I have never been more ashamed to be a citizen of Louisiana as I am today. Why you ask? Because YOU are my representative. Today you voted to keep taxpayer funded abortions in the Senate Health Care Bill. Today you voted to enable the slaghter of innocent children- and you made me responsible for paying.
You have put the blood of innocents not only on your hands, but now on mine as well. When I go to my job, I now have to deal with the fact that my hard work will be responsible for paying the “doctor” that will rip a baby from his mother’s womb.
This year you have ignored many things:
Thousands of calls to your offices demanding a town hall in North LA.
Thousands of letters and emails beggin you to listen to the people of Louisiana by voting against Health Care.
Thousands of people protesting against your party’s socialist agenda
But Mary, how long can you ignore the 45 million tiny voices? The voices of the innocent who have been killed since Roe v. Wade? The voices crying out for justice? The voices crying out to LIVE?
Ignore my calls all you want, ignore my signs outside your office window, ignore my letters and e-mails, but DO NOT IGNORE the innocent children you so casually sentenced to death with the word “Yes”!
Your campaign for re-election will be paid for with the broken, lifeless bodies you sacrificed to make Harry Reid happy. You have sacrificed THEM for your fleeting glory, and it sickens me.
I have never supported you, and I never will- but today I am more than just angry… I am disgusted, heartbroken, grieving, and done. Done with letting people like YOU pretend to stand for real women. Let me tell you something, Senator, real women are not in support of killing innocent children; they recognize the awesome blessing of having children, they glorify in the beautiful process of preganancy, and if nothing else, they realize that their child deserves LIFE.
Today you have made every citizen of Louisiana your partner in the MURDER of innocents, I hope it was worth it…
Here in America, we live in the greatest nation in the world, yet so often we do not fully appreciate it.
While we bicker back and forth about politics, other nations are suffering under radical dictators.
We complain about our presidents, but we take for granted the right to question our government, something others die for in their countries.
We may argue about equality, but other countries still treat women like animals.
While we complain about what Rush Limbaugh has to say on his radio show, we forget that other countries do not have the opportunity to speak their minds.
Many American children each year compile lists of what they want Santa to bring them, but there are children who will never receive gifts.
We complain that our troops have been gone too long; however, others are thankful for their presence.
While we talk about the deplorable state of education, children in other countries have never attended school.
We may grumble about gas prices, but we fail to recognize how lucky we are to have cars. In some countries you would have to walk miles just to access basic needs.
While we gripe about health care costs, there are people in other countries, who will never see a doctor or take medicine.
Americans debate about spending billions of dollars, but other countries are too poor to take care of its citizens’ most basic needs.
Here in America we take our prosperity, freedoms and rights for granted everyday.
This Thanksgiving, think about what your life would be like in a country other than ours, and be thankful that you live in America, the greatest nation in the world.
Congressman Joseph Cao (R-La.) (pronounced Gow) was the lone Republican vote for the House of Representatives version of Health Care Reform. Now, many are questioning his motives in voting for the bill.
In interviews, Cao defended his vote by saying that his constituents are poor and needed this bill, but in reality it was Cao who “needed” this bill-so he could get reelected in his New Orleans district.
In 2008 Cao defeated incumbent and indicted Congressman William Jefferson, making him the first Republican to hold the seat in many years. But most people recognize that he would have had no chance if Jefferson had not been caught with nearly a hundred grand in his freezer.
Facing reelection in 2010 and desperate to stay in office, Congressman Cao’s vote for Health Care Reform was a blatant attempt to pander to the overwhelming Democratic presence in his district.
And he has reason to be afraid of losing. After all in Cao’s district, three out of four voters chose Barack Obama in the 2008 Presidential election. In 2004, President Bush won only 24 percent of the vote here.
In statements released to the press the evening of the vote, Cao pretty much admits that Obama bribed him to vote yes by promising to provide greater assistance to the still struggling New Orleans area, which could influence voters in the upcoming elections.
Simply put, Cao voted not in the best interest of his district but in the best interest of his campaign.
”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
Seems pretty simple, right?
Let’s break it down.
”Congress:” the legislative body that makes the laws our country follows.
“Shall make no law:” that’s pretty self-explanatory.
“Respecting an establishment of religion,” this is where it gets a bit tricky.
This is what we refer to as the “Establishment Clause.” What it means is that we basically cannot have a national religion as established by Congress.
“Nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof:” no laws can be made that infringe upon the rights of believers to exercise their beliefs.
So if the First Amendment is that simple. Why is there so much controversy surrounding it? To clarify this, one must read the amendment again and recognize that nowhere does it say anything about “separation of church and state.” In fact this phrase does not appear in an official United States Document until Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black coined it as “official policy” in the 1947 case of Everson vs. Board of Education of Ewing Township. The question in debate during this case was whether state of New Jersey could pay for the transportation of students to parochial schools.
Many people cite Thomas Jefferson for the idea of “separation of church and state,” and while it is true that he wrote those words, it was in a personal letter which was sent to the Danbury Baptists to assure them that the federal government would not keep them from practicing their religion. Jefferson borrowed the phrase from a well-known sermon by Baptist minister and founder of Rhode Island Roger Williams. In this sermon, Williams depicts the church as a garden, the outside world as the wilderness and the “wall” as a mechanism used to protect the church from the encroaching wilderness. The Founding Fathers agreed with this interpretation, and that was the intent of the separation clause-to keep the government out of religion, not the other way around.
Does anyone honestly think that the Founding Fathers, most of whom were practicing Christians, meant to deny the rights of students to public prayer, the banning of the Bible from school libraries, forbid the mentioning of God in the Pledge of Allegiance, prohibit the display of the Ten Commandments (which many of our laws are based on), the outlawing of a banner that read “God Bless America” after the 9/11 attacks or not allowing a nativity scene to be put up at Christmas? How are any of these things establishing a national religion? They are not!
“The metaphor of a wall of separation is bad history and worse law. It has made a positive chaos out of court rulings. It should be explicitly abandoned,” Former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist said. The commonly accepted idea of “separation of church and state” is a complete and utter myth.
