Tyler TX Facebook

Follow Donny on Twitter

Username:
Password:
  Remember Me   Forgot password?  Register
0-9  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

Find or Refer a Contractor in Tyler

Wisconsin Atheists Sue Texas Governor Rick Perry

July 15th, 2011

A group of busy body interventionist atheists from Wisconsin is suing the governor of Texas for his participation in a public prayer rally in Houston due to happen next month. Now try as I might I can’t seem to rap my head around the Texas- Wisconsin connection. The Freedom from Religion Foundation is supposedly filing its lawsuit on behalf of Texas Members. The problem is, in my experience, the term “on behalf of,” is often dubious in the extreme. How many times in history has tyranny been imposed “on behalf of,” one group, onto another? I’m frankly, not all that concerned with what a tiny minority, hundreds of miles away has to say about a religious prayer meeting here in Texas.

And so what if the Governor is a religious man, and finds prayer helpful? I’d wager most Texans espouse some kind of religious view! If anything, Governor Perry’s faith makes him a more accurate representative of his constituents. The fact is the August meeting is a non-denominational, non- sectarian event. Everyone is welcome and no one is required. As far as I can see prohibiting the Governor from attending amounts to nothing more than an infringement of his right of free association.

What annoys me most about the whole episode is that, anytime a public figure who happens to be a Christian wants to meet with other Christians, the “smart people” come out of the wood work to moralize about their interpretation of the “separation of church and state;” unless of course that public figure happens to be President Obama. The fact is no one will be hurt by the Governor attending a prayer rally. But some folks just can’t tolerate other people’s pursuit of happiness. I suggest the Wisconsin atheists hold their own uh… symposium on the ineffectiveness of public prayer. I won’t attend, but I promise not to sue either.

Will Texas Pass the Anti-Groping Bill?

June 20th, 2011

TSA Groping Bill in Texas

House Bill 41 is waiting in the wings in Austin. The bill makes it illegal for any “public servant” to touch a citizen “inappropriately” regardless of whether or not the citizen is clothed. Nicknamed the anti-groping law, the bill is of course aimed at the federal Transportation Safety Administration’s manhandling of the traveling public in the nation’s airports. If the bill does in fact pass it will put the state on a collision course with the federal government, who insists it will not change its regulations. In the past, Federal attorneys have threatened to shut down any flights whose security could not be verified. What does this mean? If Texas disallows the TSA’s violation of its citizens we’ll not be able to fly from Texas airports to other parts of the country?

At this point the whole bill is up in the air (no pun intended), due to procedural considerations. While advocates are confident that they have the votes to pass the measure, it’s unclear whether Governor Perry will add it to the special session call. The public clamor for the bill seems to be growing as even Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst is urging his superior to move it forward. Either way this could be a potential make or break for a Perry presidential run. Many potential voters could see his failure to add the bill as a lack of leadership, while other may object to his advancing the bill as radical, and disrespectful of federal authority. Personally I suspect that Texans of most political stripes would favor the legislation. The TSA is an enormously unpopular organization right now, and most citizens view it as power hungry and indignant toward the public’s objections. I suspect that Texas will not be the last State to consider such laws. Hopefully, if the dissent continues it will force the federal government to acknowledge what the rest of us already know; that current procedures are not protecting the public at all; they’re victimizing it further.

The New “Romeo and Juliet” Law in Texas

June 7th, 2011

A new law has just been passed in Texas that is sure to ruffle some feathers, particularly for social conservatives. Really it’s more of an amendment to existing law and I’m not sure where I stand on this one. It’s been nicknamed the Romeo and Juliet law. It basically lowers the age of consent for teenagers from eighteen to fifteen and protects the consensual partner from prosecution on statutory rape charges, through the age of nineteen. Here’s the upside: under the current law, anyone who had sex in high school or immediately out of school who happened to be at least eighteen and had sex with a younger student could be prosecuted and wind up on the state sex offender list indefinitely. Obviously, this precludes him or her from all kinds of work, and will follow the offender where ever they go. It also inflates the sex offender numbers making it difficult to distinguish a potential threat from someone who merely made a mistake as an adolescent.

We’ve all heard horror stories about young people being put on the state’s list, despite eventually marrying their “victims.” I don’t know how often that kind of thing happens, but I don’t deem anyone who had sex as an adolescent to be a threat to my loved ones. Of course many social conservatives (with whom I often agree mind you), will argue that this merely continues to make society more permissive. Now, I’m willing to be taken to task on this but, I really don’t think this legal change is going to result in increased promiscuity. How many teens are really holding off on sex due to the threat of prosecution? All the new law really does is highlight the unfortunate lais·sez-faireapproach to sexuality that is predominate in our society. It’s not government’s job to inculcate values into our families. An old governmental principle states that a leader should never make a law he is unable to enforce. That’s what the statutory rape laws had become, largely unenforceable. As I see it, all the state of Texas did, was make the law enforceable.

Tyler Tea Party to Introduce New Senate Candidate

June 6th, 2011

Glen Addison Texas Senate Canidate
Tomorrow night, Tuesday the seventh, from 6:30 to 8:00, the Tyler Texas Tea Party, will be holding a meeting to introduce Texas Senate candidate Glen Addison to the area public. Local musician “Rusty” Paul Ruark will also be performing his hit song “You Can keep the Change.” From what I’ve read Mr. Addison has no political experience aside from serving on the Magnolia independent school district, school board starting in 1997. Otherwise he’s an area business owner who’s been operating a number of funeral homes and cemeteries in and around his hometown northwest of Houston. Mr. Addison’s platform is socially and fiscally conservative. Personally I must confess to knowing very little about the candidate. But in an election climate that is decidedly anti- incumbent, anti-establishment his lack of political experience may be seen as refreshing by a lot of Texans.

Our State has not been directly influenced by Tea Party candidates thus far. I think this is largely due to the fact that Texas politicians have been more or less compelled to adopt conservative or moderate positions, due to the already right leaning tendency of the state. As a result we have a republican establishment here with a lot of name recognition that can be tough to beat. Putting a little new or “common” blood into the state’s government would be a good idea. I don’t know whether or not Mr. Addison would be able to win, but I can appreciate the presence of more grassroots candidates reminding our party’s old guard that state offices are not their birthright. For more information on the Tyler Tea Party and tomorrow’s meeting, visit their webpage at http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=weuqvaeab&v=001IKsgF__Br-qaTFi-JVu_3xdjKDy5VDni2H5DC_LkfgYjRBCVrX5de1F5T17pOvaXvF0JXWpglsDhSMjTxu-H0w724kzhdZmyScPn-LK7sk1crjR3bFsONcvH6j1WjhUz .

Houston Pastor Can Use Christ’s Name on Memorial Day

May 29th, 2011

Memorial Day

I was trolling the area events calendar this morning, looking for a good Memorial Day topic on which to write, and I came upon a story that, to my own discredit I had yet to read about. Every year, a Memorial Day ceremony is held at the Houston National Cemetery, at which, area pastors are asked to participate by saying prayers and making speeches. This tradition has been practiced for over thirty years.

This year’s ceremony was to include an invocation by Pastor Scott Rainey, who has delivered the invocation a couple of times in recent years. This year was different however as he was asked by cemetery director Arleen Ocasio to please submit his prayer in advance. While it seemed unusual, the pastor complied with the request. Upon reading the prayer, director Ocasio notified Pastor Rainey that while the prayer was well written “…I must ask you to edit it …The tone must be inclusive of all beliefs and non-denominational in nature.” Stated clearly, she objected to the prayer because its close was in Christ’s name. This despite the fact that his prayer specifically stated “While respecting people of every faith today, it is in the name of Jesus Christ, the risen Lord that I pray…” But evidently this precaution was not enough for Ms. Ocasio who told Pastor Rainey that he would have to edit the prayer and remove the offending name of Jesus Christ before he could offer his prayer in public. Failure to make the changes would result in the pastor losing the privilege of speaking at the event. Wait, wasn’t Mr. Rainey chosen on the basis that that he is in fact a pastor, and thus does have a particular religious belief?!

When Mr. Rainey took his case to the Veterans Affairs Department, he was told that cemetery policy was to be non-sectarian, and that they couldn’t intervene. Finally the pastor took his cause to the Federal courts. Fortunately Judge Lynn Hughes agreed with the pastor citing the fact that despite the ceremonies location it was a private event and that forcing Mr. Rainey to edit his speech amounted to a violation of his free speech rights.

The frustrating thing to me (although in my opinion the story ends well), is that the military families scheduled to be present are predominately Christians, who strongly object to the exclusion of their faith, in favor of a tiny minority. No disrespect to Military families of any stripe! But why should the vast, vast majority be required to sacrifice their beliefs to the god of absolute inclusion? The case only illustrates the intellectual chasm that exists between the litigious bureaucratic class and average Americans who are not in fact trying to offend any minorities, but simply want to remember their loved ones in the context of a tradition that happens to be the majority tradition in the United States. I hate to see things like this go to the courts. But when they do, it’s nice to see traditional American values win one on occasion. All that being said, Happy Memorial Day East Texas! We honor our fallen servicemen this weekend. May light perpetual shine upon them.