on the other hand...
A friend sent me a link to a news article from the Las Vegas Review Journal:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Jun-17-Sat-2006/news/8014416.html#
The article regards the censorship of a valedictory speech at the Foothill High School commencement excersies. According to the article, the valedectorian of the graduating class first had her speech edited by the school administration, where references to her own faith and beliefs were excised, (these included two references to the Lord, nine biblical references, and one to Christ), and she was warned that her speech would be cut short if she deviated from the acceptable language.
Making a long story short, the speech was cut short when the microphone she was using was turned off to prevent the lady from deviating from the accepted script. The action was backed by the local school board and the ACLU. If this intrigues you in the least, read the article for yourself.
I guess that the ACLU is a bit down on its luck, what with the Patriot Act, and a belligerent administration continually thumbing its nose at them, so maybe they decided to pick a battle that they could win. It should be noted here that the ACLU did not appear to be a part of the process that led to the decision and subsequent action, they merely endorsed it afterwards.
From my own narrow-minded, ignorant perspective, the suppression of the rights of one for the sake of a principle or concept is anethema to the term 'liberties'. These are sometimes voluntarily surrendered by the individual, but never, ever taken by any governmental or community body. I am usually a supporter of the ACLU, not because they are always right, but because they are organized and can effect some change, (or block it, as the case may be), but this is simply ridiculous. To cite this as a defense of the separation of church and state is laughable at best. The notion that one persons ideas or beliefs, publicly expressed, are a threat flies in the face of what we as Americans believe in. Had this person quoted the Buddha, the Torah or the Koran, Charles Manson or Osama bin Laden, she may not have been censored, but to cite the Bible is, apparently, too much of a threat to our freedom.
These guys are way to beholden to thier core constituencies, (just like the "W"), and have to prove that they are still viable at every opportunity, even if it denies thier own charter.
We are quickly approaching a social, political and economic tipping point. Anyone who reads my rants knows who I blame, (and with damn good reason), but the truth is that there is enough blame to splatter us all, some more so than others. There are too many agenda's out there, like a car with seventeen drive trains working off one engine, and all moving at a unique pace, in a unique direction.
It's time to take some control of things, and that means, painfully, downsizing the government and making peace with some uncomfortable facts. Our government needs to be fair, and balanced, and a whole lot smaller.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Jun-17-Sat-2006/news/8014416.html#
The article regards the censorship of a valedictory speech at the Foothill High School commencement excersies. According to the article, the valedectorian of the graduating class first had her speech edited by the school administration, where references to her own faith and beliefs were excised, (these included two references to the Lord, nine biblical references, and one to Christ), and she was warned that her speech would be cut short if she deviated from the acceptable language.
Making a long story short, the speech was cut short when the microphone she was using was turned off to prevent the lady from deviating from the accepted script. The action was backed by the local school board and the ACLU. If this intrigues you in the least, read the article for yourself.
I guess that the ACLU is a bit down on its luck, what with the Patriot Act, and a belligerent administration continually thumbing its nose at them, so maybe they decided to pick a battle that they could win. It should be noted here that the ACLU did not appear to be a part of the process that led to the decision and subsequent action, they merely endorsed it afterwards.
From my own narrow-minded, ignorant perspective, the suppression of the rights of one for the sake of a principle or concept is anethema to the term 'liberties'. These are sometimes voluntarily surrendered by the individual, but never, ever taken by any governmental or community body. I am usually a supporter of the ACLU, not because they are always right, but because they are organized and can effect some change, (or block it, as the case may be), but this is simply ridiculous. To cite this as a defense of the separation of church and state is laughable at best. The notion that one persons ideas or beliefs, publicly expressed, are a threat flies in the face of what we as Americans believe in. Had this person quoted the Buddha, the Torah or the Koran, Charles Manson or Osama bin Laden, she may not have been censored, but to cite the Bible is, apparently, too much of a threat to our freedom.
These guys are way to beholden to thier core constituencies, (just like the "W"), and have to prove that they are still viable at every opportunity, even if it denies thier own charter.
We are quickly approaching a social, political and economic tipping point. Anyone who reads my rants knows who I blame, (and with damn good reason), but the truth is that there is enough blame to splatter us all, some more so than others. There are too many agenda's out there, like a car with seventeen drive trains working off one engine, and all moving at a unique pace, in a unique direction.
It's time to take some control of things, and that means, painfully, downsizing the government and making peace with some uncomfortable facts. Our government needs to be fair, and balanced, and a whole lot smaller.
posted by eccentric recluse at 12:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home