Ok, I may have stretched the truth there, but the truth is elusive and the government conspiracy theory just doesn't explain the evidence. Cui Bono.

The framers of the Constitution could have never imagined that lawyers can metastasize so deep and so fast. They wrote a simple set of rules, which listed those, and only those powers that were allowed to the federal government. Everything else was forbidden for the federal government. Thus, no 3-letter agencies, no Roe v. Wade, not even a mention of marriage. Then, they let in the lawyers, who began to split such complicated notions as "is" and "shall not infringe." The rest is history.

Religion was always part of government since the beginning of recorded history. It was only around the time of the American and French revolutions that most of Europe abandoned inquisitions and heresy trials and created freedom of religion -- and even then it has never quite been total, though the early US came closer than just about anyone else.

Most of the religiously-motivated laws that interfere in private life today (such as the restrictions on abortion and marriage discussed upthread) were always the law in this country, and didn't start to be challenged until at least the 20th century.

I agree with you that such laws have no business being in government, but the First Amendment was never intended to say that. So we need at least one new "mind your own business" Constitutional amendment to justify keeping them out. Courts that pull new rights out of where the sun don't shine (as in both Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas) can change their minds.

Embryos that have not yet grown a forebrain lack the reasoning ability to be morally human. That change happens about the 15th week.

Neo-cons are a bunch of liars (and their "conservatism" is fake), but they did not plan 9/11.

They do offer at least five (non-credit) online courses that I know of. But that's not the same as really going there.

BYU, or any other Christian school, I would not recommend to anyone. They impose conditions on your private life that should not be allowed.

I agree. It is a mistake for the gov to intrude into personal affairs.

And I also agree that power allows you the option of protecting the innocent. If you do not choose to do so, that is your prerogative, but it does not speak well of you.

Jan

Best of all, they're free. I think that they are now offering several different on line courses revolving around the Constitution.

Highly agree with Hillsdale. They also offer online courses such as the Constitution 101 which is worth the time!

Washington, not being of a phylosophical mindset, was the most, if not the only one who was religious. Jefferson, Franklin, especially Locke, and to some degree others played lip service to religion as they knew that, obviously, most of the people were religious. But they made great effort to keep it out of the government. I have no issue with anyone's personal beliefs; the issue is only when those beliefs are enforced upon me and others through the power of the government. I think that you will find very few on this site that would disagree with this view.

"Thanks" to FDR and communist sympathizers, Stalin had full information on the Bomb. Not only through spies, but through (incredibly!) official US channels. He knew that there were no more bombs and that his nuke program was not much behind.

Yeah, I was going to mention that, too. Just as moral to use it on the Soviets as the Japanese.

In 1941 - definitely; 1942 - probably; 1945 - NO.

I can think of several, but the first would be a "pro-life" or "anti-choice" stance. And next, probably any attempt by the government to "define marriage"...

Perhaps. But he also may have had most of the Soviet Army on his side by the time he reached Moscow...

As a student of history, you do know that the Soviet Union had over 500 divisions in 1945, most mechanized. More tanks, aircraft, cannon and, of course, men, than the rest of the Allied combined, and most of them were in Europe and deployed. Although Patton's sentiment may have been achievalbe in 1942, it was pure suicide in 1945.

No, they were not. If you read their writings, it becomes clear that they specifically kept away (and often ridiculed) Bible-based group think. Religion has been a part of American private and family life since the beginning of the country, but it has become part of government only in the second part of the 20th Century, perhaps as a response to specifically anti-religious sentiment making its way into government. Neither belongs in government.

The "name brand" universities have always been filled with upper class snobs and know –it-alls that think they are smarter than the rest of the country. Look at Obama (if he really did go to a university). Try watching the egomaniac O’Reilly.

The brain trust in the early '60s (Kennedy, McNamara etc.) thought they knew more than the people at Colts and that's why the M16 1A1 had such a jamming problem. They decided that the weapon didn't need case hardening and chrome plating for the bolt and receiver with all their superior knowledge of everything. This one cost lives needlessly, but it did save a couple of bucks.

There are only two colleges that I know of that I could recommend, if learning and not prestige is important. They are Brigham Young University in Utah, and Hillsdale College in Michigan. I highly recommend Hillsdale, and if anyone has a college age young person or is one, here is their info.:
33 E. College St. Hillsdale, MI 49242 800 437-2268
I am neither an alumni nor a spokesman, for them but it might be worth your time to look into them if you are at that stage in life.

Exactly. I don't think we can ban certain schools from participating, but I do think this "insider's club" should be exposed. The Bush's went to Harvard just like Obama and the Clintons, so it also isn't as if this is a one-sided thing.