A response from the Lord of Tolerance
From: wildbill4dixie@yahoo.com
The Lord of Tolerance honors me with a response. Of course, I simply could not resist returning that honor.


From: fatcatcommentary@gmail.com
Bill, first of all, I refuse to sink to your level. I am capable of effectively communicating without having to resort to name calling to get my point across. There is a direct correlation between the two topics as I proved so vividly in my article. The fact that you do not see the correlation is probably because of you prejudiced views on the subjects, which is understandable seeing that your bias is so apparent by the mood of your letter. America was founded on the principal that we would be tolerant of other religions, just as they were tolerant of the people who propelled the country into the Civil War.

The Constitution, regardless of how you feel, does not allow states to secede, especially when they accentuate the act by firing on federal troops. I can understand your position on the subjects and I respect your right to believe as you do, but remember that I also have a right to have my own opinion. Perhaps you will also need to keep a bucket of water near to awaken you from the stupor that you appear to be so deeply entranced in.
Wesley Thomas

From: wildbill4dixie@yahoo.com
To: fatcatcommentary@gmail.com
First, when you talk about my “level”, look up, not down. You are nowhere near my “level.” I’ve read a few history books. From the looks of it you wouldn’t know one if it fell off the top shelf and hit you on the head.
Second, name calling is name calling, be it “fathead” or referring to someone as “treasonous,” i.e. a “traitor. Once again, if you’re looking at my “level” you’re looking in the wrong direction. Don’t look down, look straight ahead. You started with the name calling and I responded. I just happen to be a bit better at it.
Third, the Constitution is a rulebook written by the Founders in 1787 for the federal government, not the states. States have their own Constitutions. Read the 10th amendment for clarification – all rights and privileges not specifically delegated to the Federal government, OR, prohibited to the states, ARE RESERVED TO THE STATES. What part of this don’t you understand? You need more proof? I am quite familiar with the words of the Founders on this matter.  
The South was not the first region to address secession. In 1803, Senator James Hillhouse, of Connecticut, said – “The Eastern States must and will dissolve the Union and form a separate government.” Then president Thomas Jefferson did not threaten to send federal troops to Connecticut. Lots more examples where this one came from.
St. George Tucker, one of the Founders, had this to say on the permanence of the Union-
"The federal government, then, appears to be the organ through which the united republics communicate with foreign nations, and with each other. Their submission to its operation is voluntary: its councils, its sovereignty is an emanation from theirs, not a flame by which they have been consumed, nor a vortex in which they are swallowed up. Each is still a perfect state, still sovereign, still independent, and still capable, should the occasion require, to resume the exercise of its functions, as such, in the most unlimited extent."
"But until the time shall arrive when the occasion requires a resumption of the rights of sovereignty by the several states (and far be that period removed when it should happen) the exercise of the rights of sovereignty by the states, individually, is wholly suspended, or discontinued, in the cases before mentioned: nor can that suspension ever be removed, so long as the present constitution remains unchanged, but by the dissolution of the bonds of union. An event which no good citizen can wish, and which no good, or wise administration will ever hazard.”
Tucker’s take on the Union was not at all unusual. Most of the Founders HOPED the Union would be permanent. They did not however, MANDATE that it be so.
As far as firing on Federal troops is concerned, what were those federal troops doing on land belonging to a sovereign state which had just declared its involvement in the Union to be at an end? Check your history books and you will see that two months before Fort Sumter fell Jefferson Davis sent 3 representatives to Washington to meet with Lincoln about this and other matters. They sat on their thumbs for 6 weeks while Lincoln ignored them. As one of them put it, “you can’t negotiate with a man who says you don’t exist.”
And on the subject of direct quotes, here’s one from Lincoln himself. This is what he told the commander of the federal fleet that was sent to relieve Fort Sumter several days after the fort fell – 
“You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Fort Sumter even if it should fail; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation has been justified.”
Commander Fox (the commander of the naval fleet sent to relieve Sumter) later remarked, that it seemed very important to Lincoln that South Carolina “should stand before the civilized world as having fired upon bread.”
Sounds to me like someone goaded someone into firing the first shot…. but American politicians would never do such a thing now would they??
Finally, yes, America was founded on the principle of religious tolerance. But it is not the tolerance of people like me that is in question here. The question is, do those Muslims who immigrate here from Muslim countries feel the same? You haven’t addressed that issue and you haven’t double checked with the Israelis either. I have addressed that issue and I’ve known not a small number of Israelis in my lifetime.
And yes, you do have the freedom to express your opinion. I might remind you however, that if you were in a country run by Muslims, you would NOT have such a freedom.
Bill Vallante