his recreated dead body in the casket, a funeral procession accompanied by bagpipes, and a memorial service with eulogies delivered by actors in the roles of his contemporaries and colleagues, attended by more than 700 admirers and mourners. The “master of the macabre” has at last been laid properly to rest.

from The Baltimore Sun:
“A Proper Reburial,” by Robert Little (with video of the viewing and funeral)
“Edgar A. Poe, local author and poet of much renown, was laid to rest at Westminster Hall yesterday inside a simple redwood coffin, after a grand theatrical and oratorical send-off to usher him, as he once wrote, ‘into the region of shadows.’ Of course the true Poe remained buried beneath the monument on the northwest corner of the church grounds in Southwest Baltimore, near where his body was placed hastily in a family plot soon after his death on October 7, 1849. But yesterday the spirit of Edgar Allan Poe’s death was revived, so that the great poet could receive the eulogy that eluded him in the days following his demise.”

[via]

“How does one become a butterfly?” she asked. “You must want to fly so much that you are willing to give up being a caterpillar.” [Trina Paulus]

“The love of money is the root of all evil.” -Jesus of Nazareth

[The following are exerpts of a new series of posts by jmallory. Emphasis is mine.]

…I want to say that I CRINGE when I hear that the US is a Christian Nation. It is not, nor will it ever be… not with the system that the forefathers have set up, anyway. Secondly, I will define what I mean, and I assume, what most people mean, when I say, “Christian Nation”.  

A Christian nation is an entire country of people, devoted to following the teachings of Christ, or an  Ekklesia (church) if you will. From this definition, we can already see that the USA, is not, and under the constitution, cannot be a Christian nation. We have the freedom to follow any religion (or lack-thereof) we choose. Of course, this isn’t a new concept to anybody. However, for the sake of my point, I feel it is necessary to reiterate that point strongly. You see, if we truly are a Christian nation this is unacceptable, as it is clearly written that if there are those who continue with unrepented sin, they should be removed from among the body of Christ. Now, if we are a Christian nation, which we are NOT, we would understand that we, living in a community of fellowship with Christ, should not let this body, this community, this ekklesia, show any wrinkle or blemish. We would have to remove the evil person from among us. 

This poses a problem to this country which, supposedly, had been founded on Christian principles. When the Bill of Rights was written, George Mason and James Madison (deists- not Christians) had in mind that Americans should be free to worship or not worship how they please, and the exercise could not be controlled by the state. <–It seems natural, based off of the first amendment, that there would need to be a separation of Church and State, yet, it seems as though it should be natural to a Christian as well, as we are to be in the world, but no of the world. 

So, just how are we, the United States of America, a Christian nation? How is it possible, under our constitution, to be a Christian nation? Is it the idea that the majority of the US claims Christianity as their religion? That doesn’t make this nation a “Christian nation.” Is it our principles? Is it the American dream that makes us a Christian Nation? Absolutely not!

Our entire system is corrupt. Capitalism and Christianity can not coexist. Especially, in this day and age, it is the most evil idea that has crept into the minds and philosophies of not only Americans, but internationally, as well… and the idea is still a growing one. The problem with Capitalism, as common knowledge suggests, is that as the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. The majority have to suffer so that a few can live as they please. Yet, if you grew up as an American, you were probably taught that Capitalism is the best economical system the world has had yet. I disagree.. but that is what I was taught too. I will agree that Capitalism works (obviously not too well, as we’ve seen in the economy)… but that is all it does. It doesn’t help.

Take this financial crisis for instance. A lot of the bailout money ended up going into the pockets of those who work to keep the businesses running, and it wasn’t used how it had been intended to be used, that is, it wasn’t used to actually help the businesses, themselves. That is what capitalism does. It keeps a corrupted heart corrupt, and it corrupts the hearts of those that are uncorrupted. 

Capitalism idolizes mammon (money). This entire country idolizes capitalism. And if the Empire is idolizing capitalism, which idolizes mammon, then WE ARE IDOLATERS. This is when we really need to look at what Jesus says, “A slave cannot serve two masters. Either he will love one and hate the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both, God and mammon.”

There are those that are reading this that will know exactly what I am talking about when they find themselves trying to defend mammon instead of God’s own words. There will be others who will not catch it… because no one wants to believe that something that has been a part of them for so long could, in all reality, be evil. [from "So You Want to be a Christian Nation? Part One"]

I find it ironic that you can find, “In God We Trust” on our currency.

What I’m saying isn’t a brand new idea, obviously, however, this subject is something that Christians ought to think about. Who is the “we” our currency is talking about? Not everyone believes in God. Some believe in a god or gods, but its (or their) name(s) isn’t (aren’t) “God”. However, our currency seems to suggest that we (Americans) trust in God. Not all of us do. In fact, many Christians don’t even put their trust in God. Many people put their trust in (drum roll please?) …MONEY! Again, I blame it on our system of capitalism. 

So does the phrase, “In God We Trust” really belong on our money? I don’t believe it does. I think that mammon is part of the world and should not taint the church. It is just another one of those things on the dollar bill that has become part of its intricate design- easy to overlook. Really, I don’t feel comfortable knowing that I will be trusting my money to put food on my table and not God. What I’m saying is, if “In God We Trust” is meant to be a friendly reminder telling us to pay attention to what we are investing in, it doesn’t work, and it really only serves as a contradiction. In a sense, this forces many people to live a lie. 

The solution to this problem is simple- though it may cost a lot. Take “In God We Trust” off of the American currency. It doesn’t need to be on our money and causes God to look at us and say, “Really? You trust me? You trust me, but you’ve refused to give that homeless man even a penny of what you’ve earned?” Remember–how you treat others is how you treat God. What you give others is what you give to God. If you want to be a Christian nation, trust God. Give away all that you have. See how God takes care of you. You may not have everything you want, but God will give you everything you need… and you would be doing this so others can have what they need. That would make one’s spirit beautiful.

I would also say that, along with taking “In God We Trust” off of our currency, we should take out “One nation under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. But I’m not going to say that. I am taking it a step further. I’m saying get rid of the entire Pledge of Allegiance… if you want to be a Christian nation (you can read some interesting stuff about the Pledge of Allegiance on Tom’s blog).  The reason why I say this is because as you recite the Pledge of Allegiance, you are declaring the USA your home. Is it really your home though? I don’t think it is. We are citizens of another kingdom. This makes us ambassadors. We are here temporarily and our purpose is threefold. 1) Worship God–serve only him (when we serve “the least of these, we serve God as well). 2) To let the world know about Christ (this is something that is less of a duty and more of something we shouldn’t help. The spirit should be overflowing in us, so we would have no choice but to tell others the source of our joy). 3) Help bring Heaven to Earth (the work of an ambassador–to represent his home)

That is all we are here for- and it is only temporary. Soon, we will be with God in our true home- the kingdom of God, which we are to help bring to earth. However, if Heaven is our true home, why would we declare the USA as our home? Is it because the USA seems more tangible then the Kingdom of God? Is it because we have a group of rulers that we can see? Is it because here, we have a sense of “freedom”? I’ve said it before and I will say it again. The term “freedom” is relative. If all of our freedoms are ripped away from us, God is still in Heaven and Christ still died for us. That is all the freedom we really need–that is, the peace and rest Christ has given us in and through him. I could still feel free if I can’t speak my mind (granted, it would not be fun). I could still feel free if I can’t worship God anywhere outside my home (I would probably do it anyway–but that is an entire different blog altogether). I would still have my thoughts. I would still have my beliefs, and NOBODY can take that away. 

Anyway, back on topic, when you say the pledge, you are claiming that we are one nation under God…this is a dilemma. Saying this can equate to saying that if you are not “under God” you are not a citizen of the USA or if you are in the USA, you are automatically under God. I have a problem with this. First, I want to explain that I do believe the USA and everyone in it is “under God”. That is my belief and since it is my belief, I say this is an accurate statement. However, we dwellers of the USA have a freedom of religion which is protected by the first amendment of the US Constitution. Not everyone believes in God or they may believe in a different god. But when they recite the Pledge of Allegiance, they are forced to say that they are under God (spiritually, they are, but in their own mind, they are not). Perhaps “forced” is the wrong word, but there is only one Pledge of Allegiance for the USA. But when you are saying that you pledge your allegiance to the USA, you are pledging your allegiance to God. Otherwise, you are not really pledging your allegiance. This goes against our very constitution, making it a contradiction to what the US actually stands for, thus, technically voiding the Pledge of Allegiance. Which to a Christian, this should be ok… because this is not our true home. We are simply visiting and making the best of our stay.

But we are not a Christian nation. If we were, we shouldn’t have a pledge of allegiance. Our pledge of allegiance should be our constant prayers to God. He is the only one we should be pledging our allegiance to, anyway. 

So you want to be a Christian nation?

Step One: Rewrite the Bill of Rights
Step Two: Find a monetary system that does not cause us to put our money before God.
Step Three: Remove “In God We Trust” from our currency- unless you really are trusting God.
Step Four: Get rid of the Pledge of Allegiance [from "So You Want to be a Christian Nation? Part Two"]

Uh, now it’s me again.  Still on the subject of the phrase “under God” in the pledge…what really irks me about this phrase is that it automatically assumes the US, our “one nation” is God-approved. If WE are “one nation under God” and your country ISN’T, then yeah, it’s “logical” to make the leap to say that the war in Iraq is a holy mission and we’re on the right side of it. [GIBSON: You said recently, in your old church, "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God." Are we fighting a holy war? PALIN: You know, I don't know if that was my exact quote. GIBSON: Exact words.] It’s a really scary place to be, assuming that God likes us better and is on our side because we go to Christian churches.

If you made a resolution:

:)

I can’t believe people actually think this is right.

Court: Christian school can expel lesbian students

A California appeals court ruled this week that a private Christian school has the right to expel two students over an alleged lesbian relationship that was in violation of the organization’s “Christian Conduct” rule.

In a 3-0 ruling, the Fourth District Court of Appeals upheld California Lutheran High School’s right, as a private, religious organization, to use religious criteria in making admission and discipline decision.

The school is not a business enterprise, the appeals court ruled on Monday, and therefore not covered in the state’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

“The school’s religious message is inextricably intertwined with its secular functions,” wrote Justice Betty A. Richli in the appeals court opinion. “The whole purpose of sending one’s child to a religious school is to ensure that he or she learns even secular subjects within a religious framework.”

The appeals court ruling relied on a 1998 California Supreme Court decision that allowed the Boy Scouts to exclude gays and atheists. The Boy Scouts of America, which had faced similar discrimination charges, did not have to comply with the state’s anti-discrimination law because it was a social organization, the state High Court had ruled.

The Riverside County-based school had expelled the two girls, then 16, for having a “bond of intimacy” that was “characteristic of a lesbian relationship.”

In 2005, a student had reported to a teacher that the girls said they were in love with each other and referred the teacher to the girls’ MySpace pages. One girl indicated she was bisexual on her MySpace page, while the other said she was “not sure” of her sexual orientation. The school’s pastor said that when he confronted the girls over the suspected lesbian behavior, the girls admitted they had hugged and kissed each other and told other students they were lesbians.

The school’s pastor suspended the two girls but the directors of the school later expelled them.

The two students, who were only identified in court documents as Jane Doe and Jane Roe, sued the school for violating state anti-discrimination laws.

Court documents show that the school has a policy of refusing admission to homosexual students and its “Christian Conduct” rule provided that a student could be expelled for engaging in immoral or scandalous conduct, whether on or off campus, including homosexuality.

The girls were expelled for “conducting themselves in a manner consistent with being lesbians,” said John McKay, attorney for California Lutheran, according to the Los Angeles Times. He noted that the girls never disclosed their sexual orientation during the litigation.

McKay said the school’s mission statement is to educate students based on Christian principles.

The Association for Faith-Based Organizations (AFBO), a coalition of over 830 California Christian schools, had sought to intervene in the case to protect its member schools’ First Amendment right to make admissions decisions and disciplinary decisions consistent with their religious beliefs.

Members of AFBO include California private religious schools, such as Biola University, The Master’s College, Point Loma Nazarene University, and Simpson University, that have religious admissions criteria substantially similar to Cal Lutheran and require their students to abide by rules prohibiting all forms of extramarital sexual conduct.

Attorneys with Christian Legal Society’s Center for Law & Religious Freedom and the Alliance Defense Fund had filed a motion to intervene on behalf of AFBO. The court denied the request since it decided in favor of the school.

“Christian schools should be able to make admission and discipline decisions consistent with their religious beliefs. The Court of Appeal’s decision preserves that right for Christian schools in California,” said CLS litigation counsel Timothy J. Tracey.

“The court understood that this right would be violated if Christian schools were subjected to liability under California anti-discrimination laws for expelling students who engage in homosexual conduct.”

The Cal Lutheran case is not unique. Four years ago, a 14-year-old girl was expelled from a Ontario Christian school in California because her parents were lesbians. The school’s admission policy states that at least one parent cannot engage in immoral practices such as cohabiting or engaging in a homosexual relationship.

[This just makes me really, really sad. Because it's totally a "Christian Value" to discriminate, to treat others unfairly and unjustly, and to teach kids early on that they are the right and good and "the others" are wrong and bad. And really, why don't we just take this all the way. If we're going to use the First Amendment to justify crap like this, why don't we just do away with anti-discrimination laws at all? Because I'm sure anti-discrimination laws violate the personal beliefs of everyone who likes to discriminate. I have to stop right this minute, or I'm going to get so mad I have to write someone a letter. Well, I might do that anyway.]