“The more you believe it, the more you will see signs that it is true.” -- Old adage (if you can find a reference for this quote let me know)

The words get 5 stars, but the application gets no stars, i.e. nice words, but total hypocrisy in application. Unfortunately, it is a missing an "*", in that the nice words applied only to white men who were land-owning, Christian, and straight. In practice, others were simply excluded at that time in our history. The same criticism applies to nice words in our Declaration of Independence; nice words but hypocritical in application. Let us not forget our terrible history of injustice for so many Americans that were excluded by the tyrannical majority who wrote the nice words.

That is some of the most convoluted logic I have ever heard. A sad footnote in the story is the separation of slave families at the decree of the master. Slave wedding vows sometimes included "until death or distance do us part." Jefferson was an integral part of this sad chapter in American history, and will forever suffer in the eyes of history for his hypocrisy. No excuses wanted, just apology. I agree that Jefferson was great in some ways, but woefully deficient in others such as character.

E Archer -- If Jefferson wrote in his original draft of the Declaration of Independence the freeing of the slaves why did he not free those slaves under his control? Words are cheap; actions speak louder and may be costly which is why I classify this quote as hypocrisy in its purest form. Jefferson will forever suffer in the eyes of history for his hypocrisy on this issue. He put materialism above freedom and justice as long as he lived.

I agree that Jefferson did some great things (I particularly like his Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom) and was a good writer. However, in examining his writings you have to agree that when he wrote about freedom and justice he was a hypocrite, pure and simple. Unless that is, you consider Negros as sub-human to which these universal truths of freedom and justice do not apply. Perhaps Jefferson put the efficient running of his plantation above these universal truths. After all, the plantation had to be run to support Jefferson's appetite for goods and services, and Negroes were required to run it. Jefferson’s logic is pure Orwellian -- "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others."

Nice words but they ring very hollow (Jefferson being an owner of slaves and never freeing them), and seem to me the ultimate example of hypocrisy. To Mr. Jefferson I would counter with the words of a president whose actions lived up to his words: "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." -- Abraham Lincoln

Mike -- The next time you talk to your god please ask him to participate in the "The Greatest god in the Universe" contest. I and billions of others are potential converts to him. We just need him to again show his dazzling display of powers. There is rumor going around that your god is retired and spends all of his time at his condo in Boca and has no current interest in the universe or its workings. Pity, I still hope he decides to come out of retirement and again show his stuff that he once was given credit for. (I might add that the motives of the writers who reported this are somewhat suspect). He has been so silent for so many past centuries. Please ask him to participate. I am pulling for him because he seems to be more rational (except for some very bad behavior in the Old Testament) than most of the other gods who are expected to enter. I hope they do poorly in the contest. The universe just does not need more crazies running around in a theocratic frenzy shouting messages of hate. I like your god's approach to that one -- except he definitely needs to get over that jealous streak. Many consider that a character flaw of his.

Robert and Mike -- I now define a third category/religion/philosophy to go along with two categories -- "believer" and "non-believer." I define it as the new religion "contest watcher," who will carefully watch the results of the "The Greatest god in the Universe" contest. You are the first to hear about this new religion which I just founded, and I am sure you will want to convert to it you will be numbers #2 and #3 on the roll. The only requirement (no dues or contribution accepted -- that is a switch) is that you be ■watchers of the upcoming contest,■ and then eagerly await any of the universe's gods putting on a dazzling display of power that will convert all followers of all other religions to this god. This stunning display will make this god "The Greatest god in the Universe." Mike -- let your god know the contest is coming so he/she/it (arbitrarily I will refer to your god as a he) can be working on the fine tuning his display of power that will convert followers of all other religions. I understand that your god wants everyone believe in him and ■have no other gods before him.■ Now his chance is coming in a definitive contest. Stay tuned for the contest rules. He should find this to be "slam dunk' if he is as powerful and mighty as you seem to feel.

Judith, what you are referred to are observations not a proof. It goes to the issue of association vs. causation. A often quoted example is "the rooster crows every morning and then the sun comes up - therefore the rooster's crowing is causing the sunrise every morning." This is testable by removing the rooster and seeing that the sun still comes up. It is essential to separate personal beliefs from logic and evidence. Most scientists believe that man created god, not that god created man. The recent book "Evolution of God" by Robert Wright gives some good historical insights into this evolution. I believe you would enjoy it.

jim k, I love your analogy about the fire department -- it gets 5 stars from me. I also like your proposed plan of action; it might actually provide some results. Mike, I believe there are laws in the universe that are yet undiscovered. I keep an "ESP log" for unexplained events (such as -- I was looking up a phone number on my Rolodex for a person I had not talked to in months, and as I was looking up the number, the phone rang and it is was that that person). I have had dozens of these experiences over the years and had two just last week. Is it coincidence or causation? I am open to all explanation; but ask -- what is the evidence for each explanation? Beliefs do not count, only evidence counts. There may be a god but I prefer to think in terms of "undiscovered laws of the universe." I am devising a contest "The Greatest god in the Universe" -- stay tuned for the rules. With this contest we can have concrete proof for the existence of god. The winner will be considered so great and so powerful that believers from every other religion will be converted to this "contest-winning god." However, I suspect that no god of any religion or culture will show his/her/its overwhelming power and glory and win the contest. As a searcher for truth I am very open to being converted based on the clear winner of the proposed contest. Stay tuned.

Nancy, good thoughts -- however, if there is a god, he/she/it is clearly not into micromanagement. Thus, I believe your prayers are for no useful purpose other than their "placebo effect" that would apply only to your own limited universe.

Perhaps the "if you can keep it" has come -- the United States today can more logically be considered a 'military-industrial-congressional complex' rather than a 'republic' as warned by President Eisenhower in his farewell address: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY (He apparently dropped the term 'congressional' from his earlier versions of this warning.)

Mike, your comment about DNA evidence and evolutionary theory is not supported by the scientific evidence. For many years evolutionary relationships were based on the fossil record and many other criteria. These were were usually incomplete and needed many assumptions. However, phylogenetic trees based on DNA and RNA sequence data now provide convincing evidence on man's evolutionary history and confirm man's evolutionary relationships based on the previous data. However, many other 'supposed evolutionary relationships' have needed to be abandoned based on these same DNA and RNA sequence data. That is what the Huxley quotation is saying so eloquently. Another relevant quote from a favorite philosophical tome that is perhaps also dear to your heart "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." -- King James translation of the Bible, 1st Corinthians 13:11. Also relevant to this discussion about bias v. fact: "Every man has the right to be wrong in his opinions. But no man has a right to be wrong in his facts." -- Bernard Baruch

Huxley, was known as "Darwin's bulldog" because of his tireless efforts in defending Darwin’s theory of evolution to the masses. Huxley is referring to the scientific method which was often in conflict with religion. In this quote he was saying that religious dogma about the earth and its inhabitants must be given up when in conflict with convincing scientific evidence. A large percentage of Americans still believe in "creationism" versus “evolution” in spite of overwhelming scientific evidence. They might as well believe in witchcraft, tiny green men, and angels. A similar quote is "Truth, in its struggles for recognition, passes through four distinct stages. First, we say it is damnable, dangerous, disorderly, and will surely disrupt society. Second, we declare it is heretical, infidelic and contrary to the Bible. Third, we say it is really a matter of no importance either one way or the other. Fourth, we aver that we have always upheld it and believed it." -- Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915)

I propose an edit of the first sentence from "The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people" to "The federal government has taken too much tax money from the poor and middle class and not enough from the wealth ..."

Mike, nice try, but I believe your logic is faulty. Two additional thoughts: "No state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" -- The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states. “Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." -- Abraham Lincoln

A good recent example is the slim majority of 52% of California voters who denied marriage equality to a large group of its citizens. "In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me." -- Reverend Martin Niemoeller