I declared that my wife, WFWP [Women's Federation for World Peace] President Hak Ja Han Moon, and I are the True Parents of all humanity. I declared that we are the Savior, the Lord of the Second Advent, the Messiah.Your Alderman at Work! (This happened at the same meeting that Our Village Elders passed the largest property tax hike in Chicago history):
Presented By
ALDERMAN MOORE (49th Ward):
DECLARATION OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 AS
"ONE FAMILY UNDER GOD CELEBRATION FOR PEACE DAY"
IN CHICAGO.
ALDERMAN MOORE (49th Ward):
DECLARATION OF NOVEMBER 14, 2007 AS
"ONE FAMILY UNDER GOD CELEBRATION FOR PEACE DAY"
IN CHICAGO.
WHEREAS, The Universal Peace Federation along with its co-sponsors. The American Clergy Leadership Conference, the Women's Federation for World Peace, and the True Family Values Ministry are strongly supporting peace and family through its "One Family Under God Peace Tour" that is holding a historic event in Chicago, Illinois, at the Chicago dovimtown Marriott Hotel on Wednesday evening, November 14, 2007; and
WHEREAS, The Universal Peace Federation co-founder Dr. Hak Ja Han Moon and her son, Dr. Hyun Jin Moon will be addressing an audience of over two thousand of Chicago's most prestigious religious, civic, educational and business leaders;
now therefore
Be It Resolved, That we, the Mayor and members of the City Council of the City of Chicago, do hereby recognize the fourteenth day of November, 2007 as "One Family Under God Celebration For Peace Day"; and
Be It Further Resolved, That a suitable copy of this resolution be prepared for presentation.
Related:
17 comments:
Once again, we witness our alderman wasting City Council time and devoting his time to things that achieve absolutely nothing for our ward.
He should be impeached for failure to do his job.
Joe and his staff are a perfect example why the city council should trim the number of alderman to 25, or less. He's totally useless.
Instead of truly addressing the violence in his ward, Joe does feel good things like this.
Go away Joe.
People are getting shot at in the 49th while you do nothing.
How many will die on your watch?
Say what? I thought progressives believed in the separation between church and state. I guess I missed a memo that I am guessing goes something like this: if you donate to my campaign then I'll give you a proclamation (or something). The Assyrians got their big poobah street name and the Moonies get a day. It's not corrupt but it's not pretty either. No wonder Blago thought it was ok to sell Obama's senate seat.
WTF!!??
First, it is unbelievable to me that a politician would officially "bless" any religion. Religion is completely private, and it is not an official's place to approve or disapprove of a particular creed.
Secondly, how could a LIBERAL possibly approve of the Moonies? The Moon organization is so far right, so retro, that it makes the American Christian Reconstructionist Movement look tolerant and progressive compared. Rev. Moon is also a great favorite of our outgoing prez, George Bush, because of its right wing (to say the least) slant on women's rights and "family values". Google connections between Bush and Moon, and read about the Moon philosophy.
I will continue to kick "moonies" out of my office every time they walk in the door to solicit.
WHY OH WHY does Moore waste OUR time on crap like this? Joe may not be the worst aldercreature in the city, for the competition for that slot is pretty frenetic. But he is surely the worst thing ever to happen to the 49th Ward.
What will it take to get this moron unseated? We've come within a couple of hundred votes in the last 2 elections, but we can't seem to get a real groundswell against this guy, or at least sufficient opposition to topple him.
To those of you who did not vote, because you thought the campaign was too "dirty" or "nasty", or because it just didn't seem to matter, don't think you can just sell your house and move. If you bought a house or condo around here since 2001, you aren't going anywhere for quite a few years, unless you are in foreclosure, of course. So make the best of it and work to improve your neighborhood.
This also shows Moore to be thoroughly brain dead.
Congressman Danny Davis also showed up in 2002 at a Moonie event, one where Moon & his wife were crowned as parents of the world or some such nonsense. Davis has been trying to explain away that one for years.
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2008/11/can-danny-davis-star-rise-with-a-moon-in-the-way.html
really unbelievable - Moore focuses on all this wacky stuff instead of really getting down and dirty and cleaning up the ward he is supposed to represent!
Hmmm, I smell a contribution.
No Joe, you misunderstood..
They were saying Moonie, not Money...
I don't believe that any representative of the U.S. national, state, or local government should publicly favor one religion over another. This makes me very surprised that Chicago would esteablish a Famil Federation for World Peace and Unification Day, because I always looked at the FFWPU was a religious church - my church in fact.
That being said, the Universal Peace Federation is a top down and bottom up non profit non sectarian organization working to build peace from the family level all the way to an international level.
Supporting the UPF and it's Global Peace Festival is a great way to solve domestic problems. For instance, this summer in Washington D.C. the GPF brought together two mothers - One who's son had been killed in gang violence, and the other whose son was responsible for the murder.
Another example is that I think they have a really great Character Education program which could help parents and teachers alike instill good character in kids so they will be less willing to harm their community and more willing to help out.
Finally, there is the somewhat affiliated Service for Peace, which actually does real life service that helps people in their lives, while at the same time spreading a culture of service at the community and worldwide level.
Maybe much of what the UPF and its affiliate organizations do are "feel good" stuff, but maybe if more people "feel good" less people would feel like doing "bad" things and more would feel like doing "good" things.
Working for One Family Under God,
Christopher D. Osborn
battleforheaven.blogspot.com
Yea, now that 'the ministers' have held a prayer meeting with Gov. Blago, he will repent and change his illegal, larcenous ways. Rightttttt! Religion has NO PLACE in our government, in any way, shape or form!
The Forefathers knew that theocracy was a dangerous thing. They also knew that people are weak, susceptible to power and money.
We were founded as "One Nation Under God" a people who remember that there is a "big picture" beyond our life, after a time in office... immoral leaders like Moore and Blago have forgotten the big picture, and we are paying dearly the price.
Blago couldn't see beyond his nose...the pain a father in jail will cause his very young daughters...the shadow cast over the President Elect, the people of Illinois, now let down by every level of Government.
There is no place for religion in government, but we do need God a part of government again.
Where did you get the idea that this country was founded as "one nation, under god"?
The Constitution reflects our founders views of a secular government, protecting the freedom of any belief or unbelief. The historian, Robert Middlekauff, observed, "the idea that the Constitution expressed a moral view seems absurd. There were no genuine evangelicals in the Convention, and there were no heated declarations of Christian piety." You got it real wrong, thelonius lunt!
Craig, instead of cutting the city council down to 25, maybe we can get Daley to outsource it to a private concern.
"Where did you get the idea that this country was founded as "one nation, under god"? "
God and the "Creator" are mentioned as the source of our unalienable rights in the declaration of independence. This, not the U.S. constitution, is the founding document of the United States. The constitution can be eradicated by a new constitutional convention, but the Declaration of Independence will always be the document which declared the United States into existence. Hens, the nation was founded with God in mind.
As for the constitution, here is the exact text of the first amendment, signed into law December 15th 1791: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I notice 2 things of note for this conversation. First, sounds scary, but the law says: "Congress shall make no law...". It does not say "All Government within these United States shall make no law..." This amendment seems to be referring to Congress only, and thereby effects no other branch of government within these United States. Considering this, it seems to me that individual States, Counties, and/or Municipalities have the right to be tyrannical theocracies, as long as they don't impose these laws on Congress.
The second thing I notice is that even within the confines of Congress, it does not say "Religion has no place." It says "establishment of religion." This seems to me to mean that they can't make any laws respecting churches and other religious establishments - taking away their rights or giving them extra privileges or powers. However, it says nothing about Congress shall not, as an establishment, believe in God. They can't favor one specific religious establishment, but they can favor religion in general, for it says absolutely nothing about Congress making sure not to hurt the feelings of Atheists. They can't infringe on the right of the people to be Atheistic or even outspokenly so, but they can refuse to be Atheistic themselves, for Atheism is not a religious(or non religious) establishment, but a non religious belief.
In this context, while I personally don't think it was right, your local government has every right to favor the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, even though it is a church. Congress can't, but your local municipal government can. It's up to you to tell them that you don't want them to.
As for the One Family Under God day, while the Universal Peace federation and the Global peace Festival or not churches, they are decidedly religious establishments. They don't favor one religion over the other, but they're still rather religious. So in this case, again your local municipality has the right to favor it, I'm not sure that Congress can because while they are not establishments of specific religion, they are religions establishments.
In Liberty, working for One Family Under God,
Christopher D. Osborn
battleforheaven.blogspot.com
fipher.blogspot.com
In response to thelonius lunt:
Myth:
The Declaration of Independence exhibits a preference for Christianity.
Response:
Many have argued against the separation of church and state by pointing to the Declaration of Independence. They believe that the text of this document supports the position that the United States was founded upon religious, if not Christian, principles, and therefore church and state must remain intertwined in order for this nation to continue properly.
There are a couple of flaws in this argument. For one thing, the Declaration of Independence is not a legal document for this nation. What this means is that it has no authority over our laws, our lawmakers, or ourselves. It cannot be cited as precedent or as being binding in a courtroom. The purpose of the Declaration of Independence was to make a moral case for dissolving the legal ties between the colonies and Great Britain; once that goal was achieved, the official role of the Declaration was finished.
That leaves open, however, the possibility that the document expressed the will of the same people who wrote the Constitution — thus, it provides knowledge about their intent as to what sort of government we should have. Leaving aside for the moment whether or not that intention should bind us, there are still serious flaws to consider. First, religion itself is never mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. This makes it difficult to argue that any particular religious principles should guide our current government.
Second, what little is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence is only barely compatible with Christianity, the religion most people have in mind when making the above argument. The Declaration refers to “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence.” These are all terms used in the sort of deism which was common among many of those responsible for the American Revolution as well as the philosophers upon whom they relied for support. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, was himself a deist who was opposed to many traditional Christian doctrines, in particular beliefs about the supernatural.
One common misuse of the Declaration of Independence is to argue that it states that our rights come from God and, therefore, there are no legitimate interpretations of the rights in the Constitution that would be contrary to God. The first problem is that the Declaration of Independence refers to a “Creator” and not the Christian “God” meant by people making the argument. The second problem is that the “rights” mentioned in the Declaration of Independence are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” — none of which are “rights” discussed in the Constitution.
Finally, the Declaration of Independence also makes it clear that governments created by humanity derive their powers from the consent of the governed, not from any gods. This is why the Constitution does not make any mention of any gods. There is no reason to think that there is anything illegitimate about an interpretation of any of the rights outlined in the Constitution merely because it runs contrary to what some people think that their conception of a god would want.
What this all means is that arguments against the separation of church and state which rely upon the language of the Declaration of Independence fail. First, the document in question has no legal authority with which one could make a legal case. Second, the sentiments expressed therein do not support the principle that government should be guided either by any specific religion (like Christianity) or by religion “in general” (as if such a thing even existed).
My response was ment for Christopher D. Osborn!
Post a Comment