The View From Here 

harassment in the name of legal enforcement

It was thought a law against parking inoperable or damaged vehicles would "clean up Peoria". Enforcement however takes that a step further, in threatening to take operable cars on private property. Someone steals your sticker or plates and if you don't have the money to replace it immediately - guess what it doesn't matter if it comes back legal when police run it. It's not. It's illegal. Quite a weapon for thieves.

Someone runs a red light and it's the victim who pays for the damage. Even with evidence the police department shifted until it was too late to do anything. Now that same car is worthy of "inoperable or damaged" notices. After months of being parked on the street it never once was a problem. Move it in the driveway out of the way and - BINGO! - the city wants to take it. What difference does it make to attempt to be law abiding? Anonymous "complaints" can be done on anyone I'm informed by the city. Valid or not. They can come into your property looking any time they want too. Wouldn't it be great to have that kind of power? Is it coincidence that they target those who can least afford to lose the vehicle? Is it coincidence that they're never wrong and never to blame for lack of enforcement of laws they want to look the other way about? Ones like running a red light and causing an accident while uninsured? For a month was told the officer handling it was on vacation and no one else could handle it...I left message after message and never have gotten a call back. Of course now, three and a half months later, nothing will be done anyway. So low income - driving WITH insurance - pays the price again.
This is Peoria justice. This is the ideals of treating others as you want to be treated...which seems increasingly hard to find here.

A timely headline

On the TOLERANCE issue - from a news story on yahoo. "FRANKENMUTH, Mich. - A rural school district will not offer a religious group's Bible class as an elective high school course, ending a yearlong debate. "

"...the rejection was not based on the threat of lawsuits, and school board members said the decision did not rule out future consideration of similar classes."
"The council says its curriculum conforms to the law. But People for the American Way and the American Civil Liberties union say its materials promote religion. "

Where is the ACLU when Christians are discriminated against. And SO WHAT if it "promotes religion"'s an ELECTIVE! If someone doesn't want their kid to take it DON'T. Where is the *tolerance* for the *CHOICE* made in education? We can't have that as an elective but it's ok to talk about homosexuality and other things in *required* classes.

Why is there such a double standard? It's not equal's special rights. There's nothing equal about it. We can't offend anyone by having an ELECTIVE class "Bible As Literature and History" without threats of lawsuits? Now before it comes up of being a "Bible-thumper" consider a few things.

We cannot post the Ten Commandments in government buildings including courthouses...but when sworn in on a court stand must swear ON A BIBLE to tell the truth. How's that?! We cannot talk about Christians praying for the tsunami victims but can do news profiles on the Muslims praying for the same victims (why is that news?!!!!). We cannot raise our hands to the Lord in worship publicly but can jump up and down and scream at a football game and that's acceptable. If someone wears a cross they're too religous but if they have a coat, shirt, hat and keychain of the Dallas Cowboys that's different.

We can have psychics on tv and ouiji boards for purchase but a prophet is "nuts" and Christian games are "misleading kids."

And it's not as simple as just suing...a white person suing for discrimination in housing is barely considered. Now if the person is black or Asian or gay or some other "minority" (which really isn't the minority in many areas!!) then that's different. Race and lifestyle should make no difference...but it does. If someone hires the most qualified person for the job and that person is white many whine. I've seen jobs go to less qualified "minorities" because of the requirement they be hired or it's discrimination. IMO the best person for the job should get the job. Period. Not the best black woman or the best Mexican man...the best person...not "well if we hire another white person will we get sued for discrimination, even though the white person is better qualified?"

It's time for the ACLU to represent all or none. It's time for common sense to come back to court rooms. If you spill coffee or food on yourself it's going to burn you...whether you're at a restaurant or at home. NO ONE should be discriminated against...there shouldn't be a need for such laws that then become a basis for abuse.

True story - a couple worked at a job where there was an instituted policy of not seeing co-workers romantically off the job. It was found out and they were told cut it off or one of them had to quit. Some months later a gay couple came to a holiday party together...they were told the same thing...and threatened to sue for discrimination if either were fired. Guess what...neither was fired...neither was asked to leave. They continued their relationship. Now is that equal rights? What about rights of the first couple? The ACLU wasn't interested in that situation!


This is a word that comes up often lately. We are to be tolerant of homosexuals and gay marriage and the teaching of the lifestyle in our schools. Exactly when has this tolerance been modelled by those complaining the loudest? The ACLU and others jump on the wagon to take our rights. Have had friends who are gay, and have *no* ill will towards them. But it's said to be intolerant if someone opposes the marriage issue.

Is it tolerant to forbid a prayer before a football game? Is it tolerant to forbid the public posting of the Ten Commandments? Is it tolerant to in so many cases forbid the mention of CHRISTmas where many have gone to "winter holiday" and forbid the singing of Christmas carols because it mentions Jesus and God? Is it tolerant to let public schools override parents wishes and teach sex ed and other subjects rather than reading and math? Is it tolerant to forbid telling a woman she's pretty without a man facing sexual harassment accusations? Is it tolerant, perhaps, to criticize those who homeschool their children? Is it tolerant to allow someone's pursuit of happiness that includes having ten dogs (forbidden in many areas as "excessive")? Is it tolerant to continue to allow hate groups to operate? Is it tolerant to target and attack medical companies? Is it tolerant to watch groups carry out arsons, terrorist activities, assaults, property damage and many other illegal activities - and see the courts turn them out to do it again? Is it tolerant to feel sorry for a convicted felon, see him reoffend on a weapons charge, turn him loose again so he can at gunpoint kidnap an ex-girlfriend? Is it tolerant to turn the other way while neighbors beat their children or each other because we "don't want to get involved" or in fear that the courts will not protect us? Is it tolerant to allow drugs, gangs and criminal activity to take over our neighborhoods? Is it tolerant to tell the guy down the street he can't have a pitbull or the rescuer that her rottweiler cannot come into the city because it's a banned breed? Is it tolerant to look the other way while police officers are killed then those responsible walking? Is it tolerant to expect everyone to cater to US with no personal responsibility (which means not suiing because you spill hot food on yourself)? How can groups and individuals who have time after time after time acted in intolerance now expect sympathy and *tolerance* when they've shown none?

I think Christians have been far too tolerant for far too long. It's time to take our country back. If someone wants to believe something else fine, but America was founded on Christian principles. The courts were set up and intended - by virtue of laws written by Christians - to keep us safe in our homes. The system is seriously flawed. It's better than many countries have...but those who push the "tolerance" need to be tolerant of our life. Maybe then we can see what they mean by tolerance...after it's modelled.

how useful...

is this site...having just spent a half hour typing in something after clicking on "create article"...then getting a message I'm not authorized to post? I'm not impressed...when clicking on something to save to the blog it shouldn't erase everything and require *additional* log ins. What a hassle and waste of time.

Illinois winter

The recent cold icy days in Illinois are but a whisper of what the weather CAN be like here this time of year. The bare tree limbs are frosted with a trimming of white, the evergreens have blots of icy snow attached to them as if nesting. It is a cold day, making one thankful for a warm home while at the same time afraid for the resulting heat bill that will follow, and the lack of available work adds to the cold.

  1 - 5 of 5 articles  

On This Site

  • About this site
  • Main Page
  • Most Recent Comments
  • Complete Article List
  • Sponsors

Search This Site

Syndicate this blog site

Powered by BlogEasy

Free Blog Hosting