LaRae Meadows’ blog

In Red Cliff (Chi bi), the people of China’s southlands face a power-hungry Prime Minister bent on taking over the entire country.   Compelling story telling, exquisite visuals, and captivating battle scenes weave together to create a brilliant cinematic tapestry.

After conquering the entire Chinese northlands in the name of the Emperor, ambitious and ruthless General Cao Cao (Fengyi Zhang), who appoints himself Prime Minister, sets his eyes on the southland.  In order to get there, he has to enter the territory protected by Liu Bei (Yong Yu).  Desperate to protect the lives of his people, Liu Bei asks his strategist, Zhuge Liang (Takeshi Kaneshiro) to ask the leader of the southern province Zhou Yu (Tony Leung Chiu Wai) for help.  When it’s impossible to ignore the realities, Zhou Yu decides to join the fight against Cao Cao.  They make their stand at Red Cliffs, their stronghold.

The plot flows like water from a pitcher.  The writers, Chan Khan, Kuo Cheng, Sheng Hyu, and writer-director John Woo chose the speed and temperature of the water.  As the audience sits and watches the story unfold, they can feel the warmth of the characters, the crashing of the shields and the cool calm of strategy.  There isn’t much emotion they can’t extract from the audience.  At one point I found myself with my mouth wide open, sitting on the edge of my seat, my heart pounding, and my eyes furrowed.

The costuming adds incredible depth to the film.  The elite are so clean, their clothing flowing and regal.  The soldiers’ uniforms are cheap and dirty looking.  The soldiers’ shields glimmer in the beginning of battles and dull at the end.   The subtle changes in costuming as the story moves on gives the movie depth and makes the story believable, because the unconscious red flags are not going off.

Woo takes the time introduce the ideas of formations, discipline and tactics to the watcher.  They don’t just out-fight the enemy, they out-think them.  He has enough respect for the audience that he is willing to cut them in on the how, as much as the what and why.

The war heroes in the story aren’t supernatural, they aren’t magical; they are just extraordinary men doing extraordinary things.  Their hand to hand combat is noticeably better than all the rest of the soldiers but it doesn’t cross the line into fantasy.

The martial arts in Red Cliff kick ass.  (Ok, I had to.)  I found myself dodging spears, stepping left and right to avoid northern soldiers.  Everyone who takes up most of the frame in any battle sequence knows how to get the audiences’ heart rate up.  Heck, there is even a man who mows through horses like a dwarf – and that will make perfect sense once you see the movie.

There’s real humor in Red Cliff too.  It is obvious that Woo doesn’t throw it in there just for the sake of making the story funny, but that even in little slices of life, like those in Red Cliff, life presents little bits of humor.  In order to make a complete story, even a war story, humor must be present.

Girly-girls will enjoy the sensual and romantic aspects of the film.  More non-traditional women will enjoy the active role women play.  There are two women in the movie, one with unrestrained femininity and one tomboy.  Both do their part for the war.

The battle scenes captivate, not only because of the graphic violence but because of the subtle emotion, steely strategy and attention to visual details.   Do not miss this movie.  It’s worth the time to go to the small-run theater and see this film.  Man or woman, old or young, everyone will enjoy this masterpiece.

Twilight:  New Moon is a 14 year old girl’s dream movie.  It reminded me of the romances I had as a teenager – a wreck.

Something happened before Twilight: New Moon began, what that was, the audience doesn’t know.  It’s obvious there is a romance between Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) and they really love each other.  Oh yeah, and Edward is a vampire but we never actually see him chew on anyone so we know that because…they told us so.  All of the sudden, Edward leaves Bella unprotected from Victoria (Rachelle Lefevre) but it’s not clear why.  The whole Cullen family is there, but I don’t know why they matter.  Then Edward get sad.  There is Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) who Bella leads on for most of the movie.  He has a dark secret.  Then Bella, Jacob and Edward do some stuff and get ready for the next movie.  Uhm, that’s like…pretty  much it.

Now before you ask me, “Didn’t you see the original?”, no I didn’t and that shouldn’t matter.   I have a ten buck rule.  If I have to pay ten bucks, it better be worth ten bucks. If I have to pay to rent the movie before, and then pay to see the movie, it’s not worth it.  Each movie, even a sequel, has to have a beginning, middle, and an end.  Twilight is one hundred percent middle.  It’s insulting to the audience that they can’t be bothered to put together an entire movie.

The one plus side is there is a pack of half naked hunky-boys that run around the forest.  Unfortunately for me, they are playing teenaged kids, so it’s hard to think of them of as sexy little beef cakes without feeling dirty.

What they do put together is a slapdash bit of soap opera drama.  There is no real drama, no real romance, no tension, no real danger, not much of anything.  The only thing is has in spades is intense eye contact.

They stare at each other from afar.  They stare at each other up close.  Their eyes dart back and forth.  Their eyes melt.  They go cold.  They open wide.  They close.  In extreme cases, they turn away.  I’m going to watch the out-takes on the DVD because I will bet dollars to doughnuts there are moments where the actors couldn’t hold it together when they were close and staring at each other and started to break up laughing.  It will probably be the most entertaining part of the DVD.

There’s just nothing to Twilight: New Moon.  There’s no plot and horrible acting.  There is certainly nothing worth watching.

In 2012, the world sinks into… the world.  A ridiculous, nonsensical, pseudo-comedic bit of film making, 2012 made me wish for the end of the world.

Metamorphosing gamma rays zingalinged the subterranean super magma in the core of the earth, when the sun had a temper tantrum and mutated the falafel crust.   Meanwhile, writer and limo driver, nearly dead-beat father Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) takes his children camping in Yellowstone.  While there, the kid’s mother, Kate (Amanda Pete), is one of the first affected by the rutabaga tectonic changes in the earth.  As the earth begins to collapse, Jackson struggles to save his children, his ex wife, and her husband.  They meet Caesars Palace and Bentley Automobiles along the way.

Don’t believe that’s the plot?  Well, too bad.  The writers Roland Emmerich (also the director) and Harald Kloser didn’t bother to try to make sense with the science.  They just string scientific words together and hoped no one would be smart enough to notice.   Why not just say my grandma’s whirly-gig collection set in motion a series of earthquakes and tsunami’s that was powerful enough to wipe away all life?  Or a team of butterfly enthusiasts trained butterflies to flap at the same time?  That would make far more sense than the plot they offered up.

2012 gave me tendonitis in my jaw from overuse in two hours and forty minutes.   Just when you think it will be a good old fashioned action movie, it becomes a tongue in cheek comedy.  I spent the entire movie putting a tongue in my cheek, taking it out, grinding my teeth, putting it in, taking it out, grinding, in, out, grinding.  (I’ll stop there because it’s beginning to sound a bit pornographic.)  

If the push-pull wasn’t enough in theme, the film makers did it again with the plot.  A good portion of the movie revolves around taking off, launching, peeling out, landing, parking or docking.  The size of the cars, planes, boats, and ships changed, but the action is the same.  Generally, the characters are saying, “Oh no, can we get to the (insert mode of transportation here) before the (select one: a. ground shifts underneath our feet, killing us when we are crunched in the core of the earth or b. fire comes from the sky and lands on our mode of transportation and burns us alive, or c. a sudden influx of water swirls around us, drowning us around our family) and the people who are relying on us.”  Then they revel in the fact that they did in fact catch that (insert mode of transportation here), until they have to land it in a tenuous place.  The only variation on the back and forth theme is the occasional awkward love related scene, be it romantic love, parental love or estranged love.  Even this variation runs on a loop through 2012.

The special effects can’t live up to their name, either.  They are just bad enough to make them seem artificial.  They reminded me of those plastic trees that are almost good enough to pass for the real thing, but can’t, and it makes the person viewing them feel a bit stupid for almost falling for it.  

Most infuriating about 2012 was the shameless and endless plot rewrites to fit the product placement and product features.  Ceasars Palace in Las Vegas is as essential to the plot as their stop there.  Yet we have to see chips, billboards, and hotel signs with their name and logo on it over and over and over again.  Bentley bought extended prime marketing spots in the film.  We see the logo, the characters say the name repeatedly, the writers don’t even try to pretend it isn’t product placement.

2012 is the longest 2 hours and forty minutes in recent memory.  I might have been less exhausted if I had actually lived through this tragedy.  I’m off to massage my jaw and cry a little bit for the loss of life in the theater – mine.  

Over the past few weeks I've been talking with Skeptical Inquiry Magazine about writing reviews for skeptics on their website. I'm elated to say the kinks have been worked out and it's official; I'm their voice in the dark (theater).  This is a fantastic opportunity for me to write for people like me and I couldn't be more excited that it is with SI. It's more than a little embarassing how much I've been dancing around my house, the store, in bed, at the DMV, and in my car.

This is a huge opportunity for me, no only because this jumps me from strictly online reviews to potentially print but it also puts my foot in the door to write about things that really matter to me in the future.  I am by far the most average person at the magazine, which is mostly written by phd's, professors, and well respected scientists, etc.  It essentially spring boards me into a new league of both writers and skeptics.  It is an amazing jump in status, credibility and opportunity.   I'm psyched.

I hope you read some of my reviews or even subscribe to the magazine.  

http://www.csicop.org/publications

Animated and in 3D, Charles Dickens’ beloved holiday story, A Christmas Carol, spills onto screens again.  A garish demonstration of the capabilities of the new 3D technology, the story only pops out when it possesses an opportunity to show off the technology.

Scrooge (Jim Carrey) is a miserly old man who holds tight each penny in his pocket.  After his business partner, Marley (Gary Oldman) dies, Scrooge loses all perspective, turning even surlier than he was before.  Devoid of all Christmas spirit, Scrooge tries to drain the spirit out of everyone around him.  The spirits of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come (All voiced and drawn to look like Jim Carrey) warn him about the consequences of inhospitality and holding on to his money too tightly.  

Robert Zemeckis should hold his head in shame for such a disgusting display of technology driven plot.  He both “wrote” and “directed” this version of “A Christmas Carol.”  A responsible director-writer would make Marley, the Spirits and Scrooge feel like they within hands reach by re-arranging the 3D to places in the plot that are enhanced by the extra dimension.   Instead, he created a masturbatory mess.  

The plot is carved back to the bare minimum and stripped of all opportunity to connect with the audience emotionally.  In fact, Zemeckis relies heavily on that fact that A Christmas Carol is so ubiquitous that he commits the sin of Cliff’s Notes.  Taken on its face, having no prior knowledge of A Christmas Carol, a viewer would see it as shallow and infuriating.  The plot is replaced with scenes meant to show off the remarkable 3D technology.  3D Scenes drone on twice as long as the plot they are supposed to enhance.  The floor drops away, fingers are pointed at the audience, and characters are dangled from different angles.  In fact, no opportunity to sacrifice the plot for the technology was missed.

Even still, the 3D is so good, it might have been fun to watch this tech demo if the voice acting was varied, interesting and sincere.  It wasn’t.  Jim Carrey plays Scrooge in all five stages of his life, as well as the Ghost of Christmas Past, Present and Future and he does it terribly.  Scrooge lacks any depth, has no resonance, all changes seen seem forced and shallow.  The Ghost of Christmas Past can only be appreciated by a herpetologist or a speech pathologist and I am neither of those.  The Ghost of Christmas Present’s insipid laughter made me consider leaving the theater, but that would mean abandoning my mother-in-law in her seat, and even I’m not that mean.  The only saving grace in Carrey’s performance is that the Ghost of Christmas Future barely talks.

Radio Disney brought teams of children to see A Christmas Carol at the press screening I attended.  There were scenes that frightened the tiny so badly that they began to cry, scream and cuddle up in the arms of their mothers.  There were times during A Christmas Carol I considered jumping into my mother-in-law’s lap and cry like a baby.

This may go down as a rumble worthy topic at family holiday parties because my hubby’s-mummy liked A Christmas Carol.  I suggest instead of wasting money seeing such a despicable waste of a classic story, spend the same money seeing the play at a local theater.  

Marvelous reckless abandon in Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant, falls prey to an invisible, ill timed hand of meaningless restraint.  The restraint is not only unnecessary, it puts a lampshade over the brilliance in this movie.  

Goodie-two-shoes Darren Shan (Chris Massoglia) and his bad influence friend Steve (Josh Hutcherson), sneak off to attend Cirque du Freak, a traveling freak show.  Amongst the standard freak show staples is a beautiful dancing spider, Octa owned by Larten Crepsley (John C. Reilly) and Darren is instantly hooked.  His obsession with the spider leads him down a path that changes his life forever.

I don’t know if writers Paul Weitz and Brian Helgeland were fighting with the studio or with each other, but there is an obvious push-pull in Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant which leaves the viewer with whiplash.  There are times during Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant that I felt I was watching inspired film making.  At other times, the inspiration is sucked into a vacuum of despair.

 As is the theme with Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant often, the conversations bounce between freakishly hysterical, and, not a moment later, is so bad the entire audience groaned, out loud while slapping their foreheads in disbelief.  Literally.
 At times, visuals were creative, interesting, glittering and spectacular.  The exaggerated sets and stunts are almost enough to make me giggle like a little girl. Just as quickly as the child-like snickering came, it disappeared, and all that was left were loud colors and dreadful purple lighting dimly illuminating half-developed characters.

It may not have even been that the colors were dreadful, but that the scenes lasted way too long.  Every aspect of Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant lingered on screen long beyond its expiration date.  In fact, each exaggerated aspect takes up so much time, the filmmakers didn’t have time to include a complete plot.  They ended the movie somewhere around the middle of the plot, without a real climax and while leaving the door open for a sequel.  

Cirque du Freak – The Vampire’s Assistant strives to satisfy one’s senses of whimsy, adventure, and fantasy with a bit of cinematic candy but the filmmakers leave it in the mouth so long, it becomes nothing more than a gag.  

How the History of Credit Cards Matters to the Future of Health Care
Interstate politics, federal regulation and oversight can teach us which direction we should go in, which we need to avoid and provides much needed wisdom to the discussion.
http://www.associatedcontent.comarticle/2190289/how_the_history_of_credit_cards_matters.html

Even motivational speakers can be stricken with bouts of insecurity and Burke is no different.  Love Happens’ flat main characters are almost saved by complex and well portrayed secondary characters who steal the scenes whenever they are on screen.

After the death of his wife, Burke (Aaron Eckhart) shares his grief with other people who have lost their loved ones by creating a self help program called A-Okay!  While traveling to Seattle for a conference, he meets the beautiful and interesting florist Eloise (Jennifer Aniston) and is instantly struck by her.  It isn’t until she sees his interaction with the conference goers that she becomes interested in return.  One of the conference goers, Walter (John Carroll Lynch), is drowning in the depths of his grief.  Neither Walter nor Burke will admit the extent of the help that they need.

The writing in Love Happens left me feeling jerked about without regard for brain injury that might occur.  One minute Burke and Eloise are engaged in a tedious banter of blossoming romance that could make even the most determined insomniac nod off and make the rest of us grind our teeth.  Just a second later, there is a poignant interaction between Walter and Burk that reduces the audience to tears.  Then, out of nowhere, comes a scene with Burke’s agent, Lane Fucking Marshall (Dan Fogler), that made me want to poke myself in the eye with a coffee stirrer.

In fact, if Love Happens had been exclusively about the emotional struggle that Burke suffered after his wife’s death and the relief he finds from his clients, it might have been a powerful and moving story with lasting impact.  Writers Brandon Camp and Mike Thompson couldn’t leave well enough alone and slapped in an unnatural, ineffective, emotionless, pseudo-love-story that turned me off to everything else.

It wasn’t just a failure of writing; Aaron Eckhart and Jennifer Aniston lack the chemistry necessary to make the struggle between the two believable or even palatable.  Individually they don’t reach an emotional tentacle out to the audience whenever a secondary character isn’t on screen.

By far the best performance in Love Happens is John Carroll Lynch as the devastated father who lost his son and everything else.  He reached into my chest and stole my breath and at times I thought my heart actually tore in two.  His story felt so real it was almost tangible and his tears made my shirt wet.  

Those moments of deep emotion and undeniably monotonous scenes are sandwiched between endless, unabashed, unashamed brand placement.  Eloise obviously works in a florist shop, not because it’s relevant to the story, but because it is a great way to get a huge floral network’s brand in front of the right audience at least ten times during the movie.  Burke stays at a nice hotel, not because it’s the best hotel in town, but because we can see their brand all over every wall, in every conference room and in every hallway, even though it adds nothing to the story.

I’d rather watch a ten minute short movie about Burke, Walter and their struggle through grief than a two hour movie that is 90% filler, flowers, marketing and cuddles.  On the plus side, your vocabulary will come out bigger than when it went in, if you ignore my warnings and go to this movie anyways.

There are few things that can get under my skin like the education system in America. We do not do enough to teach our kids about the real wonders in the world through logical inspection and we fail miserably to teach them to respect or understand history. Schools that respect the secular requirements of our government fail to impart the importance of these subjects. What education are we denying children when they are educated by a school district that makes “belief in god” a goal in their mission statement?

Lake Local School District in Ohio dismissed the constitution, and the history it is based on, and wrote in their mission statement, “belief in god” as a goal for their students. Not only is this illegal, it is intellectual negligence on the part of the school district.

It’s imperative that American students understand why the First Amendment was written and the continuous reinforcement of its wisdom that has happened since its ratification. It is impossible for a school district properly impart that knowledge when it thumbs its nose at the law it has the duty to teach.

I’m not the only one to notice the failure of the Ohio education system in the area of history. The 2006 report from Fordham Institute on education excellence gave Ohio a D for their Social Studies Content Standards which covers United States History.

I can only guess what the science curriculum of a school district which pushes belief in god looks like, but in order to meet their goal of “belief in god”, there must be academic skimming taking place. Any conversation about the scientific method must be free of any god slant or it’s not the scientific method. It is impossible to critically examine the world with the presupposition that god exists. When there is a conflict between god and science, which wins when belief in god is a stated value of the school district?

It’s the responsibility of everyone who cares about the education of our children, as well as the future of our society, to take seriously these incursions into the academic system. Slipping the children of Ohio into a dark age is not just disastrous for them. It’s disastrous for all of us.

Having pockets of populations that are less education than others in the same country can not only lead to government issues, but it can lead to exploitation of the people of lesser education. School districts that allow religion to influence their teachings have higher teen pregnancy, teen STD, and dropout rates. Due to the gaps in their education, they are more vulnerable to financial predators, religious exploitation, and exploitation in personal relationships. They also lack perspective to vote in their best interest and the best interest of the country.

A school district that disregards their duty to their pupils should not be met with simple silence. They need to have the consequences ring in their ear. We, as caring, involved citizens need to speak out for the health and well-being of these children. We must tell the Lake Local School District that their unethical, illegal, immoral behavior has not gone unnoticed and will be met with the resistance it deserves.

I already wrote the Lake Local School District, my letter is below. Please take the time to click the link at the end of this article and write a polite but passionate letter to the Lake Local School District. Together we can apply the pressure to stop the intellectual hemorrhaging in Lake Local School District.

Contact Lake Local School District

Hello Lake Local School District,

It disappoints me whenever I hear about an elected body disregarding the constitution of our country, but it shocks my sensibilities when it is a public school district, like Lake Local School District. A school district should concern itself with teaching what is reasonable, provable, and factual. It is utterly unethical, not to mention illegal, for you force even the most sanitized version of religion on your students. It may go against your personal beliefs, but everyone in this country, including your students, has the right not to believe in god.

It seems that you should be aware, as a public education district, that this country was founded on the idea that government and religion should not mix. History has spoken with a bull horn about the consequences of blurring the line between religion and government. It horrifies me that children in your district may not be taught to respect their own rights and the rights of others because you taught them that it has no value.

How can you, with any sincerity, teach the true meaning of the constitution if you so willingly take no notice of it? How can you teach your students to be law abiding, constructive members of society, if you so willfully ignore the first law of this country?

I value the constitution and our free education system. Do not dismiss your duty to your pupils because you can’t separate your personal convictions from your duty. If you were unable to do your duty as a government official, you should not have run for office. Once elected and put in office, you have a duty to all the citizens of this country to do the right thing. I trust, now that you have been made aware that you have violated the rights of your students, you will quickly abandon this effort and act in the manner they deserve.

I will leave you with the words of some of our founders that I hope you take their words to heart.

“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." - Treaty of Tripoli signed by President Adams and ratified unanimously by Congress.

“Question with boldness even the existence of a god." - Thomas Jefferson (letter to Peter Carr, 10 August 1787)

I await your changed decision,
LaRae Meadows

http://lake.stark.k12.oh.us/home/contactus/contact-form/

http://www.examiner.com/x-2044-Atheism-Examiner~y2009m8d27-Ohio-school-district-lists-Belief-in-God-as-key-value

I wrote an article against Kissimmee Florida’s City Council’s attempt to put “In God We Trust” on their city seal.  The day after the article was written the Kissimmee City Council decided to quash the motion and their attempt to make their town a mini theocracy ended.  A few days later, a man from Georgetown, Texas named Dave Atkinson wrote me a series of emails on the topic.  His comments summarize the fear that many atheists have about being tolerant of even the nicest religious ideas.  He left me asking myself; is it more damaging to society to refuse to confront religious ideas or to greet them with hostility?

The first email from Destructive Dave, as I call him, arrived on August 8th.   At first he does not sign his name at the bottom of his emails.

To: LaRae
From: Dave
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:23 PM

LaRae Meadows, you are an over educated idiot.  People like you should be kicked out of the country, in the near future that might be possible. I cannot wait until that day..............
 
http://laraemeadows.vox.com/library/post/kissimmee-fl-wants-to-add-in-god-we-trust-to-city-logo.html

To: Dave
From: LaRae
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:54 PM

You have such a problem with the fact that I've read the constitution and know the history of this country that I should therefore should be kicked out of the country?  That makes perfect sense.  You know who should stay here? People who love the country enough to not read the constitution, not understand its founding and have no education.  Sounds like a winning plan.  You inspire me to think less, understand less and be more of a patriot for doing so.

LaRae

PS. What is the appropriate level of education?  At what point does someone become "over-educated" to participate in discussions important to the future of their country?

To: LaRae
From: Dave
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:57 PM

remember the day will come, and we will look for you...........................................

To: Dave
From: LaRae
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 6:07 PM

Are you threatening me?  I'm terrified.  Or are you speaking to me of the rapture?  If you are speaking of the rapture, you obviously haven't read the book that explains what will happen.  You won't look for me, nor will god.  You'll go to heaven and I'll stay here. Bummer.  All the "over-educated idiots" will be here on a bigot and Christian free earth.  Sounds like everyone wins!  Oh, and let me add........................................................................................................................................ as that seems important to you.

Best Wishes on the Rapture,
LaRae

At this point I became interested in who was writing me and I Googled his email address.  I wanted to know who I was talking to and if I should be worried that he might actually try to come for me in the future(not a concern anymore).  I found out his vital statics and a bit more.  It is also right about here that I lost my patience.

To: LaRae
From: Dave
Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 8:37 PM

Let me get this correct, you are a Christian, and you are against having "In God we Trust" on a city seal.  It sounds like you are the enemy within- that has too much time on her little hands.  Without these words the US is already on her ride down hill and will continue to fall into the hands of the people that will take away your rights to setup web sites like yours-yet you fail to recognize this.  That's what I mean about being over-educated with very little common sense.  I know you struggle with this as do many people; you lack the ability to get the big picture- you simply run your pie-hole and should be in the kitchen cooking something to eat.  You truly must be from California, a state that is about to go bankrupt with the world's 5th largest economy?  Gee wonder how that happens, must be that your people out there lack common sense- to balance a budget?  We can go back and forth forever but you are still an educated idiot with too much time on your hands.  The majority of people will keep “In God we Trust”- even on our money and no matter how much you protest this, it will continue to stay there.  So blog and blog but “In God we Trust” will remain and people like me will be your opposition….........
 

To: Dave
From: LaRae
Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 7:57 PM

Dave,

I know how to read books - even the bible.  Important books are good to read.  Not just books though, I suggest reading important historical documents, like say, the Constitution.  It's obvious that LBJ High School didn't teach you enough.

You might consider picking up a history book and see what happens when you combine religion and government.  It's happened over and over again in the world, with deadly results.

Our founders, who gave us the right to be free from religion in our government, knew what they were doing.  They took the time to become "over educated idiots with too much time on their hands."  You cannot love your freedom to practice your religion if you do not understand that the separation of church and state is what allows you that freedom.

You don't have the right to make the government adhere to your religion.  No one does.  Your right is the opposite.  You have the right to go to the government and be free from religion.  So, no one can force you to pray to Allah, Zeus or chant a Buddhist chant.  I'm sure you don't want to go to the city council and pledge allegiance to the flag, under Allah, do you?  I don't think you'd want the government in your church, would you?  Once a cucumber becomes a pickle, it can never be a cucumber again.

Yet, you demand that the rest of society pray to your god, that you violate their right, a right you so freely enjoy. This separation protects everyone else from having to pray to your god, against their will, when conducting the business of government or participating in government.  My rights aren't protected by letting zealots force me to pray to their god, it takes my right to separation of church and state away.

 It's the first law of this country. Along with the freedom of the press, it was so important at the founding of our country that the founders put it in the first law.  The first one.  They didn't wait until 2 or 3 or 4. Even though they had such diverse ideas about religion - all the way from atheists to devout Christians, they could agree that their religious ideas had no place in government.  

You seem scared that storm troopers are going to go and gas a church and lock the doors so you can never enter again.  No one is taking your right to pray away, no one is stopping you from going to church, or praying at home, or by yourself.  Could you please show me one single example of a Christian being told they couldn't pray - except as a government agent?  

Today, our mixing of religion and government has damaged our country.  I think a man who hails from Georgetown, Texas, the state with the highest teen pregnancy rates, teen STD rates, one of the highest crime rates and per capita poverty rates should see what religion is doing to the government of his state.  While you wave the morality flag and the religious high ground, you commit acts of terrible negligence against your citizens.  So while you're going around, worrying about our state, you allow your state to wallow in griefs that could be fixed if you just learned something about how humans behave and what actually works.  

Yes, California is in a terrible budget problem.  Mostly because we pay more in taxes to the fed then we take back.  States like yours take our money to pay for your religiously driven neglect, while giving more to charity, volunteering more, giving our citizens a better quality of life, producing most of your food, giving most of the industry start up money for the country, inventing more and housing most of the brains of this country.  I'd put my bankrupt over-educated-idiot California citizen against your meagerly educated religious citizenry.

People like you don't deserve to live in this country.  You suck up its rights, do nothing to protect them, try to erase them from other people while giving yourself lordship over them.  You think you know what's best but you don't take the time to learn.  That isn't what America is about.  If you took the time to become a slightly less uneducated backwater hick from America's intellectual dumping ground, you'd see the value of the separation of church and state.

LaRae

To: LaRae
From: Dave
Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 6:45 PM

 Mrs. california-Larae,
You’re a real nice piece of work that should stay in cal because that is where you belong, history is one of my favorite subjects, loved it in college.  I am proud to be an educated Hilly Billy, and I am very aware of what the constitution says and very aware of what can happen if state & church get too mixed.  I still believe that you have too much time on your hands, and you need another hobby instead of protesting "In God We Trust".  To research me must mean that I got under your skin, your lecturing me is actually kind of funny and means that you are not used to getting any opposition to your web site and statements.  No matter what you say your educated state will go bankrupt and ours will survive, with all the amenities that go with it, crime, pregnancies and STD's.  On the other hand your bleeding heart state will fail in the near future and all your efforts will have been in vain; thus, "In God we Trust" will remain.  Sounds kind of neat.  Come on you know that all democracies’ have a life expectancy and usually end up in dictatorships, regardless of what is done- remember "Rome"- Julius, etc.  You appear to be a young lady that believes that your protest will lead to something- (change) and that you will have made a difference, but in the end it is out of your hands- just like mine.  Most people just read your protest and kind of feel sorry for you, and the people that agree with you-- because the high probability that Kissimmee will add “In God we Trust” to their logo- will be successful - and you probably cannot stop it- regardless of your effort.  Therefore you should embrace it- and this will make you feel better inside, your quick anger and detail of me means that you are obsessed with this activity.  Being so obsessed about not having “In God we Trust” written on anything “state” will cause you to have health problems in the end.  I make a motion that you support “In God we Trust” and you will be spiritually enhanced.  Your present status will leave you unhappy and unsatisfied……….

Dave

To: Dave
From: LaRae
Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Mr. Georgetown Texas Dave,

The day after I wrote the article, Kissimmee quashed the motion to add "in god we trust" to their logo.  The mayors office wrote me personally to tell me they aren't doing it anymore.  So, you are wrong, yet again.  I'm not surprised.  It seems to be a theme.  So yes, what I did mattered, gave me joy, and didn't change a thing because we have a separation of church and state.  I just defended it as we all have been called upon to do.

I find it deeply horrifying that you know what happens when you mix religion and government and you still want to do it.  You know it's wrong and you want to do it anyways.  You know its results: unchecked power, killings, murders, war, famine, fear, hunger, tyranny and yet, you still want to do it.  You know history has judged such nations as monsters who must wear badges of shame and disgust for generations, and you advocate to do it anyways.  That is the textbook definition of a sociopath.  

You are a perfect example of why people like me are scared of religious folks.  When you think the end is coming, when you honestly believe it will happen in your lifetime, your priority isn't preserving this world or ensure peace or freedom for your people.  You can do whatever you want because it won't matter when the Apocalypse comes.   Honor - who needs it?  Duty - for idiots.  Morality - I'll just repent when Jesus comes.  What does it matter that your behavior is both criminal and harmful when you know you are with god and the world won't be here anyways.

I have higher moral standards than you.  I believe I have a duty to my co-citizens, my country and my earth.  God or no god, we have a responsibility to the people around us to act with care and concern.  I refuse to discard the greater good because some unsupported book from two thousand years ago has been taken to say that some day soon the world will end.  The apocalyptic world view reeks of moral decay and it damages our country.  

People like you don't deserve to live in America.  You toss away your rights as quickly as you were born into them and strive to strip the rights from others who value them.  It is repugnant.

Rev. LaRae Meadows

If you would like to use my title in the future it isn't Mrs.  It is Rev.  Please get it right or don't use it at all.
I am in fact a reverend of every church that will ordain me online.  There are six.  So I am a reverend six times.

To: LaRae
From: Dave
Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:49 PM

Mrs. Larae,
like I said your type needs to stay in cal/ny where you belong, your life is spent typing words and reviews, you may win a few battles here and there like in Florida but that does not mean that you have won.  yes, you should be concerned, honestly.  now we are getting to your real thought process behind your agenda "some unsupported book from two thousand years ago" that's all I needed to know because that is where your heart is and that is where you stand and that is who you are; and that is why you are easy to deal with...........................

Dave

Mrs. or Rev? it does not really matter now does it........................

To: Dave
From: LaRae
Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Mrs. davE,

I wasn't aware there was a hidden thought process behind my agenda and reviews.  I wasn't hiding anything.  You scare me.  Your beliefs are dangerous.  As long as I can, I'll defend the rights of all citizens, even while petty people misspell my name, threaten me and call me by the wrong title.

I will continue to "type my words and reviews" and making people like you face the consequences of your actions.  Your beliefs are harmful to the world and to this country.  You know what damage you are doing and you do them anyways.  That is a disgusting snub at your own humanity and shows little regard for humanity as a whole.

There will come a day when you wallow in a puddle of your shame, just like your parents did about segregation, their parents did about equal rights, their parents did about suffrage and their parents did about slavery.    I can say with all confidence that your day of reckoning will come long before mine.

LaRae
-  End Emails

Destructive Dave never wrote back.  Much to his credit, he allowed me to have the last word.  His disturbing emails inspired deep introspection on my end.  I have been fiddling with my tolerance of theists for about a year.  I strongly believe that people should have the right to practice their religions peacefully whenever and however they choose as long as they don’t try to use the government to promote their religion, but a democracy can’t be separated from the beliefs of its people.   

I know that a self-governed country will always be influenced by its citizen’s personal beliefs.  So, even if a government takes no official stance on religion, religion can still significantly influence the government.  As history has shown time and again, when you allow religion to creep into government, the results are catastrophic to a particular group, or the whole society.  Do we, as “over-educated idiots” neglect our country and society when we fail to confront religious beliefs as we would any other beliefs?  Can we afford to allow these ideas to breed in our country, even though, by their nature, they are destructive?  Do we encourage or entice the animosity toward non-theists when we treat such a vital part of their identity with no more respect than we would any other beliefs?  Are we selfish when we consider our own personal treatment, bite our tongues and choose not to confront these beliefs?

Spelling was cleaned up in the emails.