Thank God, for a Christian Nation, were women are co-regents with their Beloved husbands. The Bible consents to women speaking publicly as long as they are dressed "modestly", of course.

The "Benefits of the Christian Religion" are especially to the women. Is it any wonder that the false religions hate and envy the United States. Our women are free, under the laws of God.

Do right, Follow God, and be counted as a Christian woman.

"One Nation under God"

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

We all know why these men do those savage things. it makes them feel powerful like a rapist. Men that treat women and children as described in the article are correctly called savages. Can we bring that term back to life? Stop calling them muslims, asians, africans or whatever with personality and developmental issues, and call them what they are and have always been: Savages.

Savages have to be conquered and brought up to speed with the rest of the modern world. They don't have any right to continue their behavior in the name of religion or culture.

If we are global now then let's be global. let's get it right. Modern powers with full equal rights need to get out there and conquer and re-educate.

Hey, just kidding, y'all go on back to your TV's now, and let the glow wash over you and calm you and you can forget about all this prickly things going on in the world around you...

Oddly, Mr Goldberg credits Feminists with railing against barbaric practices in other countries -- and there has been some protestation against female genital mutilation, for example -- but one of our major criticisms of the Left has been their near-total refusal to rip Islam for its brutal treatment of women. The Leftist activist who indignantly jabs the Christian bible for allegedly demeaning women turns a blind eye to the actual brutality against women that goes on all day long in the Muslim world. It's as though Political Correctness slapped a taboo on any criticism of Islam for any reason, so the Feminists largely skipped it.

It's astonishing to me that women in America will get out and protest against the hiring practices at some obscure factory in upstate NY, but they can't work up much outrage over stonings and other physical abuse that occurs routinely in Muslim countries. Perhaps they need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.

The original feminists, a hundred years ago, promoted lady-like behavior, motherhood, full time moms and decency in general. When modern feminists arose during the campaign for the ERA in the seventies they were all about brutish behavior, equality with men, bad language, abortion, male fashions, and sexual agression.

No they do not support their sisters in Muslim societies...they do not even support the millions of innocernt young women killed every year in this country. About half the babies and 100% of the moms who die during abortion proceedures are their 'sisters'.

It is a shame and disgrace that these abuses and mutilations happen, and how can you call a society that allows, even encourages, such behavior modern or progressive? And where is the outrage from the Feminists? Just wait til they find out that Muslim women are not allowed to have abortions, then you'll hear from the feminists. George Carlin once said, "When they talk about the right to choose, they're talking about *they're* right to choose which people live or die." Now, he was talking about the Gipper and his cabinet, but that is actually the true intent of the Liberal Left. They want to be the ones to decide who lives, who dies, who gets health care, who goes hungry. It's all about power, and power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely. Carlin said something else, shortly before he died, "I think we have the government we deserve. If you raise a generation of self-centered, egotistical narcissists, then that's the kind of politicians they become when they grow up."

Remember all the "Equal Rights Amendment" controversy in this Country?????? Equal Rights for who????? The "charade" that paraded as "rights for women" was a "tool" to destroy women and their high estate afforded to them in this Christian Nation.

American women have a Bill of Rights and always have, Under God. A Christian Nation maintains Men and Women, rule and reign together under the Laws of God, ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

It is "foreignism and bogus democracy" that introduced Lovely America to heathen cultures that are full of hate and destruction not just for women but good men.

All this was deliberately designed to remove US from our Beloved Foundations.

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

Ruth Ann,

I appreciate and admire your passion. However, there are a couple of things wrong with your statements.

First off, stop saying, "One nation under god," especially in all caps. That was an invention of McCarthyism and was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance in the 1950's. The Pledge itself wasn't penned until the late 1800's, so please stop using references to either to indicate your self-perceived awareness of American roots.

Secondly, American Christianity may have twisted the dogma of the Bible to fit whatever progressive agenda they needed to, but the fact of the matter is that, taken literally, the Christian texts advocate treating women in much the same was as the Koran.

Women have (at least nearly) equal rights in this country because women took a stand on the issue. They were able to take that stand because political and social environment in this country was one of growing sensitivity and tolerance. Nothing to do with god given divine rights.

What's happening in other countries to women is horrific and unacceptable, but don't act like it's because they don't believe in the same mythology as you. That is almost equally as barbaric.

Lastly, "For God and Country" is an ancient Latin saying with unknown origins, again not useful if you're trying to establish your patriotism and religious standing as a christian...

Not to detract in any way from the Feminist aspect of this article, but...

How many of you who are passing judgment on these cultures for their barbaric practices have or would have your baby boy circumcised?

Just because it's the cultural norm doesn't make it right. And that applies across the board.

I will use "One Nation Under God" as much as I like. It says exactly what I want it to say.

The way I understand the McCarthy hearings is the hearings were to "reveal" Communists, and I like that idea. I don't like Communists, they are atheists, they hate God and the Bible so if they are enemies of God, they are my enemies.

Where ever did you get the idea that Christianity and the Koran "treat women the same"????????? You evidently, do not read or know the Bible.

MYTHOLOGY - Are you equating the Bible with Mythology???????

If I like the term for "God & Country" and it expresses the definition of my life, I will use it.

Does that answer your criticism, young man????????????

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

Ruth Ann Wilson,

You've obviously reacted to Josh Fitch's criticism so there's no need to ask him whether or not you did, but you know full well you didn't answer his question.

Ruth Ann,

Thank you for your level and rational response. You have, at least, communicated your maturity level quite nicely.

You can use those phrases all you want to the detriment of others' impression of your education and awareness of historical and current events.

Yes, I am equating the Bible with mythology, as that's exactly what I believe it is. I recognize your right as an American to believe otherwise, and I expect the same from you, although, I rarely get that kind of reciprocity.

Exodus 21:7-10

Exodus 22:16-17

Leviticus 19:20-22

Leviticus 27:3-7 (really?)

Deuteronomy 22:20-21 (this sounds familiar...)

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

1 Samuel 18:25-27 (eww)

1 Corinthians 11:3-9

1 Corinthians 14:34-35

Ephesians 5:22-24

1 Timothy chapter 2

Now, bow before me, woman!!!

Let's be clear, I don't believe *any* of this nonsense...

You still haven't explained to me how the barbaric treatment of women in 3rd world countries is all that much different than continuing an ancient Jewish tradition of male genital mutilation in the U.S., "young lady."

Oh, I forgot to use repeated punctuation for emphasis throughout my response. Here is an assortment of punctuation that can be distributed throughout the above text as deemed necessary by the reader:

!!!!!!????????!!!!,,,,,,???!!!!""""""""""""''''::::::::;;;;;;;;###########@#$%^&*()_+=-

(Disclaimer: This is meant, generally, to be light banter. Any offensiveness is merely a by-product of my staunch realism, so deal with it.)

Oh, I forgot to address your misconception regarding McCarthyism.

"McCarthyism is the politically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence." -wikipedia.com

The McCarthy hearings are widely regarded as a political witch hunt. Identifying Communist sympathizers and traitors was important during the Cold War, but the nature of techniques used by McCarthy et al. are recognized as violations of Constitutional rights. Their value today is one of "how not to do things."

Mr Fitch, I don't mean to interrupt, since Ms Wilson is more than capable of defending herself, but your Left-wing misstatement of the McCarthy hearings is just wrong. I don't particularly care how they are "widely regarded," whether in the Leftist media or the Leftist academe.

If you'd like to read some non-Leftist accounts of McCarthy's crusade, feel free to pick up "A Conservative history of the American Left," "48 Liberal Lies about America," and "Patriot's History of America," just for starters. For an unbiased view of the matter, Robert Heinlein returned from a trip around the world in the midst of the McCarthy hearings and wrote about them from that perspective. His insights are both wise and quite refreshing.

If there's any quibble with McCarthy, it is correctly taken with his methods. His accusations were largely correct. The Left today denies there were any Communists, denies he revealed any, denies pretty much every material fact of the case, and denies he was correct. They paint him instead as a witch-hunting maniac who brought some sort of reign of terror down upon the nation, which is absurd.

FWIW, wikipedia is totally useless as a source on anything political due to their heavy bias toward the Left. Do you have any idea how much lobbying it took just to get them to correct a blatant falsehood in their entry for Ronald Reagan? Their "facts" concerning his lifeguard activities as a youngster, for example, are still seen listed in such places as IMDB.com. When I want to read about birds or digital photography, I include wikipedia as a resource, but they are outright dishonest when it comes to political issues.

Ah, mea culpa! I neglected to include the title of the Heinlein material in question. I believe it was near the end of his travelogue "Tramp Royale" that he discussed his impressions upon returning home to find the McCarthy hearings in full swing. He was dismayed that the American media was portraying McCarthy as a radical, since that angle was being picked up elsewhere and used as propaganda against us. Yet, he also felt that McCarthy's melodramatic methods certainly invited that sort of nonsense, even begged for it. He was no fan of McCarthy, and he was writing AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED. That's why I recommend it as a good source. Besides the whole book is an excellent peek into what travel was like, and what nations in the southern hemisphere were like, in the 1950s. Fascinating read!