John Riddle | Arkansas news, politics, opinion, restaurants, music, movies and art

John Riddle 
Member since Sep 11, 2014

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »


Recent Comments

Re: “Little Rock School District sets announcement; includes deal on building for West Little Rock middle school

With 3 schools in a 2 mile stretch in this area and a Cantrell road that is 10 years ahead of its projected traffic volume, adding another school in this finite area would be amazingly idiotic.
I expect the planning commission to endorse the proposal 100%

5 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by John Riddle on 10/01/2015 at 4:45 PM

Re: “State asks Judge Griffen to step down from Little Rock school lawsuit

The man is close personal friends with John Walker and has a history of less-than-desirable rulings.
The JV team needs to sit this one out

6 likes, 14 dislikes
Posted by John Riddle on 03/03/2015 at 7:47 AM

Re: “What price football at Arkansas State University?

^^^ given the inability to debate the issues and propensity for name calling! I suspect Reynelda is a hard leftie.

5 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by John Riddle on 09/11/2014 at 9:41 PM

Re: “What price football at Arkansas State University?

A couple of player put a cross on their helmet and everyone starts going crazy. In an age where people have tons of pride but little humility, is was refreshing to see kids take initiative and remember their team members.

looking at history, it's time to put "the Seperation of Church & State" back into perspective (with a little help from the internet). Need I remind everyone that our nation was predicated on unalienable rights with governance through family, church and community, each rightfully sovereign within its sphere.

Human dignity, legal equality and personal freedom reflect biblical values imparted on Western Civilization, which retains these values in secular form while expunging their Author from public discourse.

“Separation of church and state” is not stated anywhere in our founding documents
the establishment clause that grants "separation of church and state," preventing--for example--a government-funded Church of the United States from coming into being. Only radicals like Ginsberg, Pelosi, Breyer, and Souter agree with the radical “separationism’ view of the Establishment clause.

I also think this is where Max and his radical followers get it all wrong. Our rights are not granted by law, they are inherent (This includes the 2nd Amendment - the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed).

> Accommodationism is the centrist view which would allow such displays as long as it treats all religions equally and does not show preferential treatment.

> Preferentialism appears to be what the Founding Father intended. This view prevents a literal Church of America from being created and does not prevent the government from explicitly endorsing Christianity.

The preamble in Act Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia (1786), affirms that “the Author of our Religion gave us our ‘free will.’” And that He “chose not to propagate it by coercions.” This legislation certainly did not diminish religious influence on government for it also provided stiff penalties for conducting business on the Sabbath.
Nor did the Constitution inhibit public displays of faith. At ratification, a majority of the thirteen several and sovereign states maintained official religions.

That’s right – States maintain official religons,…

The early Republic welcomed public worship. Church services were held in the U.S. Capitol and Treasury buildings every Sunday. The imagery in many federal buildings remains unmistakably biblical.
The day after the First Amendment’s passage, Congress proclaimed a national day of prayer and thanksgiving. The inaugural Congress was largely comprised by those who drafted the Constitution.

It reflects incredible arrogance to reconfigure the Bill of Rights into prohibiting religious displays on public grounds. Hanging the Ten Commandments on the wall of a county courthouse no more mandates religion than judges displaying the banner of their favorite sports team somehow equates to Congress establishing that team as preeminent.
Our forefathers never sought to evict the church from society. They recognized that the several states did not share uniform values. We lived and worshipped differently. The framers were a diverse bunch with wildly divergent opinions on many issues, but eliminating the very foundations of America’s heritage would have horrified them. On few issues was there more unanimity.

Schools, courts and the public square were often overtly Christian and had been since their colonial beginnings. Few Americans would have tolerated a coercive central government infringing on their rights to post religious symbols on local schools, courts or anywhere else.

Alexis de Tocqueville observed that Americans intertwined individual liberty with vibrant faith. “It is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.”
Even non-Christian founders thought religion essential. None would have wished to upend the very basis for education, law or culture.
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 states: “Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.”

George Washington believed, “Religion and morality are indispensible supports” for “it is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.”
Jefferson later stated that, what communities did and how they worshipped were not federal affairs. Jefferson later said the central government was “interdicted from intermeddling with religious institutions.” Such were state matters.

Thus the Constitution decreed that Washington had no occasion or authority to interject itself into matters as obviously local as doctrines of faith. Congress was not empowered to establish a church because the framers feared that concentrated power, whether favored religions, standing armies, banking monopolies, or an overarching federal government, invited tyranny.

Church and state were distinct in that the Federal Government could not elevate one denomination over others. Nor could government and its flawed inhabitants usurp divine authority by harnessing politics to the church. Faith is no civil contract, but a personal matter not to be profaned by politics.

The framers of the Constitution witnessed the ongoing wars of the mother continent and understood official churches and centralized power corrupted. Having two or three competing factions spurred struggles between the parties to secure power, but divesting authority to innumerable smaller jurisdictions without the prospect of any gaining control promoted peaceful freedom.

Limitations on government have been altered into restrictions on religious expression, which clearly violates the amendment’s next clause: “prohibiting the free exercise thereof” and third clause “abridging the freedom of speech.” Meanwhile, Our feckless leadership in Washington publicly imposes politically correct secular religions like worshiping diversity or the environment.

Recently, Supreme Court decisions indicate that there may be a gradual shift to a mild accommodationist position in the coming years with respect to private school vouchers, federal funding for faith-based charities, and symbolic or historical affirmations of religious heritage (such as "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, or "in God we trust" on currency).

11 likes, 17 dislikes
Posted by John Riddle on 09/11/2014 at 4:17 PM


© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation