There are some bigots who think as a Jew I am forever foreign. I serve my country each and every day as a labor of love.
I took my oath of office to uphold the Constitution twice and I did swear. The second time was in a Chapel in GA and I had no reservations. I have been at government meetings in Churches. In my private life I have been to Churches, Mosques and Temples.
I am an officer charged with upholding the laws in the Constitution. My religious beliefs have no
impact in my application of the laws. Indeed there are times the law stinks, but I follow the law to the best of my ability.
My identity as a Jew and as an officer rarely if ever come into conflict. A typical example was when I was in training I had to attend classes on Saturday. Rather than make waves I did what needed to be done and did not ask about Kosher food. I was in a place where the nearest Jewish community was 20 miles a way and for much of that time had no transportation by design of the program.
The time was meant for officers to bond as a unit. We formed small social groups and I was a key member of one group. My ability to deal with different challenges as a NYC type and my life in VT made my abilities valuable to the group. Individually, I could have sought out the Jewish communities in my travels but my presence was needed on a group level. I did briefly talk with some folks from Chabad in LA and went to see the Dead Sea Scrolls privately in SD.
Sometimes we are tasked with making decisions we do not like or conflict with our morals and theological beliefs. A perfect illustration was the inner angst an officer felt when dealing with the toxic brew of young children and convicted pedophiles. The Adam Walsh law remedied that horror and every officer I spoke with had the same issue.
Our American traditions include Civil law and when possible reasonable accommodations for religious beliefs. If the laws were to be changed that Gay marriage were to be recognized my job would be to adapt to the new laws. Making laws is the job of legislatures and interpreting it is the job of judges. My task is to enforce existing laws and sometimes they stink, but it is my job.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Beak, is that about Naughty Chicken AGAIN? Honestly, you are nuts to waste your time there, but to each his own. I think I'll even break my vow not to mention the unmentionables again here and even give you some additional food for thought.
I noticed (yes, I confess I went there too) that the oh-so-above-board, wide-eyed innocent character "Güera" mentioned me. Güera registered sometimes 2007. I posted my last stink bombs there very early 2006 or late 2005. Even Yeagley has become bored with bringing me up again in the meantime.
I have ceased posting about Yeagley at my blog in May 2007 and sometimes later removed the "Waffling Warrior" posts entirely. This link leads to only remaining Yeagley entry. "Güera" knows that I used to post anti-Yeagley stuff and she (if it's a she) knows of the handle "NoraTheHun", which I have never used at BE. So "Güera" must have followed me to other places. (Mac's Scottish forum comes to mind.) Why would an innocent newcomer who has never met "Nora" at BE do that?
I could give you the full address and names of friends now and ask them to say that they are "Nora" and family if somebody calls and asks for "Nora". What sort of proof is that supposed to be? I don't think that "Güera" is PMS, though. That poster can write three stringent sentences in a row. But he/she/it is somebody with an agenda. This is fun!
Popcorn anybody?
The Editrix
Actually, this post involved a discussion of American Law and religion at the site with one of the few sane participants Ray.
Ray is under the mistaken impression that our legal traditions include religious dimensions. First off the Constitution provides a prohibition against the establishment of an official State Church. The framers intent was to foster a climate of intellectual freedom where one can define his own overall religious and political
philosophy.
Laws are not etched in stone they change over time. Sadly they often
have unintended consequences. For example there was the sanctuary law. We did not want crime victims
to suffer silently so a policy was created where police departments would not ask victims immigration
status. Sadly some municipalities do not check the perpetrators status.
My job is to enforce the laws I swore an oath to uphold. The application of Civil Law has nothing to do with my private religious or political views.
"The application of Civil Law has nothing to do with my private religious or political views."
*I* know that, Beaky!
I am somewhat baffled when people do not understand a law enforcement officer is tasked with upholding laws that may be against his judgments. There are practices to follow when given an unethical order,
but the law is just impractical in many instances.
You are well adjusted and wise. I am baffled by those who fail to understand my job and theology are seldom if ever in conflict.
Although you didn't intend it, you are close to the answer to the question why Jews are hated by so many all through history when you brought the question of ethics in here. Our Western code of ethics, of good and evil, right and wrong, is based on the Decalogue Moses brought down with him from Mount Sinai. The Jews have given God, ethics and what we call conscience to the human race. So if a Jew is hated for being a Jew it's precisely because of that. The God-less and unethical (one can call it simply "evil") will see the Jew and be reminded of his own debasement and God-lessness and he will hate him for that. And he will project all that onto the Jew. That is why any discussion with antisemites is futile.
I wonder what your brother, the Rabbi, has to say about that.
Beak, if you intend to solicit reactions from the nuthouse, it's okay to discuss me there. I consider it a compliment to be called racist and antisemite, and I'm enjoying the attention enormously. They can't let me go, although I've hardly given them a thought for years now. They are dancing to my tune. I OWN THEM!
But if you seriously intend to "clear my name": STOP IT! It will make things worse because you are arguing with subnormals. By the way, I am not a "friend of the Jewish people". Apart from its historical influence on Christianity, I have no interest in Judaism whatsoever. All I am stating are facts.
And now one very serious request: Please do NEVER AGAIN, nowhere and under no condition, compare me to Yeagley again. I am NOT joking now. NEVER use my and his name in the same sentence -- in the same context -- again. NEVER!
Thank you!
You are indeed a friend of this Jewish person.
Thank you, friend! I am indeed.
Beak, I am running out of popcorn!
Taivo thinks I am Mark Winters and Betty Ann is now attacking Paulus, the least offensive poster, as well as obsessing about sex of the kind I've never even heard about before, as no honest woman ever has. Trust Betty Ann to educate us! One lives and learns and one can't make up stuff like that!
I guess that is the cutting-edge think tank Yeagley intended.
Beak: I'll share a secret with you: I AM Mark Winters. I've fooled you all!
And now my trusted sock puppet Betty Ann will read this, copy it and paste it at Naughty Chicken. I OWN her!
Please send me a new BAG of popcorn. Butter flavour please!
Betty Ann is clearly insane. She also admits to writing under many names. The place is 3/4 paranoia.
Consider the popcorn sent.
"She also admits to writing under many names."
That has escaped me. And yet she's suspecting everybody else to do it. I'm not too knowledgeable about psychology, but isn't that what psychologist call "projection"? Methinks she is projecting all the time, probably including (one shudders to think of it) the disgusting sexual details about which she is so fond of ranting.
Best regards
Mark oooops...... Nora
P.S. By the way, any guesses who Güera might be? Was around during the second Bad Eagle revolt (probably earlier) because she knows (and dislikes) me, can write three stringent sentences in a row, but suffers from that awful chatroom punctuation. Is probably (but not necessarily) female, although the general presumptiousness speaks for a woman behind it. Has set up this persona 2007 already, but it seems it took more than a year for her to actually post at the forum.
This is FUN!
Hehe! I just saw this: "The Editrix does not like Yeagley. However, there is no larger inference in that to Indians in general."
What makes that psychopath assume that I have any interest whatsoever in or opinion of Indians? I have never met an Indian in real life (not that I know of, anyway) and in the Internet only at Naughty Chicken. Granted for argument's sake that Yeagley is Indian (I couldn't care less), any judgement of Indians by extrapolation from what I see there would be EXTREMELY unflattering to that race.
Is the low self-esteem of that woman and the problem she has with the colour of her skin MY problem? But at least SHE is honest and open in her grudge towards white women. If nothing else, Naughty Chicken has taught me one thing and Yeagley, pot-stirring little shit that he is, certainly played a major part in it. He with his lyrical waxing about white women and the ensuing grudge of certain "women of colour" has made me aware of the fact that being white is a thing worth of grudge, envy and jealousy. Good to know!
Post a Comment