Day: July 4, 2002

To celebrate the Fourth, the Blogosphere had dueling Founding Fathers history lessons — both of which are well worth reading.
First, provides an interesting story of the failed efforts of Ben Frankllin to bring prayer into the first Constitutional Convention. Contrasting this with President Bush’s recent attempt to invoke the Founding Fathers to justify prayer in governmetn life, Tim sayeth:
… the historical fact, which no amount of wishing and hoping can change, is that the record is mixed at best regarding prayer by The Founders. And at the time of the drafting of the document by which we conduct our political lives, the Constitution, the choice was not to pray each and every day.
In contrast, Howard Owens at Global News Watch, reminds us that the Declaration of Independence did put God very much at the center of American life, and sees in that fact valuable context in which to frame the current Pledge debate (along the way asking some pointed questions about the future of democracy in Afghanistan and other recovering nations):
In the aftermath of the Pledge ruling, we’ve heard in various commentaries that The Declaration of Independence, which makes several references to God, is not “a legal document.”
This is a true statement. The Declaration is not law. It is more than that. It is an encapsulation of the founding principles of this nation. It is sacred text. We should not look on it for legal precepts, but we should use it in guiding all of our legal decisions. Any legal ruling that contradicts the Declaration shakes the very foundation of our land and subverts the intentions of our Founders.
The Declaration does not establish religion, but it acknowledges divinity. This tradition, so much a part of this country throughout its growth from colonial backwater to world superpower, is very much an explanation for “under God” in the Pledge. Regardless of the history of the Pledge, and when “under God” was added, the addition was very much in keeping with the Declaration’s proposition, we are protected by Divine providence.
Great stuff from both sides, and there’s more than just my little quotes. Go read the rest.

Thanks to for pointing me at a most interesting proposal from Oliver Letwin in the U.K. Telegraph, in which he proposes that a “liberty test” be applied to any new law being proposed:
My suggestion is that each piece of legislation should have to be accompanied by an explicit, detailed and reasoned statement from the sponsoring minister, explaining how that piece of legislation will affect the liberties of the individual. The idea for such a test for legislation came out of the Free Country conference in London in May, which was sponsored by The Daily Telegraph.
A requirement for such a statement would have two principal effects. First, it would compel civil servants, when preparing legislation, to consider the effects on our liberty and would thereby prompt discussion of those effects between civil servants and ministers before the legislation was introduced to a wider audience.
It should come as no surprise to TTLB readers that I think this is a splendid idea, particularly given my recent rantings on how freedom is an excellent basis for a consistent and workable moral code.
Letwin also notes how (in his view, at least) the Tory’s have historically been the party to defend the liberty of the individual in the U.K. I find it a shame that their American counterparts in the Republican party have failed in recent times to similiarly recapture their historic grounding as defenders of freedom. (Party of Lincoln and all that, let’s recall… )

It’s Independence Day for us here in the United States of America, of course.
And to celebrate, TTLB is — for the moment — enforcing a policy of pursuing only frivolous matters this morning. No deep thought from this bear on his holiday!
But one brief exception, to sum up my sentiments of the day. I shant quote the Declaration of Independence, nor the words of our Founding Fathers: take a quick tour around the Blogosphere; you’ll find many fine bloggers have already beaten me to that.
I wish and hope simply this: that on this day, Americans all recognize and remember that we are the inheritors of the greatest experiment in freedom and liberty ever to grace this planet. The torch was lit 226 years ago, fed by sparks that burned dimly and sometimes brightly for hundreds and thousands of years before that. And it has been passed down from generation to generation, coming to reside — but not rest — in our grasp. What we do with it is up to us.
We are not the sole keepers of this flame; and that is part of its beauty. The American ideal, at its purest and most honest, is not about nation; it is not about country or land or borders. It is about ensuring that, as Lincoln said, no man need be a slave; and no man need be a master. It is about freedom.
And so, to my visitors today from Belgium, from Brazil and Japan and Finland; from Israel and New Zealand and Canada and Norwary; from Germany and Yugoslavia and Demark and Australia and the Netherlands and Greece, from every nation across the globe and yes, even from Great Britain itself, I pose to you the reverse of the declaration John Kennedy made so famously in Berlin:
“All free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words ‘Ich bin ein Berliner.’ ”
On this day, I say to you that all free men everywhere are indeed citizens of America. And I ask you to join us in celebrating our Independence Day.

OK, to all those kind folks who have been on the opposite side of the ‘Pledge’ argument as this bear, here’s your big chance to sweep right past that little issue and win the bigtime: convince me that there is, indeed, a God.
If there is a kind and benevolent deity watching over us all, then rumor from Ain’t-It-Cool-News will prove true, and become reality:
News hit these green shores this morning which seems to solves the problems of the world – or at least a few sci-fi franchises.
On one hand, The BBC want to continue ‘Doctor Who’ but up the budgets, which isn’t feesable without an American audience.
On the other hand, Anthony Stewart Head wants to spend time in the U.K with his family, but loves the cult audience that ‘Buffy The Vampire Slayer’ brings him. With t Whedon and the BBC STILL to announce a date for ‘Watcher’ ‘Giles’ or ‘Ripper’ – he may have found the perfect answer…
in a feat of impreccable casting, someone decided to put those hands together and consider something that makes this fanboy sign in post-orgasmic fullfillment: Giles taking on The Daleks!!!
Giles and Doctor Who?
Yes, please!
(PS – Yes, I am a ranting fanbear; get over it… what, I’m only allowed to post about horrible diseases and deep arguments on the nature of our society? Phlpht! to that…)

From
The Bear Necessities? It’s “silly season” in the mainstream press at the moment, and Bibendum is no exception. Apparently villagers in Dobratic in Bosnia have had a young bear living in the meadow close to the village since hunters killed his mother. The villagers have fed him and according to locals he is so tame that you can sit down and enjoy a beer with him without fear that he will turn aggressive. However, the bear, named Mrki, has been tricked into going on the wagon when people grew tired of his drunken ‘singing’ after finding half-drunk cans left over by the locals.
According to village coffee shop owner Tadija Sugic “It got to the stage of him drinking up to 20 cans of beer a day and getting drunk. We tried to give him soft drinks like cola and orange, but he just didn’t like them so we decided to trick him with non-alcoholic beer – and it’s worked a treat. He loves it.”
It’s a damned shame this is happening in Bosnia, not Germany. ‘Cause what with the Germans’ new laws on animal rights, I think there’d be a fine lawsuit here.
Non-alchoholic beer for a bear! It’s … unnatural.
Update: Jeff at Protein Wisdom points us to information showing us why this will be a very healthy bear!