Senator Rick Scott’s Narrow Mind

Speaking of Republicans … I do seem to do that a lot lately, don’t I?  They just give us so much fuel for the fires!  Republican Senator Rick Scott from Florida crosses my radar at least once a week, but I’ve largely learned to ignore him just as I have so many others.  He does, however, manage to make my antennae twitch when he goes all-out riding the bigot train as he did recently.

Last week, Scott was doing a radio interview (seems to me some members of Congress spend more time on the media circuit than they spend in the Capitol) when the host, Martha Zoller, brought up the topic of immigration.  Now, you might think that Scott, being an ultra-conservative Republican in this, the 21st century, would be completely against immigration, but you’d be wrong.  Oh no … Scott has a proposal:

“Why don’t we have a legal immigration system for the people that want to come and live our dream, that want to live, that believe in our Judeo-Christian values? Alright? Why don’t we want more? If we’re going to have more immigration, alright, let’s do that.”

Wow … I dunno, maybe some people would be happy living in a nation that only welcomes Christians, but … I personally value diversity.  Our closest friends are a family of immigrants from Iraq who came to the U.S. seven years ago and almost immediately we began learning from each other, became best friends, and still today remain so. Last year after my 11 days in the hospital, they cooked dinner for us every night for over a month!   I cherish what I have learned from them and our exchange of cultures.  I have tried and loved some Arabic foods, have picked up a few words of Arabic, though with my failing memory my attempts to say something in Arabic usually end in resounding laughter!  No, their skin is not lily-white, and no, they are not Christians, they are of the Muslim faith, but … so what???  They are wonderful people and my life is richer for knowing them!  And yet Mr. Rick Scott would shun them?

The United States was founded in part on freedom of religion.  That gives me the right to be a non-believer, that gives Rick Scott the right to be a Christian, and it gives my neighbors the right to be Muslim.  If this country tilts toward Rick Scott’s vision, then we are no longer the United States of America that was established by the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1787.  And if we allow this abominable sort of discrimination, then we are depriving ourselves of a myriad of opportunities to learn more about the world, to open our minds and our hearts. I have zero desire to live in a country of bigoted, narrow-minded people who think everyone must conform to their ways, their beliefs.


One last thing … I came across this a few days ago and found it so apt

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace. ~Jimi Hendrix

This, That, and ‘TOONS!

Until the past week, I was generally able to focus on a single issue or topic for an entire post, but my mind seems to be made of rubber these days and just bounces all over the place, hence I have done a number of posts with a variety of ‘mini-thoughts’.  This afternoon’s post is yet another such …


Apparently, some people wish to live in a nation where all people are controlled by a single religious belief set.  To those people I say, “Then please, feel free to relocate to Iran.  I would caution you, though, if you are a woman, you will be controlled, manipulated, and killed if you break the religious laws. If you are a gay person, you will be killed if it is discovered, no questions asked.”  Meanwhile, here in the United States, women are, at least in theory, given equal rights, although only for the past 100 years or so.  We now have the right to divorce our spouse, to own property in {gasp} our own name, receive equal pay for equal work, and even to … VOTE!  Okay, so we’re still working on that ‘bodily autonomy’ thing, but we’ll get there, because it’s important enough for us to fight tooth and nail for.  That’s not quite how it works over in Iran, but hey … if people want religious laws to dominate the people, they’ll just have to … get over the level of bigotry that is the foundation of such a society.  Meanwhile, here in the U.S. the majority of us fully support women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, and realize it is nobody’s business whether a woman chooses to have children or who a person chooses to love.

I respect every person’s right to believe as they wish, to adhere to the religion of their choice or no religion, if that is their choice.  But what I cannot tolerate is people trying to force everyone into their own narrow-minded box.  One of the things that the United States is noted for is freedom of religion, freedom to believe as you choose.  You have the right to attend the church, mosque or synagogue of your choice and participate in the various rites & rituals of your religion. BUT … when politicians pander to a religious group that wants to impose their will on the entirety of the nation, they are attempting to rob us of one of our most fundamental constitutional freedoms.  Be a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew or a Jain, but don’t tell me that I have to believe as you do.  Freedom OF religion must also include freedom FROM religion as an option.  The United States is not and should not become a ‘Christian nation’ but is founded on the basis of welcoming people of ALL beliefs.


A reader recently commented the following in regard to my concern for the environment:

“Time for the USA to get the message. As far as destruction of the enviro, humans cause somewhere i between 0.00020% and o.00034% of global warming. We’ve seen far bigger periods of gobal warming and ice ages throughout recorded history. Guess why the ice desert Greenland is called Greenland. It was fuxn green when the first settlers arrived there. In late Roman times they made wine in England! And we had periods of unusual warm weather but also mini ice ages and freak storms not too far in the past. Vineta (Atlantis) happened in medieval times, Tenerife will probably split in two during our lifetimes. With or without our ‘help’.”

How does one even converse with someone who is so convinced their ignorant views are correct and who looks down their nose at those of us who believe the science that tells us human activities, particularly continually increasing emissions of CO2 are creating an environment that will no longer be able to sustain human … or most other … life within a relatively few short years?  I have come to the point that I no longer bother to respond to such, for there is no give-and-take, no meaningful dialog, just arrogance and an unwillingness to consider facts.


Lindsey Graham said that if Catherine Cortez Masto beats Adam Laxalt in the race for the senate seat from Nevada, then it was fraud.  So, let me get this straight:  If the candidate Lindsey likes loses, it was fraud, but if his candidate wins, it was a fair and honest election.  Sounds to me like a rather juvenile viewpoint, rather like the ten-year-old child turning over the checkerboard and running in tears to her room and slamming the door because her dad won the game.  “No fair!  You cheated!”  But then, I guess the ten-year-old mentality is in keeping with the Republican modus operandi of late, ever since they decided to make a ‘man’ with a funny creature atop his head, a pocky complexion, a contorted mouth, and lies flowing from his mouth their “Supreme Leader”.  As of 8:49 p.m. last night, Cortez Masto is the projected winner of the race for the senate seat from Nevada, giving the Democrats a majority in the U.S. Senate.  I wonder what ol’ Lindsey will have to say this morning?  Will he have the decency to keep his mouth shut, or will he whine and demand that the election be overturned?


My jaw dropped last night when I logged onto Twitter and found that an off-the-cuff remark I had left on someone’s tweet had gained 1,281 likes, 92 retweets, and 51 comments!!!  I’M A TWITTER CELEBRITY!!!  (just kidding)  I have never had more than 30 or so likes on any tweet or tweet comment I’ve made.  Never!  This is the tweet and my response that gained so much notoriety …


And I conclude with a few political ‘toons I’ve run across over the past few days …

On Religious Freedom and Separation of Church and State

I generally steer clear of the topic of religion.  However, today I read an article on WorldNetDaily (WND), a politically conservative news and opinion website and online news aggregator. No, it is not one of my regular sites, but the headline dropped onto my radar from another site and my curiosity was aroused:

Dobson: Trump would ‘unleash Christian activists to fight for beliefs’

dobsonIn the course of the article, Dr. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, recounted a June meeting in which he met with Trump and other Christian leaders at Trump Tower in New York City. While reading the article,  I found a number of points highly disturbing.

  • Dobson told Trump, “Our Supreme Court has struck down Bible reading in schools and even prohibited prayer to an unidentified God. Then, they banned the posting of the Ten Commandments on bulletin boards. From there, the limitation on religious liberties has become even more egregious.”
  • Trump responded by calling it an “outrage that Christians have been deprived of their rights to speak openly on behalf of the values and principles in which they believe.”
  • Dobson noted that Trump criticized the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 piece of tax code that bans political participation by churches, as well as other tax-exempt not-for-profit groups. Dobson said Trump’s promise to overturn the amendment “would have a great impact on Washington because it would unleash Christian activists to fight for their beliefs.”

Before I comment on the above, a quote from the U.S. Constitution:

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

The two parts, known as the “establishment clause” and the “free exercise clause” respectively, form the textual basis for the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the “separation of church and state” doctrine. Three central concepts were derived from the 1st Amendment which became America’s doctrine for church-state separation: 1no coercion in religious matters, 2no expectation to support a religion against one’s will, and 3religious liberty encompasses all religions. In sum, citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, any support for religion – financial or physical – must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism.

c-sOne of the things that disturbs me most is that it appears Mr. Dobson does not understand that ours is a secular government.  Public schools are government organizations, and as such, the reading of a Christian text, the Bible, or the reciting of Christian prayers must be prohibited, otherwise it forces children of other faiths to participate in a religion that is not their own.  Parents who want their children to read the Bible in school have other options, i.e. parochial schools or homeschooling.

Then there is Trump’s response, which again gives the appearance that he believes the U.S. is a ‘Christian nation’, when in fact it is a secular nation that protects the freedom of religion to all.  Freedom of religion does not simply mean that one is free to be a Christian, but that one is free to be a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, or an atheist.

Religion is defined by Merriam-Webster as:

  1. the belief in a god or in a group of gods
  2. an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
  3. the belief in a god or in a group of gods: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods

Today, however, it seems to me that many, including Mr. Dobson and Trump, ascribe to the line from Henry Fielding’s novel “Tom Jones.” where he has one character say:

“By religion I mean Christianity, by Christianity I mean Protestantism, by Protestantism I mean the Church of England as established by law.”

I feel qualified to write on this topic because from my earliest days, I was ostracized on religious grounds.  I was born to a Jewish father and a Catholic mother, and our household semi-observed both religions.  Though we did not strictly keep kosher, we did not eat pork, nor did we eat meat on Fridays. I attended Catholic schools most of my childhood, where I was ridiculed and occasionally beaten for being a Jew, and attended Hebrew school on Saturdays, where I did not fit because of my Catholic heritage.  In later years, after I married a Protestant, I was told by members of his church that I could “be forgiven” for my religion, but that I must convert to their religion (I did not!).  The end result of all this is that as a mature adult, I claim no particular religion. However, I vociferously defend anybody’s right to freedom of religion so long as they do not attempt to force it upon others.  This is where I take umbrage at Dr. Dobson’s and Donald Trump’s ideas which seem to embrace Christianity to the exclusion of all others.

There is another major issue I have with Dr. Dobson, as well as all religious leaders who support and encourage their followers to support Donald Trump.  It seems to me that, as Christians, they are compromising their values.  How is Dr. Dobson not offended by Trump’s abuse of women, his many marital affairs and infidelities?  How is he not offended by Trump’s proven dishonesty in his dealings with employees and contractors?  How is he not offended by the racist and discriminatory remarks he has made against other races, cultures and religions?  How is he not offended by the violence Mr. Trump promotes?  I am puzzled as to how Dr. Dobson can even consider Mr. Trump for membership in the Christian religion, let alone as the leader of our nation.

It is not my intent to denigrate Christianity or any other religion, but simply to point out that this nation, from the very beginning, has been based on open exchange of ideas, on tolerance for all, not just a few.  Dr. Dobson’s article seems to defy one of the core principles on which our nation was founded.