Happy Memorial Day

I did a little research on war fatalities and discovered some interesting numbers (and the inevitable "fog" of war in getting the accurate counts):

World War I deaths = 50,585 (Minimum figure reported - maximum combat deaths reported = 53,402 KIA + 63,114 other deaths = 116,516 (DoD; 1991 Info. Please) or 126,000 with no breakout by other sources)
World War II deaths = 291,557 (KIA + 113,842 other for a total of 405,399 (DoD & Info Please))
Korean War deaths = 33,741 (hostile deaths only - total of 36,576 in-theater deaths from all causes)
Vietnam War deaths = around 58,000
War on Terror deaths = 1,840 (to date)

The first thing that strikes me about these statistics is how low the casualty rate in the War on Terror is compared to the other conflicts. The second thing is that today's war protest crowd has no sense of history.

Let me say that I am anti-war. War is dangerous to living things. War is chaos and destruction. War is, in fact, Hell. War, however, has been thrust upon us by the Islamic fanatics who think a Koran is worth more than human lives. We have been under attack since the 70's. Only under George Bush has the country finally said "Enough. You can no longer attack us with impunity. You have brought the war to us, but we will bring it to you."

Two quotes seem particularly appropriate today:

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)

Any community's arm of force - military, police, security - needs people in it who can do necessary evil, and yet not be made evil by it. To do only the necessary and no more. To constantly question the assumptions, to stop the slide into atrocity.
Lois McMaster Bujold "Barrayar", 1991
US science fiction author


Let us honor the fallen not with mourning of their loss, but with thanksgiving for their lives - that they were willing to expend them for this great country. That the great majority of them did so honorably, without committing atrocities. That we live in a country where even the rabid left has the freedom to express their views because better than they purchased that right with their own blood.

God bless America!

What's It All About?

Burning the Bible is OK.
Flushing the Koran (impossible, by the way) is not.
Burning the flag is OK.
Disrespecting Islam is not.
What's wrong with this picture?
Ever since the Ten Suggestions were outlawed in public places, we have things like this going on. And we wonder why.
According to the Bible (Hey, it's my blog, I can refer to it if I want), sin comes in three basic forms:

1. Sin is the trangression of God's law. 1 John 3:4
   
2. Sin is knowing to do good, but refusing. James 4:17
   
3. Sin is doing something you think is wrong. Romans 14:23

So, while it is possible for you and I to do the exact same thing with one sinning and one not, there are some definitive things that are sin no matter who does them. However, our relativistic world would prefer that all "sin" be in the mind, and therefore not real. If sin is not real, we don't need to worry about an accounting for our sins. We certainly would have no need of a Savior. "If it works for you, fine" doesn't cut it where the rape and abandonment of an eight year old girl is concerned.

Maybe They Are Sincere

For a while I have been amazed that the Democrats could have the audacity to talk about judicial activism from the right. Did they expect anyone to believe them? And what about the unprecedented use of a filibuster to avoid voting on judicial appointments? How can they talk about how the Republicans are disrupting government and impeding the legislative process. Of course the DNC/MSM Blather on about how ending the judicial filibuster would dismantle government as we know it. Are they nuts, or what?

Then I realized that I was just not seeing it from their perspective. They really do mean what they have been saying. And I finally realized why. It's all very simple, really.

For years the left has been unable to pass their agenda through what most of us think of as the legislative process. That hasn't stopped them, however. What they could not do through the elected bodies, they implemented through the courts. The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade discovered a previously hidden "right to privacy", which has now morphed into a "right to abortion" (listen to the rhetoric from the left if you doubt that). Recently that same body struck down laws in 19 states that they felt were "not in accordance to a growing consensus" and "inconsistent with the provisions" of a treaty that the U.S. never ratified. See, I know I am not the brightest bulb in the socket, but I always thought that a "consensus" could be determined by the outcome of an election. I thought elected officials might have some feel for the "consensus" of their contituents. Apparently they voters of those 19 states were not aware of the consensus in Europe on which the decision was based.

There are other examples too numerous to mention, but these will help you get the point.
You see, the left considers the courts as "the legislative process". What cannot pass through votes, they can implement with the judges. Unless, of course, some redneck cowboy appoints judges who will actually read the Constitution and base their decisions on American case law. That would be a disruption of the left's legislative process. And, in fact, would mark a major change in government as they know it.

The left wants the Constitution to grow and "evolve" - a fluid document that means "whatever the judges say it means". They complain that the "conservatives see the Constitution like the Bible and want to interpret it literally" (actual quote from a letter to the editor). Liberal theologians are free to discount the plain text of the Bible in order to find "the spiritual meaning". Liberal judges are free to ignore the plain language of the Constitution to find the "spirit of it" to grow.

Of course, there is at least one major difference between the Constitution and the Bible: the Constitution contains within it a means to change it. That process is called ratification of amendments. We have done that 27 times in our history. It is a difficult process by design - requiring both a super majority of the Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. Much simpler to change it by judicial fiat.

And here is the crux. Since judicial fiat is the left modus operandum, they presume it would be that of the right as well. They fear Christian conservatives because they might push their own agenda - something the left has done through the courts for years.

Happy Mother's Day

A little over five years ago, I became an official orphan. My father had died when he was 53 and my mother died at 76. She was loved by most, if not all, who knew her. She was giving and kind. We followed her wishes and gave away most of the things in her house, including her car (which was not actually in the house) to those she had befriended.
My wife at the time later succumbed to Ovarian cancer after a six year battle. She died on July 3, 2002 - one day before the nation's independence celebration. I didn't celebrate much that year. Maybe some day I will do a tribute to her and my mother. Words fail me at the moment.
My son got married yesterday. He and his bride are on their way to Jamaica for their honeymoon.
If you came to this blog looking for wisdom or humor today, I apologize. I am just thinking of how much my life has changed in the last three years. I married a lovely woman in 2003 and we will celebrate our 2nd anniversary this year. I went from having one grandchild to having six. With my son's new bride, we extended the family even further. Life is good.
Happy Mother's Day.