Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me some morality

I saw an interesting bumper sticker yesterday. It said, "Twitter shows the Mayans were right". I think it was a commentary on the vacuousness we Americans embrace these days. Admit it. Twitter is not exactly something that makes the old cerebral cortex do intellectual back flips. And the Mayan calendar, after thousands of years of ticking along, runs out in 2012. There is no restart. There is no "mulligan". There is no space-time continuum. It just ends. I don't know if the Mayans thought there would be some gigantic celestial bang-bang or what. But the fact is the Mayan calendar ends in three years.

When I saw on the news yesterday that our esteemed President is considering an openly gay judge for a seat on the United States Supreme Court, I stopped thinking about the Mayan implications and started contemplating the Roman Empire. The Romans had their orgies. They had their bloody spectacles in the Coliseum. But they also had the technical knowledge to build buildings, aqueducts, and roads that still stand, and function well, two thousand years after they were built. Hell, American builders can't even build houses that will stand up to wood rot for five years, let alone a thousand. And we have power tools!

The Roman Empire ruled a big chunk of what was then the known world. They built things, big things, and the things worked. Their government model is still the stuff from which many modern governments come. OK, so the Emperor gig isn't exactly something that will thrive long-term. But many modern-day governments owe a lot to the Roman model; especially the bicameral legislature and the way laws were drafted and enacted.

The Romans chugged along for years. But things started falling apart when morality (an argument can be made that the Romans were never exactly the world's moral compass) was pretty much thrown to the stone-road curb. When Rome started allowing debauchery to override the business of the state, when Roman government and government figures started letting the pleasures of the flesh dominate and adopted an "anything goes" mantra for their lives, Rome started losing battles it once won, and its people gave up on the government. True, Rome always had its share of sinful behavior, but what kept Rome going was that the people running the place understood that the empire had to come first, and party time came second. When they forgot that, things went to hell pretty quickly and the Roman Empire pretty much became, well, Italy.

President Obama played down his ties to Islam during the Presidential campaign. Whether or not he is Islamic, or has strong ties to Islam, is a subject for debate. Let's look at recent events. His deep bow to the King of Saudi Arabia goes way beyond political protocol or a breach thereof. The King of Saudi Arabia funds the building of Mosques around the world. If you get a few Muslims together, petition the king, and promise you'll go to prayers in the building, the king will build a Mosque for you. There are thousands around the world, and a ton of them in the United States. The King of Saudi Arabia is viewed as the titular head of the Muslim world. Our President bowed down to him. Deeply. Not a nod of the head, but a big old full waist bow. It was deferential. It was almost reverent. All of the Obamaites in the media pretty much blew it off. There was a little discussion of the implications, but Obama's Press Secretary said, "hey, ain't no thing", and the media puckered up and said, "we are so sorry" while genuflecting toward Mecca.

Obama just issued a proclamation for the "National Day Of Prayer". He did not hold a White House event, as his predecessors have done. If it's a separation of church and state thing, I can't really argue too much. But the first time I see a Ramadan feast or a Hajj celebration, I'm going to have a come apart.

Obama didn't go to church anywhere that I can tell on Easter Sunday.

Now Obama may nominate a homosexual to the Supreme Court.

I am not going to criticize his religious beliefs. I am not hateful and vindictive and, while I strongly believe in Christ and salvation through the grace of God, I also respect other religious beliefs, with the exception of Scientology which is just about the weirdest thing I've ever seen (you HAVE to study this stuff, it's simply amazing). I mean, I've never met any of the "body Thetans" that are running around inside me and, quite frankly, the world is weird enough so that I don't think I need to think about alien beings that I need to drive out of my body.

My point in writing this is that the President is not, in my examination, a Christian. And I believe he should come clean and let us know what he does believe. I resent the fact that he leads us on and tries to make us think he is. If he isn't, God bless him. Let's discuss but respect his relgious beliefs. Honestly, if his Presidency is a success, the country prospers. It's all good for all of us. I just don't respect people who try to fool me for their own personal gain. And if Obama doesn't have the fortitude to be honest, or he stays silent and deceitful for policial reasons, then why do I want him as my President?

Now, back to the issue of a homosexual on the Supreme Court.

The African-American community in the US is incredibly outspoken about homosexuality. There is little tolerance for it, and many black people I know are vocal and outspoken about their opposition to homosexuality. The black community in Memphis is outspoken about church and faith. I respect the fact that local African-Americans take pride in their churches and their faith in God. I think we could all learn a lot from that.

BUT, I'm going to bet you $5 right now that there will be a deafening silence from the black community about Obama's SCOTUS nominee, just as there has been almost no mention or disagreement with his cloaking of, or disguise of, his religion.

In a previous posting, I said I was going to call it "Herenton's 41% solution", the 41% of Memphians that will continue to vote for the Mayor because he's black. I hate that, just as I despise those who will vote for a white candidate ONLY because he's white, or a Jewish candidate ONLY because he is a Jew, and so on.

Can one really respect a group of community leaders that will remain silent on important issues simply because the person at the center of the controversy looks like them? Can one really respect anyone who is dishonest to a fault for their own gain?

The Roman Empire fell because government corruption and debauchery were not reined in. The people just sat silently as their way of life crumbled around them. They tolerated the intolerance and sinful behavior that flourished around them which, by many historical accounts I can find, included Roman leaders, men, having an appetite for boys.

And here's my final comment for today. I don't believe a homosexual Supreme Court Justice can be fair and balanced on issues involving the gay community. There will be too much pressure on him, just as I see various segments of society putting pressure on their home boys who are in places of authority. And here's where I'm going to get absolutely hammered; I have not yet met an outspoken defender of the gay lifestyle who is willing and able to accept honest discussion about the problems with it from any point of view, societal, religious, medical, you name it. "Out of the closet" gays who openly defend their lifestyle are usually radical and loud in their defense of it, and they will NOT listen to debate. OK, for private citizens this free speech is protected under the Constitution of our United States. But when an openly, and practicing, homosexual is selected to defend and interpret that constitution, I see no reason to believe he can do so objectively. That, to me, is a HUGE problem, and yet another step toward what some Christians believe are the "End Times".

Maybe the Mayans are right after all.