|
Identifying Our Courts And Church, Then Eh, Heh,...The State
George Eddie Burks
344-64-4917
515
E. End St. #206
Chicago Il. 60409
scndlbrkrttmc@hotmail.com
11-26-05
To The Best Not Esteems For Disclosing Liberties.
Perspective by Geo. E. Burks.
In
year 2005, with the alleviating cold breezes of autumn, after too many hot doggerel august dazes after the heated precedures
of the Ten Commandments ruling of the United States Supreme Court (USSC) by granting the recognition of our rights to erect
and cry; "We the people of the United Secularism Authority (U.S.A.) in order to form a more perfect union, newly-opposed-against-tested/able/mental/query/us-as..."
Do this sound more like relieving each or everyone the choice to be endowed by a you not chosen, against less able men awry
leads or been relieved of promoting the bold us not ignorant adapted, able men with verity? Wait a minute, was this a neo-contra-anti-e/sta/blish/ment/ari/an/just-ice
move-men (-t); with the ruling by the United States Supreme Court entitling each state of the United States Of America’s
(U.S.A.) state legistrative seats, the rights to decide what they find fit there to display as symbolic representations or
the physical signaling of our civil or social intolerance in their regional Halls of Justice? Was their always willingness
to grant orders to open windows to peer in and at with and to an already established judicious systems that were erected by
generations of security within.
Let’s
say with this case and only for this acute national episode which is not a temporary and passing acute level of national derision
save all of the traditional functional sanity and only with this peering inspection that U.S.S.C. did so do the new view of
an anti-contra-be-state!?? And so it was "We, the people of the United Secularism Authority in order to form a more perfect
union, neo-contra-anti-establish justice," and now endowed to certain inalienated rights of liberties, justice and by the
way; since we are discussing this, "DO SOMEONE IN VIRTUOUS HEIGHTS HAS AN APARTMENT FOR RENT FOR OUR DAUGHTER PRUDENCE??!
For it is not a "NO" to the perfect semantic opposite found but to the commitment of the fine values in all of this refinery
not paraphrased, not acceptance that has Liberty living in Prudence covenants and Prudence is now a guest at Charity’s
abodes.
One
can’t argue that any advancement of The American Way can’t happen without our sense of American Secularism (A.S.)
daring to evolve. Yet, A.S's has proven that its’ progress and its’ development are of the parallel rate of a
democracy era’s conjunctions on a social cohesion scale. For as much as the beneficial values of state and life improvements;
there are not always results of a rising movement of esteems and not always of a movement based and built from a graceful
hath love sakes.
All
Secularism (A.S. in the same sense!?) has hidden privatizing priorities in its ideological culturalism not theological fanaticism
from our U.S.A. (and in the same sense
here too?!) socio-economical sense of state. This form of Americans’ modern progress left the sluggish religio-cultural
fanaticism in as dividends, and this was done first in determined grace, yet to a no avail in finding the perfect coven for
its own sake because of its one true ideology in state; LIBERTY?!? Due to its bluntness, the wake of its undetermining forsaking(s
)were plainly too evident on and beyond the surface!!!
At
the minimum, don’t worry about our little daughters, Charity is adjusting and keeping up now with her guest, Prudence,
who moving about with an apex amble. Charity, who always enjoyed our company with her sisters; Faith and Fortitude, now frequent
by certain transnational liberties who were allowed in for recognized reasonable not underdetermining virtuous grounds by
Justice own discretion alone and not judgments. Of all of our daughters, little lady Justice has consistently proven her superiority
with maturity and precise intelligence with an equal scale for all who walk on virtuous grounds and even to those undeniable
recognized advisement’s discretion.
With
such added vices meant not added devices meant to produce the common defenses for each and everyone who are consistently determined
with each other's virtuous productions. With these vices not withstanding the desired liberty berths of the available discretions'
and taking that all are accountable by socio-cohesive bastardized parities of a socio-economical state as virtuous obverted
or adversed advisings. All one can say to Charity is; " It’s only a temporary fit or spell that led her, quite naturally
to extend and obliged Prudence on her couch." Will that growing boy, Liberty
find not Prudence’s' dwelling as a respite but instead finds the respect of his centuries old infatuation for a virtuous
home as prudent. With this finding their own willingness by not disclosing enough to simply say "enough is enough" and return
to grand simplicity of the esteems' not bests' statures with all our blessed little daughters’ loves’ sake.
For
it is not far and never close are the impressive hearts and strong poise of all our liberties with the constitutions of social
deviance and this is why all centuries old orders’ and established formed societies’ experienced evolution as
a natural culture not withstanding the socio-economics’ cognitive influences as not compensations due for the conjunctions
lost by our rights to enforce the blessed liberties we are entrusted with and not with our leaders legistrative leading our
ruling posterities, welfares and blessings as liberties are for each and all members of our civil society’s to symbolically
represented and signal each and all as. This is the process called grace and with this one can find its fine value and the
abstracted relationship of love and grace.
The Ten Commandments ruling
did carried an absolute semantic symbolic meaning and there was no opposites there like there is no substituting the signals,
The Ten Commandments give and naturally affect not effecting one own re-definitive beyond and on their junctions’ surfaces.
George Eddie Burks
344-64-4917
19 Clinton
3E,
Bangor, Me. 00401.
PROOF
June 07, 2006.
The Rights Of A Nation’s Adherent Responsibilities.
Perspective by Geo. E. Burks
Can you considered the depths of responsibility? We must when approaching the manner of same-sex
marriage. To view this designation for the communicable necessity as a liaison of our given significant cultural humanity
in any given presumptuous faculty, a manor for a state of life representing a social constitution and to carry a potential
amplification in form of modeling more representatives for all developing nations or sub-cultures also known as the potential
unity.
Let’s look at you with this. Have you ever seen the beginning of your responsible authority? Was it too much
of a chore or did you listen to it? Was it what you wanted or did you question it? Was it valuable for you or did you inhabit
it. It was either your abstractivity or your capability, which leads you
within the depths of responsibility. Every executive or manager knows this or do you listen to that? Every judge knows this
or do you question this? Everyone makes, earns or creates know this or do you inhabit this too? Well, this is the one hundred
percent of each and everyone pursuits in the reality of authorizing responsibilities for each as significant, valuable and
earned representatives of your and everyone humanity and that why we at this wall within the depths of our stated national
manor will the same sex marriage. With this idea of the social and cultural responsibilities of licensing an unity by marriage
in its proper perspective above, this writer will try to report on its authorization for its appointments by an administration.
President George W. Bush (a Republican) renounced its representation as a part of the constitution of his executive
position’s responsibilities for government and of his entitled depths of responsibility for authorization. Did this
decision set, settled or halt a rising cultural inhabited state of acceptance of the existence of same-sex marriages? Would this decision set, settled or halt a rising cultural inhabited state of acceptance
as a root for a significant accepted cultural alignment not concerns or would this decision set, settled or halt a rising
cultural inhabited state of acceptance as a root for another significant questioned community that have grown to an accepted
recognized equal not conformist that brought forth such a disparage state as a response from the executive officer of our
united multi-cultural nation.
With these questions rhetorical settled within our state of life as any nation, this writer found
the state of comfort that the president attempted to create as a threshold for more views within his depths of viewing our
democracy’s social responsibilities for dressing. Some places may easily contend that President Bush’s call to
remove the questions from his authority and when his office did not falter the opposition for such a national recognition
by allowing the questions to undertake a national scale appeal for rebuttal and with the decisive points place back under
a reconstituting institutional system, the socio-cultural nation’s uprisings found its response as anti-productive and
not to its proven sense of responsibility as a national representative.
Any nation of concerning people will recognize what conforms to its benefactor’s faculties.
Here is where the depths of responsibilities are examined and recognized and there is where the proven measured manner is
recognized on a clear scale. Consistent with all socio-cultural states of a highly developed order retaining a reknown institution
and responsibilities one can find considerable power when it is unified without its beneficial support in use.
U.S. Senator Allard of Colorado (A Conservative) who sponsored the measure, professed to determination
by saying ''We ought to have a vote on the amendment (of reconstituting our united multi-cultural nation) every year”
after hearing the president response to such a constituting conditioning.
What this one found in the national executive orders were its manner as a response for this same-sex
marriage question and a message harboring more than a professional demeanor yet a contempt for the forced addressing and with
unexpected emitted unsanctified tone for the consideration of such a ghastly recognition for any given manor from either a
well-structured multi-nations culture or from an unified multi-cultural facet or from a well-disciplined multi-facetted establishment
or from an authorized multi-establishments’ republic or from a quite national united public peers embraced nation with
its constituting a strong support and sport of redressing the confirmed traditional values as dues within a beneficial bi-partisan
network.
Senator Allard acknowledged that politics (did) played a part in the timing of the debate,
but for a different reason: to force United States Senators to take a stand and answer for their votes in this reconstituting
liberties campaign.
Hmm... Did the senator see the manner of sport that is known to abuse values as a power and can
reach all parred nation’s cultural facets establishing and authorizing our public strengths. Would this quality qualify
as our executives’ given national responsibilities, burdens or order to maintain?
The supporters and those sporting for the same-sex marriage would stand up against all of this
big-scale executive and judicious responsibilities better by maintaining their socio-cultural nation within their own governable
state for our life models and examples and never either worry or expect our national benefactors’ taxing on those responsibilities
and burdens concerning the each and everyone’s living significantly with their life happiness. For only by a you such
a complete lapse of the given or expected responsibilities by an one from the one hundred percent of each and everyone would
expected these executives, managers, judges, makers, earners or creators to agree to a manor for the majority to allowed any
given one of us in the one hundred percentage from anywhere, such a valued position of a licensed being of an authorized unity
of a same sex marriage for addressing, redressing and undressing as a refinement of all others of our random order for liberties
in an institution rooted with random up-shooting from multi-inheritable adherent values and it is justly so, as an one of
those responsibilities that we all must inhabit for the respect of all other pursuits for a significant happiness.
The president developing temper in his strongly moderating redressed over this June’s first
weekend is that our traditional values is in an executive’s order and the same-sex marriage proposal really isn’t
his responsibility to randomly address as an executive of an united national state and in doing so is devaluing enough and
belittling for any executive’s who must undress such contents for a national public measure, public examination and
public esteem on any given executive circumstances.
Now, this writer after hearing and quite evidently feeling the seriousness of the depths of responsibility the president
was conveying as a must to maintain with his proclamation of our national identity and knowing that this responsible writer
and educator within our United States Of America’s Mass Media will never failed the public by ignoring and withholding
major points in coverage of cultural not courts and religion not objects reports and the topic’s true designations within
its rightful courts not culture and within its sound objectives not religious, is what this writer is offering as an apology
to carry and mend to our embarrassed President Of The United States Of America for all this short-sighted as one of the one
percentage of his trust.
Also as one of the public cultural and influential guiles and guides that do recognized the mannerism
of responsibility that anyone of the one hundred percentage did proven and granted that one an allowance, such strong utterances
that you did demonstrated was merit, as an response from our president, this one must extend a note of gratitude.
Thank you, Mr. Executive, George W. Bush for been all that, in answering that challenge from
one of the any given influential one hundred percent of a power trust that is known as your and mine or our national identity
to the rest of our world.
P.S.
Did someone noticed that someone need more vacation time.
From the files of
Geo. E. Burks/344-64-4917
515 E. End St. #206
Calumet City, IL. 60409
scndlbrkrttmc@hotmail.com
11-13-03 (revised 6-02-04)
Is There Such A Motion As Achievements In Religion!!?
The General and The Chief Knew!?
Perspective By Geo. E. Burks.
*With the Question of the achievement of science versus the sacredness of religion, the admiration
of their highest place in the progressive evolving strives of the multi-culture democratic nation and the separations in their
objectives with the respects for all individual’s decisions as their ideology of God is our trust for
the betterment of humanity and to have everyone's sense of trust placed on a foundation that holds all rights for respect
, trust and hope in full consideration.
Revised from (*=) Neal Postmann’s Technopology
Attorney
General Bill Pryor of Alabama made a comment during the open procedures, which was quoted in the November 13, 2003 issue of
the New York Times that Alabama’s Chief Justice Roy Moore is demonstrating "utterly unrepentant behavior" by strongly
opposes the removal of nearly a ton of one of the ‘Ideas Of Justice’s’ oldest symbol. An action attempted,
due to the idea of a progressive democracy seeking a sense of separation of state and church.
The
General (Pryor) has a stall in his opening deliberations while facing the Alabama Court of the Judiciary Supreme Court. In
order to challenge the age old position of "what do you do with people who move in such a self-righteous way without a challengeable
doubt or questions and in so; leaving no respectable open reproach for any type of grounds to stand on for reconsideration?"
Well, to start with one must approach every step with care. As in the case involving the removal of a display (in a form of
a rotunda,) bearing the works of Ten Commandments from one of the State of Alabama’s court building (more recognized
by the title of The Halls Of Justice), where The Chief (Moore) was been charged for ethical violations for defending the display’s
rightful place in The Halls Of Justice walls did make some stepping with care.
What
The General insubvertly confessing to are the ideas of syncretizing the ideologies of a more modern court system could truly
be symbolized as a sounder representation of a justice system in an openly shown sense of the more liberal and not stringent
environment for legal liberations and deliveries with the original conceptual ideologies of parity and society cohesion as
an openly known growth. Since the birth of the ideas of social parity, social cooperation and socio-economics this ideology
evolved into and was lead on the grounds and practices with a known virtuous sense and an acceptable sense of justice.
A
movement or representation of an idea of the church separation from state for better democracy in form of a case in The Hall
Of Justices against the definition of the virtuous justice enacted within that foundation by a prosecutor of this case can
never win the opposition of that prosecutor’s opponent actions or behavior. The actions of The Chief states soundly
that any movement to remove from sight the symbols from justice’s ideological birth, on and within The Halls of Justice
physical foundations (or a court building as politically corrected known in these days) on display can never be seen or accepted
on any grounds that having any signs or ideas of a beneficial movement!?! For as long as all involved in the past, present
or the future of our justice procedures are borne by the academic’s or institutional’s sound fundamentals within
the field of law. This argument can never be approach on any grounds within that exact field without restraining and/or conceding
to the facts of, "what are the definitions of truth in the symbolic phrase of TRUTH AND JUSTICE FOR ALL?!"
What
this writer also saw impressive in The General’s comment was the idea of guilt and objective reasoning while showing
an open respect in using the taxpayer’s time and money against The Chief’s (Moore’s) sentiments. All can
easily recognized by this stand as insubvertly or direct in support to keep in constant view of those of the symbolic and
the signatures of the definition of termed "ALL," from the phrase in the former question, for those whom enter "The Bama’s
Halls Of Justice. " With this pillar of society’s original statures for civility undergoing a trial for its rightful
measure of usefulness coming into mind also was The General comment with one easily finding a sign of resignation.
In
this pursuit of a disavowing grounds that The Chief was found erected on, all who has a sentiment to contend against the grounds
must first recognized The General comment with the affirmation that there is no place in considering resistance to The Chief’s
stand. One also must noted thru the fundamental observations for all parties’ blessing that The Chief have nothing more
erected to stand on, yet the foundations that were always there since the beginning of the practice of judging for parity
and exact consolidation.
Within
the comment lie many moving adjustments for all observations for the evolution of modern justice. Proving that in opposition
of The Chief position, nothing more than the right prayer will allow continuous deliberations for one’s own precarious
grounds for reproach and only can be handled carefully in the prosecuting of this case. With this The General can continue
into the deliberations solidly with nothing more erected in one’s own grounds to step forward with by showing the recognition
of that unrepentant-able revelation of the foundation’s cornerstone threatened in our continuous future for progress
in the evolution of civility, law and justice.
It’s
a resounding place for The General in a case where all sides are showing one’s saving grace to rescue the ideas of progress
in a field of social sciences where science is the dirty word. Progress in the field of law has nowhere else for weighting
new abstractions and new academics applications outside the university without the even more treacherous approach of dividing
the theorized practical perspectives theology and justice. Where does one have to avoid the seemly, knowing offensive speculative
of a subscriptive leitmotif build on or to avoiding those heated classical torrid debates of the prescriptive applications
of a theological, governing state or system?!? (For all who late on what is a leitmotif, with the term "build on" instead
of build up, the phrase would mean "evolution is an artistic growth!?!")
Yes,
in the practice of judging for parity, reparation and socio-economics it’s the justice foundation under trial in The
Bama’s court system and that foundation is threaten by the removal of a dedication bearing one of its original symbols
for reason not found yet, heard and weighted with conniving acceptance by a general and under open, direct protest by a chief
of it’s foundation’s post. Who by both intents and actions in keeping the virtuous justice’s past syncretized
evolution of symbols and signs which grew into The Halls Of Justice’s complete identity in full view with their actions
and with a demeanor showing all the power invested from where that infuse endowment rooted and grown with time. Since this
challenge were heard by a panel of even more Justices, supreme ones at that, who must make a motion that can show a sign for
the continuing symbolism of The Ten Commandments’ and other representations of justice for its tenure, future or dismissal
within a new systems to engaged into the future with…!?! Yes, this is the quest within the case or may I surmised as
it’s a question???
So,
this one writer insists on the question for" THE ALL IN THE BIG BAMA’S" to answer; in defense of either their General,
their Chief, their Supreme Justices or their foremost identity of the Halls Of Justice; "Is there progress or a continuous
future for the Ten Commandments and other symbols and noted signs like ‘TRUTH AND JUSTICE FOR ALL" on the exact and
actual grounds and within the exact and actual foundations of The Bama’s Hall Of Justice??!"
As for this one response to such a question when this one observed such a proceeding in one’s own state; would
be to opt in questions on "what are the hidden motivations leading to its conniving acceptance on how such a regressive motion
could have start on, within and brought forth for one’s own state’s affirming Justice’s foundation?!?" In
which is an evolving existences without borders, even with or without the governing state in question of a true justice system
and still will meet the criteria of an existence governing foundations over the state in all definitions found in the difference
between a justice system and a legislative system. In conclusion justice is not over state government while its original symbols
and signs are and even more of a sounder theology for virtue and not of a governing theory. In law alone all relationships
to its symbols and signs are leading to its actual growth with all that exist and these symbols and signs can only differ
in growth and become evermore self-alienating within The Hall Of Justice; no matter where the state’s borders lies.
|
