This Christmas season brought many surprises to our house, not the least of which was that one of my children really started to like Frosty the Snowman.  That means that we’ve seen that movie, and the sequel many times.

I don’t know about you, but I have a problem watching the two back to back—I mean, if Frosty could stop being Frosty in the first one simply because he loses his hat, how/why does he keep taking it off in the second one?!

Can you say continuity error—a huge one!

The image of Frosty the Snowman links to where you can buy the two at Amazon.com. This is an affiliate link, and a portion of the purchase goes to the author of this site; however, the price of the item does not change.

So I go to thinking the other day… Since after the ratification of the U.S. Constitution there were multiple states that still had established churches (and some current constitutions still mention God and have qualifications for people holding office—which are mostly not observed), what would happen if Christians of a certain denomination (pick one) all moved to a certain state (again, pick one) enough that they could pass a law or State Constitutional Amendment to establish a state church of their denomination.

Would they be allowed to do it?  If not, what reason could opponents use to justify not letting a bunch of people from establishing whatever they wanted, since this is what the state of the States were after the Constitution?

Image from Stock Exchange used under the Standard Restrictions explained at the link.

There are many Atheists that are content to live peaceably with their neighbors.  They live and work within this country, and seek no ill will– they just do not believe in the supernatural or any deity.  These are probably your friends, coworkers, and others that many would consider good people.  However, there is a vocal minority of Atheists (I term Fundamentalist Atheists) that seek to eradicate all religion, and these are the focus of this article.

It doesn’t take long reading Fundamentalist Atheist’s thoughts to find that they believe that Christians are the American version of the Taliban.  They trot out the ideas that Christians are behind unequal rights for gays and telling women what to do with their bodies, and compare that to the Taliban telling women that they are of no worth and that they must veil themselves from head to toe.

What they miss is the fact that on a larger scale, they are actually America’s Taliban.

The Fundamentalist Atheists have come upon a land that tolerates their absurd belief that there is no higher power, and they have decided to make war with the foundations of that society.  They forced the schools to remove Christian teachings, readings and moral instruction under the guise of equality.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but Jewish, Muslim and other religions, though they may not have agreed with such teachings, were not behind the movement to take God out of school.

But their most Taliban like act is how they have behaved toward the ceremonial religion of the nation.  While they may have screamed and howled over the fact that the Middle Eastern Taliban destroyed sculptures that dated back thousands of years as they attempted to purify their country of “false religion”, they do the very same thing here, striking out against postings of the Ten Commandments, Crosses, and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Indeed, cultural heritage means nothing to the Fundamentalist Atheist, as he attempts to rewrite history and the Founders to make Atheists and Agnostics out of them for the purposes of thrusting their own beliefs on the people.  Many will state that “many of the Founders were Deists” which is to equate them with Atheism, when the reality is quite different.

They don’t care if they lose, they sue again.  They attempt to stifle speech they don’t agree with.

While the Christians may organize boycotts of items they don’t agree with, the Atheists use the legal system to intimidate and threaten people into agreeing and promoting their viewpoint.

You tell me, which is more like the Taliban?

Image from Stock Exchange used under the Standard Restrictions explained at the link.

One of the things that always baffles me every year is around commencement time.  How have we gotten to the point where we accept that a prayer in a single meeting is considered an establishment of religion?

I mean, the Congress of the United States opens with prayer, and they are the ones actually mentioned in the First Amendment as ones that are not to establish a religion!  How can someone, especially a student in a school, be interpreted to be establishing a religion?

Image from Stock Exchange used under the Standard Restrictions explained at the link.

It was summer camp.  I was a junior counselor, my father the senior counselor.  Here was the first time that I saw the battle of the sexes in full force and boys and girls sat at separate tables and each looked at the other like they were aliens.

It’s not like society doesn’t create this problem.  Boys and Girls, Men and Women are different.  Whereas they live together at home, when they are in school or summer camp they are separated into different sleeping areas, different gym classes, different facilities.  While in a home they may be forced to work together with some knowledge of their difference, all of these external places bring the differences to light.

And no one disagrees!

However, what I noticed that day in the dining room at summer camp was that I wanted to believe that the boys were better—being a boy myself—and thought that the adults trying to convince us of equality were misguided.

We Are Not Equal, And We Never Have Been And Never Will Be

The culture’s desire is basically to create one sex.  This one type of person, despite their physical apparatus, would have the entire world open to them.  They would be able to have any job, have any responsibility, marry whomever they will, and then they would be happy.  This elusive happiness drives people to do many things in its pursuit, but ultimately happiness does not come from the outside, but the inside.

Men and women were never equal.  When they were created, they were given different roles to fill and different abilities to carry out these tasks.  Even the Evolutionist will agree that women and men have different “cocktails” of hormones going through their bodies.  In fact, there are whole blogs dedicated to help men understand and manipulate the emotions and attraction of females based solely on their understanding of Evolution. 

Yet, liberalism and modern society continues to believe that if they just pushed more legislation, if they just did more indoctrination, they could rid the world of these differences.

We See This Everywhere

This concept of equality is everywhere, from the claim that women do not receive equal pay for equal work (a fallacy) to homosexual marriage.  Yes, that’s right, we can trace feminism as influential in the process of guaranteeing same sex marriage because the underlying argument of same sex marriage is that any one person should be able to marry any one other person—to eventually be expanded to polygamy.

In erasing the differences instead of celebrating them, we have created a situation where people are not viewed as different, but where every person is considered the same as another.  One only has to look at the business world to see how this works out.

In many different industries, management has attempted to make all employees equal, but none is this more real (to me anyway) than the software developer realm.  Between the tools that are created for us and the way that we are able to create something for people that thousands of miles away, management has sought to be able to think of all developers the same, and to commoditize us.  They can attempt to equate a developer of one country with a developer of another company, and they attempt to use job titles to assess skill.  Only what they’ve found is that not all developers are created equal, and (like any other profession I’m sure) passion and personal style tend to differ.

When these differences are harnessed, like at the beginning of every project where everyone is pretty much left to innovate, what comes out can be amazing.  However, after a while, when people no longer are engaged, and they become interchangeable, what you find is that a project can stagnate.  Quality goes down because of the value that you place on those people as individuals.

The same is true with the sexes.  If you look at the rate of progress and what the parents of the 20s-50s faced and beat, you see something that we’ll never achieve in the 2000s the way that we are headed.  We may no longer be living off of their prosperity, but we continue to attempt to, by going into debt over our eyeballs.  We compete with our parents in giving gifts, and with the Jones’ in what technology we should have in our house.

Basically, we’ve replaced a functioning society with the complementary pieces working together in their roles for a drone society, where women are told to be happy being “man-light” and men are told to consider these new “men” to be the same as them.  Only all men know that they are not, and they either take advantage of these new “men” or desperately seek for true women.

Conclusion

The adult counselors were right, in the fact that before God and as people we are equal.  We shouldn’t be picking on one another, proclaiming that one sex is better than one another, and seeking to best one another.  What we should be doing is encouraging one another in our differences, and seeing them as a strength.

We need men to be men and women to be women if we want to see a healthy society.  Unfortunately, we may be too far gone.

Image from Stock Exchange used under the Standard Restrictions explained at the link.

A 6 year old girl wrote a poem, a special tribute to her two grandfathers who served during the Vietnam War which included the line:

“He prayed to God for peace; he prayed to God for strength,”

Another parent got wind of this line, and complained to the school district, and the Principal and Superintendent compelled the girl to take this part out of the poem.

The offended parents didn’t want God mentioned anywhere in the program, and of course they claimed establishment clause.  What about free speech?

And you wonder why people home-school.

Image from Stock Exchange used under the Standard Restrictions explained at the link.