TheLastManInAmerica

It’s a tragedy, something no parent should have to deal with. Losing a child would undoubtedly cause a lifelong hurt no parent could ever recover from. I can’t say for certain but I’m sure the void left by the child’s death would forever be filled what ifs, a burden the parent would forever carry with them, wondering what they could’ve done differently to save the child’s life.

But why is it that we are only examining this plight now, following the death of John Travolta’s son, Jett? The national news’ hearts, along with the nation’s, are bleeding all over the place for this Hollywood icon since he lost his only son this past week. Why? What makes him so special that a family tragedy should spark such empathy from the world at large. I nearly died at sixteen when I was hospitalized following a stroke brought on by an unprovoked sucker punch from a man twice my age. Would my mother’s grief make national headlines? Would it be a top story on Larry King Live?

Children die every day in this country. Do we mourn as a nation for the thousands of parents whose children have parished in the line of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or the parents who watch their children live short, pain-filled lives dying of leukemia, expiring before they learn to walk, where’s our outpouring of sympathy for them?

I genuinely feel sorry for they guy; no parent should have to deal with that. It’s the media that has soured me on this subject. This sorrow that John Travolta feels is felt by people everyday but it takes a celebrity’s experience to make it something to report on. Then they all feel so distraught over it. Then their heart’s go out to the parents. If they’re going to report on the death of a celebrity’s child for days, then they need to dedicate an entire channel to the thousands of others who experience this pain everyday.

Get a life! Michael Newdow, you and your plaintiffs are making all of us look like whiny little children. You’re lawsuit to have “so help me god” taken out of the inaugaration and your objection to Rick Warren delivering the invocation speech are petty and seem to ignore the fact that all of our presidents have been christian.
You want these words taken out, right? To make you feel better? But what about those Christian presidents that this pledge actually means something to? You and your plaintiffs complain that you will feel ostracized if you are forced to watch an inaugaration with religious components, so you’d rather force these religious people to do without swearing their oath to their god?
And it was Barack Obama’s choice to have Rick Warren speak at his inaugaration, what say do you have in the matter? Obama is a religious man and wants another to speak at this occasion for him, you might not agree with it but that’s the cost of freedom, people will do things that you don’t like.
Atheists like to think that religious people are always forcing their beliefs on them. Sometimes they are, no doubt, but we need to pick our battles, not just start kicking and screaming every time someone says, “God bless you,” when we sneeze. Our presidents have been, and probably will be for a long time, invaribly religious. It is their choice to say these things and have these people speak; if they were atheist, I’m sure they would object to repeating that line that so offends you. If we try to take that away from them then we’re no better the zealots who condemn us for our beliefs