Jon Christian Ryter -- When America Was a Real Place to be Proud Of, Part 1

WHEN AMERICA WAS A REAL PLACE TO BE PROUD OFF
PART 1 of 2

By Jon Christian Ryter

January 2, 2008

NewsWithViews.com

Periodically, if we're Internet savvy, we receive a handful of those "remember when" emails scattered throughout the year. Those trips down Memory Lane are pleasant excursions for those of of us who who are old enough to actually remember the products or events described (but not so old that we've been sidetracked down Dementia Drive.) Fifteen-cent per gallon gasoline. Motor oil that cost 25-cents a quart. And gas station attendants who washed the bugs and dust off your windshield, checked the air in your tires and even your oil level�for free.

If you are too young to remember what a real "full service" gas station was like, put Back-To-The-Future in the DvD player and skip to the Texaco Station scene back in 1965. And, yes, a 12 oz. Pepsi was a dime. And, even though McDonald's didn't cough up the promotional bucks demanded by producer Bob Gale and Amblin Entertainment to have their name flashed on screen, in 1965 you could go to Mickey-D's for lunch�buy two cheeseburgers, fries and a soft drink for a half buck.

When I was a kid, "time-outs" were the space between the spanking and when your butt cooled off enough to sit down. When I was in high school, most male teachers had a large paddle, drilled with air holes to make sure paddle made solid contact with your behind when you got smart. I got the paddle once in math class. It felt like my teeth were momentarily jarred loose and bit my scalp. What was worse than that swat was the one I got from my dad later that same evening.

I grew up in the Ward and June Cleaver world. My neighbors could have been Jim and Margaret Anderson if my parents had money. More realistically, we would have lived next door to Chester Riley or one flat up or down from Ralph Kramden. Father may not have always known best, but Big Brother was careful not to intrude in the lives of the American people by openly snubbing the US Constitution because, in the days of black and white TV, the Bill of Rights was still respected by the courts�and government was still largely subservient to the people.

Although both were gingerly testing the elasticity of the Constitution�the high court had already violated the 1st Amendment's prohibition on creating laws that curtailed or openly banned the free exercise of religious liberty by arrogantly coupling a comment made by Thomas Jefferson�a man with deep religious convictions�in an 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association with the 1st Amendment itself to create a wall of separation between the people and their right to worship openly and freely.

The Danbury, Connecticut Baptists complained to President Jefferson that the Connecticut legislature decided that religious rights were not immutable. Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptists that no State legislature could enact any law to interfere with man's right to worship since those rights are inherent and, Jefferson noted, the Constitution places a wall of separation between the State and the church to prevent legislators from abrogating the right of the people to worship God in any manner they chose.

It took the money barons who manipulated the UN as a global replacement for the failed League of Nations two decades to figure out that patriotism and religion were so indelibly bonded together that the American people would never allow the dissolution of the US borders as long as either remain rooted in liberty. The globalists within the US government�and those who have successfully bribed it�clearly understand that the taproot of liberty in America is a two-prong tuber�patriotism and Christianity. To kill this nation, both patriotism and Christianity must die. The full-blown attack on Christianity began in 1989 when the American Bar Association and the ACLU launched a new form of lawsuit to attack Christianity as a racist religion. When liberty can no longer be construed as God-given, it becomes a retractable right.

The Pledge of Allegiance�a loyalty oath to the United States�was written by Francis Bellamy, a Baptist minister, on Sept. 7, 1892. He wrote it to help erase the psychological wedge that still divided the North and South 27 years after the Civil War. President Benjamin Harrison was the first head of State to publicly recite the pledge on Columbus Day, Oct. 12, 1892.

During the Spanish-American War Bellamy's 15-second recitation opened the school day in every public school in America. In 1940 a Jehovah's Witness, Walter Gobitis, sued the Minersville School District for forcing children to pledge their allegiance to the United States at the same time Adolph Hitler was forcing German children in Europe to pledge allegiance to the Third Reich.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 310 USC 486, that students in public schools could be required to recite the pledge. In 1943, the court reversed itself in West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette, 218 US 624. Walter Barnette was also a Jehovah Witness. The reversal was the result of FDR's appointment of Wiley Rutledge in February, 1943. Rutledge�a Unitarian�voted against the Pledge. Recently retired Associate Justice James Bymes had voted for it. Congress officially overruled Rutledge and the liberals and made Bellamy's 15-second recitation an official national pledge on December 28, 1945.

The attack on Christianity went into full swing in Everson v Board of Education and McCollum (1947) v Board of Education (1948) after President Harry S. Truman introduced Sir Julian Huxley's UNESCO into the public school system in 1946. Huxley, an original social progressive (when they were simply called communists), issued a scholastic directive entitled "Classrooms With Children Under 12-Years of Age" which accused the parents of school age children of harming their children by instilling in them a Christian ethic and patriotic pride. Huxley observed that "...[b]efore the child enters school his mind has already been profoundly marked, and often injuriously, by earlier influences...first gained...in the home." Later in the text, Huxley noted that "...it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes." Among the worst things that "infect" the family, Huxley reiterated, were religion and patriotism. Huxley, like the social progressives of today, blamed the parents for being bad influences by teaching their children Christianity, morality and patriotism. Maybe that's why it takes a village of social progressives to raise a child. They're all teachers who teach amorality, atheism and globalism.

Associate Justice Hugo Black led the majority�Chief Justice Fred Vinson and Associate Justices Stanley Reed, William O. Douglas, and Frank Murphy�held that taxpayer dollars could be used to supply school bus transportation to parochial schools. However, even though it appeared to be a 5 to 4 vote approving Everson's position, the people lost because Everson confirmed the Establishment Clause that placed the "wall of separation" theory into the 1st Amendment. Most of the minority views agreed with the majority on what has become known as the Establishment Clause which incorporated Jefferson's Danbury letter into the 1st Amendment�something that doesn't make sense since Jefferson, the primary author of the Declaration of Independence, had absolutely nothing to do with framing the Constitution. So, unlike the Federalist Papers which were positional arguments of the logic applied by the Founding Fathers who put the Constitution together, Jefferson's letter to the Danbury, Connecticut ministers was not a positional statement on the Constitution. Codifying his letter into law would be like codifying a letter from Hugo Black's aunt to the jurist�or perhaps even from a next door neighbor� raising a question on some point of law mentioned in passing, incorporated because it served as a bridge to help the court leapfrog a point of law. The justices appear to have been grabbing at political straws to help justify the UN position based on Julian Huxley's view on the dangers of Christianity.

The majority view was that the "...establishment of religion clause of the 1st Amendment means...[n]either a State nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass a law which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another, Neither can force nor influence a person to go to, or remain away from, church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or nonattendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a State nor the federal government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and visa versa in the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between Church and State."

When the social progressives�thanks to close to 100 straight years of Democrat control over the US Senate (which advises and consents on all Presidential appointments) took majority control over every aspect of the federal judiciary at district, appellate and high court level, they fought hard�even during the 8 years that the Senate was controlled by the Republicans to make sure that only social progressives�who would agree to couple European Union legal decisions with the US Code were making the decisions that judicially amended the US Constitution�were nominated to sit on any federal bench.

In 2006, US Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg attended a symposium on international law sponsored by the South African Constitutional Court. When asked by the South African judges, Ginsburg told her audience that the Republican-controlled Congress would arbitrarily terminate any debate on any proposed law that would allow the US federal judiciary to cite international legal decisions as a precedent when considering cases before them. Ginsburg admitted the GOP majority would enact whatever laws were necessary to prevent US judges from incorporating foreign legal decisions into the US Code.

Thanks to the Christian conservatives in whose best interest it was to have a conservative judiciary, they collectively decided to sit out the Election of 2006 to teach the Republican Party a lesson because they were ticked off with George W. Bush over his proposed illegal alien amnesty plan. Conservatives, for some strange reason, have an overwhelming sense of obligation to cut off their noses to spite their faces. In close elections, the far left can count on the religious right surrendering to them them the reins of governance because the GOP candidates fail to pass their theo-political litmus test. Instead, they allowed the social progressives to seize control not only of the US Senate but the House of Representatives as well. For part two click below.

Click here for part -----> 2,