To be clear, no one is questioning whether or not people have a right to build a house of worship on any private property which they own. This issue does not concern rights or laws. Rather, it concerns propriety.

The World Trade Center site and its immediate surrounding area is hallowed ground, consecrated with the blood of innocents. Those innocents were murdered by radical Islamic terrorists who believed that by killing these innocents their God would honor them. Upon learning of the events of September 11, 2001 the vast majority of Muslims world-wide looked the other way and kept their mouths shut. Whether they meant to or not, by doing so they gave their tacit approval to the atrocity.

The Muslims involved with this project claim that they are building this “community center/mosque” to foster understanding and facilitate dialog between all faiths and peoples. Yet, by insisting on building this mosque on the Ground Zero Site, these very same Muslims display a complete lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of a majority of the people of New York as well as America. It seems that Muslims, for the most part, are unwilling to show a sensitivity to the culture of Americans, while at the same time demanding that Americans show sensitivity to Islamic culture.

None of this even begins to cover the Islamic tradition of building mosques on the sites of their conquered enemies.

If you must build a mosque, build it elsewhere. Just as with a Christian church, a mosque is nothing more than a building. What counts is what the people inside the building are doing.

This past Thursday, March 5, the Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut State Legislature, which is chaired by Sen. Andrew McDonald of Stamford and Rep. Michael Lawlor of East Haven, introduced a bill that directly attacks the Roman Catholic Church and our Faith.

This bill violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. It forces a radical reorganization of the legal, financial, and administrative structure of our parishes. This is contrary to the Apostolic nature of the Catholic Church because it disconnects parishes from their Pastors and their Bishop. Parishes would be run by boards from which Pastors and the Bishop would be effectively excluded.

This bill, moreover, is a thinly-veiled attempt to silence the Catholic Church on the important issues of the day, such as same-sex marriage.

This is mind-boggling. One of the few issues that people of all political stripes agree on is that the government has no role in religion, and is forbidden by the Constitution from interferring with religion.

In defense of their actions, Democrat Mike Lawler, one of the people who introduced the bill, offers this lame explanation:

… the current state statutes governing Roman Catholic corporations … were enacted in 1955. SB 1098 is a proposal to make changes in that law, which was suggested by parishioners who were the victims of theft of their funds in several parishes, and these parishioners feel that the state’s existing Roman Catholic Corporate laws prevented them from dealing with the misuse and theft of funds.

I agree with you that the whole notion of having a statute governing the church seems like an intrusion on the separation of church and state, but the current law does that already. Perhaps we should repeal the whole thing, but if we are going to have a corporate law of this type, it probably should make sure there cannot be deception of parishioners.

As pointed out by Cassi Fiano at Wizbang:

Here’s the problem with that reasoning. Theft and fraud are already against the law. If a parishioner believes that theft and/or fraud has taken place, then they can take legal action. If they feel they’ve been deceived, then obviously there’s no legal action they can take — there’s no law against lying or deception, even if it’s not very nice to lie to or deceive someone.

This bill needs to be defeated by a landslide. Although this bill targets the Roman Catholic Church, tomorrow it could be applied to the Methodist Church, and then the Luthern Church, and so on. People of all faiths need to rise up against this unconstitutional attempt to usurp the authority of the Catholic Church over their Parishes.

UPDATE: Due to the public outcry, the bill has been killed for this session.

One thing I can say, the worse things get the more I believe and have faith in God. I would think that the normal response would be to turn away from Him. But I find myself even more devoted with each disaster that comes our way. Perhaps God will provide us with a miracle anyway. I keep thinking of the Book of Job in the Old Testament. I think I need to read it again right about now.

Rene

Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) could be replaced by “Mecca Time,” if a group of Muslim leaders get their way.

At the conference, “Mecca, the Center of the Earth, Theory and Practice,” Muslim scientists and clerics called for the change, arguing that the holy city in Saudi Arabia is the center of the Earth and should be the reference point for world time, not Greenwich, England, the British Broadcasting Corp. reports.

One geologist at the Qatar conference said Mecca’s longitude is perfectly aligned with magnetic north and should therefore replace the English city, which has been measuring time zones since 1884, the BBC reports.

That’s right; the people from The Land That Time Forgot now want to control time for the entire planet. Just let that little irony slush around in your brain for a minute or two. A civilization whose technology hasn’t risen above the seventh century, with the single exception of the tools of terrorism, wants the entire world to dance to their tune.

I can see it now; common sayings such as “beer o’clock” will morph into “beat-your-wife o’clock.” I just can’t wait.

And by the way, since when did Hell Mecca become the center of the Earth?

Hey, Muslims! You can’t control time until until you can tell time with something other than a sundial.

A report posted on Islam Watch, a site run by Muslims who oppose intolerant teachings and hatred for unbelievers, exposes a prominent Islamic cleric and lawyer who support extreme punishment for non-Muslims — including killing and rape.

A question-and-answer session with Imam Abdul Makin in an East London mosque asks why Allah would tell Muslims to kill and rape innocent non-Muslims, including their wives and daughters, according to Islam Watch.

“Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet,” the Imam says, according to the report. “If you don’t believe me, here is the legal authority, the top Muslim lawyer of Britain.”

The lawyer, Anjem Choudary, backs up the Imam’s position, saying that all Muslims are innocent.

As far as I’m concerned, Ann Coulter was right.

A HOSPITAL porter was “devastated” last night after he was sacked following a row with a Muslim doctor over a crucifix.

Joseph Protano, a devout Roman Catholic, was a regular visitor to a prayer room open to all faiths at Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital.

But Mr Protono, 54, became increasingly angry to find that a crucifix and a statue of the Virgin Mary were regularly being left covered up.

On one visit he discovered three Muslims – two patients and a consultant – inside the prayer room with the two icons masked by a cloth. A picture of the Virgin Mary had also been placed face down.

Mr Protano is alleged to have uncovered the symbols and stood the picture back up before leaving the room. But minutes later there was a “confrontation” in the corridor after the group followed him out.

The Muslims accused Mr Protano of using racist language and assault, but he strongly denies the charges against him and claims they verbally abused him.

Mr Protano, from Salford, was suspended four days after the incident in December and has now been fired.

So here’s the situation: This hospital has one prayer area for all faiths to share. Some of those faiths do not worship Christ, but have their own deity. So, they go in this room, cover up the Christian symbols and then do their thing. Up to this point, I have no problem with what is going on.

However, upon finishing their service, prayer, etc., the Muslims fail to uncover the Christian symbols when they are leaving. Instead, they leave the symbols covered, which of course insults Christians. So, this guy goes in and uncovers the symbols while the Muslims are using the room. This, of course, insults the Muslims. Mayhem ensues.

After listening to both sides, the hospital fires the Christian. So, why has a simple disagreement, which could have been resolved in many ways more amicably than this, been elevated to an offense serious enough to fire someone? One word: fear.

If you haven’t heard, the Muslim population in Great Britain is growing by leaps and bounds. Also, the Muslims who are immigrating to Great Britain are not assimilating into the British culture; rather they are keeping their own culture, religion, and religious laws and imposing it on those who enter their areas. In many ways, this immigration resembles what is going on in the southern parts of the U.S. where Mexicans are illegally crossing the border and staying. Both groups are creating large population centers, and within those population centers they speak their own language, worship their own religion, and do all they can to prevent assimilation into the local culture. The main difference is that the Mexican culture is not that different from the American culture, so there are few if any problems from that standpoint. However, there is a huge difference between Islamic culture and Western culture and that is causing a lot of problems in Britain.

Unfortunately, when it comes to disputes involving Western and Islamic cultures, usually whomever is in charge will side with the Islamic point of view in an effort to show their commitment to “diversity” and tolerance. Also, since Muslims world-wide have begun perpetrating violence on groups of non-Muslims who they believe have offended them, sometimes fear ensures that the Muslims get what they want.

In Britain, Muslim protesters often display signs such as the one above during protests over everything from cartoon depictions of Mohammed to women who dare to show their face in public. These are not exceptions to the rule; these are the rule during these Muslim protests.

Recently, two sisters in Irving, Texas were both savagely killed by their father in an apparent honor killing. One of the girls was making the mistake of seeing someone who was not a Muslim, and some say that when the father found out he killed both girls.

One of the important reasons America became a “melting pot” was that people who came here were willing to assimilate into the American culture. Surely, they brought their own culture with them, but instead of imposing it on their young they allowed the young to take the best of their native culture and combine it with American culture. This allowed the young to become educated and accepted among the rest of the people already here, and thus opened the door to the American Dream.

There is no way in hell extremist Muslims are going to assimilate into Western culture. In fact, as they have stated over and over again, their goal is to create one Islamic government to rule the world by use of force (see War on Terror). Yes, a majority of Muslims are peaceful people who fit into society fine, but guess what? I haven’t seen any massive demonstrations against Muslim extremists by these Muslims since September 11, 2001. In fact, the entire group of “nice” Muslims has hardly said a word in support of America since then. Why not? Truth is, they are as scared as we are of what the extremists are capable of, and given the choice, they’ll keep their mouths shut rather than suffer the wrath of their fellow Muslims.

Which leaves only two questions: How long is it going to take Americans to figure out that Radical Islam is coming for its sons and daughters? What are Americans willing to do to protect their sons and daughters, as well as their way of life?

Smith was working as a freelance photographer for the Boston archdiocese’s weekly newspaper at a special Mass for lawyers Sunday when a Herald reporter asked the justice how he responds to critics who might question his impartiality as a judge given his public worship.
“The judge paused for a second, then looked directly into my lens and said, ‘To my critics, I say, ‘Vaffanculo,’ �? punctuating the comment by flicking his right hand out from under his chin, Smith said.
The Italian phrase means “(expletive) you.�?
Yesterday, Herald reporter Laurel J. Sweet agreed with Smith’s account, but said she did not hear Scalia utter the obscenity.

Justice Scalia explained the gesture like this:

Scalia went on to cite Luigi Barzini’s book, “The Italians,�? which describes a seemingly different gesture – “the extended fingers of one hand moving slowly back and forth under the raised chin�? – and its meaning – “ ‘I couldn’t care less. It’s no business of mine. Count me out.’ �?

Seems pretty plausible to me, but then again, I’m not a member of the MSM trying to generate buzz on a non-happening. Oh, yeah, here’s the picture the photographer took:

When faced with Scalia’s immensely sensible explanation, the best the press could come up with was this:

“There is no answer to ‘what it really means,’ because those gestures have different meanings in different locations, even in neighbouring locations,�? said Janet Bavelas, a University of Victoria, British Columbia, psychologist who has studied human gestures.
The gesture typically means “I don’t know�? in Portugal, “No!�? in Naples, “You are lying�? in Greece and “I don’t give a damn�? in northern Italy, France and Tunisia, said David B. Givens of the Center for Nonverbal Studies in Spokane, Wash.

So, if there is no way of really knowing what the gesture means, why do the press immediately assume it’s obscene? Could it be that because Scalia is a well known conservative Justice that it suits the press’ agenda to make such an assumption? What about the obscenity that Scalia muttered, you ask? You mean the one that only the photographer heard, even though the reporter was right there at the time? Who you going to believe, a Supreme Court Justice with an impeccable character and a strong religious background, or a free-lance photographer trying to make a name for himself?

The arson attacks apparently began when the three got into Cloyd’s sport utility vehicle for a night of deer shooting in Bibb County on Feb. 2, according to Walker Johnson, a federal agent who investigated the fires.

Moseley told agents that the three set fire to five Baptist churches in the early morning hours of Feb. 3. A witness quoted Cloyd as saying Moseley did it “as a joke and it got out of hand.”

Moseley also told agents the four fires in west Alabama were set four days later “as a diversion to throw investigators off,” an attempt that “obviously did not work,” the court papers said.

First off, why are these teenagers going out at night to shoot deer? I’m not a hunter by any means, but I’m pretty sure that when you go hunting, you usually go in the early morning hours of the day so that you have enough light to see what you’re aiming at. Next, what kind of mind equates setting a building on fire with a “prank”? A prank is tying someone’s shoelaces together or making a funny face behind someone’s back. What kind of environment produces a teenager who thinks that destroying private property using arson is nothing more than a joke?

An attorney for Cloyd, Tommy Spina, declined comment on the charges, but added: “This is not a hate crime. This is not a religious crime.”

No, it is a stupid crime. After they’re done jailing the teenagers, I think the authorities need to take a look at the parents. Someone is responsible for the lack of perspective these kids have.

Coretta Scott King Funeral: President Bush attended the funeral, along with three of the four living former Presidents. Some of the people who also attended and spoke at the funeral decided to turn the remembrance into a “Bash Bush” party, including Jimmy Carter and Joseph Lowery. You’d think that after the Paul Wellstone fiasco, the Democrats would have learned that all this type of behavior does is make them look like classless jackasses, but apparently they didn’t. I guess they just can’t deny their true nature.

Al Gore, Tony Blair, and the End of the World: It seems that major supporters of the theory of Global Warming are all starting in with their doomsday rhetoric.About the only thing they can’t agree on is how much time Earth has left. Gore says ten years, Blair says seven. Even though climate scientists themselves can’t agree on whether or not global warming is actually happening or not, these giants of academia deem themselves above such petty concerns as experience, knowledge, and scientific study and announce themselves as experts on when the world will end. If nothing else, at least these chicken littles are good for a laugh now and then.

To pray — or not to pray — in Jesus’ name is the question plaguing an increasing number of U.S. military chaplains, one of whom began a multiday hunger strike outside the White House yesterday.

“I am a Navy chaplain being fired because I pray in Jesus’ name,” said Navy Lt. Gordon Klingenschmitt, who will be holding 6 p.m. prayer vigils daily in Lafayette Park.

The hunger strike is intended to persuade President Bush to issue an executive order allowing military chaplains to pray according to their individual faith traditions. The American Center for Law and Justice has gathered 173,000 signatures on a petition seeking an executive order.

Seventy-three members of Congress have joined the request, saying in an Oct. 25 letter to the president, “In all branches of the military, it is becoming increasingly difficult for Christian chaplains to use the name of Jesus when praying.”

About 80 percent of U.S. troops are Christian, the legislators wrote, adding that military “censorship” of chaplains’ prayers disenfranchises “hundreds of thousands of Christian soldiers in the military who look to their chaplains for comfort, inspiration and support.”

This is just unbelievable. How can you stop a man of the cloth from praying to Jesus? I would be interested to see what President Bush’s response to this petition is. I can’t imagine him doing anything other than finding a way to allow these chaplains to pray however their religion teaches them to.

Official military policy allows any sort of prayer, but Lt. Klingenschmitt says that in reality, evangelical Protestant prayers are censored. He cites his training at the Navy Chaplains School in Newport, R.I., where “they have clipboards and evaluators who evaluate your prayers, and they praise you if you pray just to God,” he said. “But if you pray in Jesus’ name, they counsel you.”

Muslim, Jewish and Roman Catholic chaplains are likewise told not to pray in the name of Allah, in Hebrew or in the name of the Trinity, he added.

But the Rev. Billy Baugham, executive director of the Greenville, S.C.-based International Conference of Evangelical Chaplain Endorsers, says restrictions on other religious expressions have “yet to be tested.”

“No Islamic chaplain has been refused to pray in the name of Allah, as far as we know. Neither has a rabbi been rebuked for making references to Hanukkah, and no Catholic priest has been rebuked for referring to the Blessed Virgin Mary.”

This is beyond ridiculous. The Armed Forces have NO business telling a priest not to pray to the Trinity, a Rabbi not to pray in Hebrew, or a Muslim not to pray to Allah. These religions have been firmly established for centuries and have specific ways to express their faiths dictated by their beliefs. Also, just in case they may have forgotten, the Constitution of the United States, the document that they are fighting to protect, guarantees their right to practice their religion unfettered.

I am a 100% pro-military guy. I want our troops to have the best equipment, the best training, and the support of the entire country when going into battle against our enemies. However, this is just plain wrong, and it needs to be addressed immediately.

Hat Tip: This Blog Is Full Of Crap