- US permits Arctic drilling, but questions about safety remain
- ISIS takeover of Ramadi means hard choices face the Iraqi and US governments
- State Roundup: Democrat sponsored prevailing wage amendment passes
- Facebook’s Instant Articles not a threat to media
- U of I expert: Rauner’s pension fix ‘unconstitutional’
- State Senate approves lesser penalties for marijuana possession
- State Roundup: Natural gas vehicle tax stalls in committee
- Raptors, Rangers FC announce June camp
- Student debt 101: dearth of data fuels common misperceptions
- ‘Millionaire tax’ clears House panel
To the Editor
This is not a godless nation
Four score and 12 years ago, our fathers did NOT bring forth a new nation based on godlessness. That was the former Soviet Union.
To be sure, belief in God did start to fall out of fashion here about that time. The Scopes trial in 1925 heralded the beginning of the end, for instance, for theism that doesn’t try to somehow incorporate evolution.
And yes, the past century has been rife with upheavals of every sort, and with scientific breakthroughs like Edwin Hubble’s discovery in the 1920s that what we thought was the whole universe is only our own galaxy, the Milky Way, and there are 100 billion more!
Seemingly less quaint and more rational, atheism has become the new national belief baseline, not by decree, but rather by default. In fact, we
of The Unfaith all the more, like the clear, refreshing
Moreover, when it comes to spiritual matters, the unique individual, while never a species, is nevertheless ever more endangered by the rampant, relativistic tribalism of
which, as always, cares only about categorizing us all.
No matter how proud we might be of what took the Communists the Gulag to achieve, received atheism goes against everything the USA was ever meant to stand for: the individual’s greatest strength is in his Higher Power.
Manzullo’s insurance gives him options
Re: Staff writer Stuart Wahlin’s article, July 22-28, 2009: Rep. Manzullo failed to mention which federal health insurance plan he is covered by. I suspect it is the Standard Option with Blue Cross and Blue Shield, which is a for-profit, fee-for-service PPO plan. He has several choices of plans. I feel his plan is generous, but like our basic coverage, is quite expensive considering the 70 percent contribution of the government. Yes, we, too, have no coverage for some of our needs such as eyeglasses, hearing aids and dental. These things affect our overall well-being. Perhaps he should be more positively involved and look more closely at some of the proposals in changing our system such as not denying coverage or charging more for pre-existing conditions. I believe the idea of cooperatives for small businesses is being considered also.
I believe we do need to change our health care delivery system and that initial changes will be modified many times. That’s why I’m not frightened of changing the system.
from the Aug. 26-Sept. 1, 2009 issue