I don't have a problem with it....unless the guy was AWOL and a traitor, then I do.

I do.Among other things it puts Americans--especially those living or traveling abroad--at risk.  Now the US will swap prisoners for Americans I expect kidnappings of Americans by terrorist groups for political purposes to become a problem.

Merry Christmas!In keeping with the spirit of the day, in the General Discussion forum I posted a combination of historical facts surronding the birth of Jesus and some (religious) thoughts about Christ.  Again, Merry Christmas to all.

If a person is in the country illegally are they not then already a criminal by definition and should then have a criminal record for being in violation of immigration laws at a minimum?

I am not sure this is correct, although IMO that is how it should be.In most cases simply being in the country illegally is not a felony.  I believe it is actually a violation of civil code, not criminal law.

Let's start with: I have NOT studied the issue well.  Nor do I remember most of what I studied about the issue eons ago when I was in college.I am, however, skeptical.  IMO scholars get bored and love inventing new theories to break their boredom; I think this is what is happening here.  Especially since we know there really was a Shakespeare.  Plus his will indicates he was a man of means.  If he did not make his money as a playwright then how did he make it?Shakespeare also popularized the Shakespearean sonnet; the reason I was thought he did this was to obtain literary fame.  If Bacon “was Shakespeare” then why did he write sonnets as both Bacon and Shakespeare?  To me that make no sense and makes me very skeptical of the claim that Francis Bacon “was Shakespeare.”

Based on the political philosophy on which the United States was found–that the just powers of gov't come from the consent of the governed–I think the South would have/should have won.However, the South did not elect to take their case to court.  Instead they took it to the battle field (firing on Ft. Sumter was a huge error) and consequently must accept the decision they received:  the Union is indissoluble.

Lee had another option, one he did not want to use. It may of worked.  (It did for Washington.)Washington was willing--when he still had a viable army--to let the British capture the nation's capitol, instead of being pinned down defending it.  Lee was not.  Yet, as Lee said,"Richmond was a mill stone around his neck.  Ultimately Washington's strategy was--at any cost--to keep an army in the field until the British grew weary of the conflict.  That might have worked for Lee, but he was unwilling to do it.  A guerrilla war might have worked.  Abandoning Richmond and hooking up with Johnston before trench warfare reduced Lee's army to 25,000 men might have kept an army in the field until the North became war weary.  Had Lee's forces included Johnston's army he might have been able to defeat Grant in a field of his choosing (then Sherman).  Etc.Instead, Lee defended his nation's capitol to the last.  A strategic failure that Washington avoided.  Which, for me, shows Washington was the better general.

In many religions people saw the gods as beings that were arbitrary and capricious–beings that at times lacked morality.  (Look, for example, at the adulterous practices of Zeus..  For that matter look at how religious prostitution was a part of many ancient religions. )

Due to their view that the gods were arbitrary and capricious as well as “toyed” with man for pleasure the people feared the gods.  They offered sacrifices to appease them.The Hebrews saw their relationship with God very differently.  They did not see Jehovah as being arbitrary or  capricious, rather they saw him as a person interested in their well being.  A person who rewarded them for obedience and punished them for disobedience.

Today we cannot know with certainty what was the phenomenon the Magi saw that caused them to journey to Judea and worship the Christ child.  It may have been a comet, a meteorite or a new star never before seen.  However, our knowledge of astronomy makes the movements of Jupiter two millennia ago a likely candidate for the Star the Bethlehem.  Jupiter is brighter in the night sky than any star or planet except Venus.  As viewed from the Earth, planets generally move eastward through a series of constellations known as the Zodiac.  However, planets do not always move eastward, sometimes they move westward for a few months before again moving eastward.  This westward movement is known as retrograde motion.  (Retrograde motion occurs in the planets that are further from the Sun than the Earth because these planets take longer to complete their orbit.  For example, Jupiter appears to move eastward until the Earth overtakes Jupiter in its orbit and then for a time Jupiter appears to move westward.  The effect is similar to what a person experiences when traveling in a car that overtakes another car.  At the moment faster car overtakes the slower car, the slower car appears to move backward.) The observations of ancient astronomers probably arose from the needs of ancient societies.  For example, the motion of the star Sirius was used to predict annual flooding of the river Nile.  The early evening rising of Capella (the goat star) was a sign of winter storms on the Mediterranean.  No doubt such astronomical phenomena gave rise to astrological beliefs such as the movement of the stars foretelling the future of man. When two planets—or a planet and star—get close together the event is called a conjunction.  Today state-of-art planetariums can reconstruct the appearance of the sky on any given night in history and tell us some interesting things about the movement of Jupiter long ago.  Astronomers tell us that on September 14, 3 B.C., Jupiter appeared to pass very close to the star Regulus, “the King’s star.”  This conjunction of Jupiter and Regulus appeared in the eastern sky. In the following months at first Jupiter continued its eastward movement, it then—as viewed from the Earth—it stopped and moved westward for a period of time.  On February 17, 2 B.C. Jupiter passed even closer to Regulus than it had on September 14, 3 B.C.  On May 8, 2 B.C. Jupiter passed Regulus a third time.  Thus, over a period of nearly eight months the Magi saw Jupiter appear to draw a circle, or crown, above “the King’s star,” beginning in the east.  Astrologers would probably have predicated a royal birth in Judea after observing this movement. Additionally, on the evening of June 17, 2 B.C. as the sky became dark over Babylonia, Jupiter and Venus drew closer and closer together until at 8:51 p.m. that night over Babylon they appeared to merge into a single, brilliant star in the western sky which would to be seen as pointing towards Bethlehem.  (For further information see, David and Wendee Levy, Cosmic Discoveries, published by Prometheus Books.) Of additional interest is the movement of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars.  Every 794 years, 4 months and 12 days the planets appear to merge.  In 4 B.C. the place where these planets would appear to have merged into a single planet (or star) was Bethlehem of Judea. These events help fulfill the prophecies of Balaam of Moab as well as those found in Psalms:I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.  (Numbers 24:17)The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts.  (Psalms 72:10) Serious consideration should be give to the June 17, 2 B.C. conjunction of Jupiter and Venus rear the king-star Regulus in Leo as being the Star of Bethlehem.  Additionally, it is likely that it was the sign of Christ’s conception, not his birth. In the 2000 years before and after this 2 B.C. conjunction, when Jupiter and Venus seemed to merge, there has never been another such perfect conjunction of these two planets near Regulus.  The sign of the tribe of Judah, of course, is the lion.  Regulus, within Leo, is associated both with kings and with the kingdom of Judah.  Jupiter was the father god and was often associated with the birth of kings.  Venus was the mother god as well as the goddess of love and fertility.  Thus it is likely that the Magi seeing Jupiter and Venus join together in a “marriage union” near Regulus would predict, not the birth of a king of Judah, but rather the conception of the king of Judah. It also supports two ancient Christian traditions mentioned by a fourth century churchman named Epipanius.  The first is that Christ was conceived on June 20th, which is very close to the June 17th conjunction.  The second is that Mary’s pregnancy lasted 10 months.  (It is possible a ten-month pregnancy was needed for the Magi to arrive in Jerusalem when Jesus was born.  Also that with a shorter pregnancy Mary would have delivered in Nazareth.) There was a Passover feast on April 9, 1 B.C.  The Law of Moses was interpreted as requiring parents to present a newborn child at the temple within 40 days of birth.  It is likely that Joseph and Mary would combine their enrollment in the Roman census together with a Passover visit to Jerusalem.  A trip to Jerusalem for Passover is the likely reason there was “no room at the inn” for them.  Jerusalem was always packed during Passover.  The uncertainties of travel being what they were in those days it is likely Mary and Joseph would try to arrive in Jerusalem a few days prior to Passover.  Thus a birth date for Jesus early in April of 1 B.C. seems probable, as that would put Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem shortly before Passover.  (Bethlehem is a suburb of Jerusalem located about 5 miles distant from the center of the larger city.  Then as now, those residing in the surrounding suburbs were consider to be “in Jerusalem” for Passover.) Shepherds are recorded as tending their flocks by night.  This is a common practice during the lambing season.  A Passover birth would coincide with the spring lambing season.  The Biblical mention of shepherds tending their flocks by night is consistent with a Passover birth in 1 B.C.  (Remember there was no year zero.  For Christ to be one year old on his birthday in 1 A.D. he would have to have been born in 1 B.C.  For further information supporting a 1 B.C. birth, please see the notes concerning the subject.) If the “new star” was indeed a sign of Christ’s conception, rather than his birth, it might also help explain other events.  It would explain how the Magi had sufficient time to arrive when the Christ child was still an infant in or near Bethlehem.  Especially when one considers that it is likely Mary and Joseph would remain near Jerusalem in order to be able to present Jesus at the temple forty days following his birth as was required by the Law of Moses.  Herod is reported to have killed the male infants of Bethlehem under age two after receiving the Magi.  It is likely that he wanted to take no chance that the Magi made an error.  Herod might have feared that an earlier conjunction—perhaps that of September 14, 3 B.C.—was the sign of either Christ’s conception or birth. On the evening of June 17, 2 B.C., as the sky became dark over Babylonia, the planets Jupiter and Venus drew closer and closer together until at 8:51 p.m. that night over Babylon they appeared to merge into a single, brilliant star—a marriage union—in the western sky.  What today we call the Star of Bethlehem would have seen by Babylonian astronomers as pointing directly towards Bethlehem.  It is likely the Magi concluded that a new king of Jews, the promised Messiah, had been conceived and shortly thereafter began their journey to worship him.