AssemblyBoard

I thought I'd start a thread where we could discuss various aspects of the news, if we are so inclined.  Here's something off the Drudge report today.  I find it totally fascinating.

---

PLAYGIRL EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OUTS HERSELF -- AS REPUBLICAN
Mon Mar 07 2005 19:42:14 ET

When it comes to sex and politics, Democrats are the more liberal, right? Not so fast. Playgirl editor-in-chief Michele Zipp explores “down and dirty” politics and examines sexuality on both sides of the aisle. In the process she comes to a realization about herself and reveals for the first time she’s now a Republican.

“Siding with the GOP when you live in the bluest state around is almost like wearing a Boston Red Sox jersey at a New York Yankees’ home game,” says Zipp in the April issue of PLAYGIRL. ”I cannot tell you how many times a person assumed I voted for John Kerry in 2004. Most of the time, I don’t have the heart to tell them, or the energy to discuss my reasons for going red this election year. But this is Playgirl magazine so it’s about time I was the one who bared what’s underneath.”

How could a member of the media who produces adult entertainment for women possibly side with conservatives from the red states? Zipp spells it out. “Those on the right are presumed to be all about power and greed – two really sexy traits in the bedroom. They want it, they want it now, and they’ll do anything to get it. And I’m not talking about some pansy-assed victory, I’m talking about full on jackpot, satisfaction for all.”

“The Democrats of the Sixties were all about making love and not war while a war-loving Republican is a man who would fight, bleed, sacrifice, and die for his country. Could you imagine what that very same man would do for his wife in the bedroom?” asks Zipp.

Developing...

A "man's man" fishes for these!  ;D

http://www.carpwatersworldwide.com/

The 1 million-dollar carp!  
 
The American Carp Society are offering a reward of 1 million dollars for the capture of the New York State rod caught record (standing at 50lb 4oz) in their 2005 World Carp Championship. The match will be held on the mighty St Lawrence River from 5-10th June 2005 and is set to be the largest ever carp match in the world.
The organizer Mr David Moor from the American Carp Society believes the reward will bring the carp to the forefront in the USA and prevent the sport of bow hunting.
The prize is only offered to participating anglers at a cost of $2500 to enter the composition which covers a team of two anglers and covers hotel accommodation on the first and last night of the week long festival. The opening and closing events will be held at Akwesasne Mohawk Casino in New York.
A 40 mile stretch of the river with 200 swims using computer controlled updated information on whose catching what and when. The event will be on television and radio covering the whole event all week which means loads of publicity for the winners.
A limited amount of places available to different countries are controlled by the International Carp Fishing Association in the UK. Booking are only available through Angling International by calling Rob Hughes on 01980 591484.
For updates visit www.americancarpsociety.com.  
 

     Sounds like a lotta carp! ;D

 :)March 9th.
Here are news items from Yahoo News:
My contribution to the discussion of this post.
......Its been over 25 years since I last pick up or read a Play Girl Magazine. ...As for being a daughter, sister, wife, and trained for a year as a nurse. ....Nothing new under the sun...Ecc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 
Americans flood Canadian MPs with letters and calls in gay marriage debate

Tue Feb 22, 5:30 PM ET 

BETH GORHAM

(CP) - Bob MacCready's already written to Canadian Liberal MPs who support allowing gays to marry, telling them he thinks it's against God's own law and everything that's decent.

   

Now he's thinking of sending a second letter to underscore his fervent opposition to Canada's pending same-sex marriage legislation, expected to pass this spring.


A conservative Christian who lives near Philadelphia, MacCready is one of untold Americans who've been flooding the offices of Canadian politicians with letters and calls in the past few weeks.


Many have relatives north of the border but have never before become involved in a Canadian political issue.


It's a trend that belies the strong convictions and polarized debate stirred in the United States, where President George W. Bush (news - web sites) supports a constitutional amendment to outlaw same-sex marriages.


MacCready's married daughter lives in London, Ont., with his four grandchildren and he once considered moving to Canada to be close to them.


"We're very concerned about the way things are going there," he said in a recent telephone interview from his home in Media, Pa. "How is it going to be for my grandchildren growing up?"


MacCready, a businessman, says he's sensitive to the fact that Canadians might not appreciate people like him voicing their views on a national issue, but he just can't stay silent.


"What I'm saying needs to be heard," he says. "I also feel a bit sad that (the two countries) aren't working more in harmony. It's like we've grown apart."


Dorothy McCallum, a retired bookkeeper, has been faxing and re-faxing letters to Ontario MPs from her home in Royal Oak, Mich.


"We're not against gay people themselves," says McCallum. "We feel (gay marriage) is wrong by the Bible. We're Christian believers and we just feel very strongly that this is not a good bill."


McCallum and MacCready say their lobbying is personal and they're not affiliated with any of the powerful conservative religious groups in the U.S.


Credited with helping re-elect Bush last fall, groups like the Moral Majority Coalition and Christian Coalition have been pushing their social agenda harder than ever.


Now some are supporting efforts in Canada to defeat the same-sex bill, introduced earlier this month.


Focus on the Family's B.C. chapter is backed by a massive organization based in Colorado led by James Dobson, who recently broadcast his opposition to gay marriage on 130 Canadian radio stations.


And the organization recently advertised to fill an executive director's position in Ottawa at an annual salary of more than $100,000 Cdn.


The Knights of Columbus, based in New Haven, Conn., says it's prepared to offer major help and has already spent about $80,000 on a postcard campaign.

   



Still, some American groups deny that huge sums are flowing north.

"That's a scare tactic that's been trumped up to raise the ire of Canadians," insists Robert Knight, head of the Culture and Family Institute at Concerned Women for America.

"There's not enough money to go around here. But I've seen e-mails urging people to contact politicians on both sides of the border."

Staff workers in some MPs offices have complained about the unique deluge of mail and phone calls that began in earnest in late January, about a week before the legislation was introduced.

Most don't respond to correspondence that's not from constituents.

Tony Cortese, an ethics professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, says pressure from the U.S. on the issue is "really out of bounds."

"I can see why they're doing it. They're worried about the spillover effect from Canada (if the bill passes). But we wouldn't think of interfering with any other Canadian law."

It appears there's little Canada can do about organized U.S. lobby efforts, says Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, who's concerned the Canadian debate could be skewed by those who don't understand "we've got court decisions in the country that are different from the United States."

Ellen Wyman says she's just exercising an important prerogative.

An American citizen married to a Canadian, Wyman has lived in London, Ont., for 33 years and has been writing letters for weeks to gay marriage supporters in Parliament.

"Sometimes the government needs to be told what to do," Wyman said from Cleveland, where she has been dealing with a family illness.

"The United States is the great nation it is because of its moral code. Canada isn't even considered a Christian nation anymore and they seem OK with that. It's more of a melting pot. That doesn't make any sense to me."

Wyman, whose family owns construction and masonry businesses, says they'll pull everything out and move back to Ohio - with their three grown children and their families - if the legislation goes through.

She says they have a lot of business friends who feel the same way.

"You'd be surprised how many people consider it kinky and think it's the beginning of a rotting in this society," said Wyman.

"The economy is going to fall apart. Once the morals start to go, then health care is going to go."

Wyman is particularly incensed that Prime Minister Paul Martin has pushed up the timetable on the bill and is insisting that cabinet ministers support it.

"It's corrupt. I don't know where Martin's getting this authority."


 

That $1 million dollar carp contest is truly amazing. Can you imagine cathching a fish
worth a million dollars? That is far less than the prize a few of my friends and are offering
in Southern California this month. It will take place in the San Bernardino Mountains. The
entry fee is $25.00, with the chance of winning $10,000. Not too shabby actually.

E-mail if you would like to enter. You will need to bring a burlap sack and a flashlight
because the hunt will take place at night. We will be hunting for a record sized "White
Spotted Snipe", who are completely nocturnal, and who can only be taken with the
bare hands. The record for a Snipe caught with bare hands is 31 lbs. Enter now to see
if you can better the record. $10,000 dollars is nothing to shake a stick at. If interested,
E-mail me and I'll send the entry form.

Thanks,Joe

Joe,

As I believe you are fully aware, I lost my pet white spotted snipe in those mountains a number of years ago.  By this time Poopsie, if she has survived, will probably weigh 55-60lbs.  Please tell your friends that I really want her back (as well as her front, sides, top & bottom) and will pay a reward if anyone succeeds in capturing her unharmed.

Poopsie was wearing a blue eartag, bearing the number A-26.  Nevermind that spotted snipe do not have external ears-- we can get into that later.  She also was wearing a radio-emitting collar which, except for a few mysterious automatic garage door openings near Lake Arrowhead in 1992-3, has offered us no clues to her whereabouts.

Poopsieless and lonely,
al

P.S.-- Tell contestants to bring a BIG burlap sack!  And cotton candy-- Poopsie LOVES cotton candy!

We used to spear 2-foot carp (true size) from a pier with pitch forks at a lake in Michigan that was being overrun by them. We would pile them up on shore and bury them. The town had to finally kill all the fish in order to bring the lake back to normal again. They couldn't catch enough or net enough of the carp to bring them under control. Maybe the 88 foot depth of the lake had something to do with that.

They said the carp population was a result of an accumulation of years of polution from the Gerber baby food canning business.

Occasionally, the carp would swim along the surface in schools of about 15 with the curve of their backs just above the water. It was frightening to see them coming toward you even when you were in a boat.

Loch Ness Monster babies??  ;)

From the Internet:

Science Discovers New Element

A major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the
heaviest element yet known to science. The new element has been named
"Governmentium." Governmentium has one neutron, 12 assistant neutrons,75
deputy neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic
mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are
surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.
Since Governmentium has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be
detected, as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact.
A minute amount of Governmentium causes one reaction to take over four
days to complete, when it would normally take less than a second.

GOVERNMENTIUM has a normal half-life of 4 years; it does not decay, but
instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant
neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Governmentium's
mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will
cause more morons to become neutrons, forming isodopes. This
characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to believe that
Governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in
concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as "Critical
Morass."

When catalyzed with money, Governmentium becomes Administratium - an
element which radiates just as much energy, since it has half as many
peons but twice as many morons.

March 10th:
My contribution is about the funeral for the four R.C.M.P. officers that were killed this past week.
While these men were dying for their country at a Pot Grow Up Operation, Canadian political members are considering decriminalizing marijuna use.
........................................................................

Canada - Canadian Press
 
 
Thousands of police stream into Edmonton for RCMP memorial service

Wed Mar 9,10:42 PM ET 

JOHN COTTER

EDMONTON (CP) - It will be the largest memorial service ever held for Mounties killed in the line of duty - a ceremony that will begin with a parade of scarlet and feature four brown Stetsons on four black pillows.

   

More than 10,000 officers from as far away as New York and Newfoundland and Labrador were streaming into the city Wednesday to prepare for Thursday's national memorial to four Mounties killed last week near Mayerthorpe, Alta.


The massive show of support by people who never met the victims was already helping some RCMP officers deal with the loss of their comrades.


"It is overwhelming. It is like being supported by your own family," said a veteran Mountie taking part in the preparations who declined to be named.


"When you get support and people try to do what they can to make you feel better and to indicate that they are on your side, it really helps."


Along with police, thousands of mourners - including dignitaries such as Gov. Gen. Adrienne Clarkson and Prime Minister Paul Martin - are to attend the service, which is to be broadcast nationally from the University of Alberta Butterdome.


The families of constables Peter Schiemann, 25, Lionide Johnston, 32, Anthony Gordon, 28, and Brock Myrol, 29, will be the focus of the memorial, which is to include honour guards, a minute of silence, a choir, and the playing of the Last Post by an RCMP bugler.


The ceremony is to begin with scarlet-clad Mounties on horseback leading a parade of 5,000 police officers on a kilometre-long march from a city park to the facility.


Once inside the Butterdome, the trademark Stetson hats worn by the slain Mounties will each be set on a black pillow and placed on a stage.


A representative from each family will then address the crowd.


Don Schiemann, Peter's father, said he hopes the service will help people across Canada deal with the brutal ambush of the four young men by James Roszko, 46, during a stakeout at the convicted criminal's farm.


"It is a time to grieve together and to celebrate the lives of these men," said Schiemann.


"Even in the midst of such despair there is tremendous hope. That is what is keeping me going, and I hope the nation hears it loud and clear."


Later in the service Canadian music icon Ian Tyson is to sing his song Four Strong Winds. Other musicians, including Susan Aglukark and Tom Jackson, are to perform songs including Songbird and Amazing Grace.


William Beahen, the RCMP's historian emeritus, said the service will be the largest memorial in the force's history.


The violent death of the officers eclipses the loss of three members of the Northwest Mounted Police who were fatally shot in the Duck Lake Massacre in March 1885.


"This will be a memorial service for the single most tragic incident in the history of the RCMP where four young officers were assassinated," Beahen said from Nepean, Ont.

   



"This has been overwhelming for Canadians. It is a very poignant moment in the history of our country."

About 120 people attended an ecumenical prayer vigil on Wednesday night in Mayerthorpe.

Rev. Arnold Lotholz began the service by saying that March 3, the day of the shooting, would go down in history not just for the local community but for the whole world.

"It's a day that has turned a world upside down, but now we want to begin to pick up the pieces and begin to turn it rightside right," he said.

The emotional evening of worship and song saw some light candles and say small, private prayers, while others took to the pulpit to share their feelings, including prayers for the families of both the victims and the shooter.

"Heavenly Father, I don't understand why you allowed this tragic happening but . . . please assist us to get through the pain," Jurgen Preugschas told the congregation.

"Most of all, be with the leaders of this country so some good comes out of this and we don't have to go through something like this again in the future."

Two on-duty ambulance attendants left their vehicle running and stood quietly at the back of the church throughout the service.

The deaths of the Mounties have also been felt in police forces across the United States.

Representatives from services as diverse as the FBI, as well as state and local police forces, have sent officers to take part in the event.

"A tragedy of this magnitude does not recognize any borders. Whether we know these people or not is irrelevant," said Lt. Doug Ladd of the Oregon State Police, who drove up to the city with four colleagues.

"We are all cops and we all need to support each other when something terrible like this happens. We feel as badly for the families up here as if it was right in our own backyards."

The service won't be the first time Edmonton has been the location for a national memorial to mark the death of Canadians who lost their lives in the line of duty.

In April 28, 2002, thousands of people gathered in the city to pay tribute to four soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan by a bomb mistakenly dropped by a U.S. fighter jet.

One of those soldiers, Ainsworth Dyer, was engaged at the time to Aart Van Sloten's daughter.

Van Sloten said attending that memorial was an important way to say good-bye to a man who was going to be his son-in-law. He wants to attend Thursday's ceremony, but may not because the idea makes him choke up with bad memories.

"I got the same feeling I had when I heard about Afghanistan. I could just imagine and visualize the pain and suffering the families are going through," he said.

But he hopes Canadians across the country will be watching.

"It is important because it shows a sense of unity," he said.

"We are all basically on the same team and we need law and order. We have to support them in any way we can."

Also Wednesday, police investigators contacted CBC to ask about two of the last calls that came from gunman Roszko's farm. The calls were to an audience relations number and The National's toll free line. There was no indication when the calls were made.


 



 

Taiwan Declares its Independence at Lighthouse Relighting Ceremony

March 11, 2005

In a speech before relighting the Fuiguiqiao Lighthouse, former Taiwan president Lee Teng-hui declared Taiwan a separate independent sovereign nation separate from China.

In ceremonies that took place at the lighthouse on February 28, the former president stated, "Our Light of February 28 will beam across the world to declare to the world formally Taiwan is a sovereign, independent nation country, and Taiwan and China are two countries on both sides of the Taiwan Strait." He stated that the relighting ceremony is a milestone on the march to democracy and liberty that will never be turned back by the Communist Chinese government.

As the light in the lighthouse was turned on a huge map of Taiwan was shown on the wall of the lighthouse located 10 miles north of Tamsui, the oldest town in northern Taiwan.

(from Lighthouse Depot Dispatch)

If this is true and they are serious, all you-know-what is about to break loose.
I guess we will see what the U.S is really made of...
Verne

 :DMarch 11th.

Just read the article submitted by Al about the Taiwan Independence Declaration.
Maybe my thinking here would show that I am an ignorant Canadian. But why should this declaration of independence show the United States what they are made of.

Would be it be another country that would cause the United States to flex its muscles, or would they defend this tiny country independence.

Canada has been dealing with the thought of Quebec Separation for decades now, with at least two defeated votes within that province. But another referendum on this topic is always a threat, and the next one could mean a Independent Declaration by the province of Quebec separating itself from Canada. Which will also separate the Altantic Provinces from the rest of the country. I believe it is under the disguise of the language French and English battle, but I believe it is deeper than that. Just like it is deeper cause that caused the fighting to go on in Ireland, and other parts of the world. The visible fighting cause may not be the true cause of the fighting.

Taiwan Independence could be simple like not wanting to embrace the communist way of life, or the restriction that under the government of China will insist the Taiwan people to live by.
Taiwan probably is just trying to protect the way of life, the freedoms they already have.

So Verne could you explain what you meant by "This will show the United States what it is made of" statement please.

Thanks.
Lenore

The United States has always stood by Taiwan as an ally, and has had a doctrine of protecting Taiwan from PRC aggression for decades.  I think what Verne is saying is that he wonders if we have the gumption to do what we said we would do in the face of Chinese aggression.

China may think we are weak and over-extended right now, giving them opportunity to move across the straight.  This may be true, and if so, it is an ominous sign.

Brent

The matter of Taiwan's status has been a long-standing bone of contention between that island and the mainland.
They Chinese leaders contend that Taiwan is a part of China.
The Taiwanese people aspire to independence and self-rule.
The traditional U.S policy towards China has been that saber-rattling is O.K. but hands off.
The smart money is saying that if they have to, China will exhert its perceived hegemony by force, even at the risk of running afoul of the U.S military.
I used to think that we would never allow Peking to take that island by force.
Now that they (China) are buying so much of our National debt...who knows?
Verne

These are pictures to my Carp Current Affairs. I don't spend money for cable TV, so pictures like these are just a thrill!!  Did God really make these?  ;D

Note especially the 243 pounder from Thailand about 3/4 of the way down.

http://www.carpecarpio.com/bigcarppics1.html

They took the tube out! The woman responds to her surroundings, smiles and follows with her eyes, and they took the tube out!

Let's Just Starve Our Enemies ;)
Let's Claim Our Enemies Have a Chemical Imbalance Which Causes Anoxia
Let's Starve Them Before Anyone Else Can Find Out What Really Happened To Cause Anoxia

The above episodes are brought to you by the new series: Life In Hell, formerly broadcast in Rome as Can Purgatory Be Any Worse?

I find the behavior of Michael Shiavo particularly revolting. Remove a feeding tube to starve his wife to death?  I can't believe that any judge would even consider a request like that! Even aside from Michael's ulterior motives, it is incredible that someone in America would do that. Next, they will be starving senior citizens because it costs too much to fill their prescriptions.

Informative Article from a year ago:

http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=2019

Article today from Stevensville, Michigan:

http://www.wndu.com/news/032005/news_41058.php

Great articles.

I have been following this whole thing, trying to figure out what is at stake here, other than the obvious, a person's life.

I am a strong believer in State's rights, and do agree that this matter is out of the jurisdicton of federal courts, in one sense.  However, if we look at this issue from a constitutional point of view, everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Prisoners can't be executed in some states....states' rights.  It's constitutional.

Oak trees can't be executed in California....state's rights.

Poppys can't be picked in California.....state's rights.

Manatees can't be harmed in Florida.....state's rights.

Women can be starved to death?  This is madness.  It's not at all like pulling the plug on a brain dead person.  Legally speaking, death is the absence of brain waves.

This is one case where I think the federal government needs to step in to protect the constitutional rights of Terri.  Slavery was another issue along the same lines. 

There is no doubt about the fact that she is disabled.  However, she breathes on her own, and responds to her environment to a certain degree, no one knows for sure just how much.  She is on par with a 1 month old baby.  Imagine starving a baby, because he can't feed himself....

I think the proper way to handle this affair is for the governor of florida to take a bold stand and issue an executive order stopping her execution, in much the same way he can with a prisoner.  Surely an innocent person deserves the right to live.

Eventually, a ruling needs to be handed down which says that the state's rights do not supercede our constitutional rights.  I don't see how murder can be legal in any state.

The danger here is that this becomes the Roe V Wade of euthanasia.  If some whacko court rules that starving a disabled person to death isn't murder, we are in trouble, much like we have with abortion.  I think the big fear here, for the libs, is that this case has implications that could overturn Roe V Wade.

Brent

---

The situation in Florida is something where the parents need to take a stand and break the law as required to maintain life support of their daughter, and then give their son-in-law some physical punishment to put him in his place.  At least that's what I would do if my daughter was in the same position.  Sometimes the law needs to be screwed before it screws those it's alleged to protect.  After all, that is the principle that this country was founded upon. 

In reference to cutting oak trees and hacking poppies in California, I'll just say that my chainsaw and 1-gallon bottle of super-concentrated Round-Up have been put to very good use to help enhance a view and prevent a brush fire.  Goodby poppies; hello moonscape.

 Imagine starving a baby, because he can't feed himself


Actually, Brent, this happens all the time.  When people give birth to defective children they can and do elect to not feed them if they are not willing to care for them.  I have heard many cases of this.  I'm sure there are some hospitals that will not cooperate, but there are ones that do.  This happens with mildly retarded babies, and cp babies that I know of.  These are children that will grow and thrive, but be handicapped.

The issue here, (IMHO)  is who has the right to determine quality of life, and worthiness to live.  There are large segments of our society, including ethics scholars at Princeton, who encourage this kind of selective survival of the fittest.

We all know many cases of retarded people like Terry Schiavo who are living lives that are meaningful to those who care for them.  But there are also many who abandon these people.  Of course it seems like a no brainer that if someone like her parents want to care for her then they should have that right.  But the legal issue is who has the say in determining my life as a married person or as a dependent child.  These things definately need to be reworked.

The truly sad thing is that there is new therapy for people who have had brain injury and cannot swallow.  I can't remember the name of it, but it involves attaching electrodes to the jaw/throat muscels to stimulate them to move, regenerate and operate again.  This is what Terry's parents want her to receive, but Michael has refused it.  It's true, Terry will never improve from being a retarded person, but she is not in a vegetative state and who says there is anything wrong with retarded people?  This guy really has his judgment coming!  Along with the rest of America that throws away "imperfect" people.

I heard about the babies first hand from a nurse. They weren't allowed to feed or resuscitate them, and this was the parents' decision.

I heard on Dobson's show this afternoon, that Shiavo had the ability to swallow and say a few words, like "hi" and "help me" at the beginning, but her husband refused any therapy of anykind, so she can no longer swallow or make any recognizable words. 

They must have a guard at her door, because it would be possible for someone to give her ice chips at least. If it were my kid, I'd arrange to have them secretly  8) wisked out of their room. Or somehow sneak them food. No, I'd get them out of there pronto, somehow.

Weaker, (handicapped) people need protection. They are here for us, and they have value.

Faith, Moonflower

Several people have been arrested for trying to "sneak" water into her room.  You can see the video of the arrests on the Fox news website.

I am aware of the stuff going on with babies, cp kids, etc.  It makes me sick, and to be perfectly honest I am not able to deal with it, or discuss it.

My stepfather, who was every bit a real father to me, passed in 2001.  He had "hospice" care, which was creepy.

I still can't talk about it much,  it is that disturbing to me.  However, they killed him with dehydration, and claim it is a great way to go.  I do not agree at all.  So many meds were required to keep him calm, in order for his kidneys to shut down.

I don't know what it is about this terri Shiavo case that bothers me so much....she is one of many undergoing a similiar fate.  However, the thought of having police protection in order to guarantee that someone can't get water or food is surreal.  I feel as if we, as a society, have crossed a line.  I am not a little frightened by this.

I heard someone on the radio today saying that Terri had no brain, and couldn't think or feel, and had no consciousness.  They said she wasn't human anymore, because of her injury.  If that's the case, what's the big deal if her parents want to keep her alive?  I mean, we can have ornamental plants if we wish, what's wrong with them wanting their daughter alive.  Her daughter certainly doesn't care, since she's braindead.

I can't help but wonder if there is something else, really sinister behind all of this. 

Dan, your ideas about the law, and the founding of the country are right on.  I wonder if we can still do that sort of thing today, have we got the gumption?

Brent

The way that many care homes treat their residents is horrible.  To me, it is terrifying even going into such a place, because it is like entering a monster's lair, and because visiting can be construed as endorsement of the abuse there.  They lie to get business and put on a show, as if they are giving good care, but, not so.

Increasingly, the country is being run by big businesses.  Insurance, retirement packages, taxes, etc. all cost them money.  Their interest is that the financial burdens on society of the old and infirm affect their bottom line.  Ebeneezer Scrooge spoke of decreasing the surplus population.  This kind of thinking is encouraged by movies, such as, "Night of the Living Dead", and TV game shows that involve voting people off the team.

The demographics of the end of the baby-boom generation seem intimidating.  A good portrayal of this issue is a story by Chekhov.  Literally, the title means, "Sleep is Wanted", but the Russian expression usually signifies feeling sleepy.  There is a subtle form of word play in its use as the title: sleep is wanted so badly that ...

(Hold the "Ctrl" key while pressing "A" to change to easier to read colors.)
English: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6422/sleep.html

The original Russian:
http://www.ruslang.com/downloads/texts/apchekhov/apchekhov_spathochetsya.html

Such a false idea will earn its due reward.

The old movie, "Death Race 2000", is another portrayal of the false idea in the form of a cross-country car race with extra points scored for running over the old and infirm.

Could be different in each situation. A friend of mine had it and he was just permitted to die at home with terminal cancer of the bowel matastacised to liver and a different type of cancer in his lung. He could eat and drink when he wanted and was given pain medication when he wanted it.
What is sinister behind the present case is the killer husband of the woman. This is at least the second time he tried to kill her (aside from the other court appointed starvations). I can smell it.
Sure. We can rent an SUV with blackened windows and curtains when we get down there. We could wear black muslim robes once we get there. They get in anywhere. ;)

I was in a situation last year that I'd be interested to hear other people's input on.

I am a private caregiver and a CNA. My goal is to become a nurse practitioner after completing the needed science classes. There's a program at a Seattle university that fast-tracks people through the program if they already have a bachelor's degree.

How I do stray from the subject...

Last year my client was in a Catholic nursing home. It's the best one in town, everyone likes it even people who avoid those places. He began refusing food - pushing it away and covering his head with a sheet when the person trying to feed him just wouldn't get it. His organs began shutting down but his body was so healthy - except for his brittle, broken bones - that he lingered for a month or two. He had a living will that declined any intervention so he was given pain meds and anything he wanted for food and water, though he refused both.

His stepdaughter, a Catholic, was incensed that he wasn't tube fed or hydrated. She felt it was the facilities' responsibility to maintain his life no matter what. The facility was bound by the living will.

This issue is different than current events. Yet it's a very common situation, sans the upset daughter-in-law. A resident who goes into cardiac arrest will have his chart checked to see if he's a code or not before giving cpr.

When a teenager committs suicide everyone is devastated. When an adult at the end of their lives essentially does the same thing people are sad but accept it, often approve it.

I don't know where to draw the line. We are in the unenviable place where we have the ability, but not the wisdom, to play God.  How far do we take the concept of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"; the freedom to pursue it any way we see fit, or the ability to stop lives when their ability to do so is compromised.
 
I'm not expecting a final answer, just throwing this question into space wondering about other people's input.

Karey

I see, as you do, that the situations are fundamentally different.  As a person in command of my faculties, I have the right to refuse any medical procedure, for any reason.  I also have the right not to eat or drink if I am so inclined.

Obviously, Terri Shiavo's situation is quite different.

However, when you ask the question, "how far do we take the concept of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,"  I would answer you like this.

If you and I both have freedom, by definition that implies that neither one of us has the right to deny the other freedom.  You can't force me to eat, and likewise I can't deny you the ability to eat, or harm you by force.  There is no way to take this concept too far, because the moment your freedom harms or hinders another from excercising his freedom, you have infringed on his rights.  In the constitutional sense, you have committed some sort of crime, whether a tort, misdemeanor or felony.

When the constituion was drafted, it was implied and assumed that people would exercise self restraint, as was customary for our Judeo-Christian traditions and values.  People weren't perfect then---slavery is one glaring example---and they aren't perfect now.  Nevertheless, the principles of freedom are still good ones.

In the most fundamental constitutional sense, Terri Shiavo's rights are being violated.

Aside from the horror her and her family is going through---which has actually caused me to lose sleep, it is so disturbing---I am most alarmed by the way our President is setting aside his oath to defend the constitution.  This is really bothering me.

Just because a judge, or a group of judges decide it's OK to starve someone doesn't mean it OK.  It seems to me that Jeb and a few others could walk into the clinic and take over.  I doubt the police would arrest the governor.  If the judge decided to hold him in contempt, he could get a pardon from his brother, the president.

It would be a great opportunity to do the right thing, and explain to the people why.  I suspect that if he had the courage to do so, his political stock would rise dramatically.  Instead, everyone is sitting on their hands waiting for this woman to die, because a judge said to stop feeding her.

How long do you suppose it will be until we adopt infanticide for live births, and other things like that?

I am very disturbed by this whole thing.

Brent

Brent,

There are some problems with the thinking behind this paragraph in your post:


1. "by definition"?  Why does my freedom imply that you have freedom?  You are appealing to some overarching standard that guarantees us both freedom.  What is it?

2. "There is no way to take this concept too far".  All law is a limit on freedom.  In society, people give up some freedom in order to have others.   For example, we are free to buy and operate cars.  But our freedom to operate them in any way we wish is severely limited in the interests of public safety. 

Here is a little dilemma for your "libertarian" heart. Your next door neighbor decides to operate a combination whorehouse/drug parlor/gay bathhouse/ bar next door to you.  This has implications for noise, trash, cleanliness, public saftey, parking, property values, property taxes and more.

Of course, under the new libertarian local, state, and federal governments your neighbor's activities are perfectly legal. 

How do you balance his "rights" as they relate to yours? 

3. Just what are "rights"? , where do they come from?, How do we know what they are?

 ::)

Thomas Maddux
Virulent Dog

Hi Tom,

I'm going to tackle your straw man in a playful manner, OK?

  Freedom is a right that we all have in this country, according to our constitution.  That document indicates that our rights come from our creator. My opinion on the identity of our creator is identical to yours.  I never said or implied that there was any guarantee of freedom.  In fact, I will go so far as to say that I can guarantee that mostly, the human race is taken up with various activities designed to limit, steal and abuse freedom for selfish reasons.  Freedom is not a guarantee, but it is something worth fighting for, according to many.  So, if liberty and freedom are mine by right, they are also yours, as we are created equal.   This can't be too difficult to understand.

I disagree totally with this statement.  Laws should not be a limit on freedom, but a prohibition on activities that are harmful to others.  Murder is a good example.  Your basic approach to the concept is backwards, which is why you said what you said above.  If you take it a step or two further, you will pretend that we can change people by making what they do or think illegal.  It doesn't work, and I have incarcerated prisoners to prove it.  If a person continues down this faulty path, they will make more and "tougher" laws that will indeed limit our freedom, which is what we have now....which is bad.


This one reminds me of the guy who thinks he can disprove Christianity by saying,  "How do you explain all the different versions of the Bible?  Which version is true, they all say different things?"  This fellow can't be reasoned with because his basic premises are so far off.  Tom, your assessment of Libertarianism is on par with the fellow who thinks there are different "versions" of the Bible.  If the only fish you've ever eaten is a VandeKamps fish filet, and you are convinced that it represents all fish, everywhere, it is going to hard to explain a nice piece of Ahi to you, but I'll give it a shot.

If my nextdoor neighbor started doing what you described above, it would be an infringement on my rights, and would be harmful to me, as you point out.  It would also be against the law, and I would simply invoke the judicial system against him, after which time the executive branch would force him to cease his harmful actions.  What's so hard to undertand here?  Libertarian thinking is not anarchy, never has been and never will be.

If these types of activities were legal, I would move.  If they were illegal, he would move.  The nice part about Libertarianism, is that you and I would be able to decide these issues, instead of the federal government, or some judge or government worker in a cubicle somewhere.  Prostitution is legal is some counties in Nevada, and illegal in others.  If I was going to live in Nevada, I wouldn't choose to live in a county where prostitution was legal.  {YIKES!! on edit I just realized I said LEGAL, I really mean to say ILLEGAL! Please forgive me for this error. You must all think I'm nuts!!}

The way we balance your rights versus my rights is simple.  If you engage in activity that harms me, I have two options:  The judicial system, or self defense.  If you were releasing raw sewage into my front yard, from the holding tank on your motorhome, I'd probably call the police.  If you forcibly entered my house and attempted to injure a family member, I'd use force to stop you.  That's the balance.

However, if you are going to buy cuban cigars and smoke them in your house, I'm not going to report you to the police, because you aren't hurting anyone, in any way.

Why in the world you confuse Libertarianism with anarchy is beyond me.  The foundation of free society is the idea of limited government.  That means there is a government, but that it is limited in scope and power.  That means that there are laws and law enforcement.  Why in the world to you act as if Libertarians don't believe this?

Are you still hung up on the one hippie you spoke with a long time ago? 

Does it trouble you that I am proposing nothing more than the ideas set forth in our constitution? Do you feel that we must move past the constitution?


The declaration of Independence and the Constitution spell this out pretty clearly.  I'll sum it up:

Life: I have the right to live, therefore murder is wrong.
Liberty: I have the right to freely choose my own path in life, therefore slavery is wrong.
The Pursuit of Happiness: I have the right to enjoy the fruit of my labor, therefore theft and fraud is wrong.

Is this so difficult?

Brent

Brent,

1.

Seems to me that you are confusing the Declaration of Independence with the Constitution.

The statements about "inalienable rights" is in the Declaration.  This document is based on natural rights theory as modulated through Scottish Common Sense philosophy.  Very popular among the English educated class in those days.

Actually, the Constitution doesn't mention God, except for the date of signing in "this year of our Lord".

It says that we the people...do ordain and establish this constitution.  The rights in the constitution are based on the consent of the governed, not upon the authority of God. 

BTW, the constitution never says that freedom is a right.  Rather, it delineates the powers of the federal government.   The Bill of Rights places certain limits on the exercise of Federal power and states that all other powers are reserved to the states or the people.

2.

You do realize, don't you, is that the only way to prevent person "A"'s ability to cause harm to person "B" is to limit their freedom to act?  So, all law is a limit on freedom.


3.

I suggest that you find someone who believes the above and discuss it with him instead of me.

But, the only way to give law any force is to provide for sanctions that actually deter the behavior.

In Singapore they don't have a drug problem.  Sell drugs, you die.

They also don't have a vandalism problem.  Vandalize property, 12 whacks with a kendo practice sword administered by a martial artist, plus a stiff fine.   Kids don't seem to wish to risk this.

You cannot change people by making actions illegal.   But you definitely can change what they do.

3.

Now what you are saying is that all the laws about noise, public niusances, health, littering, zoning, fire safety, parking, sewage and so on should be left in place.  The whorehouse should be allowed to stay as long as those laws aren't violated.

If we have the power to make those types of laws, all of which limit the behavior of other people, why don't we have the power to limit prostitution?

I suppose one could say that prostitutes have the right to sell themselves, as long as they don't hurt anyone else.

BUT, what if the presence of the whorehouse next door lowers the value of my property.  In other words, its presence is injurious to my financial prosperity.  Which BTW, would surely be the case.
Who would want to raise a family next door to that kind of place?  So, the pool of potential buyers of my house would be drastically reduced. 

4. BTW, most of the ideas you call "Libertarianism" that deal with maximizing freedom and limiting government have been around at least since John Locke.  This set of beliefs is generally known as "Classical Liberalism".  This should not, however, be confused with modern "Liberalism" which is really a misnomer for Leftist Elitism.

You can find the ideas of Classical Liberalism expressed in the writings of such men as John Locke, William F. Buckley, Vacel Hlavec, Dinesh D'Sousa, Norman Podhorets, Milton Friedman.   Today, we call these folks Conservatives.

I first encountered Libertarianism in the writings of Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff.   Some things I agree with.  But much I don't.   They argue from an athiest basis that ultimately destroys any basis for rights. 

The biblical basis for prohibiting murder is that man was created in the image of God.  Other men do not have the right to damage that image, flawed as it is.

This is, or at least was, also the basis for laws against behaviors that denigrate human beings, such as selling your body, taking drugs, drunkeness, and suicide.

Since the atheists don't believe there IS any God who created man in his image,  they appeal to the "right" of personal freedom, "as long as it doesn't harm others".

But, as I asked before, what makes that true?   If there isn't any overarching value to appeal to, all that's left is, "We say so."
Thomas Maddux

Hi Tom,

I'm not confused about the difference between the Decalaration and the Constitution.  I submit that the folks who drafted the constitution still believed in "Life, Liberty and the Pusuit of happiness," and that the constitution was drafted with these ends in mind.  It's a common, accepted viewpoint.

Also, the names you dropped are truly great minds.  Have you actually read what these guys wrote? 

I also agree with you that "conservatives" have adopted the ideas of classical liberalism, and least in the rhetorical sense.  The problem I have is not with what conservatives say, but with what they do.  Getting back to the Terri Schiavo thing, I am dissapointed with how the conservative governor and president have conducted themselves.

In the president's case, he swore an oath to defend the constitution, yet he is standing by and letting the courts make these hideous rulings that result in starving a woman to death.  In the case of the governor, he could simply seize the situation and save the womans life.  Should he be held in contemp, he could get a pardon from the president.

These actions would be spectacular, extraordinary and on par with the Boston Tea Party as far as they are a defiance of unjust "law."  I think that if the president truly believes in the right to life, he needs to exercise bold leadership.  Instead, he is demonstrating that although he is fond of the right to life, he defers to the courts if they say to starve the woman.  That, in a nutshell, is the problem I have with conservatives.  They have abdicated their principles, and their freedom to the government. 

The best question you raise is if there is an "If there isn't any overarching value to appeal to."  I maintain that the founders, for the most part, were believers in, or at least sympathetic towards God.  Certainly, many of the men who risked their lives in fighting the British were men of deep, sincere faith in God.  So, the reason I think murder is wrong is because the Bible says, "Thou shalt not kill."  Is this a good enough overarching value to appeal to?  Have you ever read any of John Jay's supreme court opinions?  He has a masterful way of explaining the ideas of freedom and liberty, with relation to the law, which is strikingly different to what modern "conservatives" are saying. 

We have strayed so far afield from classic liberalism it isn't funny.  While I understand your emotional attachment to the conservative movement---or the lessor of two evils---you have to admit that they certainly don't reflect your values as a christian.  Perhaps they do in what they say, but in the final analysis, they don't deliver the goods.

My libertarian leanings are based on principle.  I have no illusions about their success in the political arena, with the exception that their ideas are powerful and are having a big impact.  However, ideas and real change are not the same thing.  Even so, I can't help but try.

I remember when I first started the website being told by people,  "It'll never work.  We tried something like that, it'll never work."  I also was told a year ago, when I decided to stop taking insurance in my office,  "It'll never work.  It just isn't done that way."  I have read about the opposition that Patrick Henry and his cohorts had, when he was fomenting rebellion against the throne.  They told him, "It'll never work."  You get the picture.  I'm an idealist.  I can't help it, it's just the way i am.  I see Libertarian thoughts and ideas as being the ones that give me freedom to practice my faith, send my kids to a school I agree with, keep my own money, keep and bear arms, and generally pursue happiness.

I see the other guys as being a hinderance, or in the case of the dems, a serious threat to liberty.

What are you going to do if a pro-choice, big government republican gets the nomination in '08?  Are you going to vote for he/she?

(When I say pro-choice, I imply that they will continue to spend your tax dollars to fund abortion, there is a difference between that and what Condi says about it.   Arnold is a prime example, so is Rudi.)

Brent

All:

This whole thing with the Schiavo case seems like a three-ring circus with all the hangers-on and profiteers that accompany controversial issues.  Did this Schiavo lady not have a DNR order? 

Matt

From what I understand, there was never, at any time a DNR in writing.  However, some years after her brain damage occured, her husband claims that she told him she would not want to live under conditions such as these.  Her parents want her to live, and that's about it.

If they can't eat, neither shall they live.  Kill the disabled!  They are a drag on society.

Brent

March 26.

Brents quote:
" IF THEY CAN'T EAT, NEITHER SHALL THEY LIVE. KILL THE DISABLED!
 THEY ARE A DRAG ON SOCIETY."

Brent do you actually believe this.  This was a stands by Hitler. Only God can decide who lives or who dies. No one has that power.
That poor woman, having the courts, to decide on her fate. after having to live like in a vegtated stated after an accident.
People have come out of comas after decades of being in a vegetated state.

What disability are you saying? What forms of disabilities do you want to kill?
What about he disabilities of blindness, deafness, arthritic pains, down syndrome, mental illnesses, they are all disabilities.There are people who are productive within their limits contributing to society.

This weekend of all weekends, the Permanent Passover Lamb, sacrificing for all people, all people who was created by God. God doesnt make junk. God doesnt make mistakes.
God may allow certain things to happen. That is only to get us closer to dependence on God for the whats and whys.

To take a stand on disabilities in your quote, is saying they are worthy of love of God.
Do you not think God is with that poor woman? Do you not think God values her?
Do you not think that God is caring for her spirit even in that state?

If this quote is serious by You Brent! then you were there at the foot of the cross, and shouting Cruicfy HIM! CRUICIFY HIM! CRUCIFY HIM!.

If you would have taken the time to read what I have been writing on this thread, you would not have put your foot in your mouth.  Your righteous condemnation of me, saying I am like Hitler is pretty funny.  Do you usually say stuff like this?

Before doing so, you should at least spend a minute or two reading my posts and you would see that I am extremely upset over this incident.  I am very dissappointed in our president, who is doing nothing.

here is an interesting news story for you. 
Lenore, before comparing someone to Hitler, you should at least have a general idea what they think about a certain topic.
If you were trying to win a person to Christ, you just royally blew it.  Your holy pontificating on the passover and the cross, and placing me in the category of those shouting, "Crucify Him!" was based solely on your complete misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what i said.  Good thing I am a believer, otherwise I might think you and your religion were foolish. 

Brent

Lenore,

Brent was just being sarcastic. It's obvious to tell by reading his earlier posts on this thread that the situation is very upsetting to him as well as to the rest of us.

Moonflower


Quote from Brent's post:
Yeah, about this newsclip. The next to go in this case will be the preemies.....
Well, maybe we can let the government officials decide who will receive medical treatment and who won't, eh?  :'( Hey, it's a brave new world, eh? Let's pick em from the tubes, then we can avoid all of this unnecessary medical care on your average dreg of society. :(

Lenore, before comparing someone to Hitler, you should at least have a general idea what they think about a certain topic.
If you were trying to win a person to Christ, you just royally blew it. Your holy pontificating on the passover and the cross, and placing me in the category of those shouting, "Crucify Him!" was based solely on your complete misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what i said. Good thing I am a believer, otherwise I might think you and your religion were foolish.

Brent

If they can't eat, neither shall they live.  Kill the disabled!  They are a drag on society.

Brent


ARE THESE YOUR WORDS OR ARE THEY NOT YOUR WORDS.
'If they can't eat, neither shall they live. Kill the disabled! They are a drag on society"

Did you write these words or did you not write these words.
There was no other explanation behind them to suggest you were quoting someone else, was there. These words were in separate paragraph from the other paragraph on the DNR .

Either you meant these words or you did not meant these words.
Which is it?

I was talking to a believer, not an unbeliever.
You accused me of not being a good witness. I was not witnessing to an unbeliever, I was responding to a quote from a believer.
I would honestly believer my Saviour would not say those words. I read in one of your post with your name at the bottom of those words.
Who really put there foot in their mouths?
Hilter had a view point on genociding people who were not perfect.
Remember those who were crying Crucify Him, were Jews, Gentiles, Sinners. Down at the foot of that Cross , someone was representing me. Jesus died for me and paid my penalty for me.
As all sinners we were the one who put him there, so we will have a clean pathway for eternity.
So everyone sins caused him to go to the cross. We are all guilty of crying Crucify Him. Because it was for our sins  that Jesus died for.
As for my religion. I dont have a religion I have a relationship with the Saviour which I am working with my Saviour and God to iron out the ckinks on my journey walk with Him.
I just choose to worship in a Baptist Church.
Christianity is a person and the way of life for that person. Not a religion.

It was your words I was reacting too.
"if can't eat, Neither shall they live, Kill the disabled! They are a drag on society."

Are these your words.
After reading them how should I react?

Lenore

Hi Lenore:
You are obviously inexperienced when it comes to handling Brent's literary style. Indeed if you read all that he has written on the thread you will quickly conclude that you ascribed to him the exact opposite of the position he actually holds!
It takes a while to get his drift if you are not accustomed to the way he presents an argument. Certainly after he had clarified his position you should accept his explanation. Don't feel badly; I have done a double take or two on first read of things he has written...and then I got it... :)
Verne

Please spare me the lecture oh the true nature of Christianity and do me the favor of reading what I say, instead of reacting to a statement that is obviously abusrd, sarcastic and meant to point out what is going on with the Terri Schiavo situation. 

If you had read what I have said in several posts on this thread, you would understand that I am horrified by all the goings on with this case.  I am totally, 100 percent against starving her to death because she is unable to feed herself, or communicate any better than a 1 month old.

I have made it quite clear that  she should not be put to death in this manner, and am apalled and greatly upset by what is going on, and the lack of action on the part of the governor and the president.

I said what I said in order to illustrate the cruel absurdity of what is taking place "legally" with Terri Schiavo.

You missed the point, failed to read my posts after I flat out stated that you should do so in the last post, and then went on to compare me to Hitler again, while waxing on about sitting at the foot of the cross, etc.  You should be embarrassed the first time, but to come back with the latest post causes me to wonder about your reading comprehension skills.  Please go back and read my posts on this thread in order to see how stupid you look.  And don't even think of saying I'm being rude and mean to you.  Comparing me to Hitler, as a result of totally taking me out of context in a most blockheaded fashion is nothing compared to the way I am talking to you.  You deserve it, I don't.  Spend about 5 minutes and learn your error.

Let me speak in very simple terms.

Killing Terri Schiavo is wrong and the court's decision to starve her is nothing more than saying,  "If they can't eat, neither shall they live.  Kill the diabled!  They are a drag on society."

If you still think I am advocating euthanasia after this, and after reading what I have said earlier, you are a true dolt.

Brent

Hi Lenore,

Looks like you stuck you foot in it eh?? :)
Had I read only what you referred to, I would have known understood Brent's point for two reasons.  One, I was sort of following the discussion and therefore, knew where Brent stood on the matter.  And secondly, after 2 years on the BB I somewhat understand Brent's humor/sarcasm/whatever-you-want-to-call-it.
Someone shunned me, to this day :'(, because he butted into a conversation, misunderstood what I was saying, and then refused to back down even after I explained it to him and modified my posts for his benefit.

One thing I appreciate about you Lenore is that you are a good 'listener'.  You don't just hear, but you listen when people are talking, because you care.  BBs are a little different because one does not see facial expressions nor hear tone of voice.  But BBs have the advantage of being able to re-read what was said before and also then to 'compose' what one wants to say.

Happy posting, and Happy Easter.
God bless,
Marcia

 March 27th, 2:50 am EST:

I wasnt sleeping, since I had to get up at 7:30, since there is an Easter Service which most like will have an Communion going on. I was coming back on to apologize for reacting so quickly.

I didnt read or understand the previous comments.

ALL I SAW WAS YOUR STATEMENT.

I do not know you Brent,  How was I to know you were being sacrastic.
Put yourself in a position , that if all you read was that one statement. How would you react?

I am offering some reasons/excuses for my reacting. I believe it was probably the statement reacted in me and caused me to vent.

Easter is a bad weekend for me. On Wednesday, I was worried about my Dad. In my heart I believe my Dad is seriously ill, and is not talking to anyone. I am concerned that this could be the last Easter we have my Dad.
Two years ago I was shunned and told not to come to any family gathering at Easter , following my hospitalization breakdown the Christmas before.
My family is a normal disfunctional family.  I am out of the loop and I was feeling it.

It was a depression hiccup that got to me. When I saw that statement, I took it to heart.
I took it personally. Because I was feeling of no worth or value, or not really belonging.
Those feeling are very very much on the surface right now. Unfortunately at this very moment, because of my judgement at the spur of the moment, I am doubly feeling it those feeling now.

So when I saw that statement you said, it was the straw that broke the camels back, and I vented you were the one to received the venting.

So I apologize for my outburst and what seemed to be a personal attack on your character I apologize.

Sorry to upset you so.

Forgive me.
Lenore

First of all, apology accepted.  No ill will remains.

Secondly, if you don't know someone, and didn't read anything except for one statement....you shouldn't go off like that!  Especially after the second post.  I like to read plenty of posts, and get an idea for a person's thought processes before I "go off."

If you just read one verse from the Bible, you might conclude that God is unjust, or at least a capricious, arbitrary bully.  What a shame that would be, not to mention blasphemous!  If the only thing you read about Eilisha was 2 Kings 2:23, you might conclude that he was worse than Hitler, but that would be a mistake.....you get the point.

As to your difficulties at this time,  I truly sympathize with you, as I lost my Dad 4 years ago at about this same time.  I know what it's like to have a sick parent. 

God Bless,

Adolph.....er Brent   ;)

Where was Huxley from? the Netherlands?

http://www.indystar.com/articles/0/228185-5740-010.html
 
Euthanasia of infants often goes unreported
 
Associated Press
March 10, 2005
 
Euthanizing terminally ill newborns, while still very rare, is more common in the Netherlands than was believed when the practice was reported a few months ago -- and experts say it also occurs, quietly, in other countries.

Dutch doctors estimate that at least five newborn mercy killings occur for every one reported in that country, which has allowed euthanasia for competent adults since 1985.

In 2002, doctors at the University Medical Center Groningen helped create the so-called Groningen protocol, a list of standards for performing and reporting euthanasia of newborns with serious, incurable deformities.

Two pediatricians at the hospital, Drs. Pieter J.J. Sauer and Eduard Verhagen, report in today's New England Journal of Medicine that 22 mercy killings of newborns who otherwise would have lingered in intensive care for years were reported to authorities from 1997 to 2004, about three each year. But national surveys of Dutch doctors have found 15 to 20 such cases a year, out of about 200,000 births.
Verhagen, who supports such euthanasia, said in an interview that the doctors were allowed to review district attorneys' records on the 22 reported cases. None was prosecuted.

"These were all very clear and very extreme cases," he said, where the newborns were suffering from severe, untreatable spina bifida, with major brain and spinal cord deformities and sometimes other birth defects.

Euthanasia opponents and others have been highly critical of that viewpoint.

"During the past few months, the international press has been full of blood-chilling accounts and misunderstandings concerning this protocol," the doctors wrote.

The Groningen protocol requires being sure that the newborn is suffering greatly with no hope of improvement, that the prognosis is certain and confirmed by at least one independent doctor, and that both parents give informed consent. Details of the newborn's condition and the euthanasia procedure, usually an infusion of lethal drugs, must be reported to local district attorneys under the protocol, so they can assess each case without interrogating physicians.

"We believe that all cases must be reported if the country is to prevent uncontrolled and unjustified euthanasia," the doctors wrote.

In France, 73 percent of doctors in one study reported using drugs to end a newborn's life. Forty-three percent of Dutch doctors surveyed and from 2 percent to 4 percent of doctors in the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Germany and Sweden reported doing so.

In the United States, some doctors and ethicists say newborn euthanasia has happened occasionally for decades, although it is much more common to withhold or stop intensive treatment and let the baby die.

 

Brent:

Since I had to do driving today for my job (over a hundred and fifty miles worth) I was able to hear more about this case. 

Rush Limbaugh seemed to have made a good point when he said that the governor of Florida didn't believe that he could go any farther than he did in trying to keep Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube in her body.  Something about the Florida Supreme Court's refusal to allow it to be reinserted and his not wanting to violate the rule of law.  I imagine that President Bush might have the same set of constraints.....if he could use an executive order for this case, what is to stop him or any other president from issuing executive orders at a whim? 

At what point would we want to have the government interfere with family squabbles, even in life or death issues?  Also, are all these people that are clamoring for Terri Schiavo to be kept alive going to foot the bill for this?   I wonder if these people (besides the family) on either side of the issue are raising funds either for this woman's continued care or for her funeral.   It may not be their responsibility, but they all seem to be concerned with this out of all proportion to this issue's meaning to their own lives. (I'm thinking of people like Lou Sheldon in particular.)   Why don't they put their money where their mouths are?  (Though I hope the families have planned well for either outcome, death or life.)

Matt Sciaini

True enough, but there is a difference between personal beliefs and codified law.  You cannot enforce laws on the basis of your personal beliefs about someone else's personal beliefs.


Why don't you ask me before accusing me of "name dropping".

I majored in history, and taught both World History and American History and Government for years.  So, I have done a lot of reading on that area.

Regarding the names I mentioned, I have read several books by some, one by some others, and essays and articles by others, along with discussion of their ideas.

As for John Jay, I have only read his part of the Federalist Papers.  Hamilton wrote about half of those essays, and Madison wrote most of the others.  Jay wrote, I believe, five.



Brent, our government is designed to make change difficult.  When the leftist media blathers about government "gridlock" they are simply describing the government working the way it was designed to do.

However, don't you think a 60% reduction in the wellfare rolls is "doing someting"?  After 1992 the Republicans forced Clinton to sign a welfare reform act.  He vetoed it twice, but the idea became so popular that he finally signed it, and then immediately apologized to his A/A constituents.

They also defunded the Left by stopping all the contributions that the Democrats were making to Leftist organizations.

Recently, they were finally able to get the late-term abortion ban through the Senate.  It took 12 years of steady effort.

There is quite a difference between "nothing" and "everything".


Exactly which of his constitutional powers allows him to interfere in the decisions of state courts?


So, if Governor Bush sends the state police, acting on his direct orders, to take Mrs. Sciavo out of the hospice or to take some doctor in, and the local police resist, should the state police kill the local police who legally resist them?

If the Pres. pardoned the Gov. for such a thing, he would probably be impeached, since he would be violatiing his oath of office. 

Or, should the local Libetarians grab their guns and go shoot it out with the local police? 



As Churchill said, "Politics is the art of the possible".

BTW, when are the Libertarians going to start this kind of heroic actions?

Brent, "thou shalt not kill" is a prohibition of murder, not killing.  The Bible prescribes several types of legal homicide.  War, capital punishment etc.

The prohibition against murder is based on Genesis 9:6 "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, (ie, you shall kill in this case), FOR IN THE IMAGE OF GOD HE MADE MAN".

The problem in the Schiavo case is that she is being killed LEGALLY.   Not righteously, to be sure, but legally.  Murder is the illegal killing of a human being.

No they don't deliver ALL the goods, but if they weren't there we would be in a national meltdown of socialistic insanity. 

We would have Grey Davis on steroids running all branches of government.


My leanings are based on principle as well.  My practice is based on reality.



Seems to me that we were doing all those things long before there were any "Libertarians".


The world is not a perfect place.  A Republican half-a-loaf is far better than a Libertarian none.

BTW I never voted for Pete (flip) Wilson.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Interesting observation. There have been a number historical instances in which the above fact issued in a real dillemma for the Christian in view of 1 Peter 2:13,14.
I suspect that this kind of potential moral conflict will present itself with increasing frequency in these last days...a sobering prospect.
Verne

p.s. Some probably consider the founding of this country to be one such instance... :)

Verne,

You are 100% correct.  The Anglican church strongly supported divine right theory.  The revolution was "sold" to the 1/3 of the American people who wanted independence in 1775 by the Presbyterian and Congregationalist ministers.  They taught natural rights theory, and utilized ideas that can be traced to Duns Scotus about the rulers responsibility to the ruled.

Tom

Yes, great post Tom.

The Terry Shiavo situation put Jeb Bush, and President Bush in a tough situation.  They had to say the right thing, and go as far as possible in doing the right thing, without taking too much risk.  Compromise and triangulation is a wonderful thing...

What is happening is that the courts are fracturing, twisting and re-writing our constitution.  I need not cite the many instances that illustrate what I just said, you are aware of many of them.  The president took an oath to defend the contitution.

Here is the dilemna:  we have evolved to the point where we let the courts "interpret" the constitution in the same manner that the priests "interpreted" the Bible when the Church of Rome was at the height of its power.

A federal judge is not more authoritative than a king, and our founders saw fit to rebel against the King of England.  I really believe that this case, should have been resolved with bold action on the part of the "Christian" leaders we elected.  That's my opinion.  Sure, it would have meant breaking the law.  The Boston Tea Party was illegal, so was the Declaration of Independence, as well as a black woman sitting in the front of the bus, etc.  Sometimes you gotta break the law.

In Nazi Germany, the people didn't speak up, and didn't break the law, and things progressed from segregation, to vandalism, to genocide...all done legally.

The Terri Schiavo case is just the first drop of rain to fall.  More of this sort of thing is going to take place, and our leaders will find it ever harder to take a stand.  It would have been easy this time.

Also, you make a good point when you said, "When are the Libertarians going to stand up?"  I agree, there isn't much happening there in the form of a national uprising.  However, the republicans have already made it clear that they take a supine position on critical issues.

As far as I know, partial birth abortion is still being practiced in this country as we speak, and still being paid for with tax money.  Am I wrong? I hope so.

What I find interesting is that it is claimed that "welfare" is down x% since some time in the past.  What are they talking about?  Ask anyone who works in social services and they will tell you that their client base is growing, and that more people are being hired to handle the load in order to get people signed up for welfare.  I asked some of them if they noticed any decrease in welfare and they just laughed.

Prison guards in our area make between 80 and 200K per year, and have better benefits than teachers.

Good for you for not voting for Pete Wilson.   

Brent

[/color]

I just received this via e-mail:

Listen to a special message from Dr. R.C. Sproul
concerning the issues surrounding Terry Schiavo's tragic death:

                                  www.ligonier.org  (http://www.ligonier.org)


Excerpts from the interview:

"What happened to Terry Schiavo is symbolic and illustrative of a significant shift in the structure of our culture. Though there are many complex issues here that we can discuss, what we've just witnessed is the willful starving and dehydration of a living human being. If we did that to one of our pets, we would be arrested. If we did that to a convicted killer on death row in one of America's prisons, we would be charged with cruel and unusual punishment."

 
"There is no more fundamental civil right according to the Constitution than the right to life. And if the government cannot be involved in this, then the government should not be involved in anything. The issues here are so much larger and more serious than the life of one person, as serious as that is. What I've seen is the serious threat to the whole principle of the balance of power in the government of the United States."

 
"A reasonable response to this tragedy would include within it an emotional response, because a heart that is not moved by understanding is really not rational. I think there should be a cry of mourning but also a cry of protest throughout the land. We have an ethical crisis in this country that is not going to go away with respect to the sanctity of human life."

Great post Al,

I don't have the time to listen to it now, but can you tell me in a nutshell what RC proposes as a reasonable response?

Certainly he has encapsulated the grave nature of this turn of events.   I am incredibly disturbed by the total lack of protest.  I wonder what is needed to actually motivate us as a people?

The Schiavo case is but the first little test.  Much more like this, and even more challenging is going to take place.  It shouldn't take more than 4 or 5 years to get to the point where "aborting" sick or elderly people is seen as an act of mercy.

Brent

Brent & all,

For reasons beyond my limited knowledge, I am unable to listen to such as this on my PC.  I hope to find a print version at www.ligonier.org  (http://www.ligonier.org), but haven't had time to look for it yet.

Personally, I don't see this as the first test, nor a "little" one.  Dr. Kevorkian & others have been setting the stage for a number of years.  I understand there are websites dedicated to the subject (they have been mentioned in the media-- I have not read them).  The public support of Terry's husband has been widespread.  You are absolutely right to think that government-supported euthanasia of citizens deemed "non-productive" by reason of age or mental or physical disability IS coming.  Calling it an "act of mercy" will be merely a thinly disguised justification of the act.  Already, practically all that are left to be decided are who will implement the decisions of who gets eliminated, and what will be the deciding criteria.

The dark side of this prospect should be obvious to any Christian, but there may also be an upside:  This, added to issues such as abortion, could be a unifying factor among God's people.  I agree with you that at this point, it is unclear exactly what will prompt us to a consolidated effort...

In Christ,
al

The thing that should be obvious to everyone is the origin of the illusions that plague our society.  The illusion capital of the world is Hollywood.  People need to wake up to the reality of the kind of monsters that run the whole show behind the scenes.  People are so infantile and are pacified by trinkets from Hollywood.


Beware of a subtle ambiguity in the concept of legal killing.  What you are speaking of is that people sentenced to death are being killed for legal reasons.  Another concept to watch out for is killing by using means that are considered legal to use against anybody you like!  This is something that seems to be happening a lot lately.

Steve,

What I was pointing out was that what happened to Ms. Schiavo was according to due process of law.  There is a BIG difference between legal and moral.

What Hitler did to the Jews was legal!   :o

Adolph Hitler gained power by constitutiional means.  As soon as he was in the NAZI representatives in the Bundestag voted an enabling act giving him dictatorial powers, ie, it was all legal.

Hideously immoral...but legal in a society that was operating on the basis of certain ideas.

My post was made in a general discussion of Libertarianism.  Libertarianism is based on an atheist/materialist world view that ascribes to what is popularly known as "Social Darwinism". 

Ever notice that they are for abolishing the entire social wellfare system? Personal survival and personal prosperity are the supreme values.  If you are weak, foolish, or unfortunate...too bad for you Jack.  The weak die, the strong live and reproduce.   

Improves the race y'know.   :'(

Anyone who thinks that this is what the founding fathers of the USA stood for is operating with an information defecit.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

There will always be a moral responsibily for any self-repsecting society to care for the the less fortunate among them -  the weak, the orphan and the widow. Much of this labor of love in days gone by would be performed by Christian men and women of compassion, particularly extended family. Church folk are too busy nowadays for this sort of thing...
What many peole fail to understand is that the frightful conditions that exist in American society today are by and large by design, whether you are taliking about the so-called drug problem or the heart-breaking vicious cycle of some seventy percent of African American kids being born out of wed-lock.
Has anyone read Moynihan's study on the well-fare system recently?
His predictions have come through in spades.
How sad that a government that suppposedly cares about its citizens, woould have crafted a policy that required the ABSENCE of a male in the household, before a struggling family could receive even minimal assistance!
I don't see how, apart from divine intervention, that this awful cycle is going to be brought to an end.
The church in the black community has failed miserably in this regard....MISERABLY!!
Verne

Verne, 

I agree with your post above, 99%.

In times past, the poor in society were indeed cared for by the church....and they still are today.  However, what I have found is that we tend to focus on the poor from other countries more than our own poor.

Case in point: Doctors Without Borders is an organization in which doctors of all types take time off at their own expense and perform free surgury/medical care in 3rd world countries.  In the states, many of the procedures would be very expensive indeed, but they do them for free in Peru.

There was a Tsumnami, and Christians came through with millions (billions?).  However, if we have a flood in the midwest, we expect the government to pick up the tab.

I am trying to communicate this to Tom, but he doesn't seem to get it yet.  Our "welfare" system, as you pointed out, creates and permanently enslaves an underclass.  Doing away with the system doesn't mean abolishing our ability to do good deeds and show compassion. 

On the contrary, there are plenty of compassionate good deeds being done all around the world by americans, especially Christians.  We would simply be free to do them here at home, if there was no welfare system. 

Tom, your argument that Libertarian thinking is Social Darwinism is humorous.  Why are people so excited to go to Mexico to build houses for the poor, without welfare assistance?  If we had more of our own money to spend, don't you think this sort of thing would increase?

Does anyone dare to state that the Great Society, or any of the "welfare" programs have been successfull?

On the other hand, look at Samaritan's purse, an organization I support.  I would be free to give them many more thousands of dollars if I wasn't having to pay graft for all the programs that sustain and attract the poor.

Is there a verse somewhere that says,  "If a man doesn't(refuses to) work, neither shall he eat."?

That jives really nice with Libertarian thinking, but it sure grates against the notion that government is needed to protect us and take care of us.

Brent

Actually, the care of the poor by the church was part of the system used in the middle ages in Europe.

In the colonies, and later in the states of early US history, poor relief was the responsibility of individual counties.  The church also helped the poor, but their aid was supplemental to the government system. 

That system worked well at the time, but two things have changed that: First, the rising technological level of medical practice raised the cost tremendously.  Yes, government interference into the system is also a factor, but let's face it, the services of a modern medical lab, X-ray, MRI's and so on didn't exist in 1789.

The other factor is that the industrialization of America created rich and poor counties.  Rural West Virginia can't afford what Marin County Calif. can.

So, the state and feds stepped in and took over much of the responsibility for funding.

There is no way the church can fund health care for the poor.  Do some things?  Sure. 

Do it all?  No way, not possible.

Now, here is an example for you.

When my daughter Glory developed Wilm's tumor when she was 13, she had to have surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.  Wretched time for us all.

The chemotherapeutic agents alone cost over 20,000 dollars.  I was sent some bill copies for the hospital bills for about 6 months. I totalled them up.   Around $85,000 dollars.   I never saw the doctor's bills.   I would guess her treatment, (that saved her life), cost $200,000-$300,000 dollars. 

When she first went into CHOC there was a little girl in the next bed with the same problem, requiring the same treatment.  I had excellent insurance, and it cost me very little out of pocket.   Her folks had no insurance at all, and were working folks that didn't have much.

She was treated under MediCal.   But if MediCal or some similar program hadn't been there, she would have died a horrible death in some hospice, probably being helped by Christians who would do what they could.  But they just can't bear that burden alone my friend.

So, I guess we will just have to plug along with the traditional American way.



No it doesn't.  But it does drastically reduce the resources available, which are already inadequate.

YES...we need to protect or borders, punish fraud....kick free riders off the rolls...stop rewarding illigitimacy.   But those are "tweaks", not total abolition.

We still are free to do them here at home.

Glad you are amused...but that doesn't change what it is. 


You know why Brent.   But millions of Mexicans live in hovels. 


Most failed, due to the pollyana attitude towards evil that infects Liberals.  But there were and still are success stories from the few programs that were well designed.


What is needed is a change from "either/or" thinking to  "what will actually work" thinking.

Blessings,
Thomas Maddux

Tom,

Let me ask you a serious question,

Have you ever given someone something, money, car, etc.?

If so, have you ever given to the point where it injured you, but you were happy to give anyways?

I suspect the answer to that quesion is yes.

If you had fifty thousand dollars that you didn't need, and your neigbors daughter needed expensive oral surgery, would you help her out?

I suspect the answer here is also yes.

All I am saying is that if you kept more of your money, you would be able to do more giving.  Bush Sr's 1000 points of light idea wasn't bad.  He just ruined it by  raising taxes, which took away surplus money from individuals.

Look at it this way, if you could give an extra 2000 dollars a month to your church, along with 200 others, do you think the church could do some neat things?  If the government wasn't there to force me to pay for someone else's healthcare, I could give more, which would make the church look pretty good.

Freedom encourages magnanimous actions.  The selfish and greedy don't look so good among the generous.

I hope you know what I am saying.

Brent

I agree in the case of such complex medical procedure as the one you referenced, you need some kind of support beyond what a church-based ministry can provide.
We are getting a first hand look at how ordinary folk can have a real impact here in Champaign.
Wayne Matthews is part of  a leadership team of faith-based ministry and providing health care to the community.
We should not overlook the matter of the inherent efficiency of this approach, nor the fact that effective preventive care goes a very long way toward reducing the burden borne for the poor and indigent by the rest of society. The data on how many folk get care only from the emergecny room is quite startling.




I suspect that this finds its root in the idea that we all here are so much better off than the rest of the world.
This is indeed by and large true. I do not think that any one can have less of an excuse for being indigent than people living in this country. Whle I know we will always have the poor with us, no country presents more opportunity for self-reliance, and indeed personal prosperity than does America.

Verne

Brent,

1. Yes.
2. Yes.

3. You are correct in your ideas on the church taking collective action.  And about freedom encouraging magnanimity.

But do you really believe that 10-11 percent of the US population can provide the charitable resources for the entire nation?  I think the answer would be "no". 

What this boils down to is a worldview question.   Should we base our values on religion or on "nature".

Do I exaggerate?  Let's hear from a real libertarian: Ayn Rand, the founder of Libertarianism.


Rand was a Jewish atheist.  She hated religion, socialism/communism/nazism, and what she called "altruism".
Here is her argument against "mysticism".


Rand is correct in her belief that "there is no earthly reason for it".  There isn't.  There is no reason to be found in nature.  If the materialists are correct, all existence can be explained in terms of the evolution of hydrogen atoms according to natural law.  That's it.  No reason to recognize any moral standards at all...except for what you wish to as an individual.

So, according to our Libertarian prophetess...who is the guilty party?


There you have it.  It's that nasty fellow, God, who has caused all our problems.  It's those irrational believers who are robbing us and ruining our lives.


The founding fathers of the USA were almost all members of Christian churches.  A couple who weren't, like Franklin and Jefferson, were definitely theists and believed in morality, prayer, and the need for a Christian religious base for a moral society, which could then be a free society.  They didn't want an established church, but they did want a society that reflected Christian morality.

Libertarians such as Ayn Rand want to de-Christianize society.  Back to "rationality", ie, materialism.  We, the strong, will do as we please.  If the weak, the sick, the handicapped die...well, that's nature.  (Social Darwinism btw).  If it pleases us individually  to help them, fine. But only at the level of my personal choice.

Notice that Rand thinks in terms of either/or.  Its either the poverty and slavery caused by the evils of mysticism, (religion), and altruism, or its total abolition.   She was a doctrinaire idiologue.

Yes, the current situation has some very severe problems, and many of the programs in place don't work well at all.  But there are other options than the sweeping away of the wisdom of the founders in the name of a vaguely defined "freedom" that has a meaning they rejected.  They believed  "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" meant something for all of us, not just individuals.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Tom,

Ayn Rand is a libertarian icon, to be sure.  However, what you are quoting from is her ideas on Objectivism, which is her secular philosophy set forth in her writings.  As a Christian, I reject her atheism.  However, she makes some excellent points about governments, hypocritical religious thinking, socialism and the like.

That being said, not all libertarians are Ayn Rand clones, in the same way that not all Republicans are clones of Jerry Falwell.  Mind you, Libs like to pretend that all republicans are right-wing-fundamentalist-christian-tonguetalking-wifebeating-gayhating-holier-than-thou hypocrits...but is this really fair?

If we examine a handful of prominent republican leaders who are hypocrites, can we conclude that every member of the party is like that? 

In the same way, you can't project a couple paragraphs from Ayn Rand onto the whole of Libertarianism and make the claims you do...although I understand why you would.  You don't like it, because you have decided to be a republican, regardless of whether or not they actually do what they say.


I'm shocked at this statement.  Not only do I believe that 10-11 percent of the population can provide the charitable resources for the entire nation, but this is exactly, precisely what has been going on for decades!  Have you ever looked at the breakdown of who pays taxes?  The vast majority of federal revenue comes from the about 10% of the population.  These are the same people who give charitable donations as well.  So your statement above is totally wrong.  It's not a matter of "if" they could provide the resource....cause they already are, and have been for a long time.

Also, let's just say that they weren't doing so.  Is it your contention that we should make people give by force?  If our citizens don't want to help the poor, and we have a representational government....are you suggesting that we should force people to take care of the poor?  This is pretty much what Karl Marx wanted, is it not?

Not even God does that, He prefers a willing giver.  But your argument has been set forth by plenty of socialists, and do-gooders over the years.  You all believe that government is the solution and the protection for "the Little guy."  Actually, if one tries this theorey out, as has been done in communist/socialist nations over the last century....it doesn't work too well, and actually creates "little guys," who loot and mooch off of honest, productive people because the socialist world view rewards the needy with greater rights. Those who enforce the rights of the needy are the politburo types, whose job is to live high on the hog and keep the needy alive and in need.  Why in the world would you want to adopt this faulty reasoning here in the US?


Again, I am shocked by your thinking and reasoning.  Tom, do you remember 911?  Weren't those guys religious zealots, doing and justifying their murder in God's name?  What about the crusades, the Spanish Inquisition?  History is rife with religiously based wars, killing and murder.  People love to exercise power over others in God's name.  That is what Ayn Rand is talking about.  Are you are so threatened by the idea of freedom that you worry that you won't be able to be a Christian anymore, if we don't have welfare, taxation, and hundreds of thousands of laws and regulations?  Do you only think that Islam does horror in God's name?  I shudder to think at what would happen if the likes of Jerry Fallwell were able to exercise power over this nation. 

Could you ever see yourself giving a dime to someone of your own freewill? 

If so, why do you assume that others would not?  Do you see yourself as superior to them?

So, to sum up, I understand your emotional attachment to big government and welfare, especially medi-cal and teachers insurance.

I am not lucky enough to be on the receiving end of any of these programs....I am only forced to "give," so that others can benefit. If my kids get sick, I'll have to find a way to pay for it myself.  So, I am not fond of forced charity, as I am one of the ten percent who fund the whole nut.

However, your attachement to these programs notwithstanding, what you are basically stating is that we need a certain amount of socialism and wealth redistribution in order to be a "christian" nation.  I reject that notion in toto.  Christians are free to give when they are free.  If my money is taken from me by force, I am not free to exercise giving with it, am I?

So, what we have now isn't working....no argument there.  Do we need more of it, or less, in order to fix it?  The USSR tried more.  The USA has largely been of the "less" thinking, until recently.  Which country do you think did a better job, and which direction should we move towards?

In a free society, you are able to base your "worldview" on anything you wish, including religion.  In a religious society, you are not.  Saudi Arabia and the Taliban are good recent examples. 

As a Christian, my values are based on freedom.  I pity the poor nation that attempts a "christian" theocracy.

Brent

I forgot to comment on this one:

Tom, I concede to you that results are what really matter.  Either/or thinking never fed a hungy child.

So, what will actually work?  Is our present system working?

I think the Wright brothers were told something about it won't work, cause it hadn't been done before, etc.  I flew to Vegas last week....and it worked.  Whoda thunk it?

Welfare/socialism doesn't work, IMO.  Freedom used to work....I am willing to give it a try again. 

Of course, it's easy for me,  I have no government safety net...must buy my own insurance, my employee's insurance, my liability insurance, and my malpractice insurance, prepare my own taxes, fund my own retirement and pay for my office furniture.  It must be much harder for someone who has lived their entire life getting all this as perks.

So I guess it all depends on a person's point of view.  From where I am sitting, I buy breakfast and lunch for my five kids, as well as about 20 other kids I don't know, every weekday. 

The best situation would be where 90 percent of the population lives a life of leisure, with government healthcare, housing and welfare, whole 10 percent does all the work and pays the bills. 

We could call it a reasonable system of helping the poor.  In the past, it was called slavery.  The difference is that we used to enslave the poor, but now we can enslave the rich and productive!

Brent

Boy did we get an education once we became small business owners. We were in a state of shock when we had to pay the taxes and insurance costs of the few folk we hired last Summer. We instantly realised that we had seriously underbid a few jobs.
Nonetheless, the country is dsigned for the entrepreneur. Anybody who has not figured out that you have got to get  beyond depending on employment for income is doomed to be an perpetual victim of  confiscatory taxing policy. It is really the only way the current system can sustain itself.
Sadly, not every one has the initiative, or more likely, was ever properly taught how the American system really works. I am not sure if there is any way we can premanently fix the current mess. I suspect that as soon as the younger generation begins to assume political power there are going to be some serious changes made...and rightly so...
Verne

entrepreneurs take all the risk, and if they succeed, get all the reward, minus all the taxes they must pay.  Things are not nearly as designed for the entrepreneur as in the past, especially if the entrepreneur needs a few employees.  Labor, and the cost associated with it is incredibly expensive.

Generally speaking, Welfare types take absolutely no risk, and never know success or reward.  Living like this makes them feel bad about themselves, and they compensate by faulting others for their sorry state....namely "rich" achievers.  Are there exceptions?  Of course, but in the main what I say is spot on.

There is a way to fix the current mess.  It's simple, short, and painful for some.  You scrap it.   You get rid of the whole thing.  What do I mean by this?

eliminate worker's comp.  Owners don't have it.  I take a risk every day that I might get hurt at work, but I'm not covered by comp....cause I'm a business owner.  As such, I must be responsible for myself.  Employees, however, get to hold their employer responsible should they fall down at work.  In California, comp rates are between 30 and 150 cents per dollar payroll.  It's a complete rip-off.

Taxes: flat tax. Period.

Social Security: scrap it, and sell of government owned property in order to pay for those who are currently dependent on it for their living.  We must keep our obligations to those folks, over say 50 years old.

Healthcare:scrap medicare, do away with it.  Take the money in the system now, and use it to give people over 65 low interest loans for their healthcare expenses.  Those who haven't hit the magic number yet can keep their current health coverage after their birthday, instead of being forced onto Medicare.

Private pay worked in this country for years before Medicare and HMO's. 

Give people their money back, and let them be responsible for their own decisions.  Sure, this is going to hurt folks, but the current path is far worse.  It can be hard work trying to jibe the boat at night when it's raining, but if doing so keep you from running aground, it's worth it, even if it is uncomfortable for the short term.

Socialism doesn't work, and we are heading faster and faster down that path.

Democrats want really big government.
Republicans want slightly less big government.

Both are headed the wrong way, just that one will get there sooner than the other.  When the system finally does collapse, we'll be right back to simple capitalism anyways.

Brent

They foster an atmosphere of dependency by the poor and disadvantaged, on the government


They foster an atmosphere of dependency by the well-off and privileged on the government.

Both employ the legislative process to achieve their self-centered ends.
Both groups are hogs swilling at the tax-payer's trough.

The conduct of Bush and Cheney disabused me of any notions I had that Republicans stood for the tax-payers' best interests.
Verne

Yep.  I agree.

wouldn't it be great not to feed the hogs anymore? 

since the topic is current events, what do you think the chances are that the brave, moral republicans will do something to get judges nominated and confirmed?  Do you think they have the stomach to say, "No" to the dems?"  (I am amazed that they had to think more than ten minutes over this, but they are worried that they may be treated badly when the dems get power back.  WIMPS and WEASELS!)

Brent

On his appointments I have some mixed feelings. From what I know about Pickering for example, I must say I agreed with the Democrat's strong opposition of the man. He was reversed a remarkable fifteen times in ten years by the very conservative court Bush was seeking to appoint him to.
He decisions on civil rights and labor laws were clearly viewed as extreme by his coservative peers.
The record of Bush of appointment of Black judges in states where there is a high representation of African-Americans is not at all good.  I could give some interesting stats if anyone is interested; it happens to be an area I pay some attention to...
Verne

Brent, You obviously have done somethings right. But I'm surprised that in your ideal world you think the church would foot the bill for the nation's distressed, sick, poor and other's such as homeless. Have you ever had a true need and been on the recieving end? God knows the Church would'nt do it, so he's set up Governments. (I'm not saying you would'nt do anything) Don't you remember anything from your assm days about human nature, money and power. You don't think the church would be bias to their own, and look down on the other religious or non religious. Please re-think what your saying. Their really going to take care of some old man who's burned through his resources such  as house savings other investments and he hates christians he's laying in a bed for 10 years or so, with round the clock nursing, daily doctors visits etc. This is just one how about thousands of baby boomers nearing retirement. Oh just send the bill to the church. right. Would if the church does'nt have enough $, then what? I think your coming from a perspective of being rich, increased with goods and having need of nothing. The church is not as generous as you make it out to be.  Summer.  P.S. While having coffe in Westwood the other day it looked as if several people lived right there on the side walk just outside starbucks. I did'nt see any church groups rushing over to take care of them. These people looked sick.

Hi summer,

I think you misunderstand me.  I do not advocate that anyone be forced to care for the nations sick or distressed.  To the contrary, I think that any care, or giving should be done out of freewill, on an individual basis.  The thought of sending the bill to the Church is silly, insane and immoral.

In the same way, the idea that the taxpayors should be forced to foot the bill is also wrong.  Now, if the church WANTED to help, wouldn't that be wonderful?  However, the church would be biased, etc.

It is precisely these reasons why I say we should be allowed to keep what we earn and give as we see fit.  I believe there are more than enough generous people to see that the poor among us get some relief.  Also, if the government didn't purchase poor and homeless people in order to fill its programs, the needs would not be as great.

My "ideal" world is really pretty simple.  I like the US constitution, and the idea of limited government.  It seems pretty out of reach at present, but at one time we had it.

Brent

Brent, I think I understood what you said. If your ever hit with a catastrphic disaster, do yourself a favor and don't count on the church to come to your rescue, you would be better off getting low % loans from the govt. And if your resouces were completly exhausted and you had to get medical aid from a govt program such as medicare for something like a feeding tube for 10-20 years, you and your family would be grateful (if you'd even be aware of it.) I jumped in this conversation because I'd been thinking of alot of these issues as I'm newly self-employed. So I appreciate your insights. Also I just watched a friend lose about 3m in real estate (a landslide) and all that was offered was fema a low % loan on top of about 16k mortgage, homeowners does'nt cover this type of disaster. No-one is going to feel to sorry for someone in this case or offer to help. Things happen in life that are considered acts of God, that we have no control over. Thank-God their are some Good Samaritans out there. Would'nt it be nice to have an "Angels of Mercy" center to help the poor, sick in society. Would be Wonderful to give,could be a donation run only center, but would most likely turn into a skid-row situation real quick.   Summer.

Hi Summer,

I don't have a problem with a little help for true catastrophes.  However, that is a far cry from what we have now.  We are headed towards cradle to grave oversight by mama government.  Breakfast and lunch at school, doctor visits, housing, food, you name it.  That's a far cry from a feeding tube!

What bothers me so much is that the debate over this stuff is really over.  It used to be common knowledge that we were on our own, and that bad things can and do happen.  There were no guarantees, no safety net.  People didn't expect the government to bail them out if anything bad happened.

Now, the debate isn't over whether this is a legitimate roll for government, but over how much "help" should be given, and how much wealth should be redistributed in order to accomplish it.  If we follow this to its logical end, we end up right where we started, only totally impoverished.  Russia is a case study in this area.

Maybe I'm crazy, along with many of my friends, because I think it would be great to live on a sailboat and cruise around the world.  No control over the weather, no government to turn off and on the wind, or food stamps to re-provision.  I decide where I go, and take all the risks, as well as the rewards.  No safety, only adventure.  I'll do my best to be as safe as possible, but there are no guarantees on the ocean. 

Why does this sound so awesome?  Why do so many people want security?

Honestly, sometimes I can't decide if the world has gone mad, or if i have.

Bottom line, I don't go around asking the "church" for money.  I also don't count on them coming to my rescue.  Earthquakes, car accidents...they all happen.  It's part of life.  I'd rather face uncertainty as a free person, than as a ward of the state.

Brent

See, Brent...  There you go again with that "either/or" thinking!  ;D  ;D  ;D

Yup!  :D

http://family.org/cforum/feature/a0036082.cfm
April 4, 2005

Pope Recalled as 'Voice of Conscience'
by Pete Winn, associate editor


Catholics and evangelicals alike remember the late pontiff as a commanding pro-family figure on the international stage.

Pope John Paul II, who died Saturday at age 84, was widely considered one of the most extraordinary leaders in the modern world. And you don't have to be Roman Catholic to be amazed at the legacy the pope built for 27 years — the second longest pontificate in history.

U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., a pro-family leader of the U.S. Senate, met the pontiff when he co-led the congressional delegation to Rome that presented John Paul II with the Congressional Gold Medal.

He lauded John Paul for his willingness to confront evil and to stand for the inherent dignity of the individual.

"He was raised up at a particular, unique point in time in history — confronted Nazism, confronted communism and then confronted the culture of death," Brownback said. "And in each case, (he) saw that when evil is confronted, it may take some time, but the evil will be defeated.

"What a lineup that came together at a unique point in time of history — of Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher — to confront Communism. I'm old enough to remember that people just thought Communism was going to be there for a long time, even though it sucked life out of people. But that triumvirate confronted Communism, and it fell. An evil confronted will be an evil defeated, even though it may take time.

"He had a moral clarity and boldness that was a great gift to the rest of us."

Focus on the Family Chairman Dr. James C. Dobson agreed.

"While we grieve the profound loss of this remarkable man, we celebrate his life, his ministry and his undeniable impact on the world," Dobson said. "During his time as leader of the Catholic Church, he embodied the belief that freedom is a gift from God that should not be infringed by any government; that all life is precious and should be protected; and that dying is part of living and should not be feared nor hastened artificially."

Those are just some of the reasons John Paul II will be remembered as the greatest pope of the last century, according to The Rev. Thomas Euteneur, president of Human Life International.

"His message and the power of his witness will never die," Euteneur said. "The pope has been a voice of conscience like no one else could be — or has been in all of the past century. He knew very clearly the difference between right and wrong. He was able to carry out a profound critique of the atheistic and anti-life ideologies of the 20th century and to bring that to us in a form which has been unsurpassed."

Euteneur added that the pontiff wrote 14 encyclicals — or authoritative papal declarations; made 104 trips around the world; gave more than 20,000 messages; spoke to dictators; and "did just about everything that a human being could possible do to appeal to the consciences of the world."

Embodiment of pro-life principles

Dr. Timothy O'Donnell, president of Christendom College in Virginia, said the pope stood for the dignity of life — a core Catholic teaching. But has also served as a visible embodiment of that principle, not only for Catholics, but for the world.

"Even in his illness, he showed us the fundamental dignity of the human person," O'Donnell said. "It's not what you have or what you do, but it's what you are that's the most important thing in life."

There has been no stronger voice for the family, according to O'Donnell, who is one of the few lay leaders appointed by the pope to the Pontifical Council on the Family.

"He made the defense of the family one of the principle keys throughout his pontificate," O'Donnell said. "One of his earliest documents that he issued, he called for a gathering of the synod of bishops to discuss the family, because he saw very clearly that the way to our future passes through the family — and that's part of God's providential design; that marriage should be a union between a man and a woman, and emphasizing very clearly openness to life and that children really are a blessing — a way of sanctifying and making that marriage holy. This is something he saw as a point that really needs to be defended."

Above everything else, though, O'Donnell said the pope "wanted to proclaim Christ."

"From the first encyclical that he sent out, 'Redemptor Hominis,' The Redeemer of Men, he focused on Jesus Christ," O'Donnell said. "And he did that when he visited his native Poland, in front of Communist leaders, wherever he went — he preached the same message in season or out of season. And I think the greatest legacy for those who are not Catholics, but who would share a common Christian faith, would be (that the pope is) a great example of serving the truth in love."

The Rev. Mitchell Pacwa, S.J., a Catholic theologian and teacher who hosts programs on the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), agreed that Jesus was the core of John Paul II's theology.

"We have to come into union with God through Jesus Christ, and there is no other way to God except Jesus," Pacwa said. "He really highlighted that in everything he has written to us. And man cannot know who he is, apart from knowing Jesus Christ. Jesus is the one who has shown us what it means to be made in the image and the likeness of God."

The Rev. Robert Sirico, who heads the Acton Institute, said it is a misnomer to apply a political term like "conservative" to the pope. He was, instead, a traditionalist.

"I think what's unique about him was he articulated the vision in such an accessible way that everyone understood," Sirico said. "It was very hard for anyone to say that this was a mean man. What he spoke, he spoke with love; he spoke with profound respect, even for people who disagreed with him.

"He was a man of prayer, a man deeply committed to Jesus Christ. A man who respected them, regardless of our differences, a man for me as a priest is really the model of the priesthood, other than of course Jesus Christ Himself. But this man embodied the Gospel in a unique way."

Rita Marker, executive director of the International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force, said she saw evidence of the pope's unique appeal at a conference on families at the Vatican, with her own family present.

"There's something about a person that children tend to sense, that sometimes adults don't," she said. "And as soon as the pope came into the room, (my son) Paul, who is the second to the youngest, the shy one, went running up to him, and put his arms around the pope, and the pope put his arms around Paul — it was just utterly incredible.

"It was so out of character for Paul, and yet it really wasn't because he could tell that this was someone really special who loved children."

Brent, You sound like a classic casse of mid-life crisis. The sailing around the world sounds so good to you because your caught in the middle. You could sell all and go at anytime, but your too responsible to do that. Your children and wife would probibly not want to live your dream. Yet maybe when their grown and you retire you could live your dream, or even go on a sailing trip for a few months taking all the risks the open sea has to offer. Funny I know someone who lives on a sail boat, his only saftey net is a fishing net he uses to catch dinner, he works on the yacht anchorage, gets to surf, sail, scuba and fish at will weather permitting. (Or you could run for office your so political, you have some great ideas,) Yet I suspect the real issue is the wasted assmebly years and reconciling that against our ego's of being so stupid to fall for GG.  summer

You know something?  I think there is a lot of truth in what you say here.  Could it be that i really am in a mid-life crisis?  I bet your right.

So, when I "get over it" I can accept the rest of my life in comfort, knowing that I didn't pursue my dreams, and got over the idea of living passionately, choosing instead to compromise and live moderately.

Dang, that sounds so attractive..... :-\

I probably am in a mid-life crisis of sorts.  My question is if this is bad, something to be squelched, or is it time to take action? 

Brent

Definitly Take-Action. Plan the trip now, unless you want to sail around the world in your fifty's or sixty's, of course your probibly physically fit now, but who knows in ten years. Besides you probibly have a nice life insurance policy for the family if you don't make it back.( Here-in lies the madness!)   summer.

p.s. If you do "get over it" a very wonderful thing can happen. Your children will be grown, and be more independent. I can't believe how nice it is to not have to drive kids around all day. Mine are both driving and both have jobs after school, so I'm no longer a walking ATM/Taxi. Its also wonderful that my daughter will start college in the fall and my son will graduate and turn 18 next year. This does free me up to pursue some of the things I've had to put on hold for close to 20 years. They still remain a great blesssing in my life, even more so now. summer.

Brent,

You said,

This statement has some problems.  I am familiar with the figures you give.  I hear them quite frequently on conservative talk radio shows when someone calls in and advocates taxing the "rich".  "Rich" btw, seems to start at about what most people call "middle class".

But the 10% figure is not accurate for all taxation.  It applies to the Federal Income Tax, and is accurate as far as that goes.   But it doesn't take into account all the money that comes from corporate income taxes, excise taxes, payroll taxes, (FDIC and Medicare), tariffs and import/export licences, grazing leases, sale of oil leases on federal lands, user fees, on and on.

 We all pay many of these taxes.  The guy with a 1983 Impala probably pays as much federal excise tax on his gas as the guy with a Lexus.  And there are a lot more working stiffs than rich guys.

In addition, the folks that pay the majority of the income taxes do so because of compulsion...not out of benevolence.  Actually, only a little less than 30% of Americans make charitable donations at all!  (This, btw, is a higher percentage than the Canadians who donate)

Folks that make over $100,000 annually gave 2.7% of their income to charities.  Folks who made under $25,000 gave an average of 4.2%. (In 2000).

So, the reality is very different from what you described.

It seems to me that folks who think all the needs can be met by personal charity are as naive about human goodness are Leftists are about human evil.

Of course, we could just abandon the genuinely needy to whatever folks wish to give.  Seems to me that that is what was done for most of human history.  I can't really say it seems to have worked very well. 

More later.

Thomas Maddux

I guess you're right Tom.  Humans are selfish and won't meet all the needs.  We need government to do that for us, as government isn't plagued by selfish humans.  It's the only thing that works, because for most of human history, there have been people with needs.

I'm going to think about this before I teach my kids,  "Kids, work hard.  There are a lot of needy people out there who are counting on you to help them."

I have enjoyed our conversation, but I don't think we are on the same page at all. 

Brent

This, received today in an e-mail, could have gone on a couple of different threads, but "Current Events" seems appropriate:

al

---

                   America the Beautiful,
                     or so you used to be.
                   Land of the Pilgrims' pride;
                     I'm glad they'll never see.

                   Babies piled in dumpsters,
                     Abortion on demand,
                   Oh, sweet land of liberty;
                     your house is on the sand.

                   Our children wander aimlessly
                     poisoned by cocaine,
                   Choosing to indulge their lusts,
                     when God has said abstain.

                   >From sea to shining sea,
                     our Nation turns away
                   >From the teaching of God's love
                     and a need to always pray.

                   We've kept God in our temples,
                     how callous we have grown.
                   When earth is but His footstool,
                     and Heaven is His throne.

                   We've voted in a government
                     that's rotting at the core,
                   Appointing Godless Judges
                     who throw reason out the door,

                   Too soft to place a killer
                     in a well deserved tomb,
                   But brave enough to kill a baby
                     before he leaves the womb.

                   You think that God's not angry,
                     that our land's a moral slum?
                   How much longer will He wait
                     before His judgment comes?

                   How are we to face our God,
                     from Whom we cannot hide?
                   What then is left for us to do,
                     but stem this evil tide?

                   If we who are His children,
                     will humbly turn and pray;
                   Seek His holy face
                     and mend our evil way:

                   Then God will hear from Heaven
                     and forgive us of our sins,
                   He'll heal our sickly land
                     and those who live within.

                   But, America the Beautiful,
                     if you don't - then you will see,
                   A sad but Holy God
                      withdraw His hand from Thee.

                   ~Judge Roy Moore

  Judge Moore was recently sued by the ACLU for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courtroom foyer. He has been stripped of his judgeship and is presently threatened with the loss of his right to practice law in Alabama.

Brent,

Your complaint about guilt by association is well taken.  However, there is an old proverb that goes: "If you lie down with dogs, you will get up with fleas."

You have quite a few "fleas" that find their basis is Rand's Objectivism.  That was her attempt to create a system of moral values based on atheist premises.  I don't think anyone takes it seriously any longer, unless it would be her disciple and "heir", Leonard Peikoff.  But I'm not sure he even believes it.

But that is the basis for the Libertarian idea of "freedom" meaning the total moral autonomy of man.  But Libertarians truth claims tend to collapse under scrutiny.  For example, they are always claiming that "every man owns himself and therefore owns the product of his labor."

I always ask them, "How do you know that's true?"   They usually to dodge the bullet by asking something like, "Well, how do you know that it isn't true?"

The burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion, not the person questioning it.


Amazing Brent.   You can actually read my mind and discern the thoughts and intents of my heart all the way from San Luis Obispo!   

A better idea, (and more reliable in the long run), would be to ask me why I am a Republican.


Man, talk about guilt by association. 

First of all, a few posts back, you said you would call the city officials if a guy opened a whorehouse next door to your house, and complain about the traffic, noise, trash, and so on.

All those laws are based on force.  In fact, all law is based on force.  God set it up that way.

Romans 13: 4-6 says, " For he is God's servant to do you good, But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.  That is also why you pay taxes...".

Government was instituted by God for the restraint of evil.  Defacing the image of God is evil, so Christian influenced societies made laws against prostitution, drug use and so on.

Allowing children to starve is evil as well.  That's why they passed public wellfare laws.

Now, because of the pollyanna attitude Liberals have about human evil, they have allowed the public wellfare systems to be corrupted.  They have abandoned the ideas of personal responsibility and self reliance, so wellfare has become an entitlement in many folk's minds.

Libertarians have a Pollyana attitude about human good.  We are commanded to "love our neighbor as ourselves".  But we just don't quite find it in us to actually do that.  We are much more concerned that our kids eat, than the kids of some down and out person.   So, in Christian influenced societies, they passed public wellfare laws.

Regarding your attempt to paint public wellfare laws as Marxist/Socialist schemes. Socialism is an economic theory about the ownership of the means of production by the people. 

The wellfare state actually was invented by capitalist/imperialist Germany in the days of the chancellorship of Otto Von Bismark. Socialists like the wellfare state idea, but they learned it from capitalists.


This one has been thrown at me many times over the years.  You, however, are the first Christian to send this particular "flea" my way.  This usually comes from atheists.

1. You are equating the moral influence of Christianity upon a society with total religious domination and theocracy.  Nonsense.

2. You are equating Chrisitan moral influence with "religion", which includes Medieval Catholicism and Islam.  Nonsense.  When atheists throw this one at me,(the crusades, the inquisition), I just ask them, "Which of Jesus' teachings were they implementing?"   It is a long, long way from "do unto others" to the Spanish inquisition.

BTW, the first anti-slavery lawsuit in North America was brought in the 1680's in the Quaker colony of Pennsylvania by a Moravian immigrant.  His argument was, "since you believe in Christianity, you shouldn't have slaves unless you wish to become one yourself."   

Now, does that look like an attempt at theocracy to you?

3. The real danger to humanity is not religion.  It is atheism allied with the modern technological/industrial state.  In the 20th century that alliance killed hundreds of millions of people.  All the religious wars in history don't even count as a warm-up compared to what atheism has accomplished.
 

Could you please point out to me where I have argued that we need socialism and wealth redistribution to be a Christian nation?   I must have typed that one in my sleep.

I will post some thoughts on Christian moral reasoning later.  In the mean time, let me ask you a question:

What is freedom, and why should we have it?

Thomas Maddux

Wow, great question.

and, in the Biblical sense: 
In the context we are talking about, freedom a right that we all have.   Why do we all have it?  Because our founders thought it was a good idea, and I agree with them.  They were greatly influenced by Judeo-Christian ethics, which is where our definition of freedom comes from.

In a nutshell, freedom means I can live where I choose, worship in the say I see fit, and generally conduct my own affairs according to my judgement.

Freedom, as a universal right, means that my freedom cannot infringe on anothers.  For example, if you own a beachfront home, and I decide that I like it, I don't have the freedom to take it from you by force.  The government doesn't have this freedom either, which is why the concept of private property lies at the heart of freedom and liberty in our constitution. 

If I operate in an environment of freedom and liberty, there must be laws that protect my freedom and that of others.  Our constitution was designed with this end in mind.  The founders also understood that governments tend to grow in power and reach, and naturally begin to oppress the citizens they rule over.  That is why the constitution is a document that limits government, and places power as close to the individual citizens as is possible.

The things that I am talking about that limit my freedom are many:

1.)taxes---the type that re-distribute wealth.
2.)overbearing environmental regulation
3.)"hate" crimes legislation
4.)extra-local control of public education
5.)many, many others

So, for me, freedom is simply the ability to enjoy the fruit of my labor, a labor which I choose to do for my own reasons.

Why should we have it?  Because it seems like a good idea.  Sure, the bible talks all about it...but in a free society people aren't forced to base their views on the bible.

I can't help but be influenced by the ideas I see in scripture, and I can't help but see that they are good for believers and non-believers alike. 

In the final analysis, it is God's will that we were born Americans, where we are free.  Freedom is worth fighting for, in my opinion.  Had we been born in China, we would not be free, but perhaps we might decide to fight for freedom.  All humans crave freedom, but unfortunately, they also crave power over others. 

We basically have a serious mess here on earth, and we both know it won't be sorted out until we have a Divine Monarchy.

In the meantime, I choose freedom as the best way to live, given the option.

---

As to my charge of socialism, I stand by it.  Public healthcare is socialism, pure and simple.  Welfare is socialism, pure and simple.  Public education is socialism, pure and simple.  The question is how much socialism is good, and when does it become oppressive?  I maintain that we have long ago crossed the line from good to oppressive.

If you want to see where I am coming from read the stuff put out by the Cato institute.   They are a far cry from your "hippie, whacko" libertarian stereotype.

Brent

Brent,

You said:

An important consideration is, "Why did the founders think freedom was a good idea."

Here, for example, is Jefferson: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men...".

Notice where, according to Jefferson, the rights come from.  The Creator.  Freedom, Brent, is a religious idea.  It is also a very rare idea.  In all of history it has rarely been advocated.  Although there were repuplics before ours, ours was the first on based on the enlightenment view of freedom.

Notice also that Life is listed as one of the rights bestowed by the Creator, along with the statement that governments exist in order to secure these rights.

That is one of the ideas behind public welfare systems.  Helping the truly helpless, such as orphans, widows, the blind, the crippled and so on is derived by moral reasoning from the right to life.

Moral reasoning?  Take a look at this:

"Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as it was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical;"

Notice that Jefferson begins with what the Creator has done, and then develops the idea as to its application.  That is moral reasoning.  He says that since the mind is designed by God not to be able to be coerced, it follows that governments should not attempt to coerce belief by force.  Then he extends this idea into forcing people to pay for the propagation of religions with which they disagree.

However, the fact that the mind cannot be coerced does not mean that what men DO cannot be coerced.  Laws designed to promote public order and public welfare use coercion, and all the FF's recognized this.

Should religion be considered in the making of laws?  Here is John Adams, the second president:

"We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

These guys were not in the dark about atheism.  Their understanding of logic and reasoning far exceeded the standards of today.  That is why the first congress appropriated funds to send Christian missionaries among the Indians.  They understood that the only basis for law is morality.  They also understood that the only basis for morality, (beyond the level of personal preference), was religion.

That is why Thomas Jefferson, when he set up the University of Virginia, offered all the religious groups land on the campus where they could build centers for the propagation of thier views.  It is also the reason that when he was president he allowed churches to meet on sundays in the newly built chambers of the House, Senate, and Supreme Court.  He also ordered the US Army band to play at their services, at government expense.

Now, btw, what does, "our holy religion" tell us about "welfare".

It tells us a whole bunch.  But, here is an example:  Psalm 82: 1-4 and 8.

"God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgment among the gods, (which are understood to be government officials btw),
How long will you defend the unjust, and show partiality to the wicked?  Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed.  Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked."

Now,does this just refer to Israel? 

Verse 8 says, "Rise up, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are your inheritance.

Israel had a covenant relationship with God that differed from other nations.  But God's laws of justice and mercy are universal, and all nations will be judged by them. 

One other thing,

Since both public education and the welfare state were instituted before Socialism existed, just how do they constitute socialism?

I would be interested to see how the logic of that works.  ::)

BTW, in North America, the first public education laws were passed in, I believe, 1638 in Massachussetts colony. (However, 1643 keeps surfacing in my mind.)
In Europe, the earliest public education system I can think of as I sit here typing was that of ancient Sparta, 5th century BC.  Seems to me that Socialism came along in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Tom,

I am not going to disagree with Jefferson.  Wouldn't dream of it, except in the area of his deism and slave ownership.  His idea on government as superb and I find myself in total agreement with them.

I could not agree more with the idea that freedom is a right given to us by God.  I thought I made that clear.  It is sort of a basic assumption for me, like gravity.  Yes, freedom is a religious idea, and it was set forth by men who had all sorts of idea about religion.  Certainly you wouldn't want to emulate jefferson's faith! I'd vote for him in a second though.

If welfare is so good, why didn't we have it until FDR and Lyndon Johnson?  Same with Medicare.


Socialistic ideas were around before the politcal movement known as Socialism.  Nevertheless, let's be perfectly clear about this; what we know as public education today is a mutant monster compared to what we had 100, or even 50 years ago.  I am in possession of an 4th grade reader from the late 19th century, and it is so far beyond what the kids are learning today it's not even funny.  I also have an 8th grade history final from the same time period and it is truly amazing. 

I totally reject the idea that the founders had our current mess in mind when the set up the government.  They didn't have cabinet postitions, or huge departments and regulatory bodies, etc.

So, what we have today, in the areas of pubic education and healthcare is a state owned and operated system, which is almost completely out of the control of the local districts.  That is socialism, and it came about as a result of socialistic thought.

Do you see it differently?

Brent

The United States of America is soaking up 80% of the world's capitilzation resources to service our national debt and perennial budget deficits. The trade deficit last month hit an all time high of well over sixty billion dollars. How long can we keep this up? What if China stops buying our treasury notes?
Worse what if they decide to unload them??!
Many countries have already reduced their dollar exposure and I expect it to only get worse.
The so-called experts keep telling us that the economy is in essentially good shape and now untold millions of Americans have been treating their homes like ATM machines and squandering the equity they built up, some over decades. The new mantra of consumerism is the "interest-only loan"; it supposedly allows you to plant the money you would have paid toward principal elsewhere and achieve a much better ROI. Oh, really?
What if the real estate marke collapses and you are left holding a note twice the property's saleable worth?
This has in fact happend to some folk!
In anticipation of the inevitalbe flood of bankruptcies on the horizon, the business community have been quietly getting congress to make it virtually impossible to avoid your debt obligations even after declaring bankruptcy.
We have become a nation of absolute fiscal recklessnesss and there is going to be hell to pay down the road.
I feel terrible about what we are leaving to our children.
I have been watching the market now for some time and some time back  set 10,500 as my reinvestment strike point and put in a ton of dough late last year. I pulled it all out three weeks ago.
 So many folk I know have moved into 300 and 400 thousand dollar homes to take andvantage of the low interest and I must say we were at times solely tempted to move up as well. We decided to stay put and debt free.
Where will this all end??!!!!
I for one am very pessimistic about where we are headed.
Paul Kennedy's book about the rise and fall of great nations is starting to look prophetic.
I always knew that the moral failings of the nation would ultimately result in God's intervention.
I never expected it to be coupled with the kinds of obvious economic repercussions that now seem inevitable.
Any thoughts?
Verne

Count on it.  This is exactly what they are going to do.


I am pessimistic in the short term, but actually have hope in the long term...if we limit the discussion to the secular realm.  The whole thing takes on a different flavor if we bring end-times thinking into it.  Another thread perhaps.

In the short term, I hope to see a total collapse of government, with all the precious programs bankrupt and defunct. 

I don't think that our nation can ever be defeated solely by global electronic fiat currency economic means.  The reason is that we grow plenty of food, and have all the natural resources we need right here at home.  We can easily go it alone...but we don't do so now for a variety of reasons, most of them perpetrated by government.

Moral failings are going to be our demise, not economic ones.  Ceratainly the two are linked, but sometimes harship brings out the best in people, and they all buck-up and start doing the basic, important things again.  A country like Japan has much, much more to fear than we do, because they must import virtually all of their resources.

Seriously, if everything totally collapsed, what would life be like?  I would have a really nice vegetable garden, and would have some chickens.  Some of my patients are ranchers, and I could barter spinal correction for beef.  Also, I could trade spinal correction for other sevices, like getting a well drilled.  Entrepenuers would step in and local farmers' markets would spring up, even as they do now.  Driving everywhere wouldn't be much of an option, but riding a bike would.  Might that help our national obesity problem? 

The purchase of PS/2's, hip-hop CD's, and Plasma screen TV's wouldn't be as important as they are now, but families would sure appreciate having a meal together at dinner time.  It would do wonders for us  in many ways. 

People would also reflect on how it all happened, and might even re-learn the idea that ownership and responsibility are the cornerstones of freedom....not a bloated federal government that wastes and spends the product of it's indentured servants.

What of the police and firemen, what of basic services?  Well, that would be awkward and scary for some, no doubt.  Neighbors would have to join together, and the second ammendment would take on a whole new meaning, in light of the looting that would go on.  People would be forced to fight for their freedom, which is how America got started  in the first place.

LIfe would be hell in big cities.  That wouldn't be much fun at all.  They would have the most to lose, and would suffer greatly.

Militarily, our options would be few.  We simply couldn't outfit an invasion force to go overseas...but we could defend our soil.  The President would just have to inform the world that during our time of crisis, until we got things worked out, our policy towards foreign invasion would be Nuke first, ask questions later.  China would think twice before they tried to invade us  with this type of policy.  Kind of like MAD during the Soviet era.

The funny thing is I know people who have basically made this happen on purpose.  They are cruisers, who live on sailboats, homeschool their kids at sea and in exotic foreign ports, who work when they can, and eat fresh sashimi when they catch a blue-fin.

On such guy found himself being boarded by pirates near Indonesia.  He and his son had it all worked out.  His son hid in a locker at the bottom of the companion way, and when the pirate came below to threaten them with a gun and steal everything in sight, his son tazed him from behind.  Then they beat his skull in with a "priest" [for dispatching large fish] and took his gun, and shot the other pirate by firing through a porthole.  (The pirates boat was tied up alongside).  After dragging the other guy back to the pirates boat, they scuttled it, and it sank to the bottom with the miserable crew on board.

No government or courts were there to help them. Certainly there was no socail security safety net or welfare to give them a lift.  They had to defend their freedom with their own wits.  I have no reason to believe that this isn't a true story, but I am relating second hand info here.

My point in saying all this is that this will happen.  Hopefully sooner, rather than later, but if we continue on in our current manner we will go totally bankrupt, just like every other socialistic country has.  Government can't own and control everything, neither can they take producer's money from them forever.  Sooner of later, more people will decide to be on the receiving end, and the producers will grow fewer and fewer.  It's inevitable.

We are already totally upside down, and as Verne pointed out, it's only a matter of time until we can't finance our debt any longer.

If you have a leaky ship, you can go on as long as you have adequate bilge pumps.  Increase the amount of water coming on board (spending more) or decrease the capacity of the pumps (taxing more) and soon enough the ship will begin to sink.

Passengers who expect to be entertained and tucked in at night may not understand this, but any sailor worth his salt has this exact scenario at the top of his list every single day.

I don't know how long this will take...and it could be turned around, although no one is really trying to do so at this time.

Brent

I for one (45 minute car trip) would not be able to bicycle to work or to carpool with someone else who did; no one from my area is there.

Taking public transportion, I would probably be gone from 6 am to 10 pm each day, if I could get a seat. And this would only be possible if BUSH doesn't remove federal aid from the Amtrak coffers.

I wouldn't be the only one with the problem here.
And you think these city-dwellers would remain within their city limits?  Notice your empty vines in the morning? They will find a way....or else the "government-in-uniform" will. Guaranteed you will be sharing your spacious home with someone else, as well as your water and your land.

First of all, I doubt you would even have a job if everything collapsed, a la 1929.  If that happened, it would be even worse today, because we rely far more on the government than we did then.  So riding to work would be a moot point. Nevertheless, I think you would find that motorcycles make more sense in that case.

Amtrak is a loser, year after year.  Although it's super fun to ride the Coastal Starlighter through some of the most beautiful California coastline, the simple fact is that not enough people ride Amtrak in order to make it profitable.  It should go away.

As for sharing my home with someone else...I've done it before, and I'd do it again, but only by choice.  There is no way someone is going to take my home away from me by force if there is something I can do about it.  My neighbors would help me fight too.

I know the scenario is bleak.  I'm sure I don't have it all figured out, however the basic premise that someday our federal system will collapse is not conjecture...it is inevitable.

Think about what is happening here.  American's birthrate is negative, while immigrants are multiplying.  America's jobs are going offshore, because companies can't/don't want to afford the high cost of labor here.  Our kids are dumber than those of many developing economies, like India and Malaysia.  There is no more debate about the role of government and the morality of wealth redistribution and socialism....the only debate is how much is good for right now, and how much it should be expanded next year.  That can't go on forever....it's simply not possible.

Here's an interesting example, from what Verne brought up.  We bought a house in 2000, for 450K.  We sold it in 2003 for 699k.  The same house, a few doors down, just sold for 1.2 million.   These were upscale, nice looking track houses, very close together and not all that well made....for a million bucks!!!  That's crazy.

All this money has been loaned out, and meanwhile, people have been spending the equity in their homes to finance their lifestyles, or to move up to bigger and better.  Interest rates will go up, people will default on loans, and who will buy the houses?  Poof!  It's all gone.

Is it possible that we could see an Enron type thing in the mortage industry?  The bursting of the housing bubble is going to be really interesting, to say the least.

If we handled the situation by going to a Mexican style currency, we wouldn't be able to afford imported products, and the dollar would lose to the Euro....shoot the Egyptian pound would probably be worth more.  (I don't know if they use the pound)  We would still have food, water, timber, oil, natural gas, gold and strategic metals and a strong manufacturing base.  We could bounce back and actually get stronger as a result, but we just wouldn't be able to meet all the obligations of the bloated government.  We would have to start over, which would be a good thing.

This isn't a far-fetched nightmare at all, the makings of it are in place. As always, people who provide goods and services will be OK, while people like lawyers, many accountants, government workers, park rangers, Hip-hop artists, and professional athletes might not fare so well.  People would still want the distraction and escape provided by movies and sports, but the players would be willing to play for much less money, like the old days.

Farmer, ranchers, miners, timber companies and oil companies would rise to the top, as would manufacturing.  People would want to work so bad that they would take jobs that require hard work for fair pay, and wouldn't care if there was worker's comp, 401k's or stock options.  You might even find that American teens actually enjoyed picking strawberries.

Eventually we are going to get back to an ownership society, it's just a question of when and how.

Brent

Brent, Interesting. In my neighborhood the trend is tear-downs. You buy the land with an old 60+ year beach cottage for say 1m, you re-build a mansion on it and sell for 2 or 3m. You pay the builder his 500k or whatever costs and you profit 1 to 2m easily. These usually sell before their built in a multiple bidding war the best financing usually wins. Its not un-common to have loans go for 5 and 10% down verses the usual 20 to 25% down. Although if your  looking at a 3 to 4m loan the lender may want 30% down. They say the bubble will burst, but no one claims to know when.  Summer p.s. My bike is freshly tuned up with new tires and brakes. he,he.

Same kind of thing is going on everywhere.  Don't get me wrong, I really like that fact that I've made money on my houses, and that my current one is going way up.  It's just that it can't keep going.  Everyone knows it.....but when?

But when is right. One of my mentor's claimed their would be no fore-closures here. He said, "Were all college educated, we get it, we would know when to get out". The problem here is that Denial sets in and people try to save themselves, when its usually too late. summer.

Yeah, college educated people never:

declare bankruptcy
lose their keys
get divorced
join a cult.

As long as the people are college educated, we should be OK.   ::) ::)

What a Hoot!!! Well this is the arrogance one encounters on a daily basis, its quite amusing.( the well healed are envariblly safe)

oops..mis-spelled invariably. Intolerable.

That would be cool. I always wanted a motorcycle. For real.
I don't know that we would have a choice as to who lives in our homes, but I still think that the vines in your yard would never reach maturity.
I agree with everything you've said here. It is only a matter of time.
I think you will more likely find that they will be demanding, unwilling to work a "meanial" job that requires structured work hours. "Work for their food" when they can pick it off someone else's vine?? This attitude would be representative of many Americans.
I'd call it certain anarchy. Spoils go to the victor with the most amunition.

In your opinion, how would universities fare through all this?

Moonflower

Universities?

Well, there is only one I know of that isn't publicly funded, Hillsdale College.   I guess they might be OK.

As to the others, I guess some of them could stay open.  Private money would be sought out to help, perhaps some corporations of foreign interests would also help out.  In the final analysis, there would be a ton of bloat and waste cut out of public education....no other option.

They might question that validity of certain course, like "women's studies," or "racism in America."  With limited dollars, perhaps classic education would come back into vogue.

This much I do know, as long as people need food, shelter and clothing, the Agricultural, Manufacturing based economy is where it's at.  We really don't need email or BB's....they are a luxury that I enjoy, but it's debateable how useful they are.

The main thing I would worry about is all the services like water, sewer, trash, etc.  There could be some real confusion in the short term.

Worst case scenario, a bunch of Sanitation workers get together and drive the trucks for barter...with or without the city's  blessing.  We are so totally dependent in every way imaginable that there are probably dozens of things I haven't even considered....it could be a real mess.

In the "blue" states, where the dense urban areas are, people need their food shipped in.   It could get really interesting in LA. 

This could all be years and years in the future, who knows?  Then again, weren't people wildly speculating in the market right before the crash?  Seems to me the buy-a-house-tear it down-build-a-bigger-one-and-sell-it-pronto thing is pretty wild speculation. 

My financial planner just got back from a big meeting and he said he was really wary about the market right now.  We may make some big changes.

Brent

The trend is definitely down. I would not be surprised if it tests the 9K floor once more.
You should be charging for your insight on what are sensible stocks to own in this environment.  :)
Some of those sectors you mentioned are probably doublers for sure.
Look at what's going on  with many of the small renewable energy companies.
Everybody except us seems to be putting together a national strategy and these guys are making a killing overseas.
How interesting...
Verne
I hope it keeps falling on Monday for then I will know it is looking to test the bottom for sure.
If it bounces up at the opening, then I know the heavy hitters are trying to draw in the suckers...watch out!!  ;D

The great attack of 9/11 according to one respected leader is People who believe their religion is right.

Tolerance and Relativity are creeping into the Church if I say I know for a fact that it is true the world says I am intolerant and judgemental. But if they call me a bigot or a hypocrite are they not judging me?

I heard a great teacher on the weekend. Don't shy away from difficult topics learn how to put the burden of proof on the accuser where it belongs.

I enjoyed it so much I thought you would like to check it out for yourselves.

Hugh

http://www.str.org/cgi-bin/daily_commentary.pl

Gregory Koukl

For any knowledge at all to be possible there must be true things and there must be false things.

Main website. You will have to register if you want to enjoy all the resources. I heard Gregory Koukl this weekend and He is the best I have ever heard on how to give an answer to people on all the tough questions facing Christians today.

http://www.str.org/index.htm

I've grown weary of people running around saying that human civilization and technology is responsible for global warming.  I finally got tired of thinking that they may have a point and did a little research in hope of proving them wrong, while also finding additional reasons to enjoy some of the habits that they claim are causing the polar caps to melt.

I've concluded that much the articles regarding the issue of global warming is hype from alarmists and extremists, and tend to be devoid of rational scientific thinking.  Their claim that humans are to blame for the alleged depletion of the ozone layer is ridiculous and disturbing.  The reason is because the greenhouse gasses are naturally occuring. The major gases in the atmosphere that keep us warm and protect us from having weather like the moon's are: carbon dioxide, hydrocarbons, and methane. The alarmists have claimed that the cars, power plants, refrigerators, aerosol spray cans, tree harvesting, etc is causing global warming, or at least significantly causing it.  Here are some stats which indicate otherwise: 

Termites:
The largest single source of greenhouse gases are termites.  They are responsible for 45,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide and hydrocarbons each year.  This is 10 times more than what is produced by the burning of fossil fuels.

Volcanoes:
Estimates of the air polluting materials that were released from the eruptions of Mts.: Krakatoa, Katmi, and Helka are many times more than the amount released by humans since the beginning.  Krakatoa's last eruption caused the global temperature to drop 0.3C.

Deforestation:
Mature trees and old growth forests remove 4.5-6.5 tons less of carbon dioxide per acre per year from the atmoshere than youger growing trees.  I guess this puts the tree huggers that are concerned about glogal warming in a dillema.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's):
The changes in the amount of ozone appear to be related to the production of chlorides and nitrous oxides.  Chloride ions are injected into the atmosphere continously by natural processes.  For example, the eruption of Mt. St. Augustine in Alaska in 1976 released 290,000,000 tons of hydrochloric acid directly into the atmosphere.  That's almost 600 times the total world production of chlorine and CFC's in 1975.  Here's another:  Mt. Erebus in Antarctica has been erupting almost constantly for the last 100 years, injecting 900 tons of chlorine per day (perhaps that's causing ozone hole down there).  One more point: the oceans release 270,000,000 tone of chlorine each year through the evaporation of water.  The highest annual artificial production of chlorine was about 680,000tons per year.  Does this mean that humans really have an impact on global warming.  I think not.

So, why are some the leading scientists claiming that humans are responsible for global warming?  It appears that they are incorrect in their assertion that humans cause global warming, and that it's likely that they have some doubts about that.  So then why are they pushing this idea.  Perhaps it's an excuse for getting grant money: academic welfare to finance their livelihoods or something.  I guess that if somebody spends their entire career studying global warming under the presumption that humans cause it, and have become experts on securing grant money for thir experiments and then taking the annual vacation to exotic resorts where conferences are held for them to present their papers, it's difficult to retract.   

Now there's no reason for anybody to feel guilty driving a gas guzzler, cutting trees, or eating at McDonalds. 

Dan, until your latest post on this thread I thought you were a pretty sharp guy, but you're really missing the boat on this issue.  I'll try to respond to your points in order:

1. Termites are the largest single source of greenhouse gases.  And who do you suppose builds all the houses that the termites infest?  Out of wood?  DUH!!!

2.  Volcanoes as a source of gases.  There have always been volcanoes, so why has it become a bigger problem now than before?  People!  They have stopped throwing in sacrifices to keep the volcanoes happy!

3.  Deforestation: New trees cleanse the air of more CO2 than old trees.  OK, but people used up all the old trees and haven't finished building, so now they're cutting down all the new trees!  (This ain't rocket surgery!)

4.  CFCs produced from volcanoes (see #2, above) and from the oceans where all the highly-chlorinated water ends up that was drained from a few hundred gazillion people's swimming pools!!!

That should resolve your lame arguments, Dan'l.  Now here's the clincher-- the real reason that the human race is responsible for global warming:  they keep reproducing!  OK, it's not just that, but reproduction of the human race combined with a marked decline in family discipline has resulted in a generation of unruly kids that will go outdoors in the dead of winter, while the household heating units are running full blast, and leave the door wide open!  We are heating the entire atmosphere and we have the utility bills to prove it!

al ;)

The scientific community is not nearly as divided as it used to be about global warming. While you may see the perspective Dan presented in popular literature, the scientific literature is pretty much in agreement. The polar caps are indeed melting and the ocean levels are rising. Another very strange effect is that changing rainfall patterns are resulting in increasing evaporation in tropical regions (with increasing salinity), and subsequent alterations in flow and density in other regions. What has still not been fully established are the causal relationships but things do seem to be getting hotter.
Verne

If you want to find out when global warming started, and when the polar ice-caps began to melt, you must go back to the ice-age.

Back then, all Europe and much of North America was covered in glaciers.  There were so many campfires and bad forestry practices that the icecaps began to melt.

That is when global warming started, and look how bad it's gotten!

Yes, the earth is getting warmer, and the icecaps are melting.  However, this didn't just start since the industrial revolution.  EVERY scientist agrees that the icecaps have been melting for a long time.  However, POLITCAL scientists are divided over the reason why.

Simple logic tells us that the melt has been ongoing since long before CFC's, internal combustion engines and Amazon deforestation.  In fact, I submit that when there were ice caps everywhere, there were fewer trees....

Global warming is a fact. 

Laying the blame on America, and the last 100 years is silly.

Brent

Cleaning out the attic again, I came across something that you can all bid on: A purple, and I do mean people-eater purple, bulletin-sized flyer for the Midwest Seminar 1991. If I recall correctly, the first meeting for this one was held at a place other than the infamous Lincoln Hall, and I couldn't really get into any of the lectures. I felt like I was in a time-warp the entire time.

And now, what you've all really been waiting for: THE TITLE:

                                                 A CALL TO REALITY.

Was he trying to convince himself?

Best Offer takes it.

I bid a book of matches and a can of lighter fluid. ;D ;D ;D

Thanks Al, you've earned a few points by flattering me by believing that I was smart until my last post. 


I used to work on fishing boats in Alaska, and have had enough of them.  I don't miss boats at all.


I'll order a bacon double cheeseburger, and a beer--Coors extra gold.  Burp!


I've never built a house without a termite shield beneath the sill plate.  But I'll bet Jimmy Carter built a bunch of them without any kind of shield against termites.  Given how he and all the other democrats tend to mess things up, houses would certainly not be an exception during his Habitat for Termites, oops, Humanity gig.  Anyway, I'm no expert on termites, with the exception of knowing that people like George Geftakys are termites.  However, I do know that most of them do not live in houses. 
 

We know who a major source of gas is, but I'll refrain from going there.  But on a serious note, human activity, even now, is minimal compared to volcanoes. 


There are a lot more trees than you seem to recognize. The timber companies in the United States have had a very active program of reforestation.  The average annual growth is more than three times what it was in 1920 and increased 18% from 1952 to 1977.  Trees are like hay:  use them or lose them--in our case to the termites, myriad other insects, forest fires, tree huggers (the spikes they drive into them kill the trees in addition to the loggers), mudslides, volcanoes (remember St Helens killing all those poor trees, if you were around then?!).


Al, your points are spotted with entertaining prose. :) 


As you know, the earth is essentially a greenhouse because of our atmosphere.  If not, the earth's surface ad weather would be like the moon's: -170C at night and +100C at day.  I mentioned the major gases that protect us from these extreme temperatures.  Historically, there is no good or widely accepted explanation for why the earth's temperature and climate were as they were at any particular point in time.  No one knows what caused the ice ages and the warm periods in between.  No one knows what caused the "little ice age" of the late 17th and early 18th centuies, which was preceded by nearly a century of warming.  However, it is pretty clear that humans and industrialization did not cause those warming periods.  I havn't mentioned the universe's effect on earth....many scientists argue that global warming is due to changes in the sun rather than greenhouse gases.  Then there's the 80ppm increase in CO2 during a 100 year period 300 years ago.  I don't think humans caused that either.  Overall, I find that the proponents of the man-produced-greenhouse-gases-cause-global-warming Theory have not scientifically proven anything that compells me to trade in my pickup truck for a horse and buggy.

     Yeah, they just love those trees to death!!! ::)

P.S.-- Happy Earth Day!!! ;D

Good man!
We had a job last Summer in which carpenter ants wreaked havoc.
If the wood is not protected from moisture you  are asking for real trouble when it comes to carpenter ants.
We had to jack the house up and replace one of these load-bearing plates!
Talk about a royal pain in the - you - know  -where!
We kept telling the old guy what a huge favor we were doing him and he did not seem to get it.
I finally told him to get on the phone and call up any general contractor and get an estimate or two on what it would cost to fix his problem. He got very guiet after that. Some people...!
Hey Dan, do any of your suppliers up North have fir at a reasonable price?
Verne

FYI:


Talk Show Host Goes To Iraq
Rusty Humphries

April 18, 2005 |

Well, today is the day.  After 5 months of off and on planning, thousands of dollars in equipment and camping gear, I'm going to Iraq.  I will be the first nationally syndicated radio talk shot host to broadcast from Iraq, (Rush went to Afghanistan.)  I must be honest, the idea of going is exciting but I only found out two days ago a "possible" itinerary, which by the way, first night - "Sleep in Fallujah."   Fallujah, FALLUJAH?  What's next, overnight at the home of an insurgent just to "get to know the enemy?"  Actually, I want to go to the hot spots.  I really want to know the truth of what is going on in Iraq.  Everyday I hear conflicting reports, we're losing the war … no, we're winning the war.  The Iraqi's love us … no, they hate us.  Turn on the nightly news or Air America radio, (not that anyone does) and you'll hear a litany of the evils of our President, our country and our troops, it's sick.  But there's the thing, what if they're right?  What if  the anti-everything crowd was right and our soldiers shouldn't be there? 

My father, Capt. Gary D. Humphries was killed in Vietnam on Jan 26th 1969, I was 3 years old.  My whole life I've had lousy teachers, and other jerks tell me "Your daddy died for nothing!"  I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them now.  However, I didn't have a talk show host or a reporter who went to Vietnam to come back and tell me and my family what was really going on there.  That's my mission, to go to Iraq, clear my mind of any pre-conceived notions and report back to you what I really see and hear.  Most reporters have a bias when they report and they aren't honest with their audience.  They hide their opinions in the news and slant it so you don't know where the news ends and their opinion begins.  I'm a red, white and blue, flag waving, God Bless America, BBQ eatin', conservative Christian.  Not a favorite when it comes to the mainstream media.  Now that that's out in the open, I'm telling you I'm still not going to spin the truth.  While I'm a big supporter of military and the President, I won't be a water carrier for anyone.  My only objective is to work for what is in the best interest of The United States of America.  If that means that President Bush or Harry Reid has a good idea, or that Air-America is right then that must be reported.

I'll be in the War Zone for about 10 days.  Iraq, Kuwait, Arabian Gulf are some of the stops I have been told I'll visit.  My family and friends think I'm crazy for going (my daughter Karaline is only six months older than I was when my father got killed.)  It's only those thoughts and comments that have made me a bit nervous.  My mind has been racing, I've always been the kind of guy that jumps at a chance, gambles on my career but now I have a family and I think of Jeffery Ake, the contractor who's been kidnapped in Iraq.  What must that be like for his family? Please God, I don't want to put my family through that.  And if I was to fall into the hands of evil, will I read their messages like a scared puppet, (like that commie reporter from Italy) or will I stand up, spit in their face and take their punishments like a man?  I pray it won't happen but if so, I plan on the latter.   

I will send back my thoughts and observations, (as often as possible, I will be in a war zone after all) here to townhall.com and you can see my pictures and hear an audio blog on my website at www.talktorusty.com. (http://www.talktorusty.com.)  I also understand it's the military's job to make things look good.  I will be talking to the guy on the street, the man in the market and so on.  What do they think of you and me and do they understand the gift of freedom they have been given, or are we just wasting our time?

Rusty Humphries has been ranked by Talkers Magazine as one of the Top 10 most listened to talk-radio hosts in America.  He will be sending his thoughts of Iraq and the Middle East to townhall.com.

I get my lumber at dunbar in Vancouver BC.  I havn't checked the prices lately, but here's a link if you want to checkemout: http://www.dunbarlumber.com/

Replacing a sill plate is a lot of work that requires a lot of skill. Sounds like you're a very skilled builder, willing to take on challenging projects that others would cower at the thought of doing.  

The cost of lumber has skyrocketed this past few years.  I've been considering using light gage metal for my next house project.  But I don't know about the total cost yet.  I understand it's very popular in the southern states due to the huge cost of timber.  My favorite building material is concrete, particularly post-tensioned (PT) concrete, where high strength encapsulated cables are placed along with the rebar in parabolic drapes concaved downward (frown) over the column and upward (smile) at midspan with the anchorage at one end at middepth and the pulled end of the cable at middepth at the opposite end, then after a week or two of curing the cables are pulled to a specified amount and the slab lifts a little and the forms are removed.  For a regular slab to span 30ft, you need at lease 12" thickness with drop panels over the column...but with PT, a 7.5" thickness would suffice and without the drop panels..  Very popular in commercial construction, but highly rare in single family construction.  Righ now, I'm working on the design of a 50 story condo in Vegas, all concrete with post tensioned slabs, about 8" thick with some cantilevering almost 8-10'.  The owner will have the top two floors to himself and his wife (40,000 sf) with a 34' square swimming pool at the 49th floor so they have a place to stay during a their few visits to that city (tough life).  I figure that if PT is good for that building, then it should be good enough for a two story single family residence.  The cost per sf is minimal (just a little more than wood) but the freedom in form and appearance can be spectacular.  The only problem is that it requires special skill to build, but I figure that if you can replace a sill plate in an existing house, then you are qualified.


Al, Happy Arbor Day too!  It was nice to discuss greenhouse issues with you.  We should talk about other things, like acid rain, asbestos scares, and other such delightful subjects.

Dan

Paul Hohulin is the one with the real skill. I hand him what he needs and keep an eye on the books!  :) :) :)
Thanks for the link. PT concrete sounds like it would be great for hurricane country. We have also been very impressed withe the styrofoam forms and are thinking about trying to get a franchise. It sounds to me like you are a heavy hitter...fifty stories huh?
Verne

Gus Hansen wins in Vegas.

 :D  Do you follow poker?

Gus Hansen frightens me.  It's almost as if he knows what cards are coming.....all the time.

Brent

Styrofoam forms are great.  I like to spec them out whenever possible because they save the client a lot of money: no forms to dispose, good insulation, easy and fun to work with.  Like building with giant lego blocks.  The only thing to be concerned with is blowout from a high pour, but there are a few tricks available resolve that one.  If you run into any questions, let me know via email.

As far as being a hitter, no.  As a structural engineer, the size of the project is related to the performance of the economy.  After things wind down, it'll be strip malls on the tables again.  The real hitters are the developers behind the projects, especially the owners of the vegas tower.  They deserve their success after enduring severe risks that only their kind are willing to take.  I'd rather crunch their numbers for a small salary while building modest houses on the side.
Dan

That's exactly what one losing player said as he stood up to leave when Hansen got 3 clubs on the flop.

My kids tell me about poker, but this is the first time I've seen Hansen play. They say he's a mathematician, but if he is like a couple of women I worked with, who wear pentagrams ( ;) ), he may well know what is coming ahead of time. There is an awareness about them and a false "intelligence" that is creepy. It's more of a prescience that they attribute to intelligence than an actual IQ intelligence.

In order to figure out what they are up to, you have to think the same way they do. But I would think that Hansen's opponents would have already figured this and him out.

from the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON (April 23) - It may seem like Sen. Bill Frist has found religion in recent weeks. At least, that's what critics say about the Senate majority leader's recent alignment with social conservative groups on high-profile issues.

Their charge is that Frist is playing to religious groups to gather support for political issues - and potentially for a future presidential race.

The Tennessee Republican took some heat when Congress stepped into a legal fight over the life of a brain-damaged Florida woman last month. The critics have grown louder since he agreed to participate in an event on Sunday organized by Christian groups trying to rally churchgoers to support ending the judicial filibuster.

"He seems to be going out of his way to pander to the radical religious right leaders," said Ralph Neas, president of People for the American Way, a liberal group that has worked to block several of President Bush's appointments to the courts. "Many people have commented that it seems to be commensurate with his aspirations to be president of the United States."

Sunday's event, organized by the conservative Family Research Council, will be in a Louisville, Ky., church and broadcast across the country. Fliers for "Justice Sunday" charge the filibuster is "being used against people of faith."

Frist's office says he plans to submit a four-minute videotape with the same Constitution-focused message he has given other groups.

But his participation has raised loud protests. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said it sent Frist a petition Friday signed by 20,000 people asking him "to abandon such dishonest and irresponsible tactics that politicize faith, abuse power and drown out the voice of ordinary Americans."

The leaders of several nationwide denominations on Friday joined the chorus urging Frist to reconsider his participation in the event. Among them was the Rev. Clifton Kirkpatrick, the stated clerk of the Presbyterian Church (USA), Frist's denomination.

Most people said Frist has the right to join Christian groups or ask for their backing on important issues but called the rhetoric surrounding Sunday's event inflammatory.

"His presence is giving credibility to people who have made a stark political issue a litmus test for judging religion," said C. Welton Gaddy, president of the Washington-based Interfaith Alliance and the pastor of a Louisiana church.

Frist is a conservative who has consistently supported the type of issues that rally right-leaning Christian groups. He was a leader of the opposition to gay marriage, and when he laid out an agenda on the first day of the 109th Congress in January, he mentioned "marriage, families and a culture of life that protects human dignity at every stage of development."

A Frist spokesman said the Constitution has been the senator's constant concern during the filibuster fight, and his position on Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged Florida woman, was "clear and consistent" throughout the debate.

But some say there's been a shift in his focus.

"If you think about Bill Frist since he was majority leader, his strong suit was his intersection of science and medicine ... and his rational good government," said James Hudnut-Beumler, dean of Vanderbilt University's Divinity School and a scholar of American religious history. "I think that's still there, but to lead on a national stage, you have people who press you to come out on other issues and fronts."

Frist has said he will give up his Senate seat when his term ends next year, but he hasn't answered - or discouraged - speculation that he will run for president in 2008.

Luis Lugo, director of the nonpartisan, non-advocacy Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, said religion and religious groups are crucial factors for any candidate, Democrat or Republican.

"Any politician ... who aspires to public office ... has to come to terms with the fact that religious conservatives are a critically important part of the Republican Party," he said.

Tapping into the political force of a religious group, however, can be a divisive process when closely held moral values are at stake. The filibuster debate comes up at a time when the nation is vociferously arguing over whether to trust "activist" judges.

"It's a little bit of a third rail," said Hudnut-Beumler. Frist is "hoping to draw some power from it. Electric trains do draw power from the third rail, but people sometimes do get electrocuted."

Frist belongs to Presbyterian churches in Washington and Tennessee, has taken medical mission trips to Africa and other parts of the world, and is a regular at the National Prayer Breakfast. And even critics say it isn't possible to discern a person's true faith.

But Gaddy said he is concerned about "the transition from religion as a source of values and wisdom, to religion as a strategy for passing legislation or winning an election."

"I don't judge people's motives," he said. "If Sen. Frist sees this as an essential step in launching a presidential campaign, he's more involved in a stumble than a step."

What makes Hansen so good is that he plays "bad" cards.  He does this at the right time, and gets "lucky" with them, other times he makes bold, maniac bluffs with nothing, and on top of that he seems to get premium cards more than anyone else.  In short, no one knows what he has, and he is impossible to read.

I predict that in the next few months his winning streak will end.  You can't defy the laws of probablility forever!

As for your pentagram wearing co-workers, some people are so aware of their surroundings, and have the ability to read people so well, it seems like they have supernatural powers.  I'm not sure this is always the case, I think of the animals moving to high ground before the tsunami and things like that.  There are other types of intelligence besides IQ, as you pointed out.  Some people seem to have this more than others.

Poker runs through Gus Hansens blood and nervous system, he is so familiar with cards, and probably can smell excitement when one of his opponents gets a good hand...who knows?  All I know is that he's amazing.

Brent

Okay for the explanation of Hansen, a mathematician, a big bluffer, the game runs in his veins and he gets the cards. I only brought the pentagram issue up because you said that Hansen's ability to see the cards coming frightened you.

But have you ever been around someone who is into what is involved with the reason for wearing a pentagram? They are into evil. Mediums have an uncanny ability to read people, too.

The ones I worked with didn't seem to have a conscience in the way we would think of it. One couldn't stand to hear the name of Jesus. They seemed to thrive on making the other person look bad in any way that they could: The old trick of blowing up a tiny piece of truth into becoming something that wasn't true in the end?

There is much more going on with this group than merely wearing a pentagram ring or necklace, and since mediums have this ability to read people, we can assume that one who is connected to the same connection that mediums have, will also have this ability to a lesser or greater degree.

As far as animals go, there are physical changes going on in the earth even before the cataclysmic event occurs. Water drains in the opposite direction it normally does, for one thing. Isn't it said that there are magnetic events that bats are sensitive to? There have got to be magnetic changes going on before and after any earth-moving event. There are probably slight movements in the earth that animals are sensitive to that even our instruments can't pick up.

Some of us can read people and events better than others, sometimes only because of getting to know the bad side of human nature and the behavior that goes along with it, and sometimes because of the spritual connection that we already have with the person.  But there is a movement today, that wasn't around in such an obvious way in the past, and that IS frightening.

Hi Dan,
What is you opinion of  using Precast concrete foundation walls in a home building application ?
Thanks

This can be dangerous for someone who does not understand this. The tendency for most people is to want to explain and point out to the person what is, (to them), so obviously wrong with what they are doing.


This is a certain sign of defilement. The matter of deliberate repetition of that which they know to be false and misleading is common among this type. Satan is the father of lies. They will even talk about God. But they wil skirt or prevaricate when it come to the Lord  Jesus Christ Himself. The way a person talks about, and or respond to queries concerning the Blessed Son of God is the shortest, best route to getting insight to where they are spiritually.

  Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.  1 Cor 12:3

The problem is that some people think blasphemy has to be explicit. It usually is not, but rather implicit. It is akin to your thought about taking something with a litte bit of truth, and perverting it so as to induce a false conclusion.






This kind of spiritism is not uncommon among professing Christians who wear this thing like a badge of honor.
They are dangerous and should, humanly speaking, frighten you.
I don't mind telling you Moonflower, what you are talking about will make most people scratch their heads.
Don't sweat it - to each according to the measure of grace...

Being that it's Passover week I was invited to a Kosher Sedar 2nd night at Temple. It was wonderful to be with God's precious people and learn more about my Jewish roots. What a Blessing. They are more open then ever to Christians its amazing. Just thought I'd share the Good-News.  (to the Jews I became as a Jew...Apostle Paul)   Summer

That's an interesting idea.  It'll work structurally, but I'd recommend calling Verne up and give him a lot of cash in advance without a contract, then wait for him to build it for you with the styrofoam blocks.  I get 10%.  Good luck.
Dan

What a brilliant idea!!  :)
Verne

I don’t know if this is the place to post it but I guess it is as good as any. I found this site where you can “adopt a deployed solder and send him letters and care packages. I just thought it was so cool and the more people I could turn on to it the better. I have a solder and it is so cool to feel that I am helping even if it’s just a little bit.

http://www.soldiersangels.homestead.com/

Here is an interesting article put out by the Cato Institute.  They are a Libertarian think tank.

Read it and see what hippies they are.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/ssps/ssp32.pdf

Brent

INteresting article,

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050517-122418-5719r.htm

If you have not heard about H5N1, commonly known as the Avian Influenza Virus, you may want to do some reading about it. Most health experts predict that it has the potential tp precipitate the world's most horrific pandemic ever, far outstripping even AIDS in its devastation. Speaking of AIDS, it is interesting how the media has been all but ignoring its accelerating rate of worldwide infection.
The reference in Matthew 24 to pestilences is literally strange diseases.
I know over the centuries, folk have pointed to all sorts of reasons for expecting the Lord's imminent return, but few have cited this as a compelling sign. This particular virus is terrifying and its lethality probably rivals ebola. The places that it is likely to break loose are the least equipped to contain it. It is mutating at a scary rate, and once it perfects a vector for human to human transmission, there is going to be hell to pay...check it out...
Verne

Verne, I'll check that out. I read a book on Ebola a few years back really interesting I think it started in the Congo. I watched a show last night that went over the unpresedented events of 2004 in order a map of the world with every Volcano, Hurricane Tornado, Flood, Drought, Eathquake, Pestilance and then a run of locusts in Africa from aug-nov they are 4 inches long a pinkish red color and they destroy food crops, the man doing the show was in Israel in Nov when a part of the swarn came through from the African destruction and he said they'd never seen anything like it and immediately got out the crop-dusting planes to prevent damage. Then he ends the last catastrophy with the Tsumami. And as he goes over the charts you can see the Earth is in Travail. I find it interesting the Aids epedemic is being swept under the rug, but that's Politics and Money in action!  Summer.

I just wanted to add this person on the show I think it was Carl Baugh ? states he's not a Gloom and Doom preacher at all, but he states the Earthquake that triggered the Tsunami shifted the earths plates to such an extreme we have yet to see the repercussions of what will transpire. Also I remember an Aids package of 3.5 billion for Africa being discussed it would provide medicine over a five year period, but with the Famine and the food wars re: think "Black-Hawk Down" I think it was dropped ? it may of seemed futile to give the meds when most of them were starving anyway does anyone know what happened ?  Summer. p.s. Get Ready!

Summer,

Carl Baugh is a man who passes himself off as having several Ph.d's in various sciences.  He attacks science regularly as an advocate of recent creationism.  Outlandish claims are his stock in trade.

He naturally has attracted the ire of real scientists.  They jokingly refer to him as "Dr. Dr. Dr. Carl Baugh" in recognition of his multiple "degrees".

The problem is that his degrees seem to have been granted by a university that exists only in an office in a Baptist church somewhere in Australia.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Thanks Tom. That was the first time I watched the whole show usually he is talking about Creationism, and things for Evolutionists, and Atheists. His charts looked pretty good. Summer.

Hi All,

6 weeks ago we admitted my Dad to hospital because he was absolutely frail.  We thought that possibly he needed re-hab from his recent car accident in March.  It turned out that he had some form of bone marrow cancer, and passed away a week ago today, the funeral being this past Friday.  The trips to and from Toronto were frequent but I was able to skim and post on AB while I was there.

I feel that though my Dad, and Mum, suffered in his last days, that suffering led to them making peace with each other and with God.  So I am am comfortable with that outcome.
The miracle of it all is that all of us 7 kids had never been together since my wedding almost 27 years ago.  In his death my Dad has succeeded in bringing healing and togetherness to the family, something he was unable to do in the past, though he did try.

This is just FYI, since we have been BB pals for the past 2 years.

Marcia

Marcia, I am sorry to hear of your loss. You've been missed on the boards.  --Margaret

Hello Marcia,

   Sorry to hear about your father's passing.   I am glad to hear that you and your siblings came together and had an opportunity to mend fences or whatever else you had to do.   My father's death in 1995 had the same affect on my siblings.
   I pray that you receive other blessings and encouragements in the near future.

--Tony

Marcia, My heart felt Sympathies to you and your Family. Is'nt it something how a funeral brings people together? Weddings too! Well I hope you stay close and have many more reunions.  God Bless Summer. p.s. Yes we've all kind of been bb pals these past 2 years well 1.5 for me anyway.  Ecc 3: To every thing there is a season,and to every purpose under heaven: A time to be born and a time to die: a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; Atime to kill and a time to heal; atime to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep and a time laugh: a time to mourn and atime to dance. A time to keep silent and a time to speak.

Marcia----

Sorry to hear about your father. My condolences. But I'm glad to hear about your family
all getting together again. When my father passed away in 1997 the same thing happened--
all of us got together after not seeing one another for a few years. As Summer stated below,
weddings and funerals have a way of bringing everyone together.

God bless you,  Joe

Thank you all for your EMs PMs and posts conveying your condolences.

FYI - the 2+ years of BB discussion have been useful re. assembly matters, but the experiences of the discussion process have been beneficial in other aspects of life as well.

Marcia

FEMA has said they are suspending efforts for now in New Orleans because of violence. I really am heartbroken for these poor people. What is going to happen to all these poor people. I am praying for them it is just too sad.

Hugh

The vast majority of those who stayed in the city did not do so by choice. There were many families without cars, and in some instances those who had vehicles were unable to secure enough gas to go any distance. I am struck by the fact that the leaders of the city did not take into consideration those who had few options for leaving the city...this was a long time coming and is unspeakably tragic....
Verne

"All this talk about equality. The only thing people really have in common is that they are all going to die."

Bob Dylan

Lots of talk these days about celebrities "re-inventing" themselves. Anyone believe in "reincarnations"?

How about it Psalm51, Mercy4Me, Scruffy, and frankie? We've got some professionals here, so your opinions would be valuable. How do you look at the situation? Can we have some feedback on the issue?

I've always been taught that Hebrews 9:27 speak agains reincarnation.

The only reason I asked this question is because these posters, as professionals, have re-invented themselves.  ;)

Sondrafrankie, why did you delete all your "Ruth" posts?

This may sound like a "how about them Patriots" type post.

The current event is that I am looking to buy a digital camera (for the first time).  Any advice??

Marcia

Marcia,

Your choice should depend upon several factors:
 
How familiar you are with cameras/photography;
 
What kinds of pictures you want to take (snapshots, portraits, landscapes, micro-closeups)-- the more technical or detailed your photos are to be, the more particular you must be in shopping;

How large an instrument you want to carry;
 
Do you want to process your own photos or drop them off to be done?

How much you want to spend.

---

You definitely want glass lenses, not plastic, for quality of reproduction.

I am particular about lining up my shots (the LCD screen is for seeing what you got, not what you're going to get), so I'm partial to an SLR (single lens reflex), which shows you through the lens itself what you're shooting, as opposed to a viewfinder which only approximates what the lens will capture.

But a good LCD screen (large, with lotsa pixels) is important for deciding whether you caught what you were after or need to shoot again.

As for the photo itself, the more pixels the better-- that's what gives you definition.  E.g. camaras in phones are cheesy & their photos don't bear enlargement.  The more pixels your camera promises, the better you can enlarge.

Also consider magnification: there are two kinds.  A telephoto (zoom) lens will give you, say, x3 magnification (the number varies, check the packaging info).  Then you have the capability for electronic zoom, which can add another x4, x5, or more.  Personally, I want as much of both kinds as I can afford.

All the major brands have a good product.  Olympus, Canon, Minolta, and several more who have been in the camera business for a long time.  Some of the electronics companies are making a lot of cameras these days: Panasonic, Samsung, Sony, etc.  I am not as familiar with their products, but haven't heard anything bad about any of them.

Consider checking "Consumer Reports" before you shop.

Good hunting,
al

P.S.-- How about them Bengals ;)

Marcia,

When I retired my kids gave me a Canon Powershot A70.  As I am merely a snapshot photographer, it is great.  They are currently making a development of this, the A75 I think.

Thomas Maddux

Article from Christianity Today:

Does Electrocution Happen for a Reason?

www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/144/24.0.html (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/144/24.0.html)

Marcia

P.S. thanks for the camera advice.  Looks like Canon is the winner.  I'm leaning toward the Canon A520 4MP with optical and digital zoom. The Canons are about Cdn$100 more than an Olympus. :(  Also, Al, I figured that I would not need an SLR if I use the LCD screen, because the display is actually WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get).

Here's a neat site: www.steves-digicams.com (http://www.steves-digicams.com)

Marcia

Marcia,

Thanks for both sites.  I've bookmarked the camera site for future reference.

I'm sure you'll love the Canon.  I've used several Canons, and have never heard a bad word about their product.  With the dual zoom features you should be able to stand on your lawn and capture the Great Wall of China ;D!

Blessings,
al

i can't believe i almost missed this discussion. i am a digital camera freak  :P

i currently have 4, and they are all canon. my 35mm rebel 2000 is canon as well. they really have the edge over the competition in this market, imho. i jumped in years ago with the canon s200, which worked great and can still make some great shots, although the zoom has a kind of grindy tired sound to it. i replaced it with the s410. it was a nice upgrade but basically the same size and funtionality, just higher megapixels and a little better video. one week later a friend of mine accidentally dropped it in a glass of oj. *twitch* it was an awkward moment. it never worked quite the same again, tho it still functions. when my sister got married she wanted me to shoot her wedding, so i decided to take the plunge to an slr and got the canon digital rebel - about the cheapest slr out there. tragically this was only a few short months before the rebel xt was announced. but it worked beautifully, giving me much more control over my shots than the more compact cameras. then in january of this year i replaced my oj-soaked s410 with the incredibly sexy canon sd300. it was the tiniest ultra-compact camera on the market, yet offered superior specs to most of its larger cousins. 640x480 video, 30 fps, with sound - no size or time limit. so i could fill up my 1gb ultra II card with one long home video if i wished. i absolutely love this camera. if i were to buy a camera now its no question - i would go for its successor the canon sd550. for an excellent review of it, check out:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd550/
dpreview.com is loaded with great digital camera information. steves-digicams.com is also a great site that you have already found. even if you went for the sd400, you would have a much more powerful and significantly smaller camera for only a little more money. but again it depends on how you want to use it. i buy a compact camera for slipping into my pocket when i'm going out, and i keep my big ole slr for serious shooting. thus i am not interested in manual modes in my compact camera.

a great site for ccomparing camera prices (or prices of almost anything) is:
http://www.pricegrabber.com/search.php?form_keyword=canon&topcat_id=

note that canon has some rebates going on if you are also interested in buying a photo printer:
"Rebate Description: Bundle Rebate Offer: Buy a new Canon SELPHY DS810 Photo Printer TOGETHER WITH any new Powershot Digital Camera or new qualifying Canon Digital Camcorder with SD Memory Card feature or a new laptop or desktop computer and get a $50 rebate by mail."

one last note - digital zoom is worthless. it just crops the picture. if you take a picture using only the real zoom and download it to your computer and then crop it to a smaller size, its the exact same as taking the picture with real zoom plus digital zoom. i guess if you want to crop the picture as you take it then maybe its useful, but you are losing image quality then, so i always keep it turned off.

if you have any other questions i can ramble on endlessly about this topic.  :P

brian

The Canon although more money are worth the extra $$

Getting back to more general current events, I received the following article in an e-mail today (I do not have the specific URL for it):

---

from the internet:

Starbucks: A habit
easily broken

Posted: August 10, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Meghan Kleppinger
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com


It's been two weeks since my last Starbucks coffee.

Admittedly, I am one of those who don't think twice about dropping $4 for a cup of coffee that costs less than $.50 to make. I am a self-proclaimed coffee house junkie and need that wonderful yuppie, intellectual "atmosphere" and freshly brewed aroma as much as the caffeine.

When I moved to D.C. right out of college, I encountered my first Starbucks drink, or should I say "experience"? Growing up in a military family, I loved chain restaurants because of the sense of familiarity they offered in every new town we moved to. So, to be able to get the same type of specialty coffee – grande, iced, skim, sugar-free vanilla, latte – everywhere, was an addiction waiting to happen.

Fast forward four years, and about 800 lattes later – I'm a Starbucks addict!

When a report came out earlier this year showing that none of Starbucks' charitable contributions went to conservative causes, I didn't blink -- I bought a latte. When I walked by a liquor store in Northeast D.C. with a big advertisement for Starbucks liquor, I kept walking, stopped in at Starbucks and bought a latte! When I was at work a couple weeks ago, reading an e-alert from our California organization (yes, latte in hand), I finally had a wake-up call.

The alert described the annual "gay" pride events which are scheduled in San Diego each year:

San Diego's annual "Pride" events include dangerous "circuit" parties, a parade with sexual content and sponsors along the route, including one advertising anal lubricants, a festival with sexually oriented venues.

OK, yes, that is all pretty disturbing, but daily, I read, write about and edit papers dealing with the homosexual agenda, so I was not at all shocked that this was going on. I was a little upset when I read that Starbucks was a sponsor. I took a sip of my latte as I read on:

In addition, the "festival" includes a "Youth Hangout Space" and a "Children's Garden." Not only is there concern about young people being part of sexually oriented events and venues, but two members of San Diego's Gay Pride organization's volunteer staff have been exposed as registered sex offenders who committed sex crimes against children.

OK – STOP, WAIT A MINUTE AND PUT THAT CUP OF COFFEE DOWN!

Not only is Starbucks sponsoring "Pride" week, but an event that places innocent children in the middle of sexually explicit materials ... and registered child molesters will be there running the show? If Starbucks is doing this knowingly, it is blatant irresponsibility, and if they are doing it unknowingly, it is irresponsible of them not to have done their homework. I started pacing back-and-forth, and all I could think was "Starbucks hates children."

(continued in next post)

(Continued from previous post)

For the first time, I stepped away from my latte, faced my denial about this company and started to do some serious soul searching – I needed to find out what they really supported. Fortunately, I didn't have to search very long because I have the Internet at my fingertips and one of the nation's top experts, Robert Knight, just down the hall from me.

Less than 30 minutes of research revealed the following:

--Robert Knight told me that about 10 years ago, Starbucks started sponsoring these types of events, but backed off when conservatives started putting on the pressure. He explained that it is apparent they are slowly working their way back into the "gay" movement.

--Starbucks is listed on the Planned Parenthood website under this introduction:

The following companies all generously match employee donations to Planned Parenthood Federation of America. If your employer is on this list, then you can make your gift go as much as twice as far.

--Seattle, Wash., held "Gay Pride" events last month where, according to the newspaper, Seattle Post Intelligence Reporter:

About 75 Starbucks employees will march in the parade and will wear T-shirts in rainbow colors with the word "PRIDE" on the front ... A van from the coffee company will follow them. On Capitol Hill tomorrow, Starbucks employees at the company's three stores there will pass out samples of Mint Mocha Chip Frappuccino.

The marketing director for Starbucks in Washington explained: "We're committed to supporting things that matter to our employees and our customers."

--Several conservatives are upset already by Starbucks' fairly new "The way I see it campaign," which prints quotes from actors, artists, etc., on the outside of their paper cups. By visiting their website and reading some of the quotes, it's easy to see why there has been this big brouhaha – nearly all of them are liberal celebrities.

The list does go on, but in a nutshell – Starbucks has a corporate policy of supporting the homosexual agenda by sponsoring "Pride" events all over the country -- events where children will be exposed to sexually explicit materials and pedophiles as well as the extremely liberal and pro-abortion Planned Parenthood. This might be a good time to add that the owner of Starbucks made a large donation to a liberal candidate's campaign.

So what do I do now?

I am not a big fan of boycotts. A friend once told me if we boycotted everything we disagreed with, we would be naked and hungry. I've also heard something like, "It doesn't matter what's on the cup, but what's in it." I love Starbucks coffee and as I worked through this problem, I wasn't about to give up without a fight – and I didn't give up, but rather, I failed miserably.

I overestimated, but discovered that if I drink five grande lattes a week for a year, the total number of lattes would equal 260, coming to a total cost of $1,040. So, in my four post-college years, I could have contributed as much as $4,160 to a company that supports the volunteer work of child abusers, "Pride" events, abortionists, and do I really need to go on? Back to that marketing director's quote: "We're committed to supporting things that matter to our employees and our customers." Um ... HELLO, I am a customer, too!

As I was searching the Internet, I saw a link to a site with words no Christian girl should repeat. I didn't have to enter to read this: "Folks, if Starbucks is 'too liberal' for you then don't buy their @#$# percent*# coffee."

Thanks for the tip! "Folks," what you do is up to you, but as for me and my habit, I will no longer support Starbucks.

Yes, I started as a Starbucks coffee snob, but I am very open-minded now – if you know any good coffee houses, please let me know!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meghan Kleppinger is assistant to the national field director at Concerned Women for America[/i]]Concerned Women for America (http://[i).

Al

You need to get with the program. Tim Hortons Coffee is with Wendy's now and supports children in need. What more can I say. Grab a Wendy burger and a Timmy's coffee (double double (two sugar and two cream 18%)) and a plain old fashion donut BAKED not fried lower in fat than the other donut shop you all visit. Tim's coffee is less expensive and tastes smoother than Starbucks too. Now you can help kids too.

http://www.timhortons.com/en/childrens/index.html

Hugh  ;D

Does anyones else think it ironic that the question of whether the parents of a minor seeking an abortion should be notified, is being argued before the Supreme Court? The ACLU has pinned all its hopes on the transparent loophole of the "health" of the minor but the justices do not seem to be buying it. I suppose in one sense the entire point is moot. If a minor is seeking an abortion without the parents' knowledge, isn't that a little late to be seeking the involvement of the parents?  ???
Verne

Yes and no.  I do consider myself very involed in both my boy's lives.  However, even with that, when they reach adolescents I found the saying to be true that I only really know about 10% of what is really going on in their lives.  I feel fairly good about the other 90% based upon the 10% that I see but there is nothing keeping them from pulling the wool over my eyes as I can't follow them around 24/7.  So I am very happy when school officials, other parents, etc. let me know about things that I may not have otherwise have onto.

As for the ACLU, I am in complete agreement though I am impressed with their consistant record of being on the wrong side of the issue in the majority of their cases.

Verne, from all you have posted, your attitude toward parenthood seems exemplary.  But your best intentions and efforts can never prevent your having to face the situation you allude to above.  We may love our kids intensely and would willingly die for them, but we still "ain't all that!"

God's grace alone can and will save our children from the cesspool of the world, the desires of the flesh and the devil's lies.  Far above and beyond whatever example we may show them and instruction we may provide, the greatest service we can give our kids is our prayers for them and our faith, trust and hope in Christ on their behalf.

I don't think I'm telling you anything new, but I believe it should be said plainly for all who read here:  Our evaluations of other parents, their children, and even the judges who sit on the Supreme Court may be valid, or not, but our prayers and our testimony of faith in Christ by our lives and our words are the best possible response we have.  Only He can effect the changes needed.  And because of that, it is never too late.

al

The greatest test of my faith has to do with the destiny of my children.
I have struggled mightily with the sobering question of how much that depends on me.
I am inclined to believe that it depends more on us parents than we are sometimes willing to accept.
There is nothing that strikes fear in my heart (and there is not much that does) as the possibility that by my own negligence I would cause spiritual harm to my own off-spring.
I must confess to being greatly conflicted about this, for while know God is faithful, each person has freedom of will.
Every chance I get to do so, I pose the question to men I consider of spiritual stature the question of why some seeming Godly parents produce children that go so far astray.
In some cases God eventually gets recovery as in such parents as Billy Graham and Jim Cymbala.
Even a man like John Piper has been tested in this way.
Even the godliest parents in hindsight point to mistakes they have made in this regard as a contributing reason - most commonly allowing ministry obligations to outweigh those of family.
Jim Cymbala in a very powerful message about his daughter's departure and recovery confesses : " I took my eyes off her..."
I can safely say that there has been no greater restraint in my own life, than the awesome sense of fatherly obligation I have to my two precious gifts from heaven. May the Eternal Father direct their steps...



I have been told my many that know more about this than I that the battle for our kids hearts and minds is over by age twelve...

Verne

I'm not sure I quite see it like that.  I don't think it is over by age twelve, just different.  When they are younger, you parent by saynig "we are leaving now, get in the car".  Children are taught to be obedient to what we say.  Twelve to eighteen is a transitional period where we move them from being under our absolute authority to making their own decisions.  They want to be independant and ultimately we do too.

This is a scary period because if you give them the power to make a decision (e.g., they can go downtown with friends alone and decide what they want to do), they have the power to make a bad decision as well as a good one and you hope that you gave them the groundwork to make good ones.  But, if you give them the freedom to make a decision, you really can't control what they decide.  You can only hold them accountable for the fallout.

One big problem I saw with childtraining in the Assembly is that for many, there wasn't this transitional period where kids could make their own decisions (no you can't go out for sports because you will miss the meetings).  As a result, I saw kids who either 1) out'a here when I'm 18
2) didn't know how to make a decision  3) Passively comformed  4) rebelled against everything and went wild  (Of course there are many exceptions).

So, 12-18 are indeed teachable years.  It's just different.  You give them enough rope to succeed or blow it but enough restraint so that they don't totally mess up their lives.  Then you allow them to see that they are responsible for the consequences of their choices.  (Remember, when they make bad decisions, its their problem, not your problem).

I am happy to say that both of my boys blew it big time at the 7th-9th grade years.  I supported them as they faced the consequences of their actions.  "It's better felt than telt" was indeed true in these circumstances.  Both grew up to be much more responsible as a result.  My youngest especially learned what it means to work to regain trust.

I have seen other kids who did fine through 12th grade in a very structured environment.  When they because 18 and out from under their parents thumbs, they went wild and their parents were powerless to help because they no longer held the car keys.

So, in short, twelve may signal the end of the "authoritarian" stage but it signals the beginning of the mentoring years.

I think the larger point was that you cannot wait until that age to initiate instruction. For the most part, the world view of a youngster has pretty much jelled at that age. How they make decisions will very much depend on their world view and at that point it is really too late to start trying to shape and influence it. Not that great kids don't make mistakes, but we absolutely have to understand what is at stake at start very early indeed. Point well taken though.


Are you kidding? There wasn't a transitional period even for the adults!  :)
It was  really remarkable to see the way grown men and women, some with families, allowed themselves to be treated. I feel badly for some of the "arranged" marriages...


I by and large agree that this is the time when you begin to see the application of world view to decision-making.
For many parents and young teens it is a time of growth and increase in maturity with plenty mis-steps along the way. For far too many, Christian kids no exception, it is a time of lamentable  destruction of potential.


I think you've got to stick with them through failure - if they are indeed learning from mistakes




We have made it a habit to start giving them choices early on and lettting them live with the consequences...it works very well...
Verne

As one of several (perhaps numerous) posters whose adult children are not following Christ, I have to agree with Dave's assessment.  The battle for our children's hearts and minds is never over, but it moves to different stages as they age.  At the same time, I fully agree with Verne that the deepest of concern and sincerest of effort should have begun even before conception.  But I mean for those who have missed early opportunities to not lose heart-- your situations will be different, but right now is always the right time to begin.

I should note for others' benefit that I was a mess and completely irresponsible for my children's spiritual guidance during their formative years, so I have no experience upon which to draw regarding those stages.  But, having been restored to faith in Christ after all four kids had left home, I have rejoined the struggle at a different level.

I believe the principle works like this:  The more control we exercise in any given situation, the less we are aware of our utter need for Christ's mercy and grace.  In child-rearing, we move up the scale from controlling by use of "time-outs," to deciding the homework-to-play ratio, to curfew and use of the family car.  And, if we are wise, we see our influence gradually changing from irresistable command to merely that of example.  But that is only our visible influence...

The kids may not know it, but as we relinquish direct control of their lives to them, we must increase our commitment to prayer, both directly regarding the situations of their lives, and for ourselves, that we may be faithful witnesses, examples and intercessors on their behalf.

My words to the parents on this board must be interpreted by each according to your situations and those of your children.  If you have youngsters, pay close attention to Verne-- ask him questions-- learn from him.  Likewise, if you have teens/young adults, seek out such parents as Dave.

Grownup kids (larger people into their mid-20s and beyond) present the broadest spectrum.  I know people on this board whose adult children love Christ, and those whose kids are into every sort of confusion and self-destructive behavior.  These latter parents have come to know that their deliberate efforts toward guiding their progeny are now extremely limited in effect.  May this awareness serve to strengthen our resolve to live for Christ ourselves, and to storm heaven with our prayers for them.

Ultimately, nothing has really changed, from their infancy to their adulthood.  All is dependent upon the grace and mercy of the Lord.  All of the personal resposibility we bear toward their upbringing and their salvation reduces down to this: we must trust Christ for the fruit of our labors, or else they are in vain.

Do your absolute best, but never expect to stand before God and say, "I did my best."  Rather, when we have learned that at our very best we are but unprofitable servants, then we may begin to truly trust in Him for the fruits of our labors.

al

Folks,

Seems to me that there is something to keep in mind here.  We made our own decisions to come to Christ.  We didn't do it because our folks wanted us to.  Some folks had Christian parents who prayed for them.  Others had no one who prayed for their salvation or exemplefied Christian living before them.

I think the most important aspect of Christian training for the teenage years is that the parents themselves practice what they preach. 

Even then there is no guarantee.  I know a dear brother at my church, (one of the pastor's) who I greatly respect.  He has an adult daughter.  Growing up, she professed Christ, was baptised, was a leader in her high school and college ministries.  She witnessed and discipled others.  She went on short-term mission trips.

Then she met an unsaved guy, married him, had a kid, divorced him, met another guy, is living with him out of wedlock.

In the assembly, GG and BG taught that WE were the determiners of of our kids destinies.  Their kids were held up as the example of this "truth."   You know how that turned out.   :'(

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

I see what you're saying.  Absolutely true.

-Dave

I know of cases like this and I find them quite sobering.
I wonder what kind of advice she got about her marriage to an unsaved person? I know her father labors on his knees for her repentance.

Christians who do this absolutely astonish me. Read the stats.
I heard one former pastor try to use the story of Esther to excuse his daughter seeing an unsaved boyfriend.
At the time I did not have the guts to tell him that he was an idiot.

On a lighter note, I was at home with my nine year old Anna today and we were watching the Revenge of the Sith together.
As I usually do with kissing scenes, I said loudly as Anakin kissed the princess: "No kissing like that unless you are married!"
My daughter quickly assured me that they were, and I said: "How do you know?"
A few seconds later in the scene the princess announced that she was pregnant and my daughter stated tirumphantly:
"See Daddy, she's pregnant, and she can't be pregnant unless they are married!"

I of course said: "You are absolutely right honey!"

My heart leapt and ached at the same time as  I wondered:

"How long will her innocence last?"   :'(  :)
Verne

When I come home from work at night I often passionately kiss my wife in front of my 4 kids aged 5 to 9.  Sometimes I tell my kids that one of the greatest blessings of being married to their mother is that we sleep together, get warm under the blankets together, and sometimes we even wrestle under the covers without any clothes on.  Then I tell them that if people do these things without being married that in most cases the people are doing the sin of fornication, or if one of them is married already to someone else it is the doubly bad sin of adultery.  (I say in most cases because my kids also know that in the ancient Eskimo culture, the whole family slept naked between the animal skins in one igloo as a matter of survival; although incest and fornication probably abounded, it is possible that some of the Eskimos had an innocent conscience.)

My kids do not yet know all the details to life in the marriage bed, but they know that if a woman gets into bed with a man, she might become pregnant even if the couple is not married.  And if we are watching a movie where someone is passionately kissing, sometimes my girls are even faster than I am in exhorting out loud to the TV screen, “Hey, no kissing like that until you are married!”

Rick

 
Wrestling, Eskimos & the doubly bad sin of adultery--- LOL! Oh-my-GOSH! I've read this post like three times and each time I burst into laughter! Rick, I know you probably meant it in a very serious, holy and edifying manner---but I just cannot read this without cracking up!! Good stuff, Rick! ;D ;D LOL.

Dave,


The mentoring years keep rolling on.  Our kids are 37, 35, 33, and 26 now.  We are still "Mom and Dad" but the relationships have evolved as the years have passed.   I guess I would say we are the "mentorfriends" now.  We are friends with all our kids and can enjoy good times with them, but now and then we get into serious conversations where we are sounded out for any words to the wise that we might have.

I learned from Charles Stanley's book "How to Keep Your Kids on Your Team" that one of the most important aspects of parenting as your kids attain independence is to be their cheering section.  They usually don't ask us how to run their lives, just as we did not ask our parents when we were young adults.  But when they choose a path for themselves, we should support them in it if at all possible.  I am speaking primarily of moral support, but sometimes a little $$ is appreciated too. 

(I do not, however, believe in supporting adolescent dependency in young adults.  Freedom and responsibility are two sides of the same coin)

Accordingly, we are driving over to Tucson, Aridzona tomorrow to attend a picnic at the Fireman's Academy on Sunday.  Our baby, Stephen, is a student in said Academy.  He and his classmates will demonstrate their newly learned skills for us. 

He called me the other day and said, "I know you won't be able to be there but I just thought I'd let you know."  (I am pretty sure that means, "I wish you could be there." )  I think it is VERY important to demonstrate love, (and pride), by attending all their events we can. 

So, I'll be there, God willing.  Caryl too.  I'll "see" you folks next week.

Blessings.

Thomas Maddux
Undercomer

Is that what they call it nowadays?   :)  :)  :)



Hey Tom, I am going to have to pay for two weddings; any advice??!   :)


Verne

That's what they call it these days ;D


I am not a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, but I predict you will spend lavishly...

My advice: start saving now, and don't let them date until they're 35!!!  ;D  ;D  ;D

al ;)

Hi Verne,
My daughter just got married on Nov 19 and I played the role of the wedding planner.  It was a beautiful ceremony and reception and I was able to bring in everything, including her dress and mine, for under $4,000.  My best advice is if you love your family and want everyone to survive the blessed occasion, HIRE A PROFESSIONAL TO PLAN IT ALL!!!
Blessings,
Exausted in Missouri   :P

Hmmmnnn...! You may be onto something....it could be a bit tough as they are both comely creatures...(like their momma) :)



Only four K??! I am impressed!
If I could only find somebody like Hans in Father of the Bride the laughs would well be worth the expense ... :)
Verne

O.K Folks. My outfit must be a glutton for punishment.
We took on another sill plate and band board disaster.
The termites and carpenter ants have been on a tear.
Again, we are doing it for song (still going to make a few shekels though)  :)
It is a strange feeling working in a crawl-space under a few tons of house raised a couple of inches on hydraulic jacks!
What if the darned things give??!! We are using about eight of 'em just to play it safe.
Of course if they gave the whole thing would only drop a couple of inches but what a royal pain in the booty that would be huh?
The real danger is in the things kicking out if not perfectly plumb under all that pressure.
Well. we are soon moving on to bigger and better things - we got an offer in on a couple of killer lots...Yipee!
Verne

Has anyone seen the Wtich the Lion and the Wardrobe yet?
For Christmas I am ordering my girls the complete leather bound set from Easton Press.
They will also be getting the recently released  Complete Calvin and Hobbes.
Now I just gotta figure what kind fun and useless gadgets to acquire.... ;)
As Christina said sagely - What is Christmas without presents?
(this was after a veiled threat from her Daddy  regarding some act of misbehaviour)

Verne

Yes.  I saw it in Charlotte in a real theater with stadium seats.  I thought the casting was great (kids, witch, fawn, etc.  portrayed their characters well).  I thought they did justice in preserving the story.  Only a few minor differences I noticed but nothing that I would lose sleep over.  They essentially did it well (unlike something like the revisionist Pocahanas).  Now that I am back home, I want to see it again with my wife.

-Dave

Verne, I haven't yet seen the Easton volume, but Zondervan's version has rearranged the seven books, according to the chronological timeline of the stories instead of the order in which Lewis wrote them.  I strongly recommend reading them in the order in which they were written, to get the authentic "feel" of their development.  I'm sure Zondervan thought they were doing us all a favor by making it "easier" for us, but that's a big part of what's wrong today. 

The challenge of adjusting to the original order of the books is worth its effort.  If you aren't familiar with the stories, just check the copyright dates in the front of the volume.  I believe he wrote one each year for seven years.  Happy reading!!!

al

 Verne,

I took the little Buckaroos friday and we all enjoyed it very much.
Todays film technology and animation was very instrumental in making this movie a success.

Buck

Al---

Good point. I remember seeing a packet with the  seven books, but arranged
differently. There truly is a different perspective when you read them in the order
that Lewis originally wrote them.

--Joe

Hi Verne.  Sorry if I seem to be posting alot, but the topics of late have been interesting to me.

They became popular when my youngest son was at reading age.  My take on it was that the characters were so cartoonish one could not possibly mistake them for the real things.  So I let them read it (and I read them - or more correctly "listened" to Jim Dale's excellent reading) and got by that phase.

Recently, I have been reading a book called Wicca Charm an excellent book in Christian bookstores discussing the rise in interest in wicca  and neo-pagan religions.

Her take on it was that portrails like Harry Potter, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Carmed, etc. do not portray the neo-pagan or wicca world and are often looked down on in the neo-pagan communities.  However, these books often spark an interest in the younger set to investigate the "real stuff" further.  As a result, folks are more open to visiting their local pagan book stores, reading Starhawk, etc. 

I don't know that these books cause the stumble, but adding this to the motivators that cause young people to go into wicca or neo-pagan religions (desire for religion with little emphasis on doctrine as well as much less structure,  feelings that the church does not do enough for environmental causes, feelings that woman's roles are trivialized, experience-based sprirituality etc.) these items can serve as pre-evangelism for their cause as it portrays witches in a positive, attractive light even if what they do has nothing to do with witchcraft.

Re: the Harry Potter books & movies:



Dave, I would add to the top of your list above, desire for religion (a cause, or purpose) without personal responsibility.  This is the great common thread uniting all of fallen humanity: denial of accountability to the one personal God (sin), wherein is the denial of God himself.

Verne, I think you are right on the beam.  Just remember as they grow older to respect your daughters' capacity for independent thought-- don't be overbearing in taking a solid stand for Christ.  Flexibility in listening as the young speaker works things out verbally is a good thing, and it doesn't in any way infringe upon one's proper inflexibility in the matters that cannot be compromised.

If I seem to be preaching to the choir, you good singers need to remember that none of us has yet "arrived," and we can all use a good lesson now and again...

To the young mind, and to the older but deluded and immature mind, H. Potter and his ilk offer an oasis from a troubled world and lifestyle.  Such escapism is fundamentally no different than reading comic books or novels that portray fantasy themes.  The important responsibility of the Christian parent (or neighbor) is to explain what is fiction, what is real, what is dangerous and what is forbidden, and above all to present the example of a life lived in the love and strength  of Christ and to pray for the souls of those for whom we are responsible.

al

Verne,

Although I am a notorious know-it-all, I must confess that I am glad that when my kids were pre-teens the most mystical or occultic films that appealed to kids were the Star Wars films.  The "force" and all that.  I am as unclear as anyone else as to what the best way to deal with Harry Potter and the recent infestation of the TV channels with occultic subject matter.  Most of the TV stuff I would deal with by just not allowing it to be watched in my home.

However, Christian parents are up against two big problems in this area: 1. Your kids will see it at school or friend's houses anyway. In addition to this technology, in the form of the soon-to-be ubiquitous dvd players means that they can watch these things when we are not supervising them by simply borrowing the dvd from a friend.  2. There seems to be a genuine curiosity with occult power that dwells in fallen human nature.  Although you grew up in the Carribean area, I'll bet you can remember childhood friends practicing some forms of occultism.  I know I can.  As a teacher I came across this at times as well.

So, I guess my take is the "Vaccination Approach".  I would warn them that it is evil, dangerous, and enslaving. 

Now, regarding Harry Potter.  In my last semester at Biola I took a course in Demonology and the Occult. We studied various occultic religions, with a focus on Wicca.  Wicca is a religion that tries to tap into spiritual powers and harness them to the purposes of the practitioner.  Some of these folks call themselves witches, some don't.  A few years back I was shocked to observe a group of them trying to hex the United States Congress by holding a ceremony on the Capitol Mall in Washington DC!

Harry Potter is packed with Wiccan practices, symbols, and allusions.  For our final we had to analyze the second Harry Potter movie and identify each individual instance of occult practices, ritual objects, or worldivew beliefs.  Then we had to describe them, analyze the underlying beliefs, and use the Bible to show why people in general and Christians in particular should avoid this.  I got so sick of it that I just quit after dealing with 65 of them.  It was very distasteful to have to deal with that area at all.

So, If I had kids in that age group I would probably watch at least one of the films with my kids.  I would explain some of what is going on, and just flat out tell the children that these practices are evil to the core.  There is no neutral mystical power that can be tapped into for magical purposes.  On the rare, (in our society) occassions that someone actually does tap into spiritual power through these practices, they are fools who are being demoncially deceived and are inviting demonic intrusion into their lives.  The power, when it is real, is demonic.

I would educate myself on the topic, since we are going to have to function in a society where it is rampant.  One good book written by a Christian with expert knowledge is "Witchcraft: Exploring the World of Wicca" by Craig S. Hawkins.  (Baker Books, 1996)

I would absolutely forbid my children to play at being witches, doing spells, or participating in those things in any way. 

That is best I know to do.  If your church has some audio-visual resources available, it might be a good idea to watch a video/dvd about it with your kids.

May God grant us wisdom.

Thomas Maddux

Never watch "Bewitched" or "I Dream of Jeannie"--these are full of occultic
references and will totally manipulate and seduce your children's minds. Imagine
bowing your head or wiggling your nose and making things appear or disappear??!!
Uncle Arthur is evil incarnate.

Don't read THE LORD OF THE RINGS or allow your children to watch it--it has a
"good" Wizard named Gandalf in it. Your kids minds could be twisted into making
him a hero in the story for Pete's sake. The Chronicles of Narnia have all kinds of
occultic references and witches too---these things come from the very bowels of
hell my friends.

Especially avoid Disney movies---they have Genies, and wicked witches with poison apples,
and wacky fairy godmothers, and pumpkins that turn into carriages. How horrid is that!!
BEAUTY AND THE BEAST should be avoided at all cost. The main character has been turned
into a beast because of a hex. Kids love the story, but don't fall for it, it can be devastating
upon the minds of children.

if you hear your kids utter the words "ABRA CADABRA" they should be sent to bed without
dinner. Avoid all things magical and imaginary--it can lead to great tragedy. Imagine a story
that has a school for wizards, and has this appalling character called Harry Potter in it? He
doesn't wiggle his nose or bow his head--but he uses a wand and casts spells. This can cause
far greater harm than Samantha or Tabitha ever wielded upon an innocent society. You know
what? I know what the answer to all of this!! Never watch television. It's evil. I'm not sure if
there are many places where people don't watch television,but it must be a blessed place.


 :)  sorry    just kidding.  Or am I? :o

Folks,

An example of "good" occult activity in the Lord of the Rings is where Galadriel lets the Hobbits look into the thing that appears to be a bird bath.  She pours water into it and they experience clarevoyance, ie, seeing at a distance.  This is called "scrying" by Wiccans, and has been practiced for millennia by many different Pagan religions. 

Wikipedia says:

"There is archeological evidence that people have habitated Egypt since the 10th millennium, though the official "unified" Egypt is considered to have begun around 3000 BC. By the late 4th century, the "Late Period," one of many goddesses worshipped in Eqypt was Hathor, the Egyptian Sky Goddess of joy and love. The Egyptian priest and priestesses believed that Hathor carried a shield that could reflect back all things in their true light. From this shield she allegedly fashioned the first magic mirror to "see." Throughout Egyptian history, many forms of scrying have been used. Mirror scrying, dream scrying, and oil scrying are among the few.

Ancient Europe:

Around 2,000 BC, Greece, as well as "early" Britain and its subsequent Celtic population, were practising many forms of scrying. The mediums often used were beryl, crystal, black glass, polished quartz, water, and other transparent or light catching bodies."

Thomas Maddux

http://www.internetmonk.com/index.php/archives/pro-harry-potter#more-280
http://www.internetmonk.com/articles/H/harry.html

Thank you for this link Marcia.  I think I have been converted.
me

Marcia---

Thanks for the link. I am a big fan of Harry Potter movies(I haven't really read the books). I
agree with the article in that there is quite a bit of Christian symbolism also evident in the
stories. I think one can go overboard in finding occultism and evil in everything--that's why
I mentioned "Bewitched" and "I dream of Jeannie" below. If one wanted to they could call both
of those shows "evil" also.

--Joe

One worries about Harry Potter being taught in a high school not because of the occult or the witches, but because they are so poorly written. And they are written to a grade school level. They are page turners to be sure, but they are not great literature. They do not even begin to compare to Shakespeare in poetry or depth. They don't even compare to Frank McCourt or Annie Proulx, but I don't think that was ever Rowling's intention. They are entertaining. Like the Left Behind series, they are fast fiction. The points the article makes are sound, but the writing of the article itself is so poor one also wonders about this guy teaching English. The staff at OBI has more to worry about than spells and potions.

PART i


Folks,

Here are a few examples of the Wiccan/Witchcraft beliefs and practices that, according to the Internet Monk, are not to be found in the Harry Potter books.  I cup/pasted these from a take home final that required the class to analyze "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Askaban" (sp).  The numbers are not in sequence as I picked these out of the pile.

BIBILICAL DEMONOLOGY AND OCCULTISM
FINAL EXAM
SPRING 2005
PROFESSOR K. LEWIS



1. Event: Harry views magic book in bedroom.
   
    a. Issue: Magic

b. Definition: Magic is, "...A general term for arts, sciences, philosophies and technologies concerned with (a) understanding and using altered states of consciousness within which it is possible to have access to and control over one's psychic talents, and (b) the uses and abuses of those talents to change interior and/or exterior realities," (Hawkins, 53-54).  Magic can either be theurgic, used for religious purposes, or, thaumaturgic, used for wonder or miracle working.

c. Analysis: Biblically, the altered state of consciousness entered into in the working of magic is seen as being obtained through contact with demons.  Since demons are fallen angels they are complete spirit beings.  They possess intelligence and will, and can interact with matter. 

The "moving pictures" are presented as being a component of the supernatural world in which Harry Potter exists.  Although the Bible says nothing of such things it does inform us that Satan and his agents can work "great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven and earth in the full view of men, (Rev. 13:14).  It seems to me that if Satan can empower a sign that extends from heaven to earth, he could empower something less spectacular as well.

The Bible informs us that the Holy Spirit can empower miracles and wonders, but these are for the purpose of confirming the credentials of God's messengers, as in the case of  Moses and Aaron, (Exodus 4:30-31).  Other purposes are for the demonstration of the power of God, (Luke 11:20) and the edification of the Church, (I Cor. 13:3-4).

Any seeking for or use of miraculous powers from any source besides the Holy Spirit constitutes rebellion against God and is condemned by God, (Deut. 18:9-12).

d. Conclusion: Seeking magical power from any source is condemned by scripture.  Even though it is presented in the movie as fun, interesting, and useful it is empowered by Satan and his demons and a Christian must avoid it.


2. Event: Harry talks to his pet owl.

 a. Issue: Animal Psi or ANPSI-This is the event/issue analyzed in the example handed out in  class.

 b. Definition: Animal Psi is a phenomenon where a human has the ability to propositionally communicate with an animal in an intelligent, usually by non-verbal or psychic means.

 c. Analysis: Harry responds to the noises the owl makes in a manner that indicates
  propositional communication.  The owl is presented as asking to be let out of his cage.

  Biblically, only three classes of persons can communicate propositionally.  God, humans,
  and angels.  Therefore animals cannot communicate in this way, other than a few specially
  trained primates who have been taught sign language.  They, however, are extremely limited
  in their ability to express thoughts, and demonstrate no capacity for abstract reasoning.

  If any other animal communicates propositionally, it is highly probable that the animal is
  under the influence of another intelligence. It would most likely be a demon, since there are
  only two recorded instances of animal's speaking in the Bible, (Numbers 22:21-30 and Genesis 3:4-5).  One of these was empowered by a fallen angel, Satan.

 d. Conclusion: Animal Psi is a phenomenon that should be avoided.  God could do this, but it
  it is not something we should expect to happen.


4. Event: Dobby causes the cake to rise up and move through the air.

    a. Issue: Apportation/Apports.

b. Definition: This is the moving of physical objects without utilizing the normal space/time forces that will do so.

c. Analysis: There have been reports from reliable witnesses that such things can actually be done.  Reports of poltergeist activities frequently contain claims of these events.  Since their cause is cannot be shown to be physical, it must be spiritual. 

In the scriptures events are described where either God or angels have transported people from one place to another.  Acts 8:39-40 describes how the Spirit of God transported Phillip to Azotus.  The prophet Ezekiel also reports such an event in Ezekiel 37:1.  Since angels appear in the scriptures carrying things through the air, such as the scroll in Revelation 10:2, it seems reasonable that fallen angels could have this power as well.

These events are not the normal order of the world in which we live.  Anyone witnessing such things should attempt to discern the source of the power behind the action.  Unless it could be conclusively demonstrated that the power is from God, all contact should be avoided.  Above all, a Christian should never attempt to do such things himself, since the only power available would be a demonic, coming from a fallen angel.

Conclusion:  Contact with these beings is prohibited, (Deut. 18: 9-12), and dangerous.

PART II

8. Event: Mr. Weasly enters the house wearing a conical hat. 

    a. Issue: Cone of power.

b. Definition: The cone of power in witchcraft describes their method of focusing energy in   order to use it to effect change or mutation in the real world.

c. Analysis: In order to work a spell, witches must find a power source, gain control of it, and direct it to their purpose.  The cone of power is used in this process to focus and concentrate the power.  The cone effect can be obtained by collecting a group of witches in a circle and joining their efforts by a spell, or by the wearing of the conical hat by the individual witch. 

Interestingly, the cone shaped crown and surrounding brim shape is found in Hindu temples connected with the worship of Shiva.  In these temples the lingam, a cone shaped column representing the penis is surrounded by the yoni, which represents the vagina of the god's shakti, or wife.  The symbol represents the joining of male and female energy.  Hinduism accords with the monistic worldview favored by Wiccans, and their beliefs reflect the male/female principle of this form of Hinduism.

The Bible clearly teaches that God pre-existed the universe, (Genesis 1:1).  He created, upholds, and penetrates the universe but is in no way identical with it.  The biblical worldview is dualistic rather than monistic.  Therefore the monistic worldview is false.


d. Conclusion: Contacting and utilizing spiritual power sources other than that of the Holy Spirit is forbidden to Christians.  Christians should view the creation as real, substantial, and good.

12. Event: Hermione uses a spell to repair Harry's glasses.  She speaks a phrase in Latin and 
      then uses her wand to direct the power.

      a. Issue: Tools used by witches.

      b. Definition: The wand is a short rod or stick.  It is used by witches to direct the energy of
       the spell.

      c. Analysis: The theory behind the magic spell is described in #1 above.  Witches use certain
      objects, such as wands and athames, to direct the power of their spells.  In this case Hermione
      works her spell by a word of power in Latin, then releases the energy through her wand.

       The Bible does not mention witchcraft paraphernalia in detail.  However, since they are tools
        for sorcery they should not be used by Christians.

       d. Conclusion: All forms of sorcery fall under the prohibition of Deuteronomy 18: 9-12.


24. Event: As Ron and Harry walk to their rooms, they pass and greet a ghost named Sir
      Nicholas.

      a. Issue: Ghosts.

      b. Definition: Many definitions of ghosts have been offered.  Among them are emanations
       from the brains of living or dead people, human auras, the spirits of saved or lost people
       that have not yet reached their final destination, and demons.

     c. Analysis: I know of no credible evidence for any of the explanations listed above except
      for the view that they are probably demons masquerading as departed people.  The one
      biblical instance of a possible ghost is found in I Samuel 28: 7-19.  Even here the nature of
      the apparition is not clearly identified.  The facts are: 1. The apparition was contacted
      through a necromancer. 2. The necromancer was shocked at the appearance of "Samuel".
      3. Saul believed it was Samuel.  4. It spoke as if it were Samuel.

      Whatever the truth may be in this case, people who report having seen ghosts or to have
       communicated with the dead never report that they say, "Jesus is the Son of God" or
       anything similar.  Rather, they speak of how nice it is on the "other side".  In addition
       researchers have shown that people who are involved in this type of activities frequently
       have UFO experiences.  The messages delivered by UFO beings are very similar to those
       that come from "spirit guides" and ghosts.

       If these apparitions are demonic they should be avoided.  At any rate, necromancy is
       specifically prohibited by Deuteronomy 18:11.


      d. Conclusion: A Christian should never involve him/herself in mediumistic activities of
      any type.  Necromancy is mediumistic activity.


38. Event: In the library, Hermione consults a grimoire to find a spell to transform a person into
      the appearance of another person.

      a. Issue: Grimoires.

      b. Definition.  A witch's spell book.  Sometimes a coven maintains a group grimoire.  A
      student of  witchcraft is not usually recognized as a witch until a personal grimoire is
      compiled.

      c. Analysis: Grimoires are books of magical spells.  Magic is sorcery.  Sorcery is evil. In
      Ephesus the newly saved sorcerers burned their grimoires, (Acts 19:19).

      d. Conclusion: Christians should never work spells or use grimoires.  In fact, they should
       burn them if a real one comes into their possession. It is possible the presence of such
       an object could attract demons or provide them with increased ability to manifest their presence.

I do not believe that Children will become Demon Possessed or Witches by reading the HP books.  However, the message of the books is quite clear: Witchcraft and Magic are not inherently evil, and can even be useful and fun.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

ROTFL!!!!!

Well done Tom!  I got some great chuckles over this one.

The Cat inThe Hat , by Dr Seuss is another book that would fun to analyze in this manner. 

7.) The cat knocks on the door.

          A.)Issue: ANPSI Animal Psi is a phenomenon where a human has the ability to propositionally communicate with an animal in an intelligent, usually by non-verbal or psychic means.

The Cat, who happens to be black, is under the influence of a demon.  Notice how the demon forces its way into the house, given the slightest opening by the children.  The message being communicated is that it's OK to be curious when demon possessed cats, standing over six feet tall knock at the front door. 

8.)Thing One and Thing Two leap out of the box.

         A.) Issue, malicious imps, which are invited to wreak havoc by the demon inhabited cat.  Imps, Menehunes, Leprachuans and other small, malicious beings are well noted in many cultures across the world.  These seemingly harmless, yet irritating beings are considered to be stepping stones for getting children to be curious regarding mythical creatures, which are really demons.  The breakfast cereal, "Lucky Charms," is an example of how this type of thing has been brought to bear on the innocent minds of young children, to introduce them to the spiritual world.

9.)The Cat miraculously cleans up the mess, even as the children's mother appears at the front door.


         A.) Issue, intercourse with demons can be fun, and is something to keep secret from parents.......

Absolutely fabulous post!  Thanks for your dry sense of humor.

 ;D ;D ;D

Event: Hoss Cartwright rides up on his horse wearing the big white
conical hat he always has on. He is attempting to focus his energy in
order to change or mutate the world. Though few realize it, H.O.S.S.
stands for Hierarchy Of Satanic Servants. Though his hat is not truly conical,
it has been modified somewhat for the program. But he is occultic for
sure, just as much as the "Coneheads" are.

Out comes Hop Sing--(and yes, you guessed it, H.S. stands for Hail Satan) with
his long pony tail. Now, the Bible clearly states in Leviticus that a man should not
dress as a woman, or a woman as a man. Hop Sing, in clear malignant violation of
this Biblical law, flaunts this in view of all.

When Ben, Adam(note the reference to the first created being), Hoss and Little
Joe Cartwright ride together they are like the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse, set
out on a devilish trek. Hiding behind a seemingly "nice" exterior, these four are the
epitomy of evil.

Analysis: Both Hoss ,Hop Sing, and all the Cartwrights are clearly satanic indivduals and should be
avoided at all cost.

Conclusion: Avoid all Bonanza re-runs.

Joe and Bystander,

Your posts are clever and amusing.  The results of dabbling in occultism all too frequently are not. 

As I said:

A simple question: Is teaching children that there is nothing wrong with evil a good thing?

Blesings,

Thomas Maddux

The HP books don't "teach" this---assuming, of course, that they "teach" anything at all. I'm not of the persuasion that Rowling's books are moral tales, I think they are just incredibly interesting fiction. Period.

That being said, the HP books do make clear that magic can be used for both evil and good. There are "bad" wizards and "good" wizards and the magic itself is not evil, but becomes something evil when misused by the wizards & witches. The symbolism is clear: power itself is not evil. But when flawed humans use the power for self-motivated purposes, then it becomes evil.

In an interview, JK Rowling said she made up all the potions, spells, etc. She did not do research on occultic practices. She simply has a fabulous imagination. Sure, the books aren't conventional "literary" material but then again, in his day, Chares Dickens' work was considered cheap trash.

Will I let my children read HP? When they're old enough & have a good dose of discernment. That might not be until they're teenagers.

E.

Tom-
You realize, don't you, that if we use your logic then we have to ban Tolkein and CS Lewis because there are connical hats, wands, spells and magic in them.  And to take it even further, Tolkein has invisible demonic horseriders, dark lords, and all sorts of devilish creatures.  You can take symbolism and infer any meaning your imagination chooses to.  It is what the writer teaches/moralizes/supports that affects the reader.  It seems to me that Rowling is leaving most to your imagination.  If you are prone to see evil in x,y,z then you will.  If you are child who simply loves make believe...then who knows.  Your essays were spoofed, Tom, because your interpretation of the symbolisms were so ridiculous to everyone who read them.

I have been hesitant to have my children read Harry Potter because I was very much fascinated with the occult, ESP and the paranormal when I was young.  This fed into white magic, Ouiji boards etc.  I believe now, though, that much of that was due to a zero Christian influence in my life and bad parenting.  My children know more than I did about the evils of witches, what they are and what ghosts are.  I believe they have the maturity to understand fiction for what it truly is.  I also believe they have the moral (and parental) control to not take it any further.
me

Tom---

Of course I would agree it would be wrong to teach that there is nothing wrong with
evil. But I have seen people get so wrapped up with seeing the "occult" in things that
they even call "Casper the Friendly Ghost" an evil influence("There are no such things as
ghosts, and if there are, they are demonic in nature, so to infer one could be 'friendly'
is a horrble thing to teach children").

Some people get so centered on "not allowing" their children to view things that may
be occultic, and forget to teach them things that are truly far more evil. The Bible says
"The love of money is the root of all evil"--a parent may talk about the evil influences in
"Harry Potter", but never teach their children to be giving or loving, and may actually teach
them to avoid occultism while at the same time teaching them to be greedy.

The same result is found in legalistic churches. They may not celebrate Christmas due to
"pagan influences" and feel they are pleasing God by doing so, while at the same time for-
getting all about love and kindness to others. They are "abstaining" from what they feel
is evil, while at the same time teaching evil to their children in the form of strict legalism
and coldness. They may actually be stifling their children's imagination by not allowing them
to read books with imaginary characters, because they happen to be witches, or leprechauns,
or elves.

Almost every "role-playing" video game has characters with special powers. The character might
possess a magic wand, or magical sword, have powers to disappear, etc. etc. And that's the fun
of the whole thing. I understand the need to protect children--but there is also the case for not
suffocating them by trying so hard to insulate them from the world. They may later turn against
Christianity because they see it as a legal, stifling thing in their lives--especially what they suffered
through as children.

Imagine not allowing your children to watch "The Wizard of Oz", despite it's wonderful message, due to it having "Good Witch Glenda" in it. "There's no such thing as a good witch" you say, "it teaches children that evil can be good". So, you take away the opportunity for your children to hear the wonderful things the wizard tells the Lion, the Tin man and the Scarecrow, and the message that all you need is the love found in your own back yard--"there's no place like home". We can look for the evil in things and surely find it, but we can also see the good, and sometimes abundant good that outweighs any of the evil found in the same stories.

--Joe

Liz,

You said:

I do not doubt that she made up the spells and potiions.  I also do not doubt that she has a fabulous imagination.  As to whether or not she is being truthful about not having studied Occult practices, I do doubt that.  The reason is that her work contains dozens of allusions to Wiccan beliefs, artifacts, and practices, as well as their worldview.   I doubt that she could have come up with all that accidentally.

Seems to me that your cautious approach, (with which I agree), indicates that you share my concerns to some degree.  ;)

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Just Me,

You said:

1. I do not recall advocating the banning of any books.

2. I am well aware of the magical elements in the works of Tolkein and Lewis.  But I think that Rowling's books are quite different.  In T and L the setting is an imaginary world.  That world is peopled by creatures with powers and abilities different from the real world.  Rowling presents a world that has two aspects: 1. The normal world that the common people experience.  2. A mystical world filled with occult energies and forces that can be controlled by a special class of people who must learn the various means of doing so.   This is exactly what Wiccans believe to be true, and what they teach to those that they indoctrinate.

3. Regarding my "ridiculous" interpretations of the "symbolisms".  In the past I might have agreed with you.  After all, getting one's undies in a twist over a pointy hat seems silly.  But remember, I was not "interpreting".  I was identifying common Wiccan practices, artifacts, and beliefs. 

The assignment was to view the movie version of "Prisoner", identify, and evaluate the occult elements.  Remember that there were all sorts of people who worked on the movies.  The Wiccan elements permeate the movies. 

I had spent an entire semester listening to lectures and reading books on the Occult.  The professor had a background of personal experience in dealing with the occult and with demonized people.  While I was writing the evaluations the I was referring to these background materials as well as sources authored by the Wiccans themselves.  All I did was compare what I was viewing in the movie with what the Wiccans believe and practice. 

You are free to believe that my "interpretations" are ridiculous.  But they are accurate.

Blessings,

Thomas Maddux

Just as an aside, but as a warning too---do not let any young ones in your
family watch the Rose Bowl tonight. It's USC vs. Texas. The University of
Texas fans could be a horrible influence on your children. It's really a most
appalling site to behold--scores and scores of Texas fans will be holding up
their hands and making the sign of the devil--they will say it is because they
are Longhorn fans--but we know the real reason--they make the same  hand sign
at heavy metal rock concerts--and we know they aren't making that hand sign
because they're Longhorn fans. Don't let your children become Texas Longhorn
fans--they will soon be making that dastardly sign of the devil every time their
team has the ball, and they will wave that hand sign frantically if the team scores--
God help us. A University of Texas football game is filled with occultic symbolism--
just wanted to warn you.

--Joe

---just being sarcastic about seeing the occult in things.

Well, I seem to have put my foot in my mouth.  I thought you were joking with your post, Tom.  I really did.  I should have used discretion before I jumped on the bandwagon.

I have read all the HP books, and have seen all three movies.  The world of Harry Potter is no more real than the world of Narnia.  Both involve "ordinary" children from our world having adventures in magical places. As has been pointed out, both include witches, demons, good and evil.

Rowling's definition of "evil" is far more fleshed out and clear in books three and onward, to the point where I find no objection to reading the books at all, other than the children that read them should clearly undertand that they are fiction, merely to be enjoyed as stories.  There are good moral lessons to be had in these books, but reasonable care should be taken for children who may get the wrong idea.

I suggest that parents read them first, and then use good judgement before letting their children read them.  Of course, the children will read them, the question is when and where.

I'd rather have my children read them in our home, and be around to talk with them about it should the need arise.

bystander

Tom, I do share your concerns. I definitely see an important difference between CS Lewis & Tolkien's writings and the HP books. JK Rowlings takes "magic" a huge step further than Lewis or Tolkien ever did, particularly by specifically naming the magic in her books as witchcraft, wizardry etc. The magic in the L & T books is never called this (and not by chance, either)---the authors never intended for their magic to be mistaken as witchcraft.

Since the Bible is pretty clear that practicing witchcraft of any kind is forbidden, I will proceed cautiously in allowing my children to read HP.

I do think it's possible, however, for an older child to read the HP books and not become interested with the occult, just as a non-believer might read "The Lion, the Witch & the Wardrobe" and not convert to Christianity (or even pick up on the Christian symbolism).

It's not a matter of censorship. I think it's all about discernment. Parents need to know their children and also maintain an awareness of what their children are reading/seeing/listening to. This way they can maintain an intelligent dialogue with their children and through this teach them critical thinking skills.

E.

 I  coordinated a H.P. club at my school with an attendence of 50-200 students. As a teacher, who sees the opportunity at hand, I couldn't resist taking advantage of the H.P. phenomenon! Recently I have become aware of the dozens of websites dedicated to the reading and discussion of the books! (Has anyone read "The Half-Blood Prince") And what discussions!!!  These kids are asking questions, predicting, hypothetically concluding, looking at the most minute details and even writing their own H.P. fiction! (Reminds me of the intensity of Bible Study in the Assembly.)  J.K. Rowlings has done a tremendous service to our generation. She has "magically" accomplished what teachers are paid to do! educate! Why?  Why are these books so relevant?  Look at the main character! He is not the typical vision quest hero but one that reflects the lives of so many in our generation. (I would love to discuss this with anyone who has read the books!)

   Is magic real?   Did Mike Warnke really apperate as he wrote in his autobiography "The Satan seller?"  Did brother George really see the clouds split apart when he prayed?  I guess these are questions we should investigate and come to the best reasonable conclusions we can. But as far as these books are concerned I have read them over and over and have yet found myself able to do any magic!  Hope you enjoy them yourselves!   http://www.harrypotterspage.com

I've read several of the HP books and enjoyed them a lot. One thing that stands out to me is how Rowland makes the magic itself very attractive. The artifacts--such as Harry's wand and his owl--are described in such sensory detail it makes you wish you had them. Not to mention his Nimbus Two Thousand broomstick! Then there is the comraderie and loyalty of the three friends, and how they are able to use the magic to help each other, and do good.  It's a very cool "inner ring."

C.S. Lewis describes how it was George MacDonald's books that led him toward Christianity by inspiring in him a love of goodness, an attraction. I think possibly the attraction of the inner ring of magical knowledge and accoutrements in the HP books might provide that kind of attraction. If a child's life is not filled with absorbing activities and relationships, might there then be a susceptibility to wiccan to fill the void? It also offers a cool inner ring with attractive accoutrements, like crystals.

The challenge probably lies in providing such a meaningful life for a child that magic, along with other escapes such as video games and drugs, don't have as much appeal. One element would be teaching them a love of reading way before they get to the HP age. And a love of real knowledge--science, art, languages, the Bible, etc. And good friends. Our son's oldest daughter is 8. She has a Gameboy, but after the first few weeks, she seldom plays with it because she would rather be drawing or learning about butterflies and dinosaurs or playing with her little sister.

In reply to Dave, I can see the usefulness of HP for public school teachers to motivate children to read. And it's great that you are also using them to teach the kids to think. I agree the HP books themselves aren't going to teach anyone magic.

 --MI

I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books and don't know if I ever will.  Now, I know that that disqualifies me from offering any honest criticism of them.  But one thing I will say: the fact that we are even having this discussion at all shows a failure of Christian culture.  If there was more good Christian literature available, Christian parents would not have to wrestle with Harry Potter.  But aside from masterpieces written by authors now dead, the stuff now being sold in Christian bookstores is pure schlock.  It is theologically and technically trash.  If the people writing this stuff applied the same level of skill to such things as designing bridges and skyscrapers, flying airplanes or doing surgery, there would be a lot of dead people!  If Christians object to Harry Potter, then let some of us go to school to learn to write, and to write well.  Let us learn to create artistic masterpieces.  And let us learn to do it for free, as an offering to the Lord.  But don't go to Lifeway or Berean and peddle CBA-approved "Christian" schlock, and don't expect me to buy it simply because the name of Jesus is all over it.  Putting His name on this stuff is like spraying gold paint on cow chips.

Clarence Thompson

Yeah.  I often maintained that one should study HP (and other good literature) and then build something better.  But, it seems that the best we can come up with is the Prayer of Jabez Coffee Commuter Mug.  :(

Maybe we won't have to worry about Bird Flu now. This may get us first.  ;D

http://www.technewsworld.com/rsstory/50033.html

Tonite Paula Zahn is having some really excited Evangelicals on at 5:00 pac and 8:00 est her show is on CNN. The show will discuss Isreal, the Apocolypse and the end of the world. It is interesting alot of the fighting going on is near Megeddo.

Recently Childrens cold medicines were pulled from the shelves at the local grocery stores.

Soon my daughter will be two and during that time

we have had one stuffed rabbit recalled(by the way we kept it because if I cant rip the nose off she cant either)

One crib recalled(and I am not making light of this one) Our crib turned out to be fine but was on the list of recalled cribs.

and now the infant cold medicine.(and now she cant take it until age 6)



and we can count my laptop computer's battery was recalled too
Just dont make things the way they used to....

The Boston Red Sox easily won the World Series. Talk about bad timing the rockies won 21 out of 22 at one point. then a week later lose 4 in a row :o

Hi Christine,

  Serves those Rockies right for beating my Padres! ;)

               Wait till next year!

                                               God Bless,  Mark C.

Tech support where Steve works sent out an email alert today, "Fraudulent Grand Jury Summons Containing Malware" http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/NewDirections/FraudulentSummons.htm (http://www.geftakysassembly.com/Articles/NewDirections/FraudulentSummons.htm)