A sign for the times: Pray For Our Country

January 1, 2013

A couple miles north of the Kansas/Oklahoma border and a dozen miles west of Interstate 35 is a little spot not unlike thousands of others that dot a piece of Terra firma otherwise known as the American landscape.

Forgotten by history, unknown to the future, and insignificant in pretty much any grand scheme of humanity, it is a place that exists only in the lives of the denizens that remain and the memories of the alumni who spent their childhoods within the boundaries of her city limits.

She is the quintessential American small town. She is my “home” town.

And scattered throughout that town, staked into lawn after lawn, is a simple, wooden sign with but one message:  “Pray For Our Country”.

The work of one man, the signs are given out free to anyone who asks. He accepts no money, he wants no accolades. It is merely him doing his part to remind us that America needs help.

Help from someone who’s on just a little higher intelligence plain than that inhabited by your average self-absorbed “the progressive way is the only way” liberal.

There was a time in this country when such a generic display of faith would have been common place, but in today’s “me, me, me” society such an expression is not just “uncommon” it is openly scoffed at by the more “enlightened” bunch on the block. (My own already has been.)

That those Americans still “clinging” to their religion and such outdated notions deserve to be ridiculed and viled because they are standing in the way of the great march “forward”.

Liberals love to tell anyone willing to listen how Christianity is on decline in America and it’s only a matter of time before we will finally as a nation move beyond the constraints of the intolerance of religion.

But not all is lost.

For while the left has been quite successful in bringing about a general societal decline over the past half a century, any current celebration of man triumphing over God would be a most premature celebration.

But don’t take my word for it. Rely instead upon what the Corner always relies upon.

The one thing that sends liberals scurrying faster than a long tailed rat in a room full of rocking chairs: FACTS.

According to the latest data from the PEW Forum on Religion and Public LIfe, 78.4% of Americans identify themselves as Christians. (While that number is most certainly lower than desired, it is a far, far cry from the Godless, secular utopia the left dreams of.)

Other religions (Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu) combine for a little less than 5% of the population, while 16.1% of us chose the “unaffiliated” category.

But the numbers that jump out at me personally as a New Year dawns, is that Atheist and Agnostic categories only musters a combined 4% affiliation.

Yes, you read that right, four (4) percent.

Yet every day, (and especially the days of December) the American populace is told by the minion media that they (that 78.4%) are not “tolerant” enough of “other” views and religions. Of course “tolerant” in this context is remove all signs of Christ and the Nativity from any public venue, tear down any Cross anywhere on public land, and don’t you dare utter the words “Merry Christmas” to a total stranger. A stranger that you have absolutely no way of knowing beforehand may or may not be of one of the “other” percents.

While those who adhere without fail to the theology of liberal political correctness will most undoubtedly, vehemently disagree with me, on this the first day of a new year, January 1st, 2013, I most publicly and loudly state to them and their minions: ENOUGH ALREADY!

For almost half a century the left has been pushing, shoving and pulling this nation away from it’s Christian roots as hard and fast as it can. Utilizing the media, the courts and every shallow, unprincipled politician it can muster, it has done quite a good job of perpetuating the modern myth that the only “enlightened” America is a Godless America.

That if we dare as a nation to allow our Christian history and traditions to continue to be displayed openly on the public square or on the stages at public schools we are being “offensive” and “intolerant” to those who think otherwise.

Such “enlightenment”, is nothing but hogwash in it’s oldest and dirtiest form.

Sending kids to a church of one faith or another to see a matinee play does not “corrupt” the minds of those little ones of that faith. All those children know is each other and the play, it is the adults performing Act 1, Scene 1 of “There is no God but the god of secularism”.

My first two years of elementary school were, GASP, spent within the wall of the local Catholic school because the “secular” collection of brick and mortar did not have enough rooms. Lucky for me and my class mates, there was still a reasonable amount of common sense back in the Kansas of 1966 and the thought of filing a lawsuit over the use of “religious” space for “public” education had not filtered down to the liberal mind just yet.

Secularists, humanists, atheists, agnostics and whoever else try as they might to re-write America’s founding into being nothing but a collection of old, rich white guys exploiting everyone else for their own benefit yet when it comes down to the one thing that trips up the left each and every time, facts, they fall flat on their face.

God, (of whichever denomination you prefer), morality and a sense of virtue permeated the minds of the Founders and flowed freely throughout the colonies and eventually the fledgling United States.

And it was that public fabric that held the nation together for decade after decade, trial after turbulent trial.

It is only recently that America has begun to turn away from those founding principles. It is only recently that we have seen the family unit and societal structure being torn apart by apathy and ignorance.

Should then it really be any surprise that a UK Telegraph story published Christmas Eve revealed that “a Dad” was the 10th most popular item on wish lists for Santa? (Yes, I know England is not America but our former mother country has fallen far further down the secular hole than her former charge and there is not a doubt in my mind that had a similar survey been conducted along Chicago’s south side, across the slums of L.A. or in the other fatherless households across this country that “a Dad” would have been right up there at the top of the wish list for tens of millions of American children as well.)

Should then it really be any surprise that it is only recently that we see this once great nation on a path to decline for the first time in her history?

Should then it really be any surprise that in just 50 short years, America went from being the world’s creditor to the world’s largest debtor nation as one liberal program after another replaced our foundational Christian principles with no responsibility, “progressive”, government entitlements.

It is absolutely no surprise then, that while politician’s are slapping themselves on the back today for avoiding the media made “fiscal cliff”, time marches on. And marching right along side it, is an over 16 trillion dollar national debt and a black hole of envy, entitlement, and dependency.

Just as a black hole in space consumes all that comes in contact, so too will the governmental hole being created by Obama and crew consume everything in its path.

The dems and their media allies have been quite successful at perpetuating the myth that America was not and is not a “Christian Nation”. Yet as the Pew survey shows, it is just that, a myth.

And so it is, that on this first day, of the thirteenth year, of the new millennium, I ask you, for the sake of all that is good, for the sake of your children and your children’s children, please:


 If you’re one of the dwainbwains who lurk about here and find yourself “offended” by such an open display of faith I suggest you take in the photo below of one of many billboards scattered around my current “hometown” of Joplin.

And might I suggest that if you ever want some peace and meaning in your life and for the country in which you reside, you spend a little more time reading the book that those words on that billboard come from rather than mushing your mind on a compilation of “dreams” from the father of one of the least religious Presidents in American history.


6 Responses to A sign for the times: Pray For Our Country

  1. anson on January 2, 2013 at 7:45 am


    This is dangerous ground in an otherwise political blog, in my view. Calling for more “religion” in America, or implying the lack thereof, needs to be carefully defined. I need only point to the turmoil in the Middle East as an example where religion runs rampant. As well when religion ruled with an iron hand in earlier centuries in the western world the consequences were dire as well. And watch what happens when religions conflict with one another. Death and destruction run rampant.

    One of the defining events in western civilization is the Treaty of Westphalia, following the 30 Year’s War. The final outcome was a western society where religions, Protestant and Catholic, could coexist with one another. The world now awaits the time when Islam and Christianity can find a way to coexist. As well during the Cold War, Christianity in the West and a rejection of religion of any sort in communist countries, only Power kept the two sides from killing each other, nuclear power to be exact.

    Many “God fearing Christians” would have been happy to unleash a nuclear strike against “heathens” in communist countries and would say God’s Will dictated such actions.

    Then take the extreme forms of Christianity espoused in the recent national campaigns. I would NOT want Santorum or his supporters deciding God’s Will for me or America for sure and shoving it down my or our throat with government force.

    Take the institution of marriage, a religious concept for sure. Two people unite under God and become “one” for life. Whatever other statistics (78% “Christian” in America) you pick, I note the 70% single mother birth rate amongst the Black population in America. And yet Blacks are viewed as generally a very “religious” group within Christianity in America.

    To avoid any racial stereotype, I note the millions in America that go to “church”, pray fervently and are then vicious in their condemnation of others that do not hold the same religious views. I wonder how many of those millions give the dictated 10% to God, as well. Just imagine the Westborough Baptist Church having significant influence on American government. I can only imagine how God’s 10% from those people is used in Westborough Baptist as well. Free bus trips to funerals is probably part of that expenditure “for God”!!!

    Mixing religion and politics creates a mess, in my view. Religion, or whatever else it might be called (spirituality perhaps) must become a personal matter, a matter of morality that can become ingrained in individual lives. No way can such moral dictates be forced down the throats of individuals using government force, which is what liberals try to do in their call for social democracy, not religion.

    One last point. Religion, through dogma, tries to enforce a “moral life” as defined by any religion. Social democracy tries to enforce a “moral life” as well but uses the “dogma” of the left to enforce that form of morality. Yet what has been the most successful form of government seen yet by humans?

    I would suggest the America form of democracy that left religion to the individuals and emphasized LIBERTY as the key emphasis of government with the bounds of liberty set only to prevent anarchy through the rule of law. Push too hard for religion in America, the dogma of religion, and then watch the mobs in the Middle East espousing Islamism.


    • A Nonny Moose on January 2, 2013 at 12:50 pm

      I would agree, Anson, were Geoff calling for the establishment of a national religion. Instead, I think what he’s saying here — if I may put words in his mouth — is for people to accurately act the part of their religion (for a change, or as the old joke says, “I have no problem with Jesus… it’s his followers that I’m a little iffy about”) by actually practicing the tenets of their chosen faith (in this case, Christianity), and for Congress and liberals to finally, FINALLY recognize the part of the First Amendment that says “…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”. It’s in there, I swear! You’ll never hear it mentioned, because they just want it to go away, but it’s there.

      We are, by and large, a religious people, mostly following a religion that has always stressed peaceful coexistence, even if at times in history that tenet wasn’t followed, because humans are fallible. And you’re right that having a state-run religion would be a terrible thing. That said, the ridiculous notion that any mention anywhere by anyone of God or an expression of faith is somehow a violation of the First Amendment has got to stop. There is a huge, huge difference between a politician or a school teacher (or heaven forbid just a citizen who isn’t affiliated with the government in any capacity) calling for prayer, and one who submits a bill or runs their classroom saying “you must believe as I do or suffer consequences”. Establishment and practice are two entirely different things. Because of a vocal 4%, the vast majority who practice religion must do so in fear of accidentally offending someone. Yes, religion shouldn’t be made into a show, just to grab attention (Mt. 6:5 — “When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full.”) However, far too many act as though they have some inherent right to never see of hear anything with which they don’t agree, especially if it is based upon a religious belief they themselves do not hold. They act as those a nativity scene in a city park means they’re required to register at city hall and go to church every Sunday, OR ELSE! They’d have you believe their faces will melt like the characters at the end of “Raiders Of The Lost Ark” just because they heard a President tack on “so help me God” at the end of the inaugural oath. When someone can find me the part of the constitution that gives anyone a right to never ever be offended or made uncomfortable, my opinion may change. But for now, I agree with what I believe to be Geoff’s message here.

      Actually, I’d love for someone to find me the words “separation of church and state” in the constitution. (HINT: They’re not there.) The idea comes from a letter Jefferson sent to the Danbury Baptists Association in 1802, and in that letter, Jefferson still sees fit to include the “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” text that liberals today so desperately want to pretend isn’t there. He specifically reiterates the “shall make no law” part, not “shall never express their personal beliefs, EVER, or else!” Yet far too many liberals treat this “wall of separation” idea as an amendment to the constitution. Nay, THE amendment! Jefferson wrote it, so it must be carved in stone. The same Jefferson, by the way, who was quite in favor of the right to bear arms. The same Jefferson who, when quoted by conservatives, is suddenly pointed out as having fathered children with slaves he owned. But by golly, that one letter, that’s the most brilliant thing written by the most brilliant man ever! We can just forget the gun stuff and the slave stuff so long as we like what he wrote about religion, right?

      So yes, Anson, I share your unease with the firebrand sort of proselytizing, especially by politicians. Santorum made me queasy, the way anyone who appears to believe that what they believe is best for everyone does. And that “anyone” and their beliefs include agnostics and atheists who insist that I conform to their religious standards when in public (see Newdow, Michael). The government cannot establish a religion. That much is spelled out plainly. Religious beliefs should not be used to determine the fitness of a candidate for office, no matter what, if any, religion they espouse. That holds true whether it was a Catholic for President in 1960, a Quaker for President in 1968, a Jew for vice president in 2000, a Mormon for president in 2012, or any other time. Per Jefferson’s letter and the times during which it was written, states should not provide financial support to religions (religious charities being a possible exception). But it is just as plainly spelled out that the government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion. I cannot find it right, just, or fair that a tiny little easily offended minority can use the force of government to prevent the free exercise of religion by the majority, using one letter from a man as their basis for doing so, a man whom they willfully ignore on many other topics. Expressions of faith are not “establishment”, even if made by politicians, and even if someone finds them distasteful to their own sensibilities. Children’s school plays held in a church are not “establishment”. Calling a tree a “Christmas” tree or singing songs about Jesus during Christmas are not “establishment”. And if signs calling for prayer for our country offend the 4%, well again, find me a passage in the constitution that states that anyone has a right to never be offended.

      • SeaCaptain on January 4, 2013 at 7:21 am

        To both,

        In general I think we are all in agreement. None of us supported Santorum and I for sure voted AGAINST Akin (but unfortunately had to vote for McCaskill in doing so). That type of politician espousing HIS religion as acceptance by all is just wrong to me.

        Look at the rancerous abortion debate over the last quarter century. It is a public battle of religion vs. government power to ALLOW liberty. Government has never PROMOTED abortion but thus far it has allowed it to happen. To me it is a debate of religious motivated force to be used by government vs. LIBERTY for individual’s to choose. Thus I am decidedly pro-choice (but not anti-life either).

        Graham uses his blog to bash evangelicals every chance he gets yet he was once just that sort of zealot. My guess is he used to try to shove religion down the throats of people and now he bashes the hell out of radical evangelicals. Frankly I don’t care what a radical evangelical preacher espouses just like I don’t care what Rev Wright thinks of America. He can “god damn America” all he likes in my view and I will simply ignore him.

        Evangelicals and Tea Partiers have long tried to inextricably link Wright and Obama as a matter of political leverage. Wrong tactic in my view. I of course believe that Obama, deep in his heart, would love to “god damn conservatism and the GOP” but not “America” as a single entity. He wants to change America, not “god damn it”, at least in my view.

        But what is the real political argument in America today? To me it is liberty versus socialism. Of course we all (the three of us) firmly support liberty and detest the movement towards a more socialistic America, exactly where Obama is trying hard to “lead” us.

        THAT is a vigorous political argument and the three of us almost always join hands together to promote liberty and oppose the force of government to make choices for us that have never been included in the written words of the constitution. (Gun control being the exception where I “stray” from the path of more liberty, admittedly).

        “Religionists” think it is God’s will to burn builiding that perform abortions. “Lefties” try to use the law to prevent celebration of the Nativity. I say a pox on BOTH of them with equal vigor. I and I alone should get to choose such matters and government should have no say whatsoever in the matter, period.

        Prayer in schools, you bet I support such. But it would be “quiet” prayer and meditation, not some “group grope” lead by an evangelical. Prayer is INDIVIDUAL communication with God and should not be used to “teach” faith in any public school. As for a private school, let them teach whatever they so choose to teach, in my view.

        Biology is biology, a science. Let the science of biology (or physics, or chemistry, etc.) be taught as a science, an assembly of proven facts developed by humans over the millenia. When the facts run out and someone wants to inject faith, well let them do it in Sunday School classes, not public, science classes, as far as I am concerned.

        If I was a biology teacher I would teach evolution as a matter of science. I would also tell the class, in a very short “reference” the “faith” of creationism. I would then tell the students (biology is a High School course and thus for people that are being trained to think, scientifically) know that other views related to human development can be found in the Bible and elsewhere. If they want more on that matter I would tell them where to go to find it, as a matter of faith, not science.
        Finally, I think we all agree that the “morals” in American society are in the ditch. I think such “immorality” is as much the fault of the right as the left as well. “Religionists” promote “God’s will” as if that was something clear and precise for all to understand. Baloney in my view, not matter if they believe the “Bible tells us so”. I can go to the Bible and justify almost any “horrendous act” as long as I can use my own interpretation of “God’s will” as expressed BY MEN who ultimately wrote that book.
        Do I support the Ten Commandments? Most of the time I do so as long as I can interpret them (Thou shalt not kill, what exactly or when?). But inscribed by fire in the midst of some bush burning on a mountain, no way, at least for me. Don’t even get me started as well on a divine and physical “resurection” of a dead man. How do we know for sure the man was even dead when they put him in a tomb? FAITH tells us one thing for sure, but “proof”, no way.
        But that lack of faith in “divine words” (again written by men) does not lead me to reject Christ as such as perhaps the best standard of morality ever expressed by anyone. But hell volumes, libraries of books have been written on that subject, and no, I have not read all of them, not will I write any either. My “faith” means something to me and it is no business of anyone else as long as my actions are legal and “moral”.
        I also doubt that any of us disagree on that last point, I hope at least.
        As for “socialism”, well pox that one too, all you like, and I will join almost always in political support of such views.

        • Geoff Caldwell on January 4, 2013 at 9:02 am

          Excellent points and yes, I’m on the same “page”. But I do pose a question regarding Obama and your premise that he is not “God Damning” her just merely trying to “transform” her.

          It is no secret any longer that Obama is a pure left wing, redistribution, socialist hell bent on “correcting” his idea of America’s “wrongs” of the past.

          Is not the very act of destroying the liberty and personal freedoms that the nation was founded upon in itself an act of “God Damning” America?

          How does what Obama and the left are doing from the inside by ignoring the rule of law, circumventing the Constitution, and legislating by regulating have any different consequence to the country and future generations than an invading army implementing such ideology at the end of a gun?

          It is no longer just a “political” argument when the result of the policies behind that argument is the destruction of the very principles that founded the country.

          Yes, America as collection of states with a national boundary will still look the same on a globe, but America has never been about physical boundaries.

          America is an “idea”. And it is that “idea” of personal liberty, unlimited opportunity, and guaranteed freedoms found no where else on earth that Obama and crew are destroying.

          The country may not be engaged in a physical civil war but in regards to whether America, the land of liberty, the land of the free, the home of the brave will continue to exist for the next generation is entirely in the hands of this generation.

          The battle has been enjoined, the only question remaining is which side will win?

          Will our children and their children continue to bask in the light of freedom and liberty, or will we relegate them to the misery of but lowly serfs, their daily lives dependent upon the whims of their feudal government masters?

  2. Geoff Caldwell on January 2, 2013 at 7:03 pm

    I’ve been on the road and was just now getting to reply to Anson’s comment which I read this morning and now I see (as usual) Nonny has hit it on the head once again. (Thanks by the way NM as you’ve save me a ton of brain work on how to actually explain and kept me out of hot water with my other half who is awaiting my chicken soup for dinner.)

    Nonny “gets” my intent exactly. I’m in no way calling for “government” religion or “mandating” religion. Besides, I think we conservatives lost the “mandate” war to liberals a long time ago.

    All I’m trying to point out is that:

    1. The vast majority of America still self identify themselves as “Christian”

    2. The media and far left allow a very, very small minority who aren’t “religious” a megaphone far out of proportion

    3. It has only been in the past forty years that we have seen society, it’s morals and the idea of virtue and personal responsibility go straight to hell and amazingly it was about forty years ago that the “anything goes” liberal mentality began to permeate pop culture.

    I personally care less what faith or non-faith anyone is. What chaps my ass is the assault from the far left over the past 30 years against any and everything that even smacks of a “religious” overtone.

    Nonny has the Jefferson letter and historical context nailed. Yes, at present the courts lean to the extrapolated “separation” as written by Jefferson, but courts at one time once supported slavery as legal.

    What I find most ironic is that in order for the liberals to get there “wall of separation” they have to use the very judicial philosophy they deride on every other issue: “original intent”. They use Jefferson’s letter to show intent when it suits their agenda against religion but yet applauded the drunk and killer Ted Kennedy when he stood on the Senate floor and destroyed Robert Bork for applying the very same “intent” philosophy to the rest of the Constitution.

    I do agree Anson, that “religion” is a “private” matter. Yet I also firmly believe that when the general principles of Christianity are ridiculed, viled and driven from the public square it is that very public that suffers the consequences.

    Take any societal indicator over the past forty years and as “religion” has been driven out envy, entitlement, dependency, poverty, ignorance, violence and crime has taken its place.

    Liberals love their “wall of separation” and denigration of public displays of “religion” yet when confronted with the facts of how their “wall” has led to a dysfunctional society tearing itself apart at the seams, the best they can muster is “those, ignorant, bitter, clingers”.

    Gotta go put the soup on. Thanks for the great comments.


    Agree with both of you on the Santorum issue. He is as bad from the right as Obama is from the left.

  3. SeaCaptain on January 4, 2013 at 9:47 am

    Thus Geoff, you (and I agree) turn to the political objectives of Obama and strongly disgree with him in such attempts. But religion should not be used as part of the argument. We should stick ot our objections to his attempts to limit liberty, politically and not accuse him of “god damning” anything.
    Obama is trying very hard to CHANGE America, including the culture of America. But he has yet to “burn a church” in doing so or even object to churches in a religious sense at least. He is promoting political change and we must stick to political arguments to oppose him.
    Suggesting that “more religion” is needed to combat the Obama politics is misguided and the Tea Party by and large went down hard in trying to do so. Vote for me because I will make those dirty Dems to follow “God’s will” is clap trap in my view. Santorum and Akin, two politicians I abhor tried to do exactly that.
    And in doing so they sounded like Dems trying to force big government down my throat.
    I have no idea what “God’s will” might be for America and I must struggle very hard to determine his “will” for just ME alone. And I reject any politician that tries to tell me what “God’s will” might be for me, you or the whole “god damn” country!!!
    Think of it this way. Government can and must to some degree govern the physical, mental and emotional world. But government has no business trying to do anything in the spiritual world which should and must be a very private world for every individual. That is called “freedom OF Religion”, believe or have any faith, spiritual faith, thay you choose to have.
    But when you use that faith to justify physical, mental or emotional actions in the “real” world, the world that is common to a degree for all of us, then you better stay out of my way. I will reject anyone’s spiritual dictates and government must be very careful as well in physical, mental or emotional dictates as well.
    In that sense Graham and I can agree as well. Any politician that tries to hide behind “God” to explain his policies is stupid, dumb and probably has some really terrible policies he wants to enact even if “the Bible tells him so”!!
    By the way, I have no idea what this “sea captain” thing is and don’t know how to change it. Herein and else where in public I of course am Anson.


May 2020
« May