The "Nicole Factor" Is Online

Welcome to the Nicole Factor at blogspot.com.
Powered By Blogger

The Nicole Factor

Search This Blog

Stage 32

My LinkedIn Profile

About Me

TwitThis

TwitThis

Twitter

Messianic Bible (As If the Bible Isn't)

My About.Me Page

Views

Facebook and Google Page

Reach Me On Facebook!

Talk To Me on Fold3!

Showing posts with label citizens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label citizens. Show all posts

Friday, September 27, 2013

Physical Therapy, Rome Versus the United States, and Disabled People Like Me

I figured out something, and what I figured out hurts--if it didn't hurt, I'd either be able to not take things so personally (which, according to Patricia Evans, I shouldn't be doing, anyway--that is, I shouldn't just let things roll off of my back or send messages that I can tolerate that kind of thing) or I'd be tolerating that kind of behavior! While I'm not a hero, anyway,  I'm not a hero even among my "friends" (actual or not) and family because they probably don't like strong disabled people who have a chance to stand for something, know what we stand for, and why we stand as we stand.

Deny as they will, they'd like to see me squared away in a convent or asylum (Maybe that's even part of why some don't like Geraldo Rivera). Maybe, as much as to think that they're mad at Geraldo for keeping those like me out of places like Willowbrook hurts, that's it. If I and other disabled people were their stereotypically-controllable, compliant types, they'd like that!

Furthermore, for the ones who are also getting physical therapy, that they don't want their mind working while their bodies are working is not my fault. Besides, part of why Rome lasted longer than the US is lasting is that every forum was one for civic and social engagement--people cared and talked about issues. Granted that they didn't have physical-therapy centers like we do, but they sure had other public-utilized forums--including private businesses--in and at which people would talk with people.

Also, as the old saying goes, the mind gets working (or at least should get working) when the body does. Even further, many people are in physical therapy because they have preventable conditions which they bring on themselves or pre-existing conditions which they exacerbate by not talking. After all, apathy, bottling up of feelings, or whatever else not talking brings about can bring one down. Great-Grandma Czarnecki learned this the hard way, and she finally broke down after 73-93 years (She got married when she was 20 years old, and something at home must have affected her to be attracted to someone as abusive as Great-Granddad ended up being to her.).

Since Great-Grandma Czarnecki broke down and told Aunt Mary, "No, no; it's okay--I want to talk about it!", perhaps my family, "friends", and fellow physical-therapy patients ought to let me talk and start talking themselves--either that, or they can fall down and let whatever else fall right down with them. Besides, they ought to look no further than the once-great-and-now-late Rome and the increasingly-apathetic United States to see how well shutting up, putting on the fake smiles, and leaving everything at the door of the physical-therapy businesses is working.

Monday, May 20, 2013

Reposted Entries With Disclaimer (Read the Disclaimer First)

Disclaimer

The disclaimer shows that Emily, Facebook, and others are lucky that they're not getting sued. After all, " I wouldn't even be warning [Emily and others] if--even for all the evil that [she and others] have done to me, and I could certainly repay [them] with evil [e.g., suing them]--I didn't care about [them] and your whole cabal at Hillel--for your Kabbalic "Rabbin"ism is as Eastern Mystic ways, thus apostate [The link showing that Non-Tanakh Judaism-- in this case, Reconstructionist Judaism--is Apostate Judaism and is in fact "Jewish atheism" here is new. Emily is a follower of UMBC's apostate "rabbi".]! "



Entry One

Just because I don't respond to or engage with everything doesn't mean that I don't have a view on it. Maybe, e.g., I could just be letting you look stupid after a certain point in a conversation. Don't think that you've won the argument because maybe you haven't. In fact, you might've lost it so badly and I'm trying to save you for embarrassment even, even while I'm letting you look stupid enough.

And one last word to Emily [Entry Two here], by the way: my mistake was giving you a chance to understand my comment. You twisted my comments about Non-Orthodox Jews who care about Shavu'ot into lashon-hara, and I should've reported and/or blocked you right there and then. By the way, I'd take "Katz" out of your name--you are no kohenet-tzedek and do not deserve a name that means "Kohen-Tzedek". You walk in the ways of the Levi'im-rahim, not Tzadok. And you give the priesthood to "rabbis" like Jason--how dare you! If you keep that up, you will be cursed as was Uzziah and Jeroboam--and more so because you are a kohen who gave the priesthood to Non Kohanim. 

Also, you can see that that's G-d's promise, not any kind of threat--though I'm certainly warning you about what "rabbis" like Jason wouldn't dare tell you, since they follow Talmud instead Tanakh. So, if you have any legal case, you have one against G-d, not me--and I dare you to try to tell Him that anyone is threatening you, for you would be like Anathoth and others who told a real kohen-tzedek to stop prophesying! In fact, I wouldn't even be warning you if--even for all the evil that you have done to me, and I could certainly repay you with evil--I didn't care about you and your whole cabal at Hillel--for your Kabbalic "Rabbin"ism is as Eastern Mystic ways, thus apostate! 

I hope that I was clear enough to you and the other revisionists, Anti Messianics, Anti Semites and/or Self Haters, and others about whom I'm thinking. By the way, don't comment on this entry--I will not publish your comments or any comments of those in your circle. As I stated, I should have blocked you last time and will block you this time to save you for embarrassment even--you embarrassed yourself last time by twisting my lashon-tov into lashon-hara. Also, forgiving doesn't mean forgetting. 


Entry Two

"Emily Katz Boling
·                                 Please remove the tweet you posted with a link to our conversation. It has my name on it and I would not like that on Twitter and then you proceed to talk badly about me and my boyfriend (who has done nothing) on there.
Thank you
"

I'm not removing anything. You commented on something that I shared publicly (e.g., on the article itself, and as I would've shared in general on Facebook had I looked at the privacy settings more closely--and "Friends of Friends" is public enough, anyway); you're held to account publicly. After you slandered me when I exemplified UMBC JSU/Hillel as a Non-Orthodox community that cares about Shavu'ot, I owe you no favors.

Besides, I removed Frank as well. I don't keep non-friends' boyfriends as friends. Besides, what does that say about him that he's dating you--someone who would slander someone just because he or she is Messianic? If Frank has a problem with it, he can come to me. You're his girlfriend, not his mother; and he's old and mature enough to talk to me (I can only hope, anyway.).

Let me tell you something else, Emily. What I said and what you said is in replay all over again. Don't lie about me, and you won't be held to account for doing so:


As a Messianic Jew, I find two of the comments really problematic:

1) "The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount Sinai—is arguably the most pivotal in the narrative of the Jewish people. But from the treatment it receives next to its more popular siblings—at least within non-Orthodox American communities—you wouldn’t know it." I care about Shavu'ot, and even admire what people like UtahSoccerMom do. Also, the Kosher Korner at UMBC (which is Non Messianic and has mainly Non-Messianic patrons, mostly those who go to the JSU/Hillel events headed up by a Reconstructionist) is closed beyond the Shavu'ot holiday (May 13-May 19, although Karaites and Messianics like me celebrate Shavu'ot on only the 19th).

2) "Hanukkah is so visible that conservative talk radio hosts think it threatens Christmas." I have never heard talk-radio hosts say that. They're more worried about the Atheists and Agnostics who threaten the legality of Christmas and Hanukkah celebrations within the United States.
When it comes to theological significance, the late-spring festival of Shavuot is no slouch: The event it commemorates—God giving the Torah to the Jews at Mount...See More
Like ·  · Promote · Share
·                                
Emily Katz Boling Nicole, I am particularly offended by your comment that you make about UMBC Hillel and JSU and speaking about the Rabbi as if being reconstructionist is negative. Since you partake in Shabbat and other activities led by JSU and Hillel it would behoove you not to speak poorly about those who have welcomed you to our events and activities. The Kosher Korner is closed during Shavuot because the man who works there as well as the restaurants that provide the food for the Kosher Korner observe all of Shavuot and therefore cannot work on those days and having someone else do so would make the place unkosher since it is being operated on days that are Yom Tov. And since those are the majority of people who eat in the Kosher Korner, not messianics or karaites, then they close it. You are treading on very thin ice with some of the stuff you say. Hillel may have a reconstructionist rabbi but we have many students who are from all different sects of Judaism. JSU on the other hand is a student run organization, also comprised of many different sects of Judaism. Just remember Nicole, you too benefit from these events and it is not a nice trait to speak poorly of those who have welcomed you to Shabbat and other activities.
·                          
Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki Firstly, I was saying that I found her comment highly problematic. I even said straightly out, "Also, the Kosher Korner at UMBC (which is Non Messianic and has mainly Non-Messianic patrons, mostly those who go to the JSU/Hillel events headed up by a Reconstructionist) is closed beyond the Shavu'ot holiday (May 13-May 19, although Karaites and Messianics like me celebrate Shavu'ot on only the 19th). " I do not see what is neigative about saying that the JSU and Hillel care. Perhaps reading my comments in context would help. Secondly, while we're on the subject and since you brought it up, I am not the only one who has had issues with Jason (I will, out of respect for his or her, not say who. If he or she would like to mention who he or she even is, he or she may do so.). Having a clergyman or clergywoman who is intolerant of those who are not Talmudic is a real issue. After all, UMBC is supposed to be diverse and welcoming. Thirdly, I disclosed that I was Messianic only because I never wanted to be accused of being an infiltrator and proselytizer. I see that my honesty upfront was a problem, and that there are certain people with whom I cannot be honest lest I be slandered.
·                          
Emily Katz Boling No because I knew exactly what you were insinuating by specifically mentioning Hillel and JSU and I also gave you and explanation of why it wasn't open. ANd ok so you'll spare saying the persons name out of embarrassment but you'll say the rabbi's name...See More
·                          
Nicole Maratovah Czarnecki You took the comment right out of context again. She said that Non-Orthodox Jews don't care about Shavu'ot, and I was giving examples to counter her statement. So, you again slandered me. So much for holding about UMBC JSU and Hillel as good examples--at least to people like you--which was my mistake.


And to message me on my public-figure Facebook page when I blocked you. How dare you! I want nothing to do with you, and I made that I want nothing to do with you quite clear. Besides, people like you are part of why UMBC JSU/Hillel involvement and Jewish communal life in general at UMBC is declinining. People who try to walk in Tanakh can and should not stand those who deliberately have walked off of the derech-Yehovah v'Tanakh, and persecute those who do walk b'haderech-Yehovah v'Tanakh. People are quickly figuring out that people like you, like Jason, and like others are those kinds of people who do all kinds of chullil-Yehovah b'HaShem-Yehovah--thus breaking the third of the Aseret HaD'varim in particular.

You clearly didn't learn from when Becca persecuted me. You'll learn this time: I am not a doormat; I am not one about who you may speak lashon-hara, and I am one who is not coming back to UMBC JSU/Hillel or even the Kosher Korner--after all, I'd hate to run into you there.

My mistake for ever speaking any lashon-tov about UMBC JSU/Hillel or even the Kosher Korner--after all, you and your ilk do nothing but twist what I say into lashon-hara, every bit for which you deserve to be called out. I also guarantee that if you keep treating me and others as you have treated me and them (and I rightly group you in with certain people), you will drive people all the more away from the UMBC JSU/Hillel and Kosher Korner to the point at which there'll no longer be an UMBC JSU/Hillel and Kosher Korner. After all, people won't want to try to derive benefit from them if all they'll get is Hell for doing so.

Reposted Entries With Disclaimer; And Not Hate Speech Or Anything Else But Standing Up To a Bully

Besides, as I said, Emily contacted me on my public page and commented regarding my public tweets. Her name will be known; to respond to her using Tanakh is not hate speech, and she will not hurt me and (as I'm sure that she has) others and get away with it--especially since she has a name which means "kohan tzedek", and I guarantee you that she is ironically not. She will not violate my FirstNinth, and Fourteenth Amendment Rights to stand up  to her; and she clearly needs lessons in both Tanakh and the Constitution, so I'm going to repost the entries with the original links to Tanakh pirkei and the constitutional amendments (and the relevant articles of the Fourteetnth Amendment) with my emphasis:




  • "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; orabridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."I dealt with her on the original post itself several times, and she and whoever is supporting her didn't like that. Guess what; you're part of the government of UMBC JSU and Hillel, whether de facto or de jure, and you will get called out if you bully someone by perverting his or her lashon tov about UMBC JSU/Hillel into lashon hara. UMBC JSU/Hillel is an organization at UMBC, a public/government school; and it has the Fourteenth Amendment, which encompasses the Bill of Rights, apply to it. The Fourteenth Amendment thus applies to the government/public-school organization government that UMBC/JSU Hillel has.
  • "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." She may not quash my First Amendment Rights of criticizing her in light of her perversion of my lashon tov and in a religious context as hate speech or personal attacks on her or our shared ethnicity. As I said and demonstarted (including with a link to Ezekiel 48), she is a so-called "Katz" who is of "the Levites [who] went astray " and did not do tzedek when she twisted my lashon tov into lashon hara. As a Jew (and one who is a Levite) myself, anyway, I have the right and even a mitzvah to correct another Jew (let alone another Levite) if he or she (in this case, she) has gone astray (even if, and though, she ranks above me). 
  • "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws....The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." Again, UMBC JSU/Hillel is an organization at UMBC, a public/government school; and it has the Fourteenth Amendment, which encompasses the Bill of Rights, apply to itThe Fourteenth Amendment thus applies to the government/public-school organization government that UMBC/JSU Hillel has.
I, thus, have a legal case against both Emily and anyone else who reported the original entries as hate speech, and against Facebook for taking it as hate speech under the Constitution and various case-law laws. For example, "freedom of speech does not protect “free thought for those who agree with us, but freedom for the thought that we hate.” U.S. v. Schwimmer, 279 U.S.644, 49 S. Ct. 448, 73 L. Ed. 889 (1929)." Also, "the Supreme Court has identified several kinds of expression that the government may regulate to varying degrees without running afoul of the Constitution, including...stu-dent speech.... The degree to which the government may regulate a particular kind of expression depends on the nature of the speech, the context in which the speech is made, and its likely impact upon any listeners." Tinker clearly reads, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.

So, Emily, anyone who joined her in falsely reporting my response to her as hate speech, and Facebook could all be easily sued; especially since she first bullied me, then reported my response on my own blog which is protected under the Constitution and various case laws as hate speech. However, Messianic Jews are not to sue anybody; so I will (luckily for Emily) treated her as she deserves and sue her, let alone anyone who joined her or Facebook.

I will, nonetheless, repost the entries--and that is that.





Monday, January 28, 2013

Yeah....No....

There is no proof that we're related to the Romanovs. Russian, yes. Polish, yes. Jewish by ethnicity, and the former two (as well as Hungarian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian, among other types of citizens in Eastern Europe) by citizenship, yes and yes. Romanovs? No...and there's no proof that Stefan Czarniecki (to whom we can't even trace our family tree back) was related to the Romanovs.

czarniecki family romanov family
1
czarniecki family romanov family related
1


PS When you find proof that the Czarnieckis or Czerneckis, Uszinskys, Gajdoszes, etc. were related to the Romanovs, please, let me know. By the way, I did see my mispacha from Switzerland. Shalom alecheim, and I'm sorry that I didn't acknowledge you before. By the way, as a PolishForums guy stated, "Andrius is lithuanian equivalent of russian Andrei which comes from greek. Andriulis in lithuanian means 'little Andrius' or 'dear Andrius'. Andriulis + evičius= Andriulevičius. I checked my LIthuanian surnames dictionary and there are a lot of different surnames with root Andr-, and Andrulevičius(without "i") almost exclusively comes from this little town STAKLISKES. Hope it helps."

So, we're Litvaks. Does this help? Incidentally, I'm very Litvake--more intellectual than emotional. 

   

Saturday, February 18, 2012

Repost: Constitutional and Biblical Scholarship: "Like the Bible..."


"Like the Bible, it ought to be read again and again". (FDR via Epstein and Walker 1) In my personal opinion, no wonder FDR was an Anti Semite: that is, he treated the Constitution-- a living document-- and the Bible-- a fixed document-- as on the same par: that is, he thought that each was a document into which could read his own interpretation and thus implement said interpretation with the supposed support of said document. As FDR read Anti Semitism into the Bible, many have read their own interpretations into the Constitution.
The late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall correctly stated that "the framers 'could not have imagined, nor would they have accepted, that the document they were drafting would one day be construed be a Supreme Court to which had been appointed a woman the descendant of an African slave.'" (ibid. 6) The Constitution was inherently "'defective from the start'" (ibid.) because of its status as a living, amendable document and scarily framed by WASP Supremacist, Unitarian, and Deist misogynists who treated the Bible in the same way that FDR later would-- and by treating the Bible as such, they framed the Constitution based on their inherently UnJewish and UnChristian concept of (for a lack of a better term) Judeo Christianity (or at least Judeo-Christian priniciples).
As in the awful perversion of Biblical study known as modern Biblical scholarship, Constitutional scholarship has produced schools of original intent, textualism, and original meaning-- all three of which (in the case of Constitutional scholarship) harken back to what the framers (often chauvinistically, WASPishly, Unitarianistically, and Deistically wanted); and stare decisis, polling jurisdictionism, and pragmatism-- all three of which seek to interpret and implement the Constitution within the context of changing times and other factors.
For example and for comparison:
  1. A Reform Jew may treat kashrut as no longer or even not ever really valid under modern Biblical scholarship's forms of original intent, original meaning, and pragmatism: "[Reform and Orthodox] differences in perspective can be seen in every aspect of life: how holy days and festivals are celebrated, how kashrut (the laws of keeping kosher) are kept, how the prayer service is organized and conducted, etc. But it is not accurate to generalize and say All Orthodox Jews do this...' or 'All Reform Jews do that...'"; and " For Reform, the Torah is the God-inspired attempt by Hebrews/Israelites/ Jews to understand their surroundings and their relationship with God. While it is a holy document, the Torah is rooted in the past, and we can even sometimes discern the circumstances under which certain sections were written down. Reform thus sees development in Judaism, not just through the biblical period but thereafter as well, so that we can continue the process of helping Judaism evolve by coming to our own understandings." ( Union For Reform Judaism)
  2. In the same way that Reform Jews in modern Biblical scholarship  see kashrut and other apparently-flawed and for-the-time institutions; many (including the late Justice Thurgood Marshall) in Constitutional scholarship use original intent, original meaning, and pragmatism to see the Constitution as the framers' " attempt... to understand their surroundings and their relationship with God" and government; and thus believe about the Constitution as Reform Jews believe about the Bible (including the New Testament; although to be fair, Orthodox Jews like Shmuely Boteach and Dr. Amy-Jill Levine believe the following more about the New Testament than do Reform Jews)-- that is, " While it is a [sacred] document, [the document] is rooted in the past, and we can even...discern [and study] the circumstances under which certain sections were written down. [We] thus sees development in [the underlying philosophy behind the document], not just through the [document's] period but thereafter as well, so that we can continue the process of helping [the document and philosophy underlying it] evolve by coming to our own understandings." In other words, Constitutional stare decisis, polling jurisdictionism, and textualism within the context of pragmatism and the other schools of Constitutional scholarship are born out of the idea that the Constitution is  the framers' " attempt... to understand their surroundings and their relationship with God" and government.
In conclusion, treating the Constitution as a living document and treating it as though it were the Bible (and vice versa) causes real problems. Firstly, one can pervert the Constitution into the always-good document that (as the late Justice Marshall rightly pointed out) it wasn't. Secondly, one can read his or her own interpretations into the Constitution and, to begin with, suggest that it was ever even based on Judeo-Christian principles to begin with when it was based on three main perversions of Christianity-- chauvinistic WASP Supremacism, Deism, and Unitarianism. Thirdly, one can (so to speak) turn the clock back on how the Constitution has become by using original intent, original meaning, and textualism if he or she so wishes to use those three as the ways to interpret the Constitution. 
In further conclusion; one can basically hold the supposedly-Judeo-Christian Constitution as sacred as the Bible and treat it as "[l]ike the Bible" instead of like the chauvinistic, WASP Supremacist, Deist, and Unitarian document that it would continue to be lest people like Justice Marshall continue to treat it like Reform Jews treat the Bible (and like some Orthodox Jews treat the New Testament as a part of the Bible).

Monday, January 30, 2012

My Internet Connection Is Slower Than Me, Though Things Could Be Worse...

But I missed a class by accident today-- which I'll explain on YouTube (See my latest video.). As for my other class today (for a lack of a better term, and without saying "Antimissionary"), Non-Messianic professor who may be very liberal alert!-- although I'm not sure; but I think that a professor who openly wears a kippah, teaches at liberal UMBC (at which I am amazed that I have not been persecuted for watching FOX News on my dorm floor's community television, by the way), and has the following response to what was originally a Blackboard post is certainly Non Messianic and probably very liberal (whereas many or even most Jewish conservatives and moderates usually tread carefully on the outward symbolism, unless they're on the other extreme-- Far Right or even Meir Kahanist-- at least in America. Most Jewish conservative and moderates, for a lack of a better term, play it safe on showing outward religiosity. Think of many Modern Orthodox Jews who one can't tell are Orthodox just by looking at them-- for example, Michael Medved and Dennis Prager, and even Mark Levin).

By the way, most Messianic Jews (including myself) who I've seen usually don't go showing our Yiddishkeit the way that Non-Messianic Jews do when they do-- many or even (I daresay) most Messianic Jews are much like most secular Non-Messianic Jews and Reform Jews, gentile Christians, and others who show (for a lack of a better term) little to no outward religiosity. For comparison; take most secular Non-Messianic Jews and Reform Jews, and mainstream gentile Christians who might have only a bumpsticker on a car or keychain (whether the bumpsticker or keychain be a URJ or JCC sticker, or an Ichthys sticker or keychain), or a necklace (be the necklace a Magen David, cross, or Magen David-and-cross or an other Messianic Jewish-symbol necklace), or a copy of Tanakh (either with or without the Brit Hadashah) in a pocket, purse or other bag, or car.

As for the response on Blackboard:


"I appreciate your passion and the fact that you took time to comment. Please continue to do so throughout the semester.
But please also cut out the polemic language and try to keep your posts as concise as possible. I want the discussion boards to be a friendly place. It's possible to be passionate and opinionated, while also being polite and concise--and doing so will make this forum a lot more effective.
If you have any questions about these guidelines, please speak with me.
Again, I look forward to hearing what you have to say!"

What was apparently "polemic" and not "polite and concise"? I can more than guess. For example:

  • ""Like the Bible, it ought to be read again and again". (FDR via Epstein and Walker 1) In my personal opinion, no wonder FDR was an Anti Semite: that is, he treated the Constitution-- a living document-- and the Bible-- a fixed document-- as on the same par: that is, he thought that each was a document into which could read his own interpretation and thus implement said interpretation with the supposed support of said document. As FDR read Anti Semitism into the Bible, many have read their own interpretations into the Constitution."

That FDR was an Anti Semite is known fact. Even liberal Wikipedia cites that FDR did not support a Jewish State in "Palestine".



  • "The late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall correctly stated that "the framers 'could not have imagined, nor would they have accepted, that the document they were drafting would one day be construed be a Supreme Court to which had been appointed a woman the descendant of an African slave.'" (ibid. 6) The Constitution was inherently "'defective from the start'" (ibid.) because of its status as a living, amendable document and scarily framed by WASP Supremacist, Unitarian, and Deist misogynists who treated the Bible in the same way that FDR later would-- and by treating the Bible as such, they framed the Constitution based on their inherently UnJewish and UnChristian concept of (for a lack of a better term) Judeo Christianity (or at least Judeo-Christian priniciples).As in the awful perversion of Biblical study known as modern Biblical scholarship, Constitutional scholarship has produced schools of original intent, textualism, and original meaning-- all three of which (in the case of Constitutional scholarship) harken back to what the framers (often chauvinistically, WASPishly, Unitarianistically, and Deistically wanted); and stare decisis, polling jurisdictionism, and pragmatism-- all three of which seek to interpret and implement the Constitution within the context of changing times and other factors."


Again, the professor wants me change historical fact. The framers indeed (as, of all people, Newt Gingrich once cited in a special based on one of his books for FOX News) were 95% Unitarian and Deist (if not 95% just Unitarian). Also, the 3/5-of-a-person clause and the lack of the 19th Amendment spoke for that  "the framers 'could not have imagined, nor would they have accepted, that the document they were drafting would one day be construed be a Supreme Court to which had been appointed a woman the descendant of an African slave.'" 

I can't change that "The Constitution was inherently "'defective from the start'" (ibid.) because of its status as a living, amendable document and scarily framed by WASP Supremacist, Unitarian, and Deist misogynists who treated the Bible in the same way that FDR later would-- and by treating the Bible as such, they framed the Constitution based on their inherently UnJewish and UnChristian concept of (for a lack of a better term) Judeo Christianity (or at least Judeo-Christian priniciples)." 

Yet, I get a professor who gives much a pass to FDR and the framers of the Constitution as Shmuely Boteach gave to Mohamedians (and in comparison to Christians) on Geraldo Rivera's radio show. He (like Shmuely Boteach) has no problem blatantly implying that he's of the school that says that Jews must be both outwardly religious and proudly Democratic as you can get-- apparently, G-d forbid that one can have a moderate or conservative, factual view of history and try to assimilate as much as possible so as not to bring trouble on him- or her-self or anyone else. I'm just saying, wearing a kippah that openly and being liberal to the point of being revisionist is inviting stereotypes from and wrong rubs toward both fellow Jews and gentiles.