There was a small discussion over on Facebook tonight, and I wanted to expand upon some of my thoughts here.

Someone posted about the hypocrisy being shown by the Muslim world about the church in Florida which plans to burn a copy of the Quran. They stated that the burning of the Quran shouldn’t anger the Muslim world any more than Bible or flag burning angers others.

That statement sparked a conversation between two people that quickly denigrated into name calling and finger pointing. One person said that everyone should act like adults and stop bashing others beliefs, while the other said that “everyone should grow up” had the stench of surrender to it.

One person invoked the name of Jesus, telling the second person that Jesus made the ultimate surrender and that he degraded it with revenge and wasn’t very “Christian”. From there it went downhill quickly as the first person also invoked the names of Timothy McVeigh, the Columbine teens, David Koresh, and Jim Jones. She insinuated that those who didn’t see things her way were violent and ignorant.

After an historical reference to 1938, a couple veiled comments about the incinerators at the concentration camps, and a couple more insults, the first person ended their side of the conversation with the over-used statement that “not every Muslim is a terrorist”.

After reading the entire conversation I could not contain myself. I felt I needed to write something about it, so this is what I wrote.

When an event occurs in the present (like the burning of the Quran), I think it does more damage invoking the name of radicals of the past. We all know we cannot move forward if we don’t learn from the mistakes in our past, but that doesn’t mean we need to dwell on that past either.

Burning the Quran may offend some, but they have the right to burn it, just as you or anyone else has the right to perform many similar acts, as protected by our freedom of speech as defined in the U.S. Constitution.

When you invoke the name of radicals to support your theory, your theory carries little to no weight of its own. Just like those who invoke the name of Hitler or the Nazis, you are no better for invoking the name of Timothy McVeigh, David Koresh, or any other half dozen radicals of our time.

While I support the statement that not all Muslims are terrorists, the Quran clearly promotes violence, and claiming otherwise is extremely ignorant.

I am not arguing, I am not preaching, I am simply telling it like it is. Throughout many parts of the world books and effigies are burnt in protest, religious leaders call for the destruction of America, women are stoned to death for the most insane reasons, and all the while we, here in America, are told to remain tolerant.

I see no tolerance in many of the statements above, in fact I see a lot of intolerance to our fellow citizens while espousing a reality that simply does not exist.

What is the difference between a Christian and a “Christian” anyway? As a Christian, I don’t feel it is my place to single out specific individuals as being more or less Christian than me, for I am no better than anyone else, for we are all sinners, aren’t we?

Although I don’t agree with the burning of the Quran (or any other book), it’s a far cry short of the “violence and ignorance” that you have claimed it is. I don’t need a teacher, religious zealots, two angst ridden teenagers hellbent on destruction, or anyone else to see that.

What do you think? Personally, I think a person does a disservice to themselves, and the debate they are trying to win, when they invoke the name of radicals (from either side) to attack the other side of the argument. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to make statements which actually support your side? Wouldn’t it be prudent to converse with your opponent rather than attack them by comparing them to some of the most dangerous radicals of our time?

Has anyone ever won a debate with you by calling you names? Has anyone ever convinced you that your beliefs were wrong by comparing you to religious zealots and radicals? I didn’t think so.

Back in 2007, I wrote several posts about Georgia’s new Voter I.D. Law on my other blog, Slobokan’s Site O’ Schtuff.

Today, I am happy to say that the U.S. Department of Justice has approved the voter I.D. system.

The Justice Department has given Georgia approval to again verify voters’ identity and citizenship, Secretary of State Brian Kemp announced Monday.

Federal officials have pre-cleared a modified new program designed to confirm that prospective voters are U.S. citizens. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division had repeatedly rejected similar versions of the Georgia program.

It has been mired in legal challenges since 2008…

It’s about time. There is nothing wrong with requiring a voter to show proof of their identity and their citizenship, unless you’re a Democrat.

State Rep. Roger Bruce (D-Atlanta) said, “We should be doing things to encourage them to vote instead of making them jump through hoops”. What hoops? Carrying the same identification they are required to carry if they walk down the street, drive a car, or open an account at a bank? Hello? What hoops are Rep. Bruce referring to?

Oh wait. I remember. The only person jumping through hoops will be Roy Barnes, former Governor (and current candidate for Governor) who was spearheading an effort to overturn the law…

Former Democratic Gov. Roy Barnes had sought the action in a state court, arguing Thursday before Judge Melvin K. Westmoreland that requiring voters to show government-issued photo ID violated the state Constitution.

That’s right. Good ol’ boy Roy, who is the Democratic nominee for Governor was really looking forward to all of those votes from people who thought carrying a photo i.d. would take too much effort or would require them to act like every other member of society.

I think we should light those hoops on fire and watch King Roy sweat a little bit.

If you want to read all my previous posts about the Georgia Voter I.D. Law, here are the links to those posts.

Georgia Voter I.D. Law Upheld
Georgia Voter I.D. Law Not Unconstitutional
State Supreme Court Hears Voter ID Case
The Georgia Voter Yo-Yo Act
Georgia Supreme Court Rejects States Appeal
Georgia Voter ID Law On Hold… Again…
Georgia Voter I.D. Cards Aren’t Quite Ready
Justice Dept. Approves Georgia Voter I.D. Law
Governor Signs Georgia Voter I.D. Law… Again.
Georgia State Senate Debates Voter ID Law. Again.
U.S. Court Denies Appeal On Voter I.D.
Boortz On Yesterday’s Voter I.D. Decision
Georgia Voter I.D. Law On Hold
Got I.D.? No Problem
Nothing More Than A Poll Tax?
The NY Times Is Full Of It
The Georgia Voter ID Bus

I am taking a break tonight, but you need to read this article.

Collecting rain in a rain barrel may be illegal in your state.

Many of the freedoms we enjoy here in the U.S. are quickly eroding as the nation transforms from the land of the free into the land of the enslaved, but what I’m about to share with you takes the assault on our freedoms to a whole new level. You may not be aware of this, but many Western states, including Utah, Washington and Colorado, have long outlawed individuals from collecting rainwater on their own properties because, according to officials, that rain belongs to someone else.

Read more at Natural News.

While attempting to prove she has “overcome” her racism toward white farmers, Shirley Sherrod has now taken the next obvious step along her path to self-destruction. She is planning on suing Andrew Breitbart because the Obama administration over reacted and fired her innappropriately.

Ousted Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod said Thursday she will sue a conservative blogger who posted a video edited in a way that made her appear racist.

Sherrod was forced to resign last week as director of rural development in Georgia after Andrew Breitbart posted the edited video online. In the full video, Sherrod, who is black, spoke to a local NAACP group about racial reconciliation and overcoming her initial reluctance to help a white farmer.

Why is Sherrod suing Breitbart? His video was used to criticize the NAACP, not Sherrod. Is it his fault that the Obama administration is so scared of racial issues that they were trigger happy when they fired her? No, it’s not.

Personally, I am sick of this story, and this will be the last time I post anything about Shirley Sherrod, or her racist husband, Charles.

The video shows her making the statements she made, and the crowd reacting the way they did. Period. She’s a moron for suing Breitbart. The truth is the truth, if she can’t handle the truth then she never should have been in the position she was in.

Just imagine if a white person had made the same statements about a black farmer, and a white crowd reacted the way the NAACP crowd did. This would be a whole different story and heads would already be served up on platters.

On top of it all, she is going to drag this out into court. For what? Oh, that’s right, she needs her 15 minutes, and this past couple weeks just hasn’t been enough, I guess. Disgusting.

Did you hear what happened in Massachusetts today?

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Yes, you read that correctly. The Massachusetts Legislature essentially took the election of the President of the United States out of the hands of the citizens of Massachusetts. You see, no matter who they vote for in the 2012 election, all electoral votes for Massachusetts will be awarded to the candidate which receives the most popular votes, nationwide!

The bill, which passed on a 28-to-9 vote, now heads to Democratic Governor Deval Patrick’s desk. The governor has said in the past that he supports the bill, said his spokeswoman Kim Haberlin.

Under the law, which was enacted by the House last week, all 12 of the state’s electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally.

This is idea is actually stupid. Plain and simple. If you want to pass a law that awards your electoral votes based on the popular vote within your state, that’s one thing, but this has nothing to do with the people of Massachusetts, or their vote. If the people of Ohio, Florida, or any other swing state end up taking a candidate over the top with the popular vote, the state of Massachusetts is going to award their electoral votes to that candidate, whether or not that candidate did well in the popular vote.

Massachusetts isn’t alone either. Illinois, Hawaii, Maryland, and Washington have also adopted the same law.

I can hardly wait to see the newscasts on election night 2012. When Illinois, Maryland, Hawaii, and Washington are all painted red because the citizens of those states allowed their legislature to elect “the other guy”.

The current Electoral College system is confusing and causes presidential candidates to focus unduly on a handful of battleground states, supporters say. They also say that the popular vote winner has lost in four of the nation’s 56 elections.

Wow. Four times in 56 elections. I can understand some people wanting to abolish the electoral college, but this bill is way over the top. The first time Massachusetts goes red on the map because of this law, the people will stand up and demand it be repealed. Just watch.

If you pay attention to the news, you’ve heard of Shirley Sherrod by now. There has been a lot of commotion about her and the clip of the speech she gave. Of course, once the entire video was released it didn’t make her look as bad as the clip did (although there is no excuse for the audience’s reaction to her speech).

Well, some people may not think Shirley Sherrod is a racist, but the same cannot be said for her husband, Charles.

What a shame. I actually believed Shirley Sherrod had redeemed herself and didn’t tolerate racism, yet she’s married to it. Believe what you want, but I don’t think Charles Sherrod has any redeeming qualities in this video.

To say I am shocked is an understatement. Last night was the wildest election I have followed since I started voting. I am absolutely stunned. Some good, mostly bad, but completely and absolutely stunned. I just don’t understand what was going through the voters’ heads.

The mission of our local TEA Party organization was to educate the voters, and it’s clear the local TEA parties had absolutely no effect on the outcome of this election. While I think they had a profound effect on the message during the campaign, they had no effect on the voters decision when choosing candidates.

A few candidates won on name recognition alone, and others who busted their ass, won 98% of the straw polls statewide, and gave it everything they had, ended up being kicked to the curb prematurely.

It’s clear that the Republican voters of Georgia did not pick the best candidate to run against Roy Barnes in November. Sure, we still have a run-off on August 10th, but neither Karen Handel nor Nathan Deal are the best candidate for the job. Both of them are better alternatives than Roy Barnes, but they don’t hold a candle to others where liberty and fiscal conservatism are concerned.

With the governors race we have a surrogate showdown between Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin. Gingrich has endorsed Deal and Palin has endorsed Handel. This makes the perfect “career politician” surrogate showdown, with actual career politicians in the candidate as well as endorsing positions.

Doesn’t this make you feel like their way of telling you to “assume the position”?

With the availability of information on the internet, there is no excuse for not researching the best candidate. People have really proven how lazy they are, because voter turn out was extremely low too.

Ten percent of the people have determined the course of the general election for the remainder of the population. I would have thought that conservatives (and independents) across the state would have stepped up to make their voices heard last night, and all we got was the sound of the dedicated few who support incumbents and career politicians.

Republicans in Georgia had a chance to prove they had evolved into a better political party with a mindset on liberty, smaller government, and a return to the values of our founding fathers, but instead they handed the primary election over to the career politicians who got us in this mess in the first place.

Disgusted doesn’t even begin to explain what I am feeling.

Conservatives in general have evolved, but those who just call themselves conservatives are still taking the easy road by listening to one particular talking head at a time and ignoring the issues that matter most.

Yeah, to say I am disgusted is definitely an understatement. ;)

Tomorrow is primary day here in Georgia. It’s been a long and grueling campaign for some candidates, while a couple of incumbents have skated by with no opposition.

Whether you are a registered Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or independent (like me), make sure you get out there tomorrow and vote. Mid-term elections are notorious for extremely low voter turnout, and your vote could literally make the difference whether or not your candidate makes it to the general election.

I voted last Friday afternoon, so I could sit home tomorrow and watch the exit polls and keep my eye glued to the election returns. People say it all the time, but this year is probably the most important mid-term election of my generation (and I am not that young anymore). With out-of-control spending, an out-of-control Congress, and an egomaniacal out-of-control President, we need to elect candidates that will get our country back on track and stop the downward spiral our country is taking.

I am confident that many of the candidates I voted for will win their primary campaigns, and I look forward to voting for them again in the upcoming general election. Once we get this mid-term cycle straightened out, we can all focus on 2012!