VA HEALTH ADMINISTRATION:..... WTF?

I have been listening to all the hubbub about the VA Health Administration and how fucked up the administration is and how veterans are getting screwed big time.

First, we all know that any government administration of anything by its very nature will be fucked up. I learned this while in the military (1966-1970) and as far as I was concerned, a VA hospital is where you went to die.

Second, veterans that were injured during duty are the ones needing the most immediate care and should be the utmost priority for treatment and benefits.

What we are really talking about are old veterans basically having health issues brought on by old age and this is where I don’t quite understand why these veterans are seeking medical services from the VA system.

When I left the service I worked in the private sector and it is in the private sector that I receive health insurance that covered me and my family. When I retired Medicare took over my health insurance so why the VA.

I had one acquaintance that went to the VA because he was an alcoholic and could not get private health insurance. Also I know of some Vietnam veterans that are claiming agent orange contamination during service which now is causing certain symptoms to show up…really after all these years…well maybe.

So I am a little puzzled why old veterans would be using the VA system if they have private health coverage and/or Medicare given the terrible reputation VA hospitals have.

I realize the Republicans need to cause trouble for the Democrats so they will jump at any issue to discredit the current administration so I will have to see what the hell is the real problem with the VA system other than a bunch of greedy federal employees screwing the system.

 

DETROIT ARCHDIOCESE: 2001-2013 survey is quite telling...

T

The Archdiocese of Detroit published a survey which highlighted the changes in the archdiocese between the years 2001 and 2013 and reported in the Detroit News under: ARCHBISHOP: SURVEY TO PROMPT CHURCH CHANGES, Metro Detroit Catholics express concern about priest shortages 5/29/2014.

The survey was administered to 41,000 area Catholics who were active participants in the archdiocese and belonged to area parishes. The questions did not ask opinions on hot issues but just how satisfied the people were with their archdiocese and local parish.

It is very telling that most of the respondents to the survey were over 50 years old, predominantly female and were raised Catholic and went to Catholic schools.

Many decried the lack of priests and the lack of young people. Those that did not attend mass on a regular basis cited the reason why as “mass is boring / irrelevant to me.”

It is not secret that with the collapse of Catholic education, young people were no longer interested in participating in their family faith. In my days, we attended mass regularly and had some form of religious instruction on a daily basis. When I was deciding on a college, one of the nuns warned me that if I chose Wayne State University, I would become a heathen in no time…and she was right but I was already on my road to heathenism before I entered the university.

Some of the statistics were eye-opening with a 50% or more drop in infant baptisms, church marriages and overall sacrament participation; Archbishop Vigneron was a little shocked at the numbers.

The collapse of Catholic education was a factor but also the position of the church on social issues like contraception, gay marriage and abortion alienated young, smart Catholics who saw the absurdity in their church’s positions with no way of ever seeing any meaningful change in those positions.

Insisting on priestly celibacy in light of the priestly sexual scandal and cover-up also turned younger people off and not allowing women to join the priesthood was indefensible.

Archbishop Allen Vigneron says he needs to change the culture of his operation and make it more evangelizing but who is he going to evangelize to.

I am afraid he is stuck with the aging population of Catholic sheep but once they die off…nada.

The Catholic Church in general and the Archdiocese of Detroit in particular will not attract young members unless it dramatically changes its positions in relation to our modern society; we no longer live in the dark ages.

The archbishop here said that parishes will see changes immediately and I will be waiting to see what those changes will be…maybe making the mass less boring and more entertaining and maybe even meaningful?

 

Christians vs. Christian on Gay Marriage...

Last week about 100 pastors and church ministers from the metro Detroit area gathered in opposition to a federal court’s striking down Michigan’s ban on gay marriage.

A group of 50 church leaders gathered this week in the metro Detroit area to support same-sex marriage.

So there you have it ladies and gentlemen, Christians divided as to the issue of same-sex marriage.

On the anti-gay marriage side you have the Baptists and obviously the Catholics and on the opposite side you have other Baptists, Lutherans, Episcopalians and Presbyterians.

The anti-gay marriage group immediately called the pro-gay marriage pastors APOSTATES. I love this word…it means defector, rat, recreant, runagate, tergiversator, turnabout and turncoat…which implies that they have abandoned the “true” Christian teaching on the subject.

This is similar to the use of the word HERETIC. That is someone who dissents from the recognized truth or orthodoxy. The problem is that no one knows the real truth and the “truth” is incapable of being known so whoever asserts what they think is the truth are called orthodox and those who do not support the “imagined” truth are called heretics. Basically, whoever wins the argument is deemed orthodox and those that are on the losing side of the argument are deemed heretics and can be burned at the stake.

This is historically quite thrilling for me as there are MANY Christianities in history and even, as we can see, today with a remarkable amount of differing ideas of what is orthodox and what is not.

One anti-gay marriage minister said that those apostate pastors who are attempting to turn God’s people against God should be run out of every house of God in the country and avoided until such time as they repent and return back to God.

As you can see in this statement, some people think they “know” what God thinks and how He wants us to act. We have to rely on “people” that know God because God does not have the balls to speak for himself or is just a figment of our imagination…but I digress.

Many of these Christians base their knowledge of what God wants on the Bible which they believe is the inspired word of God or the literal word of God and therefore has to be obeyed. The fact is that the Bible says absolutely nothing about same-sex marriage. It actually does not say what people misinterpret it says, about homosexuality; the concept of homosexuality did not exist in the days when the Bible was written.

The Catholic Church in all its wisdom thinks that homosexuality is a choice and not the way people are born so they call that behavior disordered; they need to accept the science behind homosexuality.

The Catholic Church is all about procreation so two people that cannot produce a baby cannot be married; what about heterosexual couples that are sterile?

The anti-gay marriage Christians attack those not of like mind as the enemy of God and God’s people while the pro-gay marriage Christians talk of God’s love for all his people…interesting?

I am starting to see a change in Christianity where more and more Christians are following a more Jesus like approach to how Christians should think and behave instead of following historic attitudes based on imagined “truths” found in the Bible.

This change in Christian thinking is very significant and historical and will have a profound impact on our society….more to follow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JOHN CONYERS: The 13th District deserves more options...

U.S Representative John Conyers (85) is the longest serving African-American in the House of Representatives is fighting to stay on the August primary ballot in Detroit.

The reason his collected signatures to qualify him for a place on the ballot were disqualified was the fact that the people collecting the signatures were not registered voters as required by state law since 1966.

This obviously was a screw-up by whoever he placed in charge of getting and submitting the required signatures but at 85, Conyers does not appear to be quite cognizant about what is happening around him and in my opinion, should not run since he can no longer do the job in Congress.

The people that work for him in Washington will want to differ with me since their jobs are dependent on him continuing to run and win elections until he dies in office…did everyone see the movie “Bernie and Me”?

Anyway his people are up in arms about how unfair this is and all I have to say is that the law requiring registered voters to collect signatures has been on the books since 1966 so bite my ass and admit you are stupid.

So now they are claiming that 1966 law is unconstitutional based on some judicial precedents and I agree that it probably is unconstitutional but should you be arguing this point with only two weeks left before the primary ballot is qualified and printed?

His opponent (he usually ran unopposed) is a prominent black Baptist pastor from Detroit (Rev. Horace Sheffield) and the only one on the Democratic ticket for the 13^th district…Republicans never win in Detroit / Wayne County.

I don’t like Sheffield but he is making a good case for himself as a younger black man (he is not young) to replace a senile old has-been.

Since the 13^th district has been redrawn in 2014 it encompasses over 700,000 people and not all of them live in Detroit proper; the district includes quite a few of Detroit’s suburbs. As such, it is a very diverse district and should have a lot more choices when it comes to representation in Congress.

This was the time for some talented young people to have stepped up and at least got their names on the ballot but because of past history (Conyers has been there like forever) no one had enough gumption to even try. I would even go as far as to say that a moderate Republican would have a chance if he or she dared.

So we are stuck with nowhere to go…hope someone is looking at this situation and anticipating what could be possible in just another two years.

Racist remarks in Wolfsboro, N. H.

Couple of years ago we vacationed in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire to catch the fall colors; it was a grand time. We remembered seeing Mitt Romney’s family compound on one of the islands in the lake.

Recently Wolfeboro was in the news due to an 82 year-old police commissioners who when asked why he did not watch television stated quite loudly that all the TV ever shows is that N----; meaning President Barack Obama.

A white woman who overheard the comment made a big deal about it and obviously it finally made national headlines.

Robert Copeland, the 82 year-old police commissioner did not hide from what he said and said that in this country we have freedom of speech and he was just exercising that freedom and no he was not going to resign his elected position as many people urged him to do.

Copeland was rude and very disrespectful but he did not break the law but what he did as a single individual, was to paint an entire town dependent on tourist dollars, as racist and although I did not see any black people in the town, the town would carry the racist moniker from now on…unless the town did something about the situation.

Mr. Copeland recently resigned his position as police commissioner after many of the townspeople including Mitt Romney and the 13 member police force demanded his resignation for the good of the town.

I have been decrying the fact that in this country we are becoming less and less tolerant of speech we deem improper to the point of actually banning certain speech as well as certain opinions and attitudes.

The case with Mr. Copeland is different in the fact that he was an elected official and as an elected official, his words carry weight in society. Put a different way, his words affect other people and in this case, a whole town.

He of course is free to say what he wants to but as a public official he is responsible to the public that has made him an official and if that public sees that his words or actions are in any way harming the public, he can be forced to step down from his public position and be relegated to his front porch where he can spout all the racist vitriol he wants to.

Some have tried to downplay Mr. Copeland’s remarks because of his age; a different generation that lived in “different” times. I say, if you are a public official your age does not matter; you are responsible for your words and actions…hope he does not have a family because I would hate to be related to him at this point.

 

 

 

GRADUATING STUDENTS: Shut up and listen to those who have made it!

I don’t know if anyone noticed but in this graduation season a number of invited commencement speakers declined to attend due to student protests against them giving the commencement address.

I can somewhat understand this. There are some speakers that are so offensive to the student body that they do not want them at THEIR graduation ceremony. But I would think that the university leadership would be sensitive to their student’s sensibilities that they would not invite someone to deliver the commencement address that is so repugnant to the student body.

 Condoleezza Rice declined to attend due to student protests. Although she is an accomplished person she was an apologist for President Bush and his ill-fated invasion of Iraq that cost us so much money and so many lives.

But what are you looking for in a commencement speaker? Someone that has made it to the top which is what these graduates are dreaming of doing so her advice may actually be valuable even if she did not behave the way we think she should have; it’s about the journey to the top.

Actually her story from a poor neighborhood in Birmingham, Alabama, fighting racism and other factors to eventually becoming the secretary of state; does not sound too shabby.

Another speaker who declined to speak because of student protests was the female head of the International Monetary Fund; some students did not like how the IMF operated. Another was a social activist who said some bad things about Islam.

Another person who declined an invitation to speak was Richard Birgeneau a former chancellor at the University of California, Berkley. Dr. Birgeneau’s liberal reputation is stellar but because there was a student protest at Berkley in 2011 under his watch, which was violently squelched by police, some students at Haverford College asked that he apologize for the way students were handled during that protest and explain his role in the incident. Birgeneau told them to eat shit.

William Bowen, former president at Princeton, who replaced Birgeneau as commencement speaker, called the students protesting Birgeneau immature and arrogant. He told the students that you should not expect to agree with commencement speakers about everything but you should agree that these speakers have had and continue to have, exemplary lives because they took a path in life that got them to the top.

Graduating seniors think they are really smart because they got a degree and will find out very shortly that wisdom does not come with a degree but with experience and action.

I remember getting back into Wayne State University after serving four years in the Air Force and I remember my classes being disrupted by hippies in military jackets trying to protest one thing or another. I just wanted to tell them to quit wasting my precious time with your ignorant drivel. You have not yet lived an adult life and you got all these opinions about how life should be…grow up!

And that is how I feel about these graduates trying to protest anybody and everybody that does not quite fit their mold of the perfect individual…shut the fuck up and listen; you may just learn something!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caught in the pulpit; Leaving belief behind...Dennet & LaScola

I have just finished reading: CAUGHT IN THE PULPIT; LEAVING BELIEF BEHIND by Daniel C. Dennet and Linda LaScola.

This book was quite the eye opener since I have not encountered a book on this subject matter which was a survey of clerics who lost their belief in what they were preaching. Some of these clerics are still in their positions, many have left the ministry and some are about to leave.

The clerics or former clerics come from all denominations of Christianity and some from the Jewish faith. The book examines each cleric’s particular journey into disbelief.

The one thing that is common to all and very puzzling to me is their time in school learning to become a cleric. These schools are seminaries or theological institutions that one has to attend and graduate from to obtain a degree allowing you to become a priest, minister, pastor or whatever the title each denomination gives to their religious clerics.

What is puzzling to me about the education these individuals receive is the courses that are taught there. These courses, many of which I have also taken, tell the honest truth about what is known about the Christian faith as known from historical data.

The strange part is that what they learn in class in many cases contradicts what they are expected to preach to their flock…

Technically they are taught the “historical / critical” method of Bible study which is basically a scientific process that takes all the variables into consideration…simply put, it treats the Bible as a bunch of books written by humans and tries to figure out why they wrote those words and why did those words make it into the Bible.

Once you know all the facts about why Christianity came about and how it came about, you see it as a scam and how can you as a good person perpetuate this scam on people in your flock…but you do!

I feel many people entering the ministry have an actual “calling” where they have the best intentions of doing God’s work among the people so why do these schools try to poison their raw belief in their religion as they perceived it since childhood?

I happen to know a few people that went through seminary. One made it all the way to a Ph.D. level and abruptly quit cold and is now a meat slicer at a local grocery store. Reminds me of St. Thomas Aquinas who was and is the Catholic Church’s most brilliant Aristotelian (logic) philosophers of all time who had a stroke and died when his carefully crafted philosophy crumbled like a house of cards…some say.

Another friend who went through seminary training and tried out what he learned on me believed that the Bible is the inspired word of God. One can make oneself believe that but the historical / critical method of Bible study really does its best to deny that belief.

I will be looking into this issue some more because it does fascinate me…hopefully I will find more books on this subject.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOBBY LOBBY trying to cram their religious views down kid's throats...

I have written about HOBBY LOBBY and its ultra-religious president STEVE GREEN on a number of occasions.

Mainly his goal in life is to cram his religion down everybody’s throat whether they like it or not because that is the mission God gave him.

How can a man that owns 500+ Hobby Lobby stores and therefore has business smarts be so fucking backward when it comes to social issues; he is not the first or the last.

His new mission is to make all the high schools in the nation offer a Bible study class because our nation is ignorant of what God has taught and therefore our future as a nation is scary.

Normally I would just laugh at the religious jackass but he is a jackass with millions and maybe billions of dollars that can do some damage to our society and thus must be taken seriously…he has persuaded one school in Oklahoma City to offer such a class in the fall.

Green convinced the school that the class would pass any constitutional challenges…really?

If he does not intend to proselytize than he would not mind if the class also teaches about the Koran and other religious sacred texts as literature and not religion. I have taken classes on sacred texts as literature and as religion and the classes were fascinating but the big thing was that they were not taught by religious nuts but by professors of history who were not trying to convert you to their religion.

Green belongs to the Evangelical Council Road Baptist Church in Bethany, Oklahoma and believes the Bible is LITERALLY TRUE which is a position so absurd that most Christian denominations do not support that position and go to great lengths showing why that position is absurd.

As one critic already stated; his class is a Trojan horse, get into the classroom and promote his religion over all others.

I hope this issue is dealt with quickly and decisively; just because your’ rich does not give you the right to trample our Constitution and therefore our rights.

 

PAUL VI WAS NO SAINT...

I was a little surprised to read that Pope Paul VI was up for sainthood.

I said before that the sainthood process is a little silly with the need for confirmed miracles and such. I always thought that the potential saint had to have done something dramatically good for humanity to deserve the sainthood ring around his head.

John XXIII called for Vatican II which modernized the church and John Paul II helped defeat Communism and the Soviet stranglehold on Easter Europe EVEN though he allowed priests to sexually violate children.

I don’t know much about Paul VI but I do know that one of Vatican IIs many pronouncements was a reconsideration of the ban on contraception (artificial birth control).

A blue ribbon panel was convened and after much expert discussion, the panel recommended that in light of the Vatican allowing the rhythm method as a means of contraception, it had admitted that couples can and should have sex for the pleasure of it and not just for procreation.

Since the Vatican did recognize sex for pleasure, it only made sense to allow contraception to help the couple prevent unwanted pregnancies.

Unfortunately John XXIII died too early since he would have absolutely allowed contraception based on plain logic and common sense but Paul VI did not have John’s view of the realities of married life even though he thought he did…really?

Paul did not want to be remembered as a pope that reversed a church teaching which would have indicated that the church was wrong in its pronouncement on birth control.

This is a twisted argument since the church has backed out of many of its pronouncements in the past and even today as in cremation is now allowed after further deliberation and the conclusion that we will not be raised from the dead physically at the end of the world, only our spirits will…hmmmmmm.

To me Paul VI was not forward thinking and by keeping the ban on contraception, he actually did a grave disservice to humanity and probably was responsible for many female deaths caused by multiple births that they could not prevent because of his ignorant declaration.

I think the Vatican should re-write the rules for sainthood and base those rules on something more than supernatural mumbo-jumbo; Paul was no saint!

 

MR. STERLING'S BIGOTRY AND FREE SPEECH

I have been watching for more commentary on the Donald Sterling / NBA / LA Clippers saga and found a letter in the Wall Street Journal titled: THE EMBARRASSING MR. STERLING AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH by Ron Anderson of Rancho Palos Verdes, California.

In the letter, Anderson says that the racist remarks by Donald Sterling are troubling but to him what was more troubling is the overwhelming response of thousands in our society to his words in this age of instant communications.

He said that as a society, we are increasingly less able to state unpopular views without being censored, bullied or even mobbed.

He goes on to detail some examples which included 110,000 signatures on a petition demanding the Washington Post ban any and all articles that questioned global warming.

A huge point in his letter is his comparison of how our society reacted to Mr. Sterling’s words with actions of religious-motivated persons in other parts of the world when they respond with violence to words or images that offend them, such as the reactions of some Muslims to writings, cartoons or films that disparage the Prophet Muhammad.

He decries the loss of our ability to think and speak freely in our daily lives.

As a frequent blogger and editorial letter writer, I am personally aware how my words and opinions can affect those who disagree with me on subjects and issues; I have had threatening phone calls.

And the phrase, I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it is something this country has stood for from the beginning.

The views of our society is changing and changing fast in recent times as evidenced by the sea change in opinion about homosexuality but there are those in our society that will buck the trend and oppose the new thinking with all their might; it is their right.

In the case of Donald Sterling, his bigotry came into public view and the nation reacted to his words. I don’t think Mr. Sterling was putting forth an idea or a thought or even an opinion about a certain subject; he was plainly making derogatory remarks about certain people.

I think Mr. Anderson’s letter to the Wall Street Journal was clearly a warning about a slippery slope we may be nearing.

 

 

 

NO TO PRAYER IN GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS...

The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision to allow prayer before government meetings is troubling on many levels (Greece v. Galloway).

The First Amendment to our Constitution prohibits governmental endorsement of a religion; in essence sponsoring a national religion.

The arguments against prayer stated that the city council had mostly Christians give the prayer but the council was open to prayers by people of any other religion or belief system and so, to me, it did not violate the First Amendment as endorsing a specific religion.

To me, a better argument would be, why is a governmental body even dealing with religion? Our Constitution dictates a separation of church and state which means government does not mess with religion in any way; their job is to govern but they are free to pray in their CHURCH and NOT at public functions.

Justice Anthony Kennedy argued that legislative prayer has a long history in this country and that the original framers of the Constitution considered legislative prayer a benign acknowledgement of religion’s role in society.

In actuality, the Founding Fathers were deists and did not believe in religion, just a supreme being of some sort and legislative prayers were basically calling on a supreme being to guide the members of government in their deliberations.

Using “tradition” as an argument for allowing legislative prayer is risky since not all traditions are good when viewed by today’s societal standards. At the outset, Americans were predominantly Christians even though there were many Christian denominations that did not see eye to eye with each other.

Today, even though the United States is still very religious, there are big changes already present with a growing population of atheists and secularists who don’t want any religion interfering in their lives and that has to be recognized as a growing trend no matter how things were in the beginning.

It is no secret that those members of the city council were trying to cram THEIR religion down the throats of people that came to the meeting for a civil purpose NOT TO FUCKING PRAY.

The problem with the very misguided Supreme Court decision is that it sets a precedent for other religious nuts in power to keep religion in the sphere of the governmental body.

Judges Scalia and Thomas even went so far as to say that the court has improperly limited state governments’ ability to support religion and that is in DIRECT opposition to the First Amendment.

Since the Supreme Court has the final authority on these issues, we have nowhere else to turn. We can only vote against politicians and political parties that when elected nominate social conservatives to the Supreme Court…all we needed was one vote to turn this issue the other way…maybe a different Supreme Court will see the error in this decision and repeal the dumb thing!

 

Privacy issues in light of the Sterling / NBA case...

I waited till the hoopla surrounding the Donald Sterling / NBA issue died down somewhat to see what kind of commentary I would find once people had a chance to look at the matter with cooler heads.

One thing that came to mind almost immediately once Sterling’s racists remarks were made public was the fact that these remarks were part of a private conversation and taped, I would imagine, without his permission.

In this Sunday’s Detroit Free Press, Mitch Albom wrote STERLING CASE PROVES NO WORDS ARE PRIVATE. Albom also mentions that he was one of thousands of pundits who immediately jumped on Sterling in a sort of knee-jerk reaction to his racist remarks without giving much thought to how and why his remarks were made public.

It is illegal in California as well as in Michigan to record a conversation without the permission of all parties involved.

Albom states that what if LeBron James made an ethnic joke in his living room that was recorded and made public or a homophobic comment in the locker room that went viral…what would he say about that?

We now live in an age where nothing seems to be private and you are not safe in restaurants, parking lots or even your own bedroom especially if you are a public figure.

We all have said things we regret at some point in our lives; maybe even many things.

This is not a defense of Sterling; he is getting what he deserves and not only for his newest remarks but for a history of bigotry that was known to many but ignored; this is asking about personal privacy and what is being done to protect it.

Albom thinks that we need new laws to protect personal privacy; laws that were not imagined as needed before the age of the internet, tiny microphones, cell phone cameras, etc. etc…….and I agree with him.

One ironic twist to the Sterling case was TMZ refusing to divulge how they received the recording due to privacy issues…really?

 

BELLE ISLE TROOPERS STAND YOUR GROUND...don't take any shit from Detroit officials...

Belle Isle is an island in the Detroit River between Canada and the United States.

This was a great place to visit in my youth. It had so many things for families to enjoy including an aquarium, a zoo and a botanical garden. We even had Polish parades there on May 3^rd to celebrate Poland’s Independence Day even though Poland was under Communist rule.

Anyway, the island deteriorated just as the City of Detroit deteriorated and for many years it was just allowed to rot and become a dangerous place where families did not feel safe to visit anymore.

Last year, the state took over running the island from the incompetent and corrupt city government; the island became a state park….the island was now being patrolled by the state police and not Detroit police who never really patrolled the island.

This week a few City of Detroit officials complained that they were being HARRASSED by the state police while driving on Belle Isle. In fact, the officials were stopped for speeding (35 mph in a 25 mph zone) one of the officials was the new mayor of Detroit but he did not complain in fact he apologized to the officer and thanked him for doing his job.

I was happy to see Letters to the Editor and a number of columnists addressing the issue this morning and basically telling those city officials complaining of harassment where to stick their complaints.

It appears that Detroiters are used to breaking the law because they know that there is no police presence or that the police officers that may be present could care less about enforcing minor legal infractions when there was a homicide epidemic gripping the city.

The policy of “Broken Windows” where police enforce all laws no matter how small and in so doing prevent larger crimes is a policy proven to work but obviously in Detroit, the police do not practice such a policy.

The complaints about police harassment on Belle Isle are very telling, especially coming from city officials.

The state police on Belle Isle have said that many of the stops were warning stops; telling the drivers that a strict speed limit will be enforced to protect the many joggers and walkers on the island.

Also telling was the fact that many of the stops for speeding ended in arrests; not for speeding but because the drivers were wanted individuals…see how the “Broken Windows” policy works?

Anyway, I am happy to see that the state police will not take shit from city officials or the media; they are just doing their job…enforcing the law.

Detroiters need to stop breaking the law and get used to a new sheriff on Belle Isle…maybe the Detroit police department can actually learn something from the Belle Isle troopers.

 

 

 

ARAB FESTIVAL needs to be held despite Christian protesters...

The Michigan ARAB FESTIVAL has been cancelled for a second year in a row…why?

Here in Michigan (Dearborn area) we have the largest population of Arabs in the United States. The yearly festival was great for Arabs and non-Arabs alike. It featured Arab culture and especially Arab food and we just love Middle Eastern cuisine.

The problem with the Arab Festival is that it draws many Christian fanatics who feel compelled to attend the festival to protest against Islam or to try to convert the Muslims attending the festival; convert them to Christianity…really?

When the police tried to limit the disruption by the rabid Christians, things got a little out of hand and the City of Dearborn ended up paying $300,000 in fines.

The Christian protesters also sued the city for violating their right to free speech under the First Amendment; a federal judge disagreed with their charge.

To me the situation is just unacceptable.

All festivals are patrolled by police to maintain law and order. People that attend festivals depend on the police to keep festivals safe for attendees and vendors.

Vendors can purchase a booth and sell, display or proselytize their stuff in a peaceful manner.

The problem is that you have Christian fanatics that want to disrupt and cause problems. On the other hand you have Muslims that object to Christians trying to bad mouth Islam and that inevitably leads to conflict.

To me this is a simple police matter; keep the peace and if you have to arrest people, so be it.

Everyone has a right to attend a festival; no one has the right to disrupt a festival.