Just because we cannot physically see something, does this make it any less real?
Similar to the saying if a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody there to hear it, does it still make a noise?
Yes it still makes a noise however there was simply nobody there to hear it when it fell, therefore this saying in itself is designed as a giant head fuck for all intents and purposes.
My son brought home a copy of Oregon’s state song. I am not 100% sure I am interpreting it correctly, so let me get some feedback here. To me, it sounds like the song is glorifying the killing off of the native people… I am a bit dismayed at this. Here are the lyrics:
Oregon, My Oregon
—
Land of the Empire Builders,
Land of the Golden West;
Conquered and held by free men,
Fairest and the best.
-
Onward and upward ever,
Forward on, and on;
Hail to thee, Land of Heroes,
My Oregon.
-
Land of the rose and sunshine,
Land of the summer’s breeze;
Laden with health and vigor,
Fresh from the Western seas.
-
Blest by the blood of martyrs,
Land of the setting sun.;
Hail to thee, Land of Promise,
My Oregon.
WHY does the Roman Catholic Church attempt to take away an individual’s freedom of religion, by claiming that it is THEIR religious freedom that is being taken away? Regardless of name, these “Catholic” hospitals are run for profit, not charity. If they gave their services to the poor, instead of expecting the government or the patients to pay for them, then, and only then would they have any right to hide behind freedom of religion.
Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan, archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said
“To force American citizens to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable. It is as much an attack on access to health care as on religious freedom. Historically this represents a challenge and a compromise of our religious liberty.”
(source = this linked article from the US Conference of Catholic bishops own website)
There are a few problems with this statement. First, no American citizen is being forced to choose between those things. Contraception is not being forced on anyone. The OPTION of contraception is being made available to those who need it. Since these “religiously-run medical facilities” are what the public must use in many areas (I just had my knee operated on in a “Catholic” hospital, paid for by a government program), all this does is make medical care appropriate to those of all faiths available to them. That one year extension is a polite concession so that those BUSINESSES that operate FOR PROFIT, that make money off the GOVERNMENT, can quit hiding behind RELIGION, and stop denying the fundamental rights of those who have no choice but to use them.
If these “Catholic hospitals” wish to operate without following government mandates, then they need to start following the teachings of Christ, and minister unto the poor, by giving of their own riches. As it is, these hospitals are businesses who rely on government payments to continue operating. As such, they must concede to the first amendment rights of all who utilize them, even those whose beliefs require a responsible approach to procreation.
Once again I find myself amazed at how far modern religion has been twisted by politics and power-grubbing.
Personhood activists, this blurb’s for you!
Read all of my words, and then read the words of Jesus in the Bible, so you can know that I speak the Truth, in understanding Scripture. Jesus has a plan for His followers to help in bringing people to God. Jesus teaches his followers to act in meekness, humility, love, respect, kindness, acceptance, and forgiveness. Jesus teaches that that is the way to treat people who do not follow your morals. Jesus said noone comes to the Father except by him. The only way to lead people to God is to follow his example. I am typing these words, but they are the lessons of Jesus. Heed them. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for their judgmentalism and for their use of Law to force others to conform to their moral codes.
Before you let your anger direct you away from this, recognize that these are the ideals of Jesus, and then consider both where your anger comes from, and what Jesus had to say about acting in anger. The acts of the Personhood movement violate each and every one of these directives, given by Jesus. The acts of the Personhood movement do exactly those things Jesus that Jesus rebuked his challengers and followers for doing and thinking.
If you wish to help people find God, or even if you just want to claim to follow Christ, then you need to repent your indiscretions, and start reaching out and ministering to the needs of the sinners, until they come to you to ask “why”. Only then can you lead them to God. What you are doing now pushes people away from you, and destroys your witness. You push people away from God. Reread your Bible, without the anger that has directed both you and your teachers away from the words. You will discover that Jesus spoke out against things like the Personhood movement when he rebuked the Pharasees for their involving themselves in the lives of others. Jesus would not approve of the anger and hate that fuels this movement. He would not approve of taking away the rights of others. He may not have approved of concept of abortion, but he did speak directly against your response to it.
http://front.moveon.org/the-thanks-mississippi-image-that-is-lighting-up-facebook/#
Authoritarian Follower: An individual who, for whatever reason, accepts what an accepted authority tells them, regardless of whether or not it makes sense.
Compartmentalization: term describing the ability of authoritarian followers to keep separate the ideas, given by their authorities, that prove each other wrong.
There are different causes for this inability to comprehend reality. One of the more common involves severe punishment of very young children for asking questions or not accepting the statements of their parents. When a child feels like it is in danger, due to anything ranging from frightening yells and screams to extreme “spanking”, because it challenged the words of their parents, they develop a survival mechanism called compartmentalization. This allows them to not have to ask questions, and risk the hurt or fear of hurt they were (usually repeatedly) subjected to. These children become Authoritarian Followers, following the authority of their parents, regardless of their parents accuracy. As the children get older, the mantle of authority gets passed on to the religious and political leaders the parents themselves follow. The fear of questioning is a directly attached to their sense of survival, so anyone trying to reason with them causes a fear reaction, usually masked as anger.
This pattern is often found in members of the fundamentalist churches who teach “spare the rod, and spoil the child”. Political power mongers, realizing the power in numbers, have played on these peoples inability to question discrepancies and turned them into the “religious right”. Their political views are about as full of misunderstanding and deceit as a religion in which Jesus teaches kindness and compassion, but who’s followers practice abuse of their children and hatred for those Jesus said to love.
This is how the Tea Party was formed: by playing on that fear of questioning authority, regardless of how ridiculous the claims may be. I have to remember that their anger is really fear, so I can pity them, instead of hating them.
I am disappointed. I have looked at facts, I have done research, I have looked at timelines, I understand that the effects of momentum and inertia affect political and economic trends almost as much as they do things in the physical world, and I look for cause and effect relationships. Because I do research, and because I do not base my opinion only on what someone I was told to trust says, I have been mostly in support of President Obama and his policies. These policies have not been perfect, but they usually tend to guide our country in the direction that works for the overall country, at least when appropriate time was given to counter the momentum of the previous policies. Because of this, he has earned my support.
Due to the Tea Party takeover of the House of Representatives, his ability to get things done was hampered, and he had to start making compromises. This I understand to be the nature of the political beast. I do not like the policies that came after that, but I recognize his inability to have policy move through easily.
A combination of two things have left me disappointed. First, President Obama should have realized much sooner that the new idea was to block him no matter what, and so he should not have continued compromising. He should have strongly suggested to the public that elected these new Representatives to recall them, and any other Representatives who put the people in such risk. Second, he should have made a direct statement about the brutality that the police in certain cities have used to respond to the Occupy movement. Not only should he denounce the police violence, but he should have sent in the Federal Marshals to investigate, using the ample footage provided by the people there.
AND he should have attached himself to the movement, and used it’s power as the crutch he needed to stand back up to the idiots in office who want to make their puppet masters happy.
Just a quick (for me, anyway) rant about current politics. Pick me up on your way to the next protest… These middle aged knees just can’t walk that far anymore.
.
I participated in a conversation on a site that promotes drilling in the Gulf to solve our oil problems. My response to “we need to drill” starts below this paragraph. The sad thing is, that if oil companies took the money they intended to use to build new oil derricks and invested it in the ideas below, they would still be on the cutting edge of profit, while doing the USA and the global environment a good turn.
This is one solution [drilling in the Gulf]… The sad truth is that by the time the new drilling and processing could reach the market, we could go back to producing the fuels that the engines we use were designed to use before DuPont purchased legislation to make the more effective competitors of fossil illegal.
The “gasoline” engine was originally run and intended to run on alcohol (not limited to corn – we already could effectively produce alcohol from trash). With a few modifications, any gasoline engine could run on alcohol NOW. Manufacturers could easily (and without any more cost than the usual modifications) start putting engines already capable in new cars as soon as they change the engines over for the next model year. We could be running on cheaper, produced inside the USA, fuel in about as much time as new drilling could be rushed through.
When Rudolf Diesel introduced the diesel engine, his first words were “Vegetable Oil”. Current diesel engines can, and some do, run on filtered fast food oil. The modifications to make this the most effective fuel for new diesel engines could be made for new vehicles (and without any more cost than the usual modifications) as soon as the manufacturers make their model year modifications.
Then there is the other stuff like plastics, medicines, etc. that we make from fossil fuel. Before DuPont’s purchased legislation made hemp illegal(and by making hemp illegal, made researching with hemp illegal), research into the applications of the seed oil were already producing amazing results. The advances made with fossil oil could be slightly modified to produce very similar results from renewable oils.
The truth is that if the government were to step up and make these kinds of changes, then by the time new wells were drilled and producing, we could be close enough to oil free to not need more than the oil we already drill for and produce.
Another sad truth is that if the oil companies really wanted to, they could have set up large scale processors of fry oil and other oils to produce fuel for diesel engines, and they could have set up mass alcohol refineries, so that they could still be the primary producers of fuel in the USA. They could have cornered the market, simply with their ability to set up major production, which would make their product cheaper to produce than anyone else. Between their ability to set up mass production, and using the various fuel consumption reducing patents that the various oil companies have purchased and not put into use, oil companies could quickly revolutionize the energy market, and be so far ahead of any competition that their domination would continue. Sure, profits might not be quite as extravagant, but the overall economy would benefit so that their non-fuel petroleum products would have more demand…
Now, I know I am smart, but not so smart that their people that are paid to think of ways to keep business working couldn’t have seen this and worked it out. The final answer still ends up that corporations operate on greed. Nothing but greed. We need that “we the people” part of our history reinstated before this greed wipes out all that makes the USA great.
Picture of 3 people holding a copy of the US Constitution, in a classroom full of kids. The kid in the middle looks like he is intently reading. Bush Jr. looks confused, and Rick Perry looks pissed. I understand the kid and we are familiar with Jr being confused. What was Perry pissed about? oh, yeah, he can’t handle the truth.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
It amazes me how much a difference in perspective matters. It seems that the closer you are to a problem, the better you understand it. State level government deal much more closely with educational issues than federal level does. We have Republican state governors admitting that Obamas actions have had positive effect. Of course Perry is a good example of that change in perspective – as Governor of Texas, he requested a great deal of aid that was put in place by liberals – his state would not have been able to remain solvent without it. Now that his eyes are set higher, he condemns such programs.
I am not a great fan of Obama, but the ideas he has managed to push through have had positive effects, and the problems we still have often lead back to blocks to policies he suggested that look like they could have helped, if they had made it through.
I would consider any reasonable, self thinking candidate that could manage a campaign that answers questions without fear that someone would ask something that shows their mental compartmentalization of ideals. Right now, the only one in the ring that can keep his facts straight, (and I mean actual fact, not this corporate run, business leaning media twisting of half-truths flavored with out and out lies) is Obama. Until there is even one person throwing in their hat that can do that, then we need to support the man with the working plan.
Democracy Talking has an article asking if the Occupy movement will make history. We as Americans have a history. Granted, it is a short one, but we do have a history to look back upon. We, as a people DO something. If we feel oppressed, we move somewhere where we can write our own rules. If we can't move, we (slowly) stand up and make our voice heard. If that doesn't work, then we toss tea into the sea, drop bricks off bridges, and start riots. Look at the American Revolution in response to corporate and government greed. Look at the rise of unions and workers rights organizers to better the sweatshops. Look at the Civil War, which started about northern corporate greed, and ended on racial social justice issues. Look at our pushes for equality, such as race and gender rights.
A few of these movements were resolved (Pilgrims, Western expansion) by moving. A few of these (certain social justice issues, union picketing) were resolved during the “stand up and speak” stage. Others(American Revolution, Civil War, union violence when picketing didn’t get a result, even the threat and beginning of reciprocal violence in the Civil Rights movement) went to the step of violence before the government stepped in and corrected the situation.
The Occupy movement may be remembered in history, if it is the last step before the government takes it upon itself to fix the issue. If the government waits until violence (already started – Seattle docks, certain police responses to the various Occupy movements) gains precedent, then Occupy will be a footnote to the violence. One way or the other, change will occur.
