Happy Easter

I hope you get to spend it with your family.

of and from; little words, great meaning

It seems to me militant atheists are out to change the constitution for their benefit. The constitution gives us freedom OF religion. This means we can choose our religion, our faith and not be told how to worship by our government. Basically we are given the right to exercise our religious freedom. It is up to us how we choose to worship or not worship.

Nowadays atheism and atheists want to take away our rights by trying to ban any type of worship. Basically they want us to believe the constitution
reads freedom FROM religion. And they seem to be doing this with a religious fervor.

We have to careful about what they are trying to accomplish, even fighting to maintain one of the primary rights afforded to us by our forefathers. We cannot let a few people co opt such a valuable right.

And these militant atheists work so hard hard to get us to believe there is no God. Our constitution even gives them the right not to believe in God. Yet they spend tons of energy wanting others not to believe.They work so hard denying you wonder are they more trying to convince themselves that God doesn't exist. It is like they believe, but don't want to deal with the reality of answering to Creation. Their denial speaks volumes about a negative belief rather than a non belief. If you truly do not believe something it doesn't stir up anger when other people believe. You cannot attack something you feel doesn't exist, attacking other beliefs means you believe or fear it does exist. You can say or deny you don't believe, but why be so adamant about it.

Also people talk about separation of church and state so you are not suppose to talk about religion in a government work place. Many institutions let atheists dictate pilicy on this. Separation of church and state means the government cannot tell you how to worship or who. The fact that so many places of government work won't let you talk about God is unconstitutional. I have a right to talk to anyone of my faith about my faith just as much as someone wants to talk about their favorite TV show or favorite sports team. I cannot in the work place interfere with your work or distract you from your work with any possible conversation. Another words I can't make you like my favorite team and hold you to agreeing with me and have that affect your job rating as a boss. Religion should be given the same treatment as any other topic. Conversation at any employer is based on how you treat others, not the topic. Anything different is
unconstitutional.

I have been trying to write this on a smart phone and have never been able to work on this in one sitting. The flow isn't to my liking and it may be a few days before I get back to a computer so I am posting as is. I really think we need to stand up to attacks of faith in our society. I am not infringing on anyone's rights talking about my faith in public. I cannot effect any aspect of your life if you don't agree with me and conversely you cannot take away my rights just because you have no faith. Atheism means you deny God, but it doesn't give you anymore rights than anyone else. If the govt cannot tell you how to believe, militant atheists cannot take away my right to believe. We need to make sure we hold onto our rights. And for separation of church and state a casual conversation about faith in the workplace is not the state telling how to believe. Just like talking about any other topic if you don't like what is being said,go somewhere else. If its at your desk you have every right to ask to have the subject changed, but you have no right to complain because you overheard something. Otherwise all talk at work should be taboo.





Have a Happy Easter

Cowboys; Mavericks

And as we head into the NFL draft I am still looking for a new GM for the Cowboys.

I first floated this idea in the late 80's when the Cowboys were for sale. Since the Cowboys, even today, seem to be something more than just another football team, I suggested we as the public own the team. This would be something similar, but not exactly like the Packers. Mr Jones is destroying something more than a business, something more than a brand, he is playing with a public trust that the Cowboys are representative of the NFL to the world "America's team". And yes I am a homey when it comes to my teams (see Mavericks' comments coming up), but the Cowboys do have a certain chic to them that goes beyond being a football team.

My idea was that we would put together a holding company where people could invest/buy shares and once we reach a certain goal make an offer. There were very severe rules though. To give it to the people, you couldn't own more than ten shares as an individual or corporation; once the team was bought the shareholders would vote on a management team to hire the actual management group to run the team. Basically two levels to prevent one person being a dominant player, but allowing for a small group from the shareholders to have a working relationship with who is hired to be the President of the team and GM of football operations etc. The management group among the shareholders would be voted on every three or five years to give some consistency to the football operations. One factor of this is to allow a group a chance to be successful, you cannot expect results in one year when building a successful organization, but only allowing 3-5 years to prevent what has happened under Mr Jones where no real success for 15 years. Basically if the management group is successful they would be voted back in, and would continue to work with a President of business operations and a GM for football operations, and yes I am separating the two roles. One reason of course is this is an investment and true Cowboy fans would accept a smaller return on their money if the team was successful, but they should get a return on their money as an investment. Second you have one person working on the actual team and its success without worrying about the business portion. And I think everyone knows that to have a successful football team you need football people in charge of the team. The business portion can be run by a more diverse group of people with business experience. And you need to control owners to Cowboy fans. Tough call to enforce. This is the rough draft of the proposal. More than willing to talk about it if you are interested.

There are some perks too. For example one suite could be designated the owner's suite and each year 8 names would be drawn among all the shareholders to sit in the owner's suite for a home game. IF owners can sit in visiting stadiums,then you pick 16 names. The "owner" for the game would get full perks of dinner, etc for that person and a set number of guests. And all owners might be able to spend a few days in training camp or off season getting to meet the players, get autographs if desired etc. There would be an annual meeting, just like any other public owned company, for the benefit and knowledge of the shareholders. Certain merchandise could be created and sold to owners only to let them show who they are in public if wanted. These are just a few ideas to give the shareholders a feeling of entitlement as team owner.

Back in the 80's I was thinking you could start with $10,000 a share or maybe $100,000. Now though I think we would be stuck with a million for a share at least, which precludes many people from participating, so to help out I was thinking that more than one person could own a share, but they would have to decide who votes on the share. Which of course could lead to trouble. Anyway, anybody curious about trying to partake in a hostile takeover of the Cowboys? Mr. Jones isn't doing Cowboy fans any favors.

The Cowboys to Dallas and to fans around the world are much more valuable than Mr Jones' ego.



Mavericks, like I mentioned I am a homey when it comes to my teams, are sitting on the edge for the playoffs. I have been holding onto hope, but the margin for error is razor thin now.

And for me I wish they were doing better. I think Vince Carter has really been a good team player this year and he deserves more for his efforts, Marion has always been underrated and under appreciated, and Dirk can still contribute. For Vince and Marion I wish we were doing better, both have had great attitudes and great work ethic this year.

The Mavericks are a good team for 46 minutes a game, but for some reason, there is an intangible missing for close games. I have felt that if they had found it these last couple of weeks they could have done well. Not only can the three mentioned above contribute to a successful team, Brandon Wright is starting to develop, Kaman and Brand can come in and add 10-15 points a game,or at least one of them a night, Collison is developing as a point guard and brings tons of energy, Mayo is almost there and if he steps up just a quarter step can contribute, and the rest of the bench has been productive. To me that intangible whatever it is, has cost this team too much,but to be a playoff/successful playoff team those are the things that make the difference. If they just go 50/50 on close games they are 7th seed or so not 4 games back.

Sad to see the efforts of Carter and Marion lost when they are touching being a really really good team. Anyway still holding out this year, "it ain't over till its over"


A few Sports comments heading into the usual wonderful Texas Spring weather. And I just don't have a feel on the Rangers yet.

It is more than......

Dignity of life is always talked about when we talk about the pro life argument. And don't get me wrong, we must talk about dignity of life when we talk about being pro life. This is important and all that we do is important and yes we can do even more.

My concern is we make dignity of life a one topic argument. We spend endless efforts working for pro life, and yes it is never enough till life is won. We seem to forget though that dignity of life encompasses more than the pro life argument. There are so many issues around the world that don't get the same amount of attention here in the United States that are just as important.

What about genocide? Why is the suffering of entire people put on the back burner? Historically we were outraged by the atrocities of the Nazis and rightfully so, but today in other parts of the world it continues. At one time President Carter suggested we should make human rights a major part of our foreign policy, a point derided by many so called conservatives now and then. Yet they scream pro life, to me some serious lack of consistency is rampant here, you cannot pick and choose when to respect dignity of life and when to ignore it.

What about victims of rape? Every now and then stories such as the ones coming out of India recently we get a bit of media outrage at how women are treated around the world, a complete lack of consideration for the rights of rape victims, yet here in our country women are raped, and it barely makes the news. Why? Is it because it is too commonplace, (I hope not) or is it because we don't put it in the right perspective? Remember last election season when the Republicans were blowing the question about abortion and victims of rape. They kept sticking their foot in their mouth. I hope I said this back then, but just in case, the answer should have been: "we need to work to protect women from being raped, just as we need to protect unborn children, we need to protect the lives and dignity of those living. Rape is a problem that should be addressed by society and we need to teach ourselves as a society to prevent it. Then there is no issue of a pregnant rape victim because the woman is not raped, therefore it becomes a non issue." Somewhat simplistic maybe,yet this is the attitude we should take. Rape is a symptom of a lack of respect for life, both for the perpetrator and by the perpetrator towards the victim.

There is human trafficking. We completely ignore what is happening to many children around the world. What good is it to save a live, then abandon it.

What about victims of domestic violence? Women, children, and yes even men sometimes, are abused in their own homes. How can we ignore what is happening in our own families. And this abuse comes in all shapes and sizes, but no matter how repulsive or how simple, domestic violence shows a lack of respect for dignity of life.

And you can add much more to this short list. Examples of lack of respect towards life are way too easy to find.

Will I continue to support the pro life movement, yes, but not just as a movement, but as a human who cares about all life and I will support the dignity of life wherever it is needed. Dignity of life is more than political speeches, church meetings, rallies, it must be a way of life.

Politics vs the death penalty

At one point in my life I was for the death penalty. That was until I was up to be on a jury where the death penalty was going to be addressed. I took one look at the person charged and even with a rash judgment that this person may have committed a heinous crime, who was I really to decide the fate of another person's life.

This issue comes up every now and then, and unfortunately it falls under the liberal vs conservative political spectrum instead of what can we do better as a society.

Liberals/democrats argue against the death penalty, but for the wrong reasons, some are noble, but to really accomplish something we need to address root causes.

And the crime and punishment aspect is where conservatives fail. I know many people nowadays don't want to hear a moral argument about right to life, so lets try something more basic. And it comes from the basic and well known phrase "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". Too often we decide that punishment should be based on deterrence, and use that as the idea of prevention. This is way too short sighted. The real solution is to work to create a better society so people don't commit heinous crimes, sure this may take more work, but the alternative is to decide, as if we are God, whose life to take and whose to not. I ask you, go look at yourself in the mirror and answer(HONESTLY) what right do I have to pass judgment on another human being. Even if you don't believe in God, go ask yourself that question. And if you were to answer yourself honestly and have any sense of respect for yourself and humans in general you will realize why the death penalty should not be the answer to preventing heinous crimes.

The Death penalty is an easy answer to a horrible situation. The better answer though takes real work,but wouldn't it be better to have a society that respects life first than to make arbitrary judgments on people's lives.

Many conservatives feel the death penalty and punishment as a deterrence is the answer, so how does a person get conservatives that feel this way to realize a better answer is needed. Conservatives want our government to tax us less ( and me too), but always choose solutions that cost us as a society more in the long run.Does anyone truly believe our prison system is working? Our prison system is becoming a highly expensive failure of deterrence. Liberals throw tax money at our problems with answers that solve for the day, not to get ahead of the problem to prevent it. The liberals spend money under the idea of lets give someone a fish, feeding for the day, but never touch on how to teach people how to fish so they don't need constant help. And worse no one has an answer to really rehabilitate criminals.


And if you noticed I used two phrases well used by conservatives, ounce of prevention... and give a man a fish, feed for day,, teach to fish, feed for lifetime,,, but I and say this with emphasis, two phrases not followed well by conservatives when it comes to actually doing something about the problems in our society. We, as conservatives, fail to truly be conservative. If you prevent the problem, even if it seems the cost up front is high, then you are not stuck with the cost of failing which is always higher. And in the case of the death penalty, puts us in the position of deciding who should live and who shouldn't. And if you think you can make this decision, well you really need to think about who you think you are. Frankly I only like playing God in my dreams and even that only on Tuesday.

The ounce of prevention is starting with children, and this means working against environments that we as a society let get created where poverty, desperation, frustration,horrid education, lack of values, run rampant in our country, (and lack of values is not only in areas of poverty, our whole society is filled with a lack of values)and to start teaching a new generation the value of positive influence and decision making. And then so many non God believing liberals deride the concept of family values and a sense of morality that comes from God, yet they don't have a solution to base our society doing right. And putting both together we get failure of us to get to a point where we don't need to worry about the death penalty at all. And we end up using politics to not solve a very important issue of who we are as a society.

As a conservative, I feel we need to step up and work to solve our problems such as events that lead people to lose respect of life so much so they commit heinous crimes. This is the real solution and once we can do that we are taking a step forward in calling ourselves a civilized society.