Global Warming – take the thermometer out, we are not going to melt and die!!!!

According to ice core researchers, the coldest point in history over the last 8,000 years coincides with the beginnings of meteorological observations. No wonder we're in such a panic over the rising climate temperatures. It's warmer now than anything the weathermen of history have ever experienced, but not necessarily warmer than the climates predating weather reports. It makes me chuckle a little bit.

I remember an elementary school childhood filled with recycling efforts, when the main focus of conservation was to SAVE THE RAINFORESTS. We had movies like Fern Gully, wore t-shirts that declared Earth Day is every day, and I knew all the words to the "Rainforest Rap."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4bNrIIe0bk.

There seems to be a new environmental scare for every generation, but none of the problems ever really get "solved". Does this mean the problems went away, or do we have environmental Attention Deficit Disorder? I fully support the efforts of conservationists and I believe in "being green". However, is it possible that things are just a little bit exaggerated?

I think that the major storms and recent climate changes could be caused by natural cyclical changes in weather patterns. I mean - I don't think the end of the Mesozoic Era was brought on by the blatant disregard to recycling or over use of sport utility vehicles by dinosaurs. There have been natural Earth wide changes in climate before, and there will continue to be in the future. Isn't it possible that we are just witnessing the change over from one climate era to another?

There is no going back, and as Earthlings, we should be more protective of our planet. But change is inevitable, and instead of blaming the litterbugs of the world for an increase in hurricane strength, maybe we should start working on methods of adaptation for the climates of the future.

Land of the Free (some restrictions may apply)

When I was an elementary school student, in the public school system, we stood proudly every morning and recited the Pledge of Allegiance with our hands over our hearts. In second grade we added to that ceremony by singing "This Land is Your Land". It was meant to instill in us a sense of pride for our country. We were also permitted a moment of silence each morning before beginning the day of learning. Some children prayed during this time, some stared at the ceiling, and others just stood with eyes closed enjoying the peace and quiet (the word "meditation" comes to mind). The point is that the choice of whether or not to dedicate that time to prayer was left up to us. Nobody implied that we should or shouldn't pray, and for those who did pray - there were no consequences.

Since my days of elementary school, the phrase "under God" has been removed from the public school version of the Pledge of Allegiance. The phrase was absent from the original version of the pledge, so I have no problem with its removal. What I do have a problem with, is the reasoning behind its removal and the changes in policy that came with it.

The fight to remove God from the pledge was headed by the atheist father of a young girl in California. He felt that the phrase "Under God" turns the Pledge of Allegiance into a profession of religion, and therefore, encroaches upon his daughter's rights as an American citizen. Enter the First Amendment. Amendment I of the Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

Since Congress was responsible for the addition of "Under God" to the pledge in the first place, it was a valid argument that the phrase violates the First Amendment.

Sticky lawsuits and court cases like this one strike the fear of being politically incorrect into the hearts of school administrators. So, it's out with religion altogether. Just the whisper of a religious phrase or acknowledgement of a religious belief may be grounds for teacher dismissal. While we're at it, we'd better get rid of the theory of Intelligent Design. We just won't mention the inconsistencies in the scientific theories of the origin of the universe. For all intensive purposes, God does not exist. So where does that leave us with the founding fathers and the whole reason for the Pilgrims' voyage to the New World? Should we eliminate the need for money to operate schools and purchase supplies? After all, every dollar we exchange displays the blatant proclamation, "In God We Trust".

Have we gone overboard?

We've censored and silenced the thoughts, beliefs, and prayers of millions and millions of American children, and all for the purpose of keeping one little atheist from feeling funny about the recital of a daily verse.

Let's look at the First Amendment one more time. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," so far so good, "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." Hmmm, I'm feeling a little prohibited. Maybe when my son is ready to enroll in school, I'll have to file my own complaint. If he decides to say a prayer before he eats his lunch every day, I don't want any little atheists making him feel funny about it!