tdaxp

Markos Moulitsas Zuniga writes "The gloves are coming off in Lousiani" in response to this weird, anti-Catholic advertisement put out by the Lousiani State Democratic Party

Not stopping there, he posted a bizarre pueudo-summary of an article previously written by Jindal for the New Oxford Review.

Much of the nonsense about the relationship between Church and State comes from the late 19th century, when anti-immigrant nativists targeted Catholics (Irish, Italians, Poles, etc.) as un-American and un-Christian. It's no surprising that Louisiana's Democratic Party, facing a second-generation American and first-generation Catholic, decided to play the faith card again.

Ralph Peter's June 25, 2007 article, "Faith's civil wars," has already drawn criticism from Curtis. Let me pile on.

Peters writes:

The great religious civil war of this century afflicts not only Islam but also Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and Buddhism. It's the conflict between those in every faith who promote a punitive, disciplinary deity and those who worship a merciful, loving god. Not all confrontations will be violent, but many will be venomous.

No, it's not.

There are few Christians are bigoted against my faith as the Jack Chick organization, for instance:

Indeed there are many Roman Catholics who, in spite of their beliefs, looks past it all and reach out by faith to the living Saviour. Oh yes, such accept Christ as their personal Saviour, are born again and leave the old life behind. Such we call "converted former Roman Catholics."

But the question here is are there any saved Roman Catholics? That is, being a saved person and remaining in Roman Catholicism.

Just as you cannot mix fire and water, neither can one be a saved person and remain a faithful Roman Catholic.

But here's the thing. Jack Chick is not trying to kill me. And he does not apologize for those that do.

There is a real global insurgency, essentially Arabist and Islamist. Conflating that with bigotry is a big mistake, and one Ralph Peters makes all too easily.

Hoegh, P. (2007). Senator criticized over move to restrict alcohol in church. CNSNews.com. January 19, 2007. Available online: http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200701/CUL20070118a.html.

The news is so incredible that I thought it was fake:

Democratic State Sen. Lowen Kruse has introduced a bill that would eliminate two provisions to Nebraska's underage drinking law which allow in their own homes or at places of worship during religious ceremonies.

While saying the primary goal of the bill was admirable, Catholic League President Bill Donahue worries about the implication for Mass. Catholics and some Protestant denominations use wine in their communion services.

I immediately tried to check this out by going to Senator Kruse's webpage.



Kruse provided a link to the , where I found the proposed law. The strikethrough (like so) is the part of the law that Senator Kruse wants to revoke:

53-180.02. Except as provided in section 53-168.06, no minor may sell, dispense, consume, or have in his or her possession or physical control any alcoholic liquor in any tavern or in any other place, including public streets, alleys, roads, or highways, upon property owned by the State of Nebraska or any subdivision thereof, or inside any vehicle while in or on any other place, including, but not limited to, the public streets, alleys, roads, or highways, or upon property owned by the State of Nebraska or any subdivision thereof. , except that a minor may consume, possess, or have physical control of alcoholic liquor in his or her permanent place of residence or on the premises of a place of religious worship on which premises alcoholic liquor is consumed as a part of a religious rite, ritual, or ceremony.

It actually gets worse than this. Not that not only are the religious service excemption revoked, but other exemptions stay on the books.

53-168.06. No person shall manufacture, bottle, blend, sell, barter, transport, deliver, furnish, or possess any alcoholic liquor for beverage purposes except as specifically provided in the Nebraska Liquor Control Act. Nothing in the act shall prevent (1) the possession of alcoholic liquor legally obtained as provided in the act for the personal use of the possessor and his or her family and guests; (2) the making of wine, cider, or other alcoholic liquor by a person from fruits, vegetables, or grains, or the product thereof, by simple fermentation and without distillation, if made solely for the use of the maker and his or her family and guests; (3) any duly licensed practicing physician or dentist from possessing or using alcoholic liquor in the strict practice of his or her profession, any hospital or other institution caring for the sick and diseased persons from possessing and using alcoholic liquor for the treatment of bona fide patients of such hospital or other institution, or any drug store employing a licensed pharmacist from possessing or using alcoholic liquor in the compounding of prescriptions of licensed physicians; (4) the possession and dispensation of alcoholic liquor by an authorized representative of any religion on the premises of a place of worship, for the purpose of conducting any bona fide religious rite, ritual, or ceremony; (5) persons who are sixteen years old or older from carrying alcoholic liquor from licensed establishments when they are accompanied by a person not a minor; (6) (5) persons who are sixteen years old or older from handling alcoholic liquor containers and alcoholic liquor in the course of their employment; (7) (6) persons who are sixteen years old or older from removing and disposing of alcoholic liquor containers for the convenience of the employer and customers in the course of their employment; or (8) (7) persons who are nineteen years old or older from serving or selling alcoholic liquor in the course of their employment.

This blog has a "health mullahs" to point out over-zealous health laws. However, this isn't a health law. It keeps the exemption allowing 19 year olds to sell and serve alcohol, it keeps the exemption that allows 16 year olds to handle alchol, it keeps the provision for people making their own moonshine.

This is not a health law. This is hate speech in legislative form, designed to harrass Catholics and criminalize Catholocism. Senator Kruse, a Methodist minister, should be ashamed of himself. Like all other bigots.

"As Holidays Approach, French Find New Ban on Religious Symbols Cuts Both Ways," William J. Kole, Associated Press, http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGB720IZO2E.html, 13 December 2004.

France continues her anti-Catholic, anti-Islam, anti-God bigotry.

PARIS (AP) - They arrived as they do every December: gaily wrapped gifts destined for children at a kindergarten in rural northern France.

But this year, teachers unwrapped a few, took a look and sent all 1,300 packages back to City Hall. The presents were innocent, but strictly speaking, illegal: seasonal chocolates shaped like Christian crosses and St. Nicholas.

As Christmas approaches, France is awakening to the realization that a new law banning conspicuous religious symbols at schools - a measure used mainly to keep Muslim girls from wearing traditional Islamic head scarves to class - can cut both ways.

"It's an unhealthy political affair. Absolutely regrettable," said Andre Delattre, mayor of the northern town of Coudekerque-Branche, which has shipped the traditional chocolates to local schools for 11 years.

"What's the point? It's the children who are being penalized for this difference of opinion," he said. "They've been deprived of a festive moment."

The law, which took effect in September, bans overt symbols such as Islamic head scarves, Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses at public schools.

In the United States, religious expression is encouraged. The U.S. Justice Department recently intervened to protect a Muslim schoolgirl's right to wear the head scarf. In France, they would make her a criminal.

No wonder our ancestors fled that continent of death and decline.

Hat tip Democratic Underground.