BookTalk.org

I know this member journal entry is long overdue. I have been participating in threads without formally introducing myself. I haven't meant to buck the system; I just don't think talking about myself is that interesting, but here goes.My name is Rosemary, I'm a 27-yr-old female. Ummmm...I work for city government (the horror), in law (the horror), though I am not a lawyer, yet. I have applied to law school and am hoping to be accepted for the upcoming fall semester. I aim to study constitutional law with a focus on public interest, but I know these things change all the time. Currently, I have a BA in literature and American studies with a minor in gender studies. I read voraciously, as I am sure all of you do too. For many years I read predominantly fiction, drama and literary theory/criticism. However, recently I have read much more non-fiction with a focus in history, current events, legal history/theory and constitutional law. My reading paths are not very similar to what is currently being discussed on the book forums, but I'm hoping I'll be inspired or influenced to pick-up one of the selections.I'm not sure what else would be of interest, but if anyone has any questions I will, probably, answer them. To end, thanks for such a wonderful discussion forum; I'm having fun reading and participating.

We hope you will become one of the regulars!!Mr. P. Mr. P's place. I warned you!!!Mr. P's Bookshelf.The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

RosemaryWelcome to the community...officially. You've been a pleasure to get to know on the forums, even without the formal intro. Several of us have been talking behind the scenes about your posts. You're a talented writer, but the way you attack an opponent's argument is what impresses me most. You're methodical and precise with your language.Quote:...I am not a lawyer, yet. I have applied to law school and am hoping to be accepted for the upcoming fall semester.You'll make an outstanding lawyer. I wouldn't want to go up against you.Quote:I aim to study constitutional law with a focus on public interest, but I know these things change all the time.I'd like to plant a seed. But I'm sure you've thought about this at some point. Atheists need good lawyers to defend their constitutional rights. Michael Newdow seems to be the only lawyer with the courage to challenge our government on church/state issues. But now his ability may be drastically hindered. I'll copy and paste an article in a follow-up post in this thread that explains what I'm talking about.Quote:My reading paths are not very similar to what is currently being discussed on the book forums, but I'm hoping I'll be inspired or influenced to pick-up one of the selections.That is one of the goals around here. None of us will ever see our own personal book choices winning every quarter. But we still have a tremendous learning opportunity if we commit to ourselves to dive into the winning book - even if it is something we'd never pick up on our own. I've enjoyed learning about topics that I would never have approached on my own.Quote:To end, thanks for such a wonderful discussion forum; I'm having fun reading and participating.You're welcome and we're enjoying having your participation and input. Are you going to make it to the Eugenie C. Scott live chat? I'm a little nervous that many of our newer members have no experience with using our chat room. I'm hoping they'll practice by coming to one of the Thursday night casual chats.Chris Edited by: Chris OConnor  at: 11/8/06 12:18 am

Here is the article...American Atheists Statement on PERA For some years, federal law has provided that attorney fees be paid by the losers to a Plaintiff's attorney in a civil rights lawsuit. This only happens when the lawyer successfully proves that persons "acting under color of state law" have violated federal civil rights laws, and unconstitutionally and unlawfully deprived the attorney's clients of "due process of law" or "equal protection of the laws." This is to give the little person, who otherwise would have no means of access to the courts and the legal system, some measure of insulation from persons who, cloaked with the power and money of the state, engage in discrimination against citizens of our country and injure them because of such things as their race, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin.The Constitution of the United States prohibits state officials from attempting to "establish a religion." If state officials try to do that, a lawyer who sues them on behalf of clients is able to recover attorney fees from the state at the conclusion of the case. This has been a powerful tool to prevent religious tyranny by a majority religion. Many lawyers have worked for years without compensation to protect the freedoms of our citizens. Now, some in Congress want to change that. Thus, a law known as "PERA" has been voted out of committee. It represents a virulent form of treason by those who apparently want state officials to be able to establish a religion."PERA," or the "Public Expression of Religion Act," now before the Congress, is better understood as "Protecting Evangelical Repression Again."Of all the outrages assaulting American freedoms, "Protecting Evangelical Repression Again," is perhaps the worst. Shakespeare was correct. If you would establish a tyranny, you must first kill all the lawyers. Then people will be denied skilled advocates to aid in their attempts at survival.Why would any law abiding American object to paying attorneys who successfully attack unlawful behavior by public officials. The lawyers are not paid if the case is dismissed or otherwise lost. How can the pending bill protect the public when it rewards scofflaws in public places and punishes those lawyers who dare to prove the violations to American juries?There is no hint in this legislation that lawyers not be paid if they are successful in legal actions that expose public officials who endorse or practice racial discrimination, sexual harassment, or unequal treatment of citizens because of age or disabilities. Why then deny attorney fees to those lawyers who succeed in exposing officials who want to make their religious views everyone's religious views? Do those supporting PERA think the First Amendment is wrong?Could it be that those who support this religionist bill do not like our American way of life that mandates religious fundangelicals cannot use the laws of our nation to make us all play in their sandbox?Separation of religion and government is the American way.Why do they hate our freedoms?Edwin KaginNational Legal DirectorAmerican Atheists, Inc. [email protected]

Mr. P. and Chris, thanks for the welcome. I do hope to become a regular. I really think this forum will provide a lot of information on a field that is relatively new to me with regard to scholarly research. I am looking forward to learning about the different positions, which is why I am happy there are both theists and atheists who contribute. I also feel that it will be a great foundation for, as Chris suggests, exploring constitutional issues with regard to religion. My work thus far centers largely around gender issues (especially violence against women), education issues, and social service issues; however, religious issues have become a fast focus of mine.Chris:Quote:You're a talented writer, but the way you attack an opponent's argument is what impresses me most. Thank you.Quote:You're methodical and precise with your languagePeople find that off-putting when speaking/debating with me, though I know you meant it as a compliment. My attempt to proffer a precise and strongly worded argument is, I think, perceived as arrogance on my part. I'm trying to work on being more pleasant with my language, without sacrificing precision.Quote:Are you going to make it to the Eugenie C. Scott live chat?I hadn't planned on joining the Eugenie C. Scott chat, as I think it unlikely I will fit in Evolution vs. Creationism during this reading period. I was thinking of observing the discussion, but will probably not have anything to contribute.

As for the Public Expressions of Religion Protection Act, it's been on my radar since it passed in the House in September. A bi-weekly review of GovTrack, the U.S. Supreme Court, the ACLU, and the PA Supreme Court websites keep me apprised of the slow but steady erosion of our civil liberties. (It kind of reminds me of the island in "The Willows.") I urge all citizens, especially voting citizens, to do similar reviews within their own political frameworks. The information is readily available online now; however, it is often the information that doesn't make it to the news. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral argument today on two important cases (Gonzalez v. Carhart and Gonzalez v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America) dealing with the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act." This is unlikely to make the news in light of current election coverage.I read the transcripts of the House debate on PERPA a couple weeks ago and found one of the most eloquent and honest recent congressional statements. Representative James McGovern (MA) essentially targeted the House leadership for allowing red herrings such as this bill to monopolize floor time, while other more pressing issues remain unaddressed. I am going to include the best chunk of Rep. McGovern's argument below, but urge anyone reading this to look at the full transcript to see what really goes on in Congress. There is a lot of bad reasoning and illogical conclusions in the arguments for the bill

don't you just wanna grab these people by the lapels and yell "The line 'in the year of our Lord' is a rhetorical device! a cliche! Not an argument! Get a grip!"Probably wouldn't work, but may feel good doing it...See you around! "All beings are the owners of their deeds, the heirs to their deeds." Loricat's Book NookCelebrating the Absurd

My family had our first next generation baby on Saturday evening. So now I am a first-time aunt of a beautiful baby boy! We've been waiting so long for this and I'm so excited I just wanted to share.

IrishrosemCongratulations to the aunt and the rest of the family!What's the little guy's name? Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a wellpreserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out,shouting..."Holy Crap...what a ride!"

Thanks, Frank. His name is Liam John. And he's a big guy (9lbs 6oz.) I guess we make big Irish babies in this family.