Ruminations of the Easily Amused for 12/28/2015 Somervell County Salon-Glen Rose, Rainbow, Nemo, Glass....Texas

Salon is now an archive. New site here
This site's archives

Ruminations of the Easily Amused for 12/28/2015

28 December 2015 at 2:23:30 PM

Snowed overnight, at least almost a one inch coat with mush. 

This is ridiculous. Texas Democratic party didn't like Ramirez Hinojosa using his name, so they had him removed from the primary ballot.  Sheesh. What is there were two men named Bob Smith running? 

“After further review and on the advice of our legal counsel the Texas Democratic Party requested that Mr. Ramirez clarify that he meets the statutory requirements to use 'Ruben Ramirez Hinojosa' as his ballot name in order for us to certify that all information in his filing is correct,” Manny Garcia, deputy executive director of the Texas Democratic Party, told The Texas Tribune Thursday.

“Mr. Ramirez refused to sign a sworn affidavit attesting that he has gone by the name 'Ruben Ramirez Hinojosa.'” 

Ramirez Hinojosa told the paper that he’d continue to fight the decision. 

Cleveland Grand Jury doesn't indict the cop that shot Tamir Rice.

Star-Telegram opinion says GGreg Abbott was in the wrong about the Texas Capitol FFRF nativity scene.

Abbott wrote that the “juvenile parody” violated the regulations of the State Preservation Board by not having a public purpose, not being educational. and promoting ignorance and 0hood. He also said the exhibit “deliberately mocks Christians and Christianity.”

But the display did educate (its sign contained information about adoption of the Bill of Rights), had a public purpose (to remind people of separation of church and state) and didn’t promote 0hoods (nowhere did it say the Founding Fathers worshiped the Bill of Rights).

All of Abbott’s allegations stemmed from his interpretation of the display.

The nativity scene could be seen as a mockery of Christianity or as a representation of the importance of the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers wanted to protect religious freedom, even religion not aligned with their own personal faith. The display could be interpreted as a representation of that idea.

Bill of Rights protections often make people uncomfortable. This display should have come under First Amendment protection. Abbott’s urging its removal was simply wrong.



     Views: 2192 
Latest Blog Post by salon -Video- Somervell County Commissioners Court Special Sessions (2) Dec 23 2019
Somervell County Salon Blog is now an archive site. Commenting not enabled.

Click Here for Main Page

Today Is  
Friday, April 19, 2024

Latest Posts

More Blog Headlines