U.S. compared to other nations

[Valley Oak]

It's fascinating to see how American conservatives who consider themselves 'patriots' like to compare the U.S. only to countries without civil rights or liberties, without democracy. For example, because reactionaries don't like competition they always compare the United States to a nation where they commit terrifying acts of injustice such cutting someone's hand off for stealing.

How about upping the ante a little and comparing the U.S. to other industrialized democracies? The United States won't fair very well and this makes right wingers very insecure and defensive. In dozens of countries around the world, their quality of democracy is clearly better than in the U.S. and their standard of living is objectively higher than in the U.S. (e.g. per capita income, social services, etc).

So how about a little more competition or are we wimps here? How about a challenge? Forget those countries that practice clitorectomies on little girls for a while. We all know about how much better the U.S. is than them. But how about trying on the Scandinavian countries. Oh, oh, the U.S. is in serious trouble there!

How about it? Any loud mouthed 'patriots' here want to accept a challenge? No? That's what I thought. Woosies, chickens, cowards full of hot hair and bullshit as always.

Edward

[Braggi]

...
How about upping the ante a little and comparing the U.S. to other industrialized democracies? ...

That's a fair question.

Now, how about asking it without the childish name calling?

-Jeff

[Lenny]

If I responded, he couldn't see it anyway, as I am on The List. Thank goodness for small victories.
Besides it's hard to quantify freedom and democracy. And then to compare/contrast it with their system are what books are for, not this site. Also, his language IS childish; I mean "quality of democracy" and "standard of living".....really now, if it isn't silly, then it is mostly meaningless.
And why do folks always bring up Scandinavians? No wonder they drink and kill themselves so much! Folks are always talking about them! :2cents:

[MsTerry]

Yes Eduardo,
Weren't you turning over a new life?
Didn't you make a public apology and promise?
Can we believe in you, that's the real question.



That's a fair question.

Now, how about asking it without the childish name calling?

-Jeff

[MsTerry]

If I responded, he couldn't see it anyway, as I am on The List. Thank goodness for small victories.

That is an excellent point!
:xtrmlaugh::woohoo::xtrmlaugh:

[Valley Oak]

How about if I edit my original post?

Edward


Yes Eduardo,
Weren't you turning over a new life?
Didn't you make a public apology and promise?
Can we believe in you, that's the real question.

[thewholetruth]

You've already shown your true colors in your first post, bro. But if you wErE going to edit it, how about including the names of some of the countries you'd like to see us compared to?

Oh, wait. I'm on The List, too, so he won't see this reply.

Oh well...

Don


How about if I edit my original post?

Edward

[Lenny]

You've already shown your true colors in your first post, bro. But if you wErE going to edit it, how about including the names of some of the countries you'd like to see us compared to?
Oh, wait. I'm on The List, too, so he won't see this reply.
Oh well...
Don

Don, you know what countries he refers to: European, all of them that weren't in the Bloc. No chauvinism there. Anyway, those that were in the bloc have such pollution problems, we won't talk about them.
Oh, and Japan & now Korea.
Now as an intellectual he will blend in (ignore) cultural issues, like "quality of democracy" for Korea, Japan, Singapore.
Or the historic and ongoing issues relative to THIS country in his imaginary comparison.
And as a True Believer he would rather squeal like a pig than admit that THIS country has been the greatest good for the greatest number IN THE WORLD, in all of the history of peoples. Remember, he reads Howard Zinn, and nothing else. Not even this dis' :2cents:

[ChristineL]

We could start with access to medical care. We don't exactly shine in comparison to other western countries in that area.

We spend the most per person, but are asked to believe that the competitiveness of a "free market" lowers insurance costs. Did I miss something and that actually happened? Or...is it ok to let people die for not being able to afford medical insurance or care? After all, the life of a retired person who no longer works is worth less than a Senator's or a CEO. Waiters, maids, farm workers, retail workers, etc. are all replaceable...so they can die of treatable illnesses. Of course, I do have a strange way of looking at things. If all the CEO's in the country dropped dead tomorrow, I doubt I'd feel it. On the other hand if my garbage collectors all died tomorrow...that I would feel.

Yes, this country has done a lot of good. However, it's time to recognize it is no longer the land of opportunity it once was. When I first immigrated here in 1959 (yes, legally after a two year wait), the average working person could live decently. If you were willing to work hard, you could lead a decent life. Or...do those of you who believe so much in ambition think that only the hard working really intelligent and/or talented people should be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care? I guess the less naturally gifted (unless they have a moneyed powerful father, like our president) and those keeping their gardens tended, their children safe, their garbage collected, etc. should live in poverty or on the edge thereof no matter how hard they work. Strangely enough, under Eisenhower (a republican), the average working person had a chance at a decent life. No, I'm not a Republican, my father was...but back then the Republicans were not today's Republicans.

It's not about dumping on this country, but until we can see that this is no longer the country it was, we cannot fight to make it better.


Don, you know what countries he refers to: European, all of them that weren't in the Bloc. No chauvinism there. Anyway, those that were in the bloc have such pollution problems, we won't talk about them.
Oh, and Japan & now Korea.
Now as an intellectual he will blend in (ignore) cultural issues, like "quality of democracy" for Korea, Japan, Singapore.
Or the historic and ongoing issues relative to THIS country in his imaginary comparison.
And as a True Believer he would rather squeal like a pig than admit that THIS country has been the greatest good for the greatest number IN THE WORLD, in all of the history of peoples. Remember, he reads Howard Zinn, and nothing else. Not even this dis' :2cents:

[Valley Oak]

We Americans execute people in large numbers every year. Only Communist China kills more of its citizens than the U.S. in a regular, systematic, and 'lawfully' administered fashion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/16cnd-scotus.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[thewholetruth]

There is nothing which supports that contention in the link you offered, Ed.

FYI, we're the third largest country in the world, Ed. From what I can tell, India doesn't use the death sentence much, and the US is the next largest country who does, after China, sooooo, logic dictates that it's no surprise.

Don


We Americans execute people in large numbers every year. Only Communist China kills more of its citizens than the U.S. in a regular, systematic, and 'lawfully' administered fashion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/16cnd-scotus.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[thewholetruth]

"Yes, this country has done a lot of good."

Amen, it has, and it still does. More money to charitable organizations, and more volunteers to minister to the sick and starving and oppressed in this world come from the USA, hands down, by far.

"However, it's time to recognize it is no longer the land of opportunity it once was."

Horse puckey. That is simply untrue.

"When I first immigrated here in 1959 (yes, legally after a two year wait), the average working person could live decently."

The average working person can STILL live decently.

"If you were willing to work hard, you could lead a decent life."

Still can.

"Or...do those of you who believe so much in ambition think that only the hard working really intelligent and/or talented people should be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care?"

That is a pessimist's view of America. Hard working? Yes, it must be there if one wants to be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care. Really intelligent? Not necessary. Working hard and practicing principles like rigorous honesty, self-discipline, submission to authority (i.e. the BOSS, for example) are all that's necessary to make it up the corporate ladder in practically any field.

"I guess the less naturally gifted (unless they have a moneyed powerful father, like our president) and those keeping their gardens tended, their children safe, their garbage collected, etc. should live in poverty or on the edge thereof no matter how hard they work."

I disagree that this describes America. In order for your description to be accurate, you forgot to add the word "entitled", which cancels out "hard-working". In the past, the America you described was full of people of faith who sought God's blessings. Today, many choose to be left to their own devices and then they wonder why their lives don't go as well.

"Strangely enough, under Eisenhower (a republican), the average working person had a chance at a decent life."

They still have the same opportunity today, and even more so.

"It's not about dumping on this country, but until we can see that this is no longer the country it was, we cannot fight to make it better."

Again, I disagree completely. This country is every bit the land of opportunity it ever was. More so, in fact. The difference today is that many Americans have become selfish and drowning in a sense of entitlement that no previous generation has ever seen, believing that the government OWES THEM medical benefits and OWES THEM money to live on and that our society somehow OWES THEM a successful career. Many Americans are simply lazy and self-centered, and THAT is why they struggle financially. Anyone can be a millionaire who is willing to work hard, stay the course, seek greater wisdom than we're born with, and be honest. Ooops, there's a slight problem with that last one, now, isn't there. (Rhetorical question) What with "your truth" and "my truth", it seems that some Americans have lost sight of THE truth. Therein lies the rub.

Don


We could start with access to medical care. We don't exactly shine in comparison to other western countries in that area.

We spend the most per person, but are asked to believe that the competitiveness of a "free market" lowers insurance costs. Did I miss something and that actually happened? Or...is it ok to let people die for not being able to afford medical insurance or care? After all, the life of a retired person who no longer works is worth less than a Senator's or a CEO. Waiters, maids, farm workers, retail workers, etc. are all replaceable...so they can die of treatable illnesses. Of course, I do have a strange way of looking at things. If all the CEO's in the country dropped dead tomorrow, I doubt I'd feel it. On the other hand if my garbage collectors all died tomorrow...that I would feel.

Yes, this country has done a lot of good. However, it's time to recognize it is no longer the land of opportunity it once was. When I first immigrated here in 1959 (yes, legally after a two year wait), the average working person could live decently. If you were willing to work hard, you could lead a decent life. Or...do those of you who believe so much in ambition think that only the hard working really intelligent and/or talented people should be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care? I guess the less naturally gifted (unless they have a moneyed powerful father, like our president) and those keeping their gardens tended, their children safe, their garbage collected, etc. should live in poverty or on the edge thereof no matter how hard they work. Strangely enough, under Eisenhower (a republican), the average working person had a chance at a decent life. No, I'm not a Republican, my father was...but back then the Republicans were not today's Republicans.

It's not about dumping on this country, but until we can see that this is no longer the country it was, we cannot fight to make it better.

[Zeno Swijtink]

"Yes, this country has done a lot of good."

Amen, it has, and it still does. More money to charitable organizations, and more volunteers to minister to the sick and starving and oppressed in this world come from the USA, hands down, by far. (snip)

Don

I think the picture is more complicated:

"The United States is the world's largest contributor of ODA [official development assistance] in absolute terms ($15.7 billion, 2003), but the smallest among developed countries as a percentage of its GDP (0.14% in 2003). The UN target for development aid is 0.7% of GDP; currently only five countries (with Norway in the lead with 0.92%) achieve this. "

Even if private donations (...) match ODA in the US Norway is way ahead of us in total per capita donations.

Also, "in the United States, popular estimates of spending on aid are often highly inflated. Surveys show that people typically think about 20% of the federal budget is spent on aid; the real number a little less than 1%.[5] In absolute terms, the $15-20bn of aid compares with $50bn spent annually on the war on drugs and $500bn spent on the military."

All from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_aid

[Zeno Swijtink]

We Americans execute people in large numbers every year. Only Communist China kills more of its citizens than the U.S. in a regular, systematic, and 'lawfully' administered fashion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/16cnd-scotus.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

I agree with Don that you need to look at this per capita (and that your link does not talk about these numbers).

Still, "executions are known to have been carried out in the following countries in 2007: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Botswana, China, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Kuwait, Libya, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, USA, Viet Nam, Yemen." https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/001/2008/en/b43a1e5a-ffea-11dc-b092-bdb020617d3d/act500012008eng.html

Mostly unpleasant company we keep!

[Valley Oak]

I will study the per capita rates of capital punishment in different countries. Any good sources you might recommend?

Thanks,

Edward


I agree with Don that you need to look at this per capita (and that your link does not talk about these numbers).

Still, "executions are known to have been carried out in the following countries in 2007: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Botswana, China, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Kuwait, Libya, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, USA, Viet Nam, Yemen." https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/001/2008/en/b43a1e5a-ffea-11dc-b092-bdb020617d3d/act500012008eng.html

Mostly unpleasant company we keep!

[Zeno Swijtink]

The Amnesty International link

https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/as...012008eng.html

together with Wikipedia's population figures for each country gives a basis for your calculation.

Cheers, Zeno

(Ed, Your email address does not work.)



I will study the per capita rates of capital punishment in different countries. Any good sources you might recommend?

Thanks,

Edward

[Valley Oak]

I answered my own question by following the link Zeno provided. The U.S. ranks number 5 in the world. I included only the countries that executed 10 or more people. Nonetheless, the list of nations practicing the death penalty is a surprisingly short one. There are a few barbaric holdouts such as China and the United States of America:

Country and number of executions:

CHINA 470+
IRAN 317+
SAUDI ARABIA 143+
PAKISTAN 135+
USA 42
IRAQ 33+
VIET NAM 25+
YEMEN 15+
AFGHANISTAN 15


I will study the per capita rates of capital punishment in different countries. Any good sources you might recommend?

Thanks,

Edward

[ChristineL]

No amount of honesty and hard work will allow a day care worker's or teacher's salary to be raised enough to afford rent, food and medical/dental care or benefits. (Yes, teachers do have benefits, but it's costing more and more out of their pockets to have them.)

Yes, everyone should be able to at least get adequate medical care. No, no one is owed a living. But...I doubt that Christ would agree that the young child of a poor family should be denied life saving medical care. To my way of thinking true Christians do not make judgements as to whose life is worth saving and whose is not based on social position and earning power. This is precisely what our government is doing. No amount of saving and planning guarantees a retiree will not be wiped out by one medical emergency or chronic illness.

How about all those rescue professionals who rushed to the Twin Towers when asked, but are now chronically ill and denied any medical care because they were not in the direct employ of the City? Not hard working and honest enough to get the care they need? Maybe, if there's another catastrophe similar to this one, those not in the direct employ of the city or state will be smart enough to stay away.

Christ threw the Pharisees out of the temple. I wonder what he would think of the large pharmaceutical and medical insurance companies seeking more and more profit by making their products and services less and less affordable.

No, there is really not more opportunity. When I went to college, I was able to get scholarships and get enough work to afford to go. At today's costs, I would never be able to do it. Yes, my parents worked hard and were honest...my father just had not planned on suddenly dying while I was still in High School.




"Yes, this country has done a lot of good."

Amen, it has, and it still does. More money to charitable organizations, and more volunteers to minister to the sick and starving and oppressed in this world come from the USA, hands down, by far.

"However, it's time to recognize it is no longer the land of opportunity it once was."

Horse puckey. That is simply untrue.

"When I first immigrated here in 1959 (yes, legally after a two year wait), the average working person could live decently."

The average working person can STILL live decently.

"If you were willing to work hard, you could lead a decent life."

Still can.

"Or...do those of you who believe so much in ambition think that only the hard working really intelligent and/or talented people should be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care?"

That is a pessimist's view of America. Hard working? Yes, it must be there if one wants to be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care. Really intelligent? Not necessary. Working hard and practicing principles like rigorous honesty, self-discipline, submission to authority (i.e. the BOSS, for example) are all that's necessary to make it up the corporate ladder in practically any field.

"I guess the less naturally gifted (unless they have a moneyed powerful father, like our president) and those keeping their gardens tended, their children safe, their garbage collected, etc. should live in poverty or on the edge thereof no matter how hard they work."

I disagree that this describes America. In order for your description to be accurate, you forgot to add the word "entitled", which cancels out "hard-working". In the past, the America you described was full of people of faith who sought God's blessings. Today, many choose to be left to their own devices and then they wonder why their lives don't go as well.

"Strangely enough, under Eisenhower (a republican), the average working person had a chance at a decent life."

They still have the same opportunity today, and even more so.

"It's not about dumping on this country, but until we can see that this is no longer the country it was, we cannot fight to make it better."

Again, I disagree completely. This country is every bit the land of opportunity it ever was. More so, in fact. The difference today is that many Americans have become selfish and drowning in a sense of entitlement that no previous generation has ever seen, believing that the government OWES THEM medical benefits and OWES THEM money to live on and that our society somehow OWES THEM a successful career. Many Americans are simply lazy and self-centered, and THAT is why they struggle financially. Anyone can be a millionaire who is willing to work hard, stay the course, seek greater wisdom than we're born with, and be honest. Ooops, there's a slight problem with that last one, now, isn't there. (Rhetorical question) What with "your truth" and "my truth", it seems that some Americans have lost sight of THE truth. Therein lies the rub.

Don

[mykil]

Hmmmm Edward; since I personally have never been anywhere else in this world, cause I do not feel safe abroad, I cannot answer this question. I can ask you a question thou. What are you doing here? Could it be you feel safe and secure right here in Sonoma County just like the rest of us? I don’t even conceder the rest of the country my home. I really don’t even conceder Southern Cali. My home. I live and breath in Northern Cali and this is where I myself feel safe.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
I sure as hell am not getting on an airplane and traveling to a Scandinavian Country so I can attempt to feel the need to spend ten bucks on a cappuccino! Lets all move to Brazil and live and work our lives for absolutely nothing! Maybe we can all be Japanese, I hear they are happy! Germany is adequate, they speaky two languages! Australia! Now there’s a place for you Edward! I hear the people are beyond wonderful and they really care for one another like no other place on earth!
<o:p></o:p>
I think for mew though I will stay right here and not compare MYSELF to other parts of the world. I know whom I am, I know what I want out of life and I feel secure right here in Sonoma County. If I didn’t feel this way I think you wouldn’t even see my tracks as I was on my way out the door.
<o:p></o:p>
I applaud you for trying to enlighten the bunch of us of worldly politics and making sure we all know the rest of the world is better than the bunch of us, but I myself am trying to enlighten a broader range of individuals that need to have their eyes open. I head up an extreme clan called [TxT] or The extreme Team. A vast branch of the gaming world that travels far and beyond trying to enlighten people that don’t need to be enlighten. These kidz all over the world think war is cool, people need to die! Infiltrating such a vast group is fun and rewarding. Talking online with a few dozen kidz and telling them they are crazy for eating meat and they can live without it is just plain rewarding! Telling people in Sebastopol that we are a bad county is a waist of your breath don’t you think?
<o:p></o:p>
I don’t understand your petty need to belittle people like us that try to live green and beyond what the rest of the world live and breath already. WE are all here to try and be a tad bit greener and set an example for the rest of the world, while you say WE as a group should be ashamed? Once you listed what you do, what groups you are involved with, and how busy you are trying to save the world, maybe you should try harder! This way you won’t have time to try and belittle the ones that really do care and are standing right beside you!:2cents:

[Valley Oak]

Mykil and company and other esteemed Wacco colleagues,

Please stop taking it so personally. I am criticizing the system, not you, certainly not my friends. Did any of you give the orders to torture in Iraq? Did any of you make public policy so that there would not be universal health care? Did any of you give the order to invade Iraq? Did any of you make the decision to defund public education and government in general? Etc, etc, etc?

I didn't think so. I'm sitting where you are! I'm one of you. When I fire away with my criticisms, I am directing them towards systemic faults, not my friends and neighbors here in Sonoma County. Another Wacco member recently quoted Buckminster Fuller as saying something along the lines of: 'There are no bad people, only bad systems.' Kudos to you, Mr. Fuller. Such a profound statement could not be more true. Please remember something else that is very important, we have freedom of speech in order to criticize things in general and we don't use that freedom very much in this country. How are we ever going to improve our lives and our society if we don't use what the framers of the US Constitution intended us to use? They knew that a nation's ability to be self-critical was fundamental for a democracy to be able to renovate itself, to change for the better.

So please remember QTIP (Quit Taking It Personally). I will segue to recommending anyone to take at least the first in a series of workshops from the Human Awareness Institute (www.hai.org). The workshops are expensive but well worth it and you can get scholarships to help you pay almost all of it. You will never forget the illuminating experience because it is transformational.

Edward


Hmmmm Edward; since I personally have never been anywhere else in this world, cause I do not feel safe abroad, I cannot answer this question. I can ask you a question thou. What are you doing here? Could it be you feel safe and secure right here in Sonoma County just like the rest of us? I don’t even conceder the rest of the country my home. I really don’t even conceder Southern Cali. My home. I live and breath in Northern Cali and this is where I myself feel safe.
<o:p></o:p>
I sure as hell am not getting on an airplane and traveling to a Scandinavian Country so I can attempt to feel the need to spend ten bucks on a cappuccino! Lets all move to Brazil and live and work our lives for absolutely nothing! Maybe we can all be Japanese, I hear they are happy! Germany is adequate, they speaky two languages! Australia! Now there’s a place for you Edward! I hear the people are beyond wonderful and they really care for one another like no other place on earth!
<o:p></o:p>
I think for mew though I will stay right here and not compare MYSELF to other parts of the world. I know whom I am, I know what I want out of life and I feel secure right here in Sonoma County. If I didn’t feel this way I think you wouldn’t even see my tracks as I was on my way out the door.
<o:p></o:p>
I applaud you for trying to enlighten the bunch of us of worldly politics and making sure we all know the rest of the world is better than the bunch of us, but I myself am trying to enlighten a broader range of individuals that need to have their eyes open. I head up an extreme clan called [TxT] or The extreme Team. A vast branch of the gaming world that travels far and beyond trying to enlighten people that don’t need to be enlighten. These kidz all over the world think war is cool, people need to die! Infiltrating such a vast group is fun and rewarding. Talking online with a few dozen kidz and telling them they are crazy for eating meat and they can live without it is just plain rewarding! Telling people in Sebastopol that we are a bad county is a waist of your breath don’t you think?
<o:p></o:p>
I don’t understand your petty need to belittle people like us that try to live green and beyond what the rest of the world live and breath already. WE are all here to try and be a tad bit greener and set an example for the rest of the world, while you say WE as a group should be ashamed? Once you listed what you do, what groups you are involved with, and how busy you are trying to save the world, maybe you should try harder! This way you won’t have time to try and belittle the ones that really do care and are standing right beside you!:2cents:

[mykil]

Edward maybe you should start a "Edwards Vent Thread" that states "Don't take this personally" cause when I reread the topic in general it is definitely feels projected toward your friends and fellow waccotiers. Seems to me you just want to act out a personal vendetta toward anyone in your path. When I myself vent I state that I am venting at the top or bottom of my post just so there arte no misunderstanding! You might want to try this approach towards life and therefore making it further in your quest for true peace! Just so there are no misunderstandings I myself am venting toward you kind sir!:2cents:<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

[ChristineL]

Take a look at the last sentence of your original post Edward. A lot of us do speak up and challenge the status quo. It's hard for people to respond to the topic when we're called cowards, etc. So, yes, it does feel like a personal attack. Not the best way to get people thinking and dialoguing.

Mykil, I do feel safe in my community...that still won't save me from being wiped out financially and ending up homeless should I have a medical emergency or come down with a chronic illness. It's not about Sonoma County...It's about recognizing our country no longer compares well with other western countries in many areas.

My hard working and honest cousin in France, who is not a particularly high earner, received quality medical care for breast cancer without getting into endless debt or losing her home or vehicle in the process. Her sister who lives here lives in terror of her job being transferred to Indonesia, she cannot afford to lose her medical insurance as her son is midway through the process of being treated for Leukemia. Even with good medical benefits, she and her husband are having to spend a lot out of pocket. Her husband's job was transferred to Indonesia several months ago. By the way, she's a chemical engineer and I don't remember what kind of engineer he is. They had their child later in life, so they're not all that young. He was recently treated for prostate cancer. They have worked hard, saved a lot...and they could lose everything.


Mykil and company and other esteemed Wacco colleagues,

Please stop taking it so personally. I am criticizing the system, not you, certainly not my friends. Did any of you give the orders to torture in Iraq? Did any of you make public policy so that there would not be universal health care? Did any of you give the order to invade Iraq? Did any of you make the decision to defund public education and government in general? Etc, etc, etc?

I didn't think so. I'm sitting where you are! I'm one of you. When I fire away with my criticisms, I am directing them towards systemic faults, not my friends and neighbors here in Sonoma County. Another Wacco member recently quoted Buckminster Fuller as saying something along the lines of: 'There are no bad people, only bad systems.' Kudos to you, Mr. Fuller. Such a profound statement could not be more true. Please remember something else that is very important, we have freedom of speech in order to criticize things in general and we don't use that freedom very much in this country. How are we ever going to improve our lives and our society if we don't use what the framers of the US Constitution intended us to use? They knew that a nation's ability to be self-critical was fundamental for a democracy to be able to renovate itself, to change for the better.

So please remember QTIP (Quit Taking It Personally). I will segue to recommending anyone to take at least the first in a series of workshops from the Human Awareness Institute (www.hai.org (https://www.hai.org)). The workshops are expensive but well worth it and you can get scholarships to help you pay almost all of it. You will never forget the illuminating experience because it is transformational.

Edward

[Valley Oak]

Christine and Mykil and anyone else who might be following this thread,

I posted my original, thread starting message with the intent to bait and provoke the reactionary elements in the Wacco List. You and Mykil are not in this small group so, it was not directed to you or even the majority in this Waccotalk.

But apparently that was lost on many folks. However, 'Decterlove,' who gave his/her appreciation to my thread starting message, it seems, did understand what I was trying to say (which were several points, really). And, also apparently, Jeff's (Braggi) only objection was my strong language but it seems to me that he also understood what I was trying to say (read his post in response to my original message).

I have to be more careful because if most people are misunderstanding what I'm saying then they are going to perceive a different message or get distracted from the main points that I'm trying to make. I hate it when someone gets sidetracked with a quibble and completely misses the essential ideas that I was trying to get across.

Thank you Christine and Mykil for your input,

Edward


Take a look at the last sentence of your original post Edward. A lot of us do speak up and challenge the status quo. It's hard for people to respond to the topic when we're called cowards, etc. So, yes, it does feel like a personal attack. Not the best way to get people thinking and dialoguing.

Mykil, I do feel safe in my community...that still won't save me from being wiped out financially and ending up homeless should I have a medical emergency or come down with a chronic illness. It's not about Sonoma County...It's about recognizing our country no longer compares well with other western countries in many areas.

My hard working and honest cousin in France, who is not a particularly high earner, received quality medical care for breast cancer without getting into endless debt or losing her home or vehicle in the process. Her sister who lives here lives in terror of her job being transferred to Indonesia, she cannot afford to lose her medical insurance as her son is midway through the process of being treated for Leukemia. Even with good medical benefits, she and her husband are having to spend a lot out of pocket. Her husband's job was transferred to Indonesia several months ago. By the way, she's a chemical engineer and I don't remember what kind of engineer he is. They had their child later in life, so they're not all that young. He was recently treated for prostate cancer. They have worked hard, saved a lot...and they could lose everything.

[thewholetruth]

Ed, Mykil said it best, I think.

When someone is doing nothing but venting, it's hard to imagine that there might be some of value to the message in there somewhere. That is, when one wraps a jewell inside of a turd, most people aren't going to bother to digging into it since typically a turd is a turd, through and through.

Don


Christine and Mykil and anyone else who might be following this thread,

I posted my original, thread starting message with the intent to bait and provoke the reactionary elements in the Wacco List. You and Mykil are not in this small group so, it was not directed to you or even the majority in this Waccotalk.

But apparently that was lost on many folks. However, 'Decterlove,' who gave his/her appreciation to my thread starting message, it seems, did understand what I was trying to say (which were several points, really). And, also apparently, Jeff's (Braggi) only objection was my strong language but it seems to me that he also understood what I was trying to say (read his post in response to my original message).

I have to be more careful because if most people are misunderstanding what I'm saying then they are going to perceive a different message or get distracted from the main points that I'm trying to make. I hate it when someone gets sidetracked with a quibble and completely misses the essential ideas that I was trying to get across.

Thank you Christine and Mykil for your input,

Edward

[ChristineL]

I appreciated, and responded to, the basic ideas in the original thread...it is thought provoking.

Christine


Christine and Mykil and anyone else who might be following this thread,

I posted my original, thread starting message with the intent to bait and provoke the reactionary elements in the Wacco List. You and Mykil are not in this small group so, it was not directed to you or even the majority in this Waccotalk.

But apparently that was lost on many folks. However, 'Decterlove,' who gave his/her appreciation to my thread starting message, it seems, did understand what I was trying to say (which were several points, really). And, also apparently, Jeff's (Braggi) only objection was my strong language but it seems to me that he also understood what I was trying to say (read his post in response to my original message).

I have to be more careful because if most people are misunderstanding what I'm saying then they are going to perceive a different message or get distracted from the main points that I'm trying to make. I hate it when someone gets sidetracked with a quibble and completely misses the essential ideas that I was trying to get across.

Thank you Christine and Mykil for your input,

Edward

[ChristineL]

Donc,

You're quick enough to respond to Valley Oak's last post, rather tersely and strongly, in order to make your point. I do however, find it interesting, that after complaining in other threads that none of us "liberals" are willing to dialogue intelligently and respectfully with you that you have not responded to my last attempt to do just that. I was looking forward to seeing your response to my response. I do enjoy a good dialogue whether the person I'm doing it with agrees with me or not.

Christine


Ed, Mykil said it best, I think.

When someone is doing nothing but venting, it's hard to imagine that there might be some of value to the message in there somewhere. That is, when one wraps a jewell inside of a turd, most people aren't going to bother to digging into it since typically a turd is a turd, through and through.

Don

[Lenny]

Christine and Mykil and anyone else who might be following this thread, I posted my original, thread starting message with the intent to bait and provoke the reactionary elements in the Wacco List. Thank you Christine and Mykil for your input, Edward

I resemble that remark!
I ASS-u-me he is writing about old reactionaries like me, but then I am placed on The Ignore List......I recall and old Bob Dylan song......"and you ask me why I don't live here? Honey, you don't have t' ask me that"! from Maggie's Farm.....
You know, actually I can't blame old Ed, as if it were me, and I had to put up with some cranky, old, argumentative, nasty me, I'd probably ignore me as well. :):

[Valley Oak]

I just love it when I read the following!

This message is hidden because Lenny is on your ignore list.

Edward

[Lenny]

Christine, I see on other posts you made that you and yours are having a medical issue, and I apologize if I may offend you in some way.
From what I gather, at least in this state, NOBODY is totally turned away from medical care. Arguments are made as to the modality, and COMPLETE treatment, but when compared to other countries, there are points to be made. In other countries medical staff is taught to say, "I am sorry, there is nothing more that we can do for you". Sounds final, but there IS more that MAY BE done, except there is no "free market" way that would happen. If a person has money there, then more IS done (no surprise as that is the history of folks), while here there are various organizations one may go to in order for help to be given. It is a LOT of work to hustle, but the free market "gives" that option. In those other countries, it is severely limited by government pay only. And the government won't pay, as it is all ready figured out by the actuarialists. Not heard often enough, but in progressive Holland, old useless eaters are being sent into that Good Night with increasing frequency, and without the permission of the single party whose "life" is affected! All on the government dime!
The great expense in our medical system is for R&D. Now we can all hate the pharmaceuticals and medical groups, but they are doing MORE research on "the cure" than any other system outside US, collectively. And it is all private enterprise. The greed of those bastards, and the products from that greed, gives a greater good for a greater number.
No we are not in heaven yet and there is a WHOLE lot more than can be done to give medical access, but it is a FACT that NO ONE is turned away from an emergency room. Now I've seen hospitals that won't let some folks into their ER, and that is a game for demons, but once in there, they will be treated, no matter what.
As for the 1959 time line, the California government meet for 90 days per year only, then they had to go back and live with us normals at a job that would pull down an income. They were not paid much as a politician. No longer the case. They meet and are paid for a full year, at a salary that most here consider obscene. And they don't live among the people they affect as well. In 1959 there was a bill to make UC free for all residents. There was a move IN THE ASSEMBLY to make all electrical power free to all residents in this state. We were so rich then, before the mess that was made which we now currently suffer, that if folks out here KNEW!?! the 2 bit punk foreign governor could not stop the revolution and it would be televised!
But you still make good points so please, keep posting, while I get off my soap box. :2cents:


We could start with access to medical care. We don't exactly shine in comparison to other western countries in that area. We spend the most per person, but are asked to believe that the competitiveness of a "free market" lowers insurance costs. Did I miss something and that actually happened? Or...is it ok to let people die for not being able to afford medical insurance or care? After all, the life of a retired person who no longer works is worth less than a Senator's or a CEO. Waiters, maids, farm workers, retail workers, etc. are all replaceable...so they can die of treatable illnesses. Of course, I do have a strange way of looking at things. If all the CEO's in the country dropped dead tomorrow, I doubt I'd feel it. On the other hand if my garbage collectors all died tomorrow...that I would feel.
Yes, this country has done a lot of good. However, it's time to recognize it is no longer the land of opportunity it once was. When I first immigrated here in 1959 (yes, legally after a two year wait), the average working person could live decently. If you were willing to work hard, you could lead a decent life. Or...do those of you who believe so much in ambition think that only the hard working really intelligent and/or talented people should be able to afford housing, food and medical/dental care? I guess the less naturally gifted (unless they have a moneyed powerful father, like our president) and those keeping their gardens tended, their children safe, their garbage collected, etc. should live in poverty or on the edge thereof no matter how hard they work. Strangely enough, under Eisenhower (a republican), the average working person had a chance at a decent life. No, I'm not a Republican, my father was...but back then the Republicans were not today's Republicans. It's not about dumping on this country, but until we can see that this is no longer the country it was, we cannot fight to make it better.

[ChristineL]

You're right, the emergency room has to take anyone requiring emergency care. By the time someone who cannot afford medical care or insurance goes to the emergency room due to illness, the care required costs much more to deliver than it would have cost at the very beginning of the condition. In the cases of diseases such as cancer, it's too late. Besides, emergency care is just that, great for a broken leg not so great for cancer.

Sorry, if you think everyone can get the care they may need, not so. In the late 1990's I was told my income qualified me for free breast cancer testing (I had a lump), but did not qualify me for treatment. I wonder, why would I then want the tests? Anyway, I could manage to afford those. People are dying of treatable conditions due to lack of insurance or ability to afford it...right here in California.

In order to get free care, you have to own nothing...to treat a serious illness, you have to lose your home and anything else you worked hard for before you qualify. No matter how hard you work and how well you plan, the cost of medical care and medications can wipe you out. Millions of people in this country are one medical emergency or chronic illness away from total poverty. My cousin is one unfortunate lay-off away from being in serious financial peril due to her son's leukemia. Many face these dilemmas...save the child's life and have no home for him to live in and no ability left to educate him.

Even when you have insurance, most of the insurance companies will not pay for preventive...makes sense...I guess...after all it's so much cheaper to treat full blown cancer than a tiny contained lump. Even MediCare no longer covers exploratory blood tests. You have to have a diagnosis for the test, but...you can't get a diagnosis without the test...if you can, the condition has progressed to a point that makes it more difficult and expensive to treat.

As far as the free market advantage...ever hear of "orphan diseases"? As far as the "nothing more can be done"...I'm not sure all these life prolonging miracles that keep dying people around for a few more months is all that great. Free market, yes, if you have lots of money...there is more they can do for you. In terms of all that "research" big Pharma uses as a rationale for their every increasing prices...they spend a lot more on advertising and courting doctors to push their medications. One advantage of my age, the AARP Bulletin and magazine is a fountain of information.

Rent Sicko...watch it carefully. There's a group of Americans living in France (yes they all have jobs) who really don't want to come back because they can afford a life-style they can't have here (yes in spite of the higher taxes) due to the availability of affordable medical care, medications and day care. Doctors in Great Britain are given bonuses for "prevention", for every patient they get to stop smoking, lose weight, etc. Can you imagine how much money is saved that way?

Today, big business runs the country. Do you have any idea how many people could get all the medical care they needed if the money used to pay the isurance companies' CEO's were used to pay the insured's medical costs? Does anyone else get angry about the high costs of medical insurance when their CEO's are making millions a year? What do they do to earn all this money besides devising ways to deny claims? How about those people, without any kind of medical degrees who decide whether or not you can be covered for specific medical procedures and treatments?

You can't begin to bring about change if you can't see that change is needed.



Christine, I see on other posts you made that you and yours are having a medical issue, and I apologize if I may offend you in some way.
From what I gather, at least in this state, NOBODY is totally turned away from medical care. Arguments are made as to the modality, and COMPLETE treatment, but when compared to other countries, there are points to be made. In other countries medical staff is taught to say, "I am sorry, there is nothing more that we can do for you". Sounds final, but there IS more that MAY BE done, except there is no "free market" way that would happen. If a person has money there, then more IS done (no surprise as that is the history of folks), while here there are various organizations one may go to in order for help to be given. It is a LOT of work to hustle, but the free market "gives" that option. In those other countries, it is severely limited by government pay only. And the government won't pay, as it is all ready figured out by the actuarialists. Not heard often enough, but in progressive Holland, old useless eaters are being sent into that Good Night with increasing frequency, and without the permission of the single party whose "life" is affected! All on the government dime!
The great expense in our medical system is for R&D. Now we can all hate the pharmaceuticals and medical groups, but they are doing MORE research on "the cure" than any other system outside US, collectively. And it is all private enterprise. The greed of those bastards, and the products from that greed, gives a greater good for a greater number.
No we are not in heaven yet and there is a WHOLE lot more than can be done to give medical access, but it is a FACT that NO ONE is turned away from an emergency room. Now I've seen hospitals that won't let some folks into their ER, and that is a game for demons, but once in there, they will be treated, no matter what.
As for the 1959 time line, the California government meet for 90 days per year only, then they had to go back and live with us normals at a job that would pull down an income. They were not paid much as a politician. No longer the case. They meet and are paid for a full year, at a salary that most here consider obscene. And they don't live among the people they affect as well. In 1959 there was a bill to make UC free for all residents. There was a move IN THE ASSEMBLY to make all electrical power free to all residents in this state. We were so rich then, before the mess that was made which we now currently suffer, that if folks out here KNEW!?! the 2 bit punk foreign governor could not stop the revolution and it would be televised!
But you still make good points so please, keep posting, while I get off my soap box. :2cents:

[mykil]

RE: Medical Research: How to play the game?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
IF you are truly from this region you will know all too well how to play the game. If you are rich you pay a heath insurance premium just like you do your auto insurance yes? Or poor you have no need to worry about health issues. If you have medical insurance you might want to reconsider and stay In the poor category, you might live longer! If you get injured on the job the first thing they ask you in the hospital is “was this a work related injury”? IF it was you might want to reconsider your answer. IF you answer yes you may just have hell to pay. The hospitals and doctors in general have no morals when it comes to making a living just like everyone else. You sprain ankle could very well need ten surgeries if you answered yes. And could need nothing more than a look see if you answered no. Moral scruples seem to disappear when you enter the doctor’s office in the states this is beyond even worth arguing about. If you are buying a house you should think about getting adequate health insurance before even making a venture in this direction. If you are working paycheck to paycheck whom the fuck cares about heath issues? You are covered! Plain and simple you have nothing to lose besides you car and what little money you have in the bank! This perhaps is your best option to deal with medical is a wonderful tool and uneventful if you should get sick. No added illnesses with the government program. This is the way is should be in my opinion. The government should run everything for the government, err wait I think that might be communism to its finest upbringing, yes? Wasn’t this tried once or twice before? Things seem to be getting out of hand here in the free world, do you think we can ever be able to bring things back to I was going to say the way they used to be but… VENT!<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

[ChristineL]

You do have to make sure that pay check is awfully small. If you qualify for Medical as a single person, you can't really afford rent and food.


RE: Medical Research: How to play the game?<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
IF you are truly from this region you will know all too well how to play the game. If you are rich you pay a heath insurance premium just like you do your auto insurance yes? Or poor you have no need to worry about health issues. If you have medical insurance you might want to reconsider and stay In the poor category, you might live longer! If you get injured on the job the first thing they ask you in the hospital is “was this a work related injury”? IF it was you might want to reconsider your answer. IF you answer yes you may just have hell to pay. The hospitals and doctors in general have no morals when it comes to making a living just like everyone else. You sprain ankle could very well need ten surgeries if you answered yes. And could need nothing more than a look see if you answered no. Moral scruples seem to disappear when you enter the doctor’s office in the states this is beyond even worth arguing about. If you are buying a house you should think about getting adequate health insurance before even making a venture in this direction. If you are working paycheck to paycheck whom the fuck cares about heath issues? You are covered! Plain and simple you have nothing to lose besides you car and what little money you have in the bank! This perhaps is your best option to deal with medical is a wonderful tool and uneventful if you should get sick. No added illnesses with the government program. This is the way is should be in my opinion. The government should run everything for the government, err wait I think that might be communism to its finest upbringing, yes? Wasn’t this tried once or twice before? Things seem to be getting out of hand here in the free world, do you think we can ever be able to bring things back to I was going to say the way they used to be but… VENT!<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

[Lenny]

You make good some points in the below, however it is a fact (seen it) that to get a simple dental exam in England may take 4 months. Just to get the exam! And then an additional wait to get treatment. Here, down to U.C.S.F. Dental school and you will be seen much quicker and get excellent care. Each day in the chair may take some time, but it truly is the best. And cheap.
Now I understand when you write that some are a medical emergency away from being evicted, and I've no doubt there are some folks that have wound up in that pickle. I do believe that when each case is reviewed, the individual or primary person, can share the responsibility in making a poor choice. We WANT more than what we may have or are "entitled" to. We FEEL we WANT MORE, and SHOULD GET more. But things don't always work that way. And from I viewed in England, briefly, the system here works miracles in a short amount of time. Now in my dotage I've not been exposed to the tragedies that have befallen you, and I am glad that the lump did not turn out malignant, but then the "treatment" could have been worse than the disease. I know when my time comes (cancer runs rampant in the family) I will have the grace to say "no thanks" to all that debilitating stuff. Well, all except the morphine drip.
Good points, you made. There really is something wrong when 1/10 of 1% make as much as the bottom 50%.
Was never meant to be that out of whack, but you know the modern golden rule! They got the gold..........:2cents:


You're right, the emergency room has to take anyone requiring emergency care. By the time someone who cannot afford medical care or insurance goes to the emergency room due to illness, the care required costs much more to deliver than it would have cost at the very beginning of the condition. In the cases of diseases such as cancer, it's too late. Besides, emergency care is just that, great for a broken leg not so great for cancer.
Sorry, if you think everyone can get the care they may need, not so. In the late 1990's I was told my income qualified me for free breast cancer testing (I had a lump), but did not qualify me for treatment. I wonder, why would I then want the tests? Anyway, I could manage to afford those. People are dying of treatable conditions due to lack of insurance or ability to afford it...right here in California.
In order to get free care, you have to own nothing...to treat a serious illness, you have to lose your home and anything else you worked hard for before you qualify. No matter how hard you work and how well you plan, the cost of medical care and medications can wipe you out. Millions of people in this country are one medical emergency or chronic illness away from total poverty. My cousin is one unfortunate lay-off away from being in serious financial peril due to her son's leukemia. Many face these dilemmas...save the child's life and have no home for him to live in and no ability left to educate him.
Even when you have insurance, most of the insurance companies will not pay for preventive...makes sense...I guess...after all it's so much cheaper to treat full blown cancer than a tiny contained lump. Even MediCare no longer covers exploratory blood tests. You have to have a diagnosis for the test, but...you can't get a diagnosis without the test...if you can, the condition has progressed to a point that makes it more difficult and expensive to treat.

As far as the free market advantage...ever hear of "orphan diseases"? As far as the "nothing more can be done"...I'm not sure all these life prolonging miracles that keep dying people around for a few more months is all that great. Free market, yes, if you have lots of money...there is more they can do for you. In terms of all that "research" big Pharma uses as a rationale for their every increasing prices...they spend a lot more on advertising and courting doctors to push their medications. One advantage of my age, the AARP Bulletin and magazine is a fountain of information.

Rent Sicko...watch it carefully. There's a group of Americans living in France (yes they all have jobs) who really don't want to come back because they can afford a life-style they can't have here (yes in spite of the higher taxes) due to the availability of affordable medical care, medications and day care. Doctors in Great Britain are given bonuses for "prevention", for every patient they get to stop smoking, lose weight, etc. Can you imagine how much money is saved that way?

Today, big business runs the country. Do you have any idea how many people could get all the medical care they needed if the money used to pay the isurance companies' CEO's were used to pay the insured's medical costs? Does anyone else get angry about the high costs of medical insurance when their CEO's are making millions a year? What do they do to earn all this money besides devising ways to deny claims? How about those people, without any kind of medical degrees who decide whether or not you can be covered for specific medical procedures and treatments?

You can't begin to bring about change if you can't see that change is needed.

[ChristineL]

Tragedies have not befallen me, I read a lot. I deal with lots of people. Want more and are entitled to more???? Yes, some people do feel that way. However, anyone who works hard should be able to afford to have a place to live and access to medical/dental care. My cousin did not decide to have a child with leukemia. She's always had medical insurance, she and her husband saved money, made all the right financial decisions. In spite of an excellent combined income, they drive ordinary cars, have little in the way of fancy toys and no credit card debt. They made good career choices...they did not decide that HP and Agilent should send most of their jobs overseas...once they had been working there for over 25 years.

It's not a few people at risk of being wiped out by medical emergencies or illness...it's millions of people. It's not just the uninsured, it's the insured as well. Insurance companies are in the business of denying as much care as is possible. All you have to do is read the newspaper...people's policies are often cancelled as soon as they start using them. People are punished for working here. You have to be either extremely poor, well insured (which costs a lot every month), or have lots of money to get medical care if you need it. There are a lot of people on disability who would be more than happy to work at something they could handle and forgo the monthly disability payments, but the co-payments on their medication would then wipe out any income they could generate. Make an extra $100.00 a month, pay $500 to $1500 a month for your meds.

I would agree, take all the equity out of your house in order to buy fancy cars, RV's, electronics, etc., and lose your home, that's on you. Having to lose your home to get your child medical care should not happen.

When was the last time you tried to get a dental appointment? It usually takes at least 3 to 4 weeks here. I'd gladly wait four months for a dental exam...if I had access to getting the dental care. Emergencies are taken care of in Enland.

Again...rent "Sicko", it is an eye opener.

UCSF is a great idea, that's probably where I'll end up going. Getting there and back is another matter.




You make good some points in the below, however it is a fact (seen it) that to get a simple dental exam in England may take 4 months. Just to get the exam! And then an additional wait to get treatment. Here, down to U.C.S.F. Dental school and you will be seen much quicker and get excellent care. Each day in the chair may take some time, but it truly is the best. And cheap.
Now I understand when you write that some are a medical emergency away from being evicted, and I've no doubt there are some folks that have wound up in that pickle. I do believe that when each case is reviewed, the individual or primary person, can share the responsibility in making a poor choice. We WANT more than what we may have or are "entitled" to. We FEEL we WANT MORE, and SHOULD GET more. But things don't always work that way. And from I viewed in England, briefly, the system here works miracles in a short amount of time. Now in my dotage I've not been exposed to the tragedies that have befallen you, and I am glad that the lump did not turn out malignant, but then the "treatment" could have been worse than the disease. I know when my time comes (cancer runs rampant in the family) I will have the grace to say "no thanks" to all that debilitating stuff. Well, all except the morphine drip.
Good points, you made. There really is something wrong when 1/10 of 1% make as much as the bottom 50%.
Was never meant to be that out of whack, but you know the modern golden rule! They got the gold..........:2cents:

[thewholetruth]

Great, Christine! I read your response to my response, and I guess I didn't respond. I found your thoughts interesting, but I didn't see you call me to respond back. I'll take another look. :):

Don


Donc,

You're quick enough to respond to Valley Oak's last post, rather tersely and strongly, in order to make your point. I do however, find it interesting, that after complaining in other threads that none of us "liberals" are willing to dialogue intelligently and respectfully with you that you have not responded to my last attempt to do just that. I was looking forward to seeing your response to my response. I do enjoy a good dialogue whether the person I'm doing it with agrees with me or not.

Christine

[thewholetruth]

Christine, I'm in agreement with you all the way up to where you say: "No, there is really not more opportunity. When I went to college, I was able to get scholarships and get enough work to afford to go. At today's costs, I would never be able to do it."

I disagree completely. College isn't the answer to success. It's not the only road to success. I know many people who have college degrees who have never worked in their field after graduation.

God has a plan for all of us, Christine, and that plan does not include dropping us on our behinds (someone recently took offense to the term "arse"). My observation has been that when one takes an interest in what God's plan is for them, that plan manifests and their needs all get met. When we launch into our OWN plans, oftentimes they don't pan out the way we'd hoped. I experienced that myself for the first 36 years of my life. So there is an interesting dynamic that has come from America collectively abandoning God, kicking prayer out of the schools (which I don't agree with at all - everyone should have the right to pray however they feel led, whenever they feel led) and propping up Material Success as our god. Americans are not enjoying the prosperity we have always had in the past.

"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" isn't just encouragement. It's a testimony from someone who lived it, who tried the ways of God and the ways of Man, and discovered that he could do all things when following God.

My question, every day, as I watch folks struggling with life, is when are we collectively going to realize that turning away from God in the '80's and 90's like we have has resulted in more struggle, more chaos, less prosperity, & more strife and worry? When will we recognize that putting ourselves in EACH OTHERS' hands - doctors, attorneys, financial advisors, etc. - rather than seeking His wisdom and direction has a) revealed that Man isn't capable of much wisdom, and that b) the answers we're seeking aren't found in Self, not MY self nor anyone else's Self?

We created this mess, Christine, left to our own devices. It's not too late to seek greater Wisdom and Power to pull us back from the edge of the abyss at which point we are currently poised. Sure, it's easier to stand back and throw rocks at each other than pray, blaming one another - Republicans, Democrats, judges, police - you name it, we blame them for our troubles. But the truth is that the answers are at our disposal. We're just too prideful, collectively, to ask Him for the answers we so desperately need.

Don


No amount of honesty and hard work will allow a day care worker's or teacher's salary to be raised enough to afford rent, food and medical/dental care or benefits. (Yes, teachers do have benefits, but it's costing more and more out of their pockets to have them.)

Yes, everyone should be able to at least get adequate medical care. No, no one is owed a living. But...I doubt that Christ would agree that the young child of a poor family should be denied life saving medical care. To my way of thinking true Christians do not make judgements as to whose life is worth saving and whose is not based on social position and earning power. This is precisely what our government is doing. No amount of saving and planning guarantees a retiree will not be wiped out by one medical emergency or chronic illness.

How about all those rescue professionals who rushed to the Twin Towers when asked, but are now chronically ill and denied any medical care because they were not in the direct employ of the City? Not hard working and honest enough to get the care they need? Maybe, if there's another catastrophe similar to this one, those not in the direct employ of the city or state will be smart enough to stay away.

Christ threw the Pharisees out of the temple. I wonder what he would think of the large pharmaceutical and medical insurance companies seeking more and more profit by making their products and services less and less affordable.

No, there is really not more opportunity. When I went to college, I was able to get scholarships and get enough work to afford to go. At today's costs, I would never be able to do it. Yes, my parents worked hard and were honest...my father just had not planned on suddenly dying while I was still in High School.

[ChristineL]

I really prefer to believe that it was not God's plan for Bush to become president even if he does claim that God talks to him. If I said such a thing, I would be considered to not be in complete possession of my sanity. The very people who have allowed the corporations to take over the country claim to be "Christian". In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS. All non-profits dealing with AIDS prevention had their government grants taken away if they at all promoted the use of condoms. These "Christians" decided that one act of sex committed outside of marriage was punishable by death. Even if you agree that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is a sin; people, especially adolescents, are going to slip. Death is an extreme punishment. Thousands of women across the globe have died for lack of gynological and obstetric care because Bush decided that UN aid money could not go to any organization which might promote an abortion. Again, in the name of being "Christian". Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going. I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren.

Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". Some of the kindest, most compassionate, charitable and ethical people I have known were atheist or agnostic.

Too many people who claim to be following "God's Plan" for them are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else.

I don't think it's about people abandoning God, and the pursuit of ever more money and things has always been part of the American way of thinking. Even in the 50's and 60's, many thought it was absolutely necessary to get a new car every two years. The difference is more that the working man/woman has become disposable in the name of ever more profit. The "Walmart" philosophy, so to speak. In the name of being "Christian" some overpopulate the earth and don't hesitate to obliterate other species because "God" created the earth for us to use. I think, in the end, God will hold us accountable for the destruction of the earth and its other creatures.

Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree.


Christine, I'm in agreement with you all the way up to where you say: "No, there is really not more opportunity. When I went to college, I was able to get scholarships and get enough work to afford to go. At today's costs, I would never be able to do it."

I disagree completely. College isn't the answer to success. It's not the only road to success. I know many people who have college degrees who have never worked in their field after graduation.

God has a plan for all of us, Christine, and that plan does not include dropping us on our behinds (someone recently took offense to the term "arse"). My observation has been that when one takes an interest in what God's plan is for them, that plan manifests and their needs all get met. When we launch into our OWN plans, oftentimes they don't pan out the way we'd hoped. I experienced that myself for the first 36 years of my life. So there is an interesting dynamic that has come from America collectively abandoning God, kicking prayer out of the schools (which I don't agree with at all - everyone should have the right to pray however they feel led, whenever they feel led) and propping up Material Success as our god. Americans are not enjoying the prosperity we have always had in the past.

"I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" isn't just encouragement. It's a testimony from someone who lived it, who tried the ways of God and the ways of Man, and discovered that he could do all things when following God.

My question, every day, as I watch folks struggling with life, is when are we collectively going to realize that turning away from God in the '80's and 90's like we have has resulted in more struggle, more chaos, less prosperity, & more strife and worry? When will we recognize that putting ourselves in EACH OTHERS' hands - doctors, attorneys, financial advisors, etc. - rather than seeking His wisdom and direction has a) revealed that Man isn't capable of much wisdom, and that b) the answers we're seeking aren't found in Self, not MY self nor anyone else's Self?

We created this mess, Christine, left to our own devices. It's not too late to seek greater Wisdom and Power to pull us back from the edge of the abyss at which point we are currently poised. Sure, it's easier to stand back and throw rocks at each other than pray, blaming one another - Republicans, Democrats, judges, police - you name it, we blame them for our troubles. But the truth is that the answers are at our disposal. We're just too prideful, collectively, to ask Him for the answers we so desperately need.

Don

[thewholetruth]

Respectfully, Christine, many of your comments are such blanket statements that I can't imagine a reasonable person taking them seriously.

"The very people who have allowed the corporations to take over the country claim to be "Christian"."

Blanket statement, Christian bashing which is patently untrue. Both political parties have allowed this, regardless of whether or not they are Christian.

"In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS."

Patently untrue. This wasn't done "in the name of being Christian". More Christian bashing.

"All non-profits dealing with AIDS prevention had their government grants taken away if they at all promoted the use of condoms. These "Christians" decided that one act of sex committed outside of marriage was punishable by death."

Patently untrue. Now you're just Christian bashing. Well, you've been Christian bashing since you began this post.

"Even if you agree that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is a sin; people, especially adolescents, are going to slip. Death is an extreme punishment."

Liberals have been promoting condom use for decades. Has it solved any problems? Condoms aren't the answer. Whoring isn't conducive to anything healthy. Teaching our kids that being a whore is acceptable hasn't created a healthier generation. Sexual self-discipline is virtually nonexistent now, thanks to the Liberals promoting condoms. Promoting indescretionary sex has created the most confused, diseased generation yet, Christine.

"Thousands of women across the globe have died for lack of gynological and obstetric care because Bush decided that UN aid money could not go to any organization which might promote an abortion."

Bush believes that killing babies before birth isn't the answer. Most Americans agree.

"Again, in the name of being "Christian"."

Patently untrue, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going. I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren."

You've rabbit trailed so far away from the subject that I'm not tracking with you. Now YOU'RE speaking for God? LOL I hope you can see the irony in this.

"Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". Some of the kindest, most compassionate, charitable and ethical people I have known were atheist or agnostic."

The opposite is also true. You're just Christian bashing again.

"Too many people who claim to be following "God's Plan" for them are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else."

Too many Godless people who have their own selfish agendas are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else.

"I don't think it's about people abandoning God..."

Of course you don't. But then, you've done nothing but bash Christians in this post, so I think it's safe to say that you've already revealed your extreme bias against the Christian community.

"...and the pursuit of ever more money and things has always been part of the American way of thinking. Even in the 50's and 60's, many thought it was absolutely necessary to get a new car every two years. The difference is more that the working man/woman has become disposable in the name of ever more profit. The "Walmart" philosophy, so to speak."

Now you're referring to Capitalism. It's what drives our economy in America, a free and open market bringing whatever the market will bear.

"In the name of being "Christian" some overpopulate the earth..."

Patently untrue, and in fact, now your Christian bashing has led to making bizarre statements like that. Wow.

"...and don't hesitate to obliterate other species because "God" created the earth for us to use."

People do this, not just Christians, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"I think, in the end, God will hold us accountable for the destruction of the earth and its other creatures."

Interesting notion. Where did you get that opinion? Just curious as to where your opinions originate. I know where most opinions come from. Where did you get that one?

"Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree."

Finally, common ground. :wink:

Don


I really prefer to believe that it was not God's plan for Bush to become president even if he does claim that God talks to him. If I said such a thing, I would be considered to not be in complete possession of my sanity. The very people who have allowed the corporations to take over the country claim to be "Christian". In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS. All non-profits dealing with AIDS prevention had their government grants taken away if they at all promoted the use of condoms. These "Christians" decided that one act of sex committed outside of marriage was punishable by death. Even if you agree that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is a sin; people, especially adolescents, are going to slip. Death is an extreme punishment. Thousands of women across the globe have died for lack of gynological and obstetric care because Bush decided that UN aid money could not go to any organization which might promote an abortion. Again, in the name of being "Christian". Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going. I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren.

Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". Some of the kindest, most compassionate, charitable and ethical people I have known were atheist or agnostic.

Too many people who claim to be following "God's Plan" for them are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else.

I don't think it's about people abandoning God, and the pursuit of ever more money and things has always been part of the American way of thinking. Even in the 50's and 60's, many thought it was absolutely necessary to get a new car every two years. The difference is more that the working man/woman has become disposable in the name of ever more profit. The "Walmart" philosophy, so to speak. In the name of being "Christian" some overpopulate the earth and don't hesitate to obliterate other species because "God" created the earth for us to use. I think, in the end, God will hold us accountable for the destruction of the earth and its other creatures.

Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree.

[Braggi]

Respectfully, Christine, many of your comments are such blanket statements that I can't imagine a reasonable person taking them seriously.
...

And yet, Christianity, and especially US originated Christianity has become such a pariah on the Earth, so damaging in so many ways, blanket statements about the negative aspects of Christianity are becoming more and more true.

I agree blanket statements are hard to support and blame people who shouldn't be blamed, but we are in extreme times and the influence of the "Christian Right" has caused so much harm under W. Bush blanket statements are hard to avoid when discussing political issues.


...

"In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS."

Patently untrue. This wasn't done "in the name of being Christian". More Christian bashing.
...

Don, where have you been the last 7 years? This isn't news (any more). Bush was "making good" on campaign promises made to the Christian Right (what a misnomer!) by getting condoms and abortion counseling out of foreign aid packages, especially in Africa. Those decisions have cost the lives of thousands and may wind up costing millions of lives as AIDS continues to spiral out of control.

I don't have time to respond line by line to your defensive post, but I suggest you start reading the papers (or something?). You are unaware of what is going on in the world.

-Jeff

[MsTerry]

????



Whoring isn't conducive to anything healthy. It sounds like you equate sex with sin, and that condemning people is a healthy practice.

Teaching our kids that being a whore is acceptable hasn't created a healthier generation.
Can you define for us what you consider to be a whore?
Jesus himself was accepting of prostitutes, if you are a follower of him, shouldn't you too be ?


Sexual self-discipline is virtually nonexistent now, thanks to the Liberals promoting condoms. LOL Are you saying only liberals use condoms or that they are the only ones who are having sex?

Promoting indescretionary sex has created the most confused, diseased generation yet, Christine.
Can you please post your data to back up your blanket statements?

[alanora]

We are generally in agreement historically, I had a gut response to some of your ideas expressed that was contrary. I will endeavor to be clear, with your words in quotes.

"I really prefer to believe that it was not God's plan for Bush to become president even if he does claim that God talks to him. If I said such a thing, I would be considered to not be in complete possession of my sanity." you say, and then you go ahead and report your beliefs re what g-d has said regarding technology....I believe g-d was involved in the creations of technology, including artificial insemination and "life" prolonging ideas. It can not be that all things which are in accord with you are divine and those of "others" are not. It is all g-d and all good. We humans do things difficult to understand. "Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going." Technology is neither good or bad...it just is, our uses may be questionable, to my way of thinking. Terry's body really raised awareness of the issues involved, and surely altered some choices since. "I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren" I hope you don't really think that fertility treatment is against g-d's will.....could it be all the difficulty in reproducing really causes those babies to be way valued and is simply another choice available for particular aspects of soul growth?

"Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". As a youthful Jew, I visited Israel. Whilst near Jerusalem, riding horseback, I had opportunity to hang with the folks who rented out and cared for the small arab horses. After a dusty trip on saddles of rope,t hey invited me into their tent for refreshment of strongest turkish coffee ever brewed, and we communicated comfortably, wonderfully without mutual language, at a heart and soul level. The ease was so pronounced that I have never fully understood why everyone doesn't just get along. Then there is the ancient history and the feeling of g-d given land rights, and the certainty that it is indeed a situation of kill or be killed...........and I was a 16yo tourist who felt the unity, beyond history and borders, that causes me to take humanity more as a whole to this day, rather than categorized by the portion of earth's crust from which their ancestors first emerged and were recorded, and about whom ideas of separateness and fear and loathing had been inculcated forever by very racist, fear-filled immigrant family of eastern european/russian descent. I am extremely grateful, prefer "greatfull" tho it is incorrect, for the view afforded me from here, while remembering that we are not our stories. Our connections are way deeper than that.





"Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree." Perhaps we ought start there and rise against the rampant consumerism that drives our country's planet-wide, planet raping, greed.
Respectfully, mindy.

[ChristineL]

Sorry everyone, I wasn't completely clear. I wasn't "Christian bashing", I was "Christian Extremist bashing". Too many people out there claim to be "Christian" and use that as rationale to justify their actions.

Respectfully, yes, references to condoms were deleted in the name of legislating morality originating in Christian Conservatives pressuring our administration to push "abstinence only" in the prevention of HIV. I wonder, say you had a teen age daughter, or son, who once made an error in judgment and comitted the sin of engaging in sex without marriage, would you consider HIV contamination, potential death, to be well-deserved and proper punishment?

Condom use has saved many from STD contamination and at least has prevented many of these "sinners" from having unwanted children. Anything that prevents creating unwanted babies, whether the parents are "sinners" or not is ok in my book.

Yes, the non-profits which discussed condom use in AIDS prevention had their grants cut. Again, Christian Conservative extremists are at the root. These organizations were also threatened with federal law suits if they said anything about the reasons for their funds being cut. Yes, I do know what I'm talking about, but obviously I can't divulge my sources.

Yes, it's not just Christians who have allowed the corporations to take over the country...but the Christians who have promoted it should know better.

Is it, in your opinion, ok for countless women to die in child-birth for lack of adequate medical care because of the fear the money given for that care might go to an organization which could decide to give an abortion? Many who are anti-abortion don't even want to make an exception for saving the life of the mother or sparing a 12 year old rape or incest victim the mental and physical health risk of going through the pregnancy and giving birth. I have a problem with someone deciding that a woman's life and health is less important than the life of a feotus in the name of whatever "God" they believe in (Muslim extremists are included in this as well).

I do hope when you refer to "whoring" and lack of sexual discipline, you're referring to boys and men as well a girls and women. In my opinion a whore is a whore whether male or female. This lack of sexual discipline has little to do with promoting the use of condoms. I was taught about both sexual discipline and birth control by my parents. They were wise enough to know they could pass on the values, but did not want me to ruin my life if I made a, what they would consider, a mistake.

About Terry Schiavo, no I didn't mean to speak for God. However, when you're brain dead...it would seem to me that God is calling you.

Out of curiosity...would you consider those who answer to the "Great Spirit", Buddha, Allah, etc. to not be believers in God?

As I said, it wasn't about "Christian bashing", it was about "Christian extremist" bashing.

Also how do you define "Christian"? I define it as the member of any religion which has it's base, or thinks it does, in Christ's teachings.

In that vein, the greatest example of Christianity I have seen in the last several years are the Amish who forgave the man that killed some of their children and showed compassion to his widow and child.

I consider the lady who runs our local thrift store and uses the money to feed the hungry in our community, whether homeless or not, to be a "True Christian". She judges no-one, feeds anyone who's hungry, provides blankets, warm socks, coats and a change of clothes to anyone in need. On the wall, behind the cash register, is a sign that says; "Just ask yourself, what would Jesus do?". She feels this sign says it all, I agree. She lives it, as the Amish proved they truly live by their beliefs.

A Christian friend of mine, who is against abortion, has my respect and admiration. When her son's girl friend claimed to be pregant by that son, her parents pushed her to have an abortion. My friend begged her not to and offered to support her and the baby, or adopt the baby themselves. To want to abolish abortion and cut back all programs which would provide for those babies, does not make sense to me. I don't see too many anti-abortionists willing to help these children once they're born.....

Speaking of blanket statements...blaming my entire generation for what you perceive to be the present problems of this country is annoying. I was somewhat of a "hippie" and did not indulge in drugs and did not think the world owed me a living. I also never gave up the basic Christian principles I was raised with. My generation brought us the Civil Rights Movement, fought for women's rights to equal pay for equal work (not special privelege or lowering of requirements), amongst other positive movements.

As far as God holding us accountable for the destruction of his other creations, I do seem to remember something in the Bible about even the falling sparrow....etc.

As far as capitalism goes, do you feel it's ok for a large company, like Walmart, to not pay a living wage and by it's sheer size and power put those who do out of business is ok? Is it also OK for them (and others) to exercise no real quality control on their manufacturers in China and sell poisonous products? In the name of Capitalism?...Of course, there's an answer to that...don't shop there and try support businesses who do pay their employees a living wage (CostCo for example).



Respectfully, Christine, many of your comments are such blanket statements that I can't imagine a reasonable person taking them seriously.

"The very people who have allowed the corporations to take over the country claim to be "Christian"."

Blanket statement, Christian bashing which is patently untrue. Both political parties have allowed this, regardless of whether or not they are Christian.

"In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS."


Patently untrue. This wasn't done "in the name of being Christian". More Christian bashing.

"All non-profits dealing with AIDS prevention had their government grants taken away if they at all promoted the use of condoms. These "Christians" decided that one act of sex committed outside of marriage was punishable by death."

Patently untrue. Now you're just Christian bashing. Well, you've been Christian bashing since you began this post.

"Even if you agree that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is a sin; people, especially adolescents, are going to slip. Death is an extreme punishment."

Liberals have been promoting condom use for decades. Has it solved any problems? Condoms aren't the answer. Whoring isn't conducive to anything healthy. Teaching our kids that being a whore is acceptable hasn't created a healthier generation. Sexual self-discipline is virtually nonexistent now, thanks to the Liberals promoting condoms. Promoting indescretionary sex has created the most confused, diseased generation yet, Christine.

"Thousands of women across the globe have died for lack of gynological and obstetric care because Bush decided that UN aid money could not go to any organization which might promote an abortion."

Bush believes that killing babies before birth isn't the answer. Most Americans agree.

"Again, in the name of being "Christian"."

Patently untrue, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going. I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren."

You've rabbit trailed so far away from the subject that I'm not tracking with you. Now YOU'RE speaking for God? LOL I hope you can see the irony in this.

"Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". Some of the kindest, most compassionate, charitable and ethical people I have known were atheist or agnostic."

The opposite is also true. You're just Christian bashing again.

"Too many people who claim to be following "God's Plan" for them are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else."

Too many Godless people who have their own selfish agendas are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else.

"I don't think it's about people abandoning God..."

Of course you don't. But then, you've done nothing but bash Christians in this post, so I think it's safe to say that you've already revealed your extreme bias against the Christian community.

"...and the pursuit of ever more money and things has always been part of the American way of thinking. Even in the 50's and 60's, many thought it was absolutely necessary to get a new car every two years. The difference is more that the working man/woman has become disposable in the name of ever more profit. The "Walmart" philosophy, so to speak."

Now you're referring to Capitalism. It's what drives our economy in America, a free and open market bringing whatever the market will bear.

"In the name of being "Christian" some overpopulate the earth..."

Patently untrue, and in fact, now your Christian bashing has led to making bizarre statements like that. Wow.

"...and don't hesitate to obliterate other species because "God" created the earth for us to use."

People do this, not just Christians, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"I think, in the end, God will hold us accountable for the destruction of the earth and its other creatures."

Interesting notion. Where did you get that opinion? Just curious as to where your opinions originate. I know where most opinions come from. Where did you get that one?

"Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree."

Finally, common ground. :wink:

Don

[ChristineL]

I particularly agree with your last statement.

Yes I agree, it's not the techonology, it's the uses it's sometimes put to.

My point, not completely clear apparently, is that if people are going to say God should decide, then all our tinkering with life prolonguing technology, fertility treatments, etc. are interfering with those decisions. I do not want to be kept going should I one day be brain dead. I also don't want some Christian extremists to interfere with the plug being pulled.

No, I'm not against people who want babies that badly being able to have them through medical technology. I was just trying to make a point. If people are going to say "God meant....", maybe they should be a little less sure of themselves...

I don't understand why we can't all get along either. Christian extremists think they have the only path to God. To me, that's dangerous thinking and can be too easily used as justification for the abuse of way too many non-Christians. That goes for Muslin extremists as well.


We are generally in agreement historically, I had a gut response to some of your ideas expressed that was contrary. I will endeavor to be clear, with your words in quotes.

"I really prefer to believe that it was not God's plan for Bush to become president even if he does claim that God talks to him. If I said such a thing, I would be considered to not be in complete possession of my sanity." you say, and then you go ahead and report your beliefs re what g-d has said regarding technology....I believe g-d was involved in the creations of technology, including artificial insemination and "life" prolonging ideas. It can not be that all things which are in accord with you are divine and those of "others" are not. It is all g-d and all good. We humans do things difficult to understand. "Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going." Technology is neither good or bad...it just is, our uses may be questionable, to my way of thinking. Terry's body really raised awareness of the issues involved, and surely altered some choices since. "I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren" I hope you don't really think that fertility treatment is against g-d's will.....could it be all the difficulty in reproducing really causes those babies to be way valued and is simply another choice available for particular aspects of soul growth?

"Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". As a youthful Jew, I visited Israel. Whilst near Jerusalem, riding horseback, I had opportunity to hang with the folks who rented out and cared for the small arab horses. After a dusty trip on saddles of rope,t hey invited me into their tent for refreshment of strongest turkish coffee ever brewed, and we communicated comfortably, wonderfully without mutual language, at a heart and soul level. The ease was so pronounced that I have never fully understood why everyone doesn't just get along. Then there is the ancient history and the feeling of g-d given land rights, and the certainty that it is indeed a situation of kill or be killed...........and I was a 16yo tourist who felt the unity, beyond history and borders, that causes me to take humanity more as a whole to this day, rather than categorized by the portion of earth's crust from which their ancestors first emerged and were recorded, and about whom ideas of separateness and fear and loathing had been inculcated forever by very racist, fear-filled immigrant family of eastern european/russian descent. I am extremely grateful, prefer "greatfull" tho it is incorrect, for the view afforded me from here, while remembering that we are not our stories. Our connections are way deeper than that.





"Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree." Perhaps we ought start there and rise against the rampant consumerism that drives our country's planet-wide, planet raping, greed.
Respectfully, mindy.

[ChristineL]

One more thing, don't you think there's such a thing as a "Christian Liberal"? For all you know, I am Christian...being against extremism does not cancel out my basic beliefs.


Respectfully, Christine, many of your comments are such blanket statements that I can't imagine a reasonable person taking them seriously.

"The very people who have allowed the corporations to take over the country claim to be "Christian"."

Blanket statement, Christian bashing which is patently untrue. Both political parties have allowed this, regardless of whether or not they are Christian.

"In the name of being "Christian" all references to the use of condoms were removed from government web sites dealing with AIDS."

Patently untrue. This wasn't done "in the name of being Christian". More Christian bashing.

"All non-profits dealing with AIDS prevention had their government grants taken away if they at all promoted the use of condoms. These "Christians" decided that one act of sex committed outside of marriage was punishable by death."

Patently untrue. Now you're just Christian bashing. Well, you've been Christian bashing since you began this post.

"Even if you agree that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is a sin; people, especially adolescents, are going to slip. Death is an extreme punishment."

Liberals have been promoting condom use for decades. Has it solved any problems? Condoms aren't the answer. Whoring isn't conducive to anything healthy. Teaching our kids that being a whore is acceptable hasn't created a healthier generation. Sexual self-discipline is virtually nonexistent now, thanks to the Liberals promoting condoms. Promoting indescretionary sex has created the most confused, diseased generation yet, Christine.

"Thousands of women across the globe have died for lack of gynological and obstetric care because Bush decided that UN aid money could not go to any organization which might promote an abortion."

Bush believes that killing babies before birth isn't the answer. Most Americans agree.

"Again, in the name of being "Christian"."

Patently untrue, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"Terry Schiavo's body was kept alive for many years in the name of "God should decide", sorry God had decided fourteen years previously...technology kept the body going. I love to hear women who have undergone fertility treatments and eventually ended up with sextuplets claim "God meant for us to have these babies". Sorry, God meant for them to be barren."

You've rabbit trailed so far away from the subject that I'm not tracking with you. Now YOU'RE speaking for God? LOL I hope you can see the irony in this.

"Some of the least compassionate racist and sexist people I have known were "Christian". Some of the kindest, most compassionate, charitable and ethical people I have known were atheist or agnostic."

The opposite is also true. You're just Christian bashing again.

"Too many people who claim to be following "God's Plan" for them are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else."

Too many Godless people who have their own selfish agendas are causing harm all around them. They're also trying to impose that plan on everyone else.

"I don't think it's about people abandoning God..."

Of course you don't. But then, you've done nothing but bash Christians in this post, so I think it's safe to say that you've already revealed your extreme bias against the Christian community.

"...and the pursuit of ever more money and things has always been part of the American way of thinking. Even in the 50's and 60's, many thought it was absolutely necessary to get a new car every two years. The difference is more that the working man/woman has become disposable in the name of ever more profit. The "Walmart" philosophy, so to speak."

Now you're referring to Capitalism. It's what drives our economy in America, a free and open market bringing whatever the market will bear.

"In the name of being "Christian" some overpopulate the earth..."

Patently untrue, and in fact, now your Christian bashing has led to making bizarre statements like that. Wow.

"...and don't hesitate to obliterate other species because "God" created the earth for us to use."

People do this, not just Christians, Christine. More Christian bashing.

"I think, in the end, God will hold us accountable for the destruction of the earth and its other creatures."

Interesting notion. Where did you get that opinion? Just curious as to where your opinions originate. I know where most opinions come from. Where did you get that one?

"Yes, Greed has become a God...with that I'll agree."

Finally, common ground. :wink:

Don

[thewholetruth]

"I wasn't "Christian bashing", I was "Christian Extremist bashing"."

Not true. Read your own comments again. You were Christian bashing, Christine, clear as day.

"Too many people out there claim to be "Christian" and use that as rationale to justify their actions."

Too many people out there claim NOT to be "Christian" and use that as rationale to justify their actions.

"Yes, it's not just Christians who have allowed the corporations to take over the country...but the Christians who have promoted it should know better."

Oops! More Christian bashing, Christine. Seems to be a habit with you here.

"In my opinion a whore is a whore whether male or female."

Amen.

"This lack of sexual discipline has little to do with promoting the use of condoms."

I disagree. Does the availability of guns have little to do with kids killing kids these days? Your illogic fails the litmus test.

"I was taught about both sexual discipline and birth control by my parents."

Good for you. When they taught you to defend yourself, did they buy you a gun or a switchblade?

"Also how do you define "Christian"?"

The Christian Bible defines it quite clearly, Christine. It's not a matter of opinion.

"I define it as the member of any religion which has it's base, or thinks it does, in Christ's teachings."

That's not the definition of Christian, sister. You made that definition up in your own head. It's in the Bible. Look it up for yourself. Then you'll actually know the definition. The definition isn't a matter of opinion. The definition is in the Bible.

Makes me wonder how many other people make up definitions to things, rather than doing the research to find out the truth about them. (TOO many, I know, but I wonder how many.)

Where I come from, when I'm making up the definitions of things in this life which already have definitions, that's called 'living in a dream world', or 'The world according to Don'. (There was a day, but I don't do that anymore - I take interest in what words actually mean now.) In the real world, words mean something. We don't get to make up our own definitions of things like what "Christian" means. It already means something. Look it up.

"In that vein, the greatest example of Christianity I have seen in the last several years are the Amish who forgave the man that killed some of their children and showed compassion to his widow and child."

That was a great example of forgiveness, I agree. It's what all Christians are called to do, not for the benefit of others, but for our own benefit, so that we don't get caught up in anger and resentment which render us less capable of being of service to Him and to our brothers and sisters.

"I consider the lady who runs our local thrift store and uses the money to feed the hungry in our community, whether homeless or not, to be a "True Christian". She judges no-one, feeds anyone who's hungry, provides blankets, warm socks, coats and a change of clothes to anyone in need. On the wall, behind the cash register, is a sign that says; "Just ask yourself, what would Jesus do?". She feels this sign says it all, I agree. She lives it, as the Amish proved they truly live by their beliefs."

Amen. There are definitely Christians out there who actually practice how He told us to live, that's for sure.

"A Christian friend of mine, who is against abortion, has my respect and admiration. When her son's girl friend claimed to be pregant by that son, her parents pushed her to have an abortion. My friend begged her not to and offered to support her and the baby, or adopt the baby themselves. To want to abolish abortion and cut back all programs which would provide for those babies, does not make sense to me. I don't see too many anti-abortionists willing to help these children once they're born....."

Every Prolifer I know would have made the same offer to her son's girl friend. Perhaps you're leaning on your own definition of "Prolifer", like you do with the word "Christian"?

"Speaking of blanket statements...blaming my entire generation for what you perceive to be the present problems of this country is annoying."

But true.

"I was somewhat of a "hippie" and did not indulge in drugs and did not think the world owed me a living. I also never gave up the basic Christian principles I was raised with. My generation brought us the Civil Rights Movement, fought for women's rights to equal pay for equal work (not special privelege or lowering of requirements), amongst other positive movements."

The good that our generation has done doesn't cancel out the bad we've done, Christine.

"As far as God holding us accountable for the destruction of his other creations, I do seem to remember something in the Bible about even the falling sparrow....etc."

You are correct. He made us stewards of the Earth, and we WILL be held accountable for what we've done. No doubt about that in my mind.

"As far as capitalism goes, do you feel it's ok for a large company, like Walmart, to not pay a living wage and by it's sheer size and power put those who do out of business is ok?"

It's how Capitalism works. Do you have a better system we could take a peek at, working now anywhere on the planet?

"Is it also OK for them (and others) to exercise no real quality control on their manufacturers in China and sell poisonous products?"

Absolutely not. Our government dropped the ball, allowing that in our country.

"In the name of Capitalism?"

Um, it IS Capitalism.

"...Of course, there's an answer to that...don't shop there and try support businesses who do pay their employees a living wage (CostCo for example)."

I agree completely. Hey! Another thing we agree on! :wink: Before you know it, we might actually drop the enemy/adversarial thing, end up friends and just have intelligent conversations about those things upon which we disagree! Ya think?

Don

[thewholetruth]

"And yet, Christianity, and especially US originated Christianity has become such a pariah on the Earth..."

That's funny. Collectively the most generous and charitable people in the history of Mankind, and you're calling us "a pariah", Jeff?!? You must be living in a dream world, my friend.

"... so damaging in so many ways, blanket statements about the negative aspects of Christianity are becoming more and more true."

No they aren't, Jeff. If you had any actual evidence of that opinion you just produced, you would have offered it. Your bias against Christians is showing now, Jeff.

"I agree blanket statements are hard to support..."

In this case, they are impossible to support, Jeff.

"...and blame people who shouldn't be blamed, but we are in extreme times and the influence of the "Christian Right" has caused so much harm under W. Bush blanket statements are hard to avoid when discussing political issues."

I see. So you're saying that it's now okay to "blame people who shouldn't be blamed" because "we are in extreme times"? Wow, Jeff. Do you read what you write before you post it? Do you actually believe that it's EVER okay to blame people who shouldn't be blamed, about aNyThInG?

Wow. Your bias against Christians is hanging out all over, brother.

"Don, where have you been the last 7 years?"

Santa Rosa, CA, sir.

"This isn't news (any more). Bush was "making good" on campaign promises made to the Christian Right (what a misnomer!) by getting condoms and abortion counseling out of foreign aid packages, especially in Africa."

No he wasn't. That's just your opinion, Jeff. Many of us don't believe that supporting free condom giveaways has helped lower disease, unwanted pregnancies, rape or anything else related to sex. In fact, many of us believe quite the contrary, especially among young people.

"Those decisions have cost the lives of thousands and may wind up costing millions of lives as AIDS continues to spiral out of control."

Where did you get that opinion, Jeff? Any unbiased news source who can provide the actual evidence that "Those decisions have cost the lives of thousands"? Not Liberal news sources, Jeff. I'm asking if you have any UNbiased new sources and statistics which support your claim.

"I don't have time to respond line by line to your defensive post, but I suggest you start reading the papers (or something?). You are unaware of what is going on in the world."

Again, unfounded opinions which you're stating as fact. Jeff, you have no idea what I'm aware or unaware of, brother. You've never met me, never taken the time to talk with me and so you have no way of knowing whether or not I'm aware "of what is going on in the world". That's just another absurd blanket statement, this time about me!

Wow. Is Liberalism about blanket statements now? It wasn't when I was a Liberal.

Don

[thewholetruth]

"One more thing, don't you think there's such a thing as a "Christian Liberal"?"

I do.

"For all you know, I am Christian..."

All the Christian bashing you've posted in your last post strongly suggests that you are not.

"being against extremism does not cancel out my basic beliefs."

I agree, but the proof is in the pudding, so to speak, Christine. You do nothing but bash Christians here. Not exactly the stuff that Christians are made of, now is it? :wink:

Regardless, even, of your Christian bashing, the definition of "Christian" could very easily include you.

Don

[ChristineL]

Yes, words have meaning. However, I do question the accuracy of words used in books translated from ancient languages no longer used into gutter greek and from that into English. Somehow, I think many of the true meanings of specific words may have been lost. I watch subtitled movies in French and the real meanings of words get lost in the translation...never mind something that has been translated over and over again for thousands of years. I don't claim to have all the answers, nor would ever believe I do, I just like to hold people to what they profess to be their truth. In the case of "Christians" that would mean living by the principles of not judging others, having compassion, and practicing charity and forgiveness. In my mind, that would include being good stewards of God's creations, and feeling that everyone, regardless of earning power, should have access to medical care. It would also mean advocating that all who work hard should be able to afford food and shelter.

I don't have time to respond in detail at the moment, and may not be able to for a couple of days as my house is being painted...but, I will as soon as I am able.


"I wasn't "Christian bashing", I was "Christian Extremist bashing"."

Not true. Read your own comments again. You were Christian bashing, Christine, clear as day...

[ChristineL]

Out of curiosity, who are the "unbiased" news sources? The Conservative Press? Christian Newspapers?. Which sources do you consider to be the Liberal Press?


"And yet, Christianity, and especially US originated Christianity has become such a pariah on the Earth..."

That's funny....

[thewholetruth]

Great point, now that you mention it, Christine. The unbiased news sources left are very few and far between. Politics and business has forced it's way into virtually every one.

What I was referring to, however, is news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning.

Don


Out of curiosity, who are the "unbiased" news sources? The Conservative Press? Christian Newspapers?. Which sources do you consider to be the Liberal Press?

[thewholetruth]

"However, I do question the accuracy of words used in books translated from ancient languages no longer used into gutter greek and from that into English."

Oh, really? Do you "question the accuracy of words used in" Homer's Illiad or Odyssey? Other ancient Greek authors? How about the accuracy of words written by Plato or Socrates? Do you question those?

Or is it just CHRISTIAN authors of Biblical text that you question, Christine? If you're being honest, sister, I think we both see that your bias against Christians is showing again.

"I don't claim to have all the answers, nor would ever believe I do, I just like to hold people to what they profess to be their truth."

Let's be honest about this, then: There is no such thing as "their truth", Christine, if it doesn't line up with THE truth. What you refer to as "their truth" is, in reality, "their opinion", unless it is THE truth.

"In the case of "Christians" that would mean living by the principles of not judging others, having compassion, and practicing charity and forgiveness."

Just as your definition of "Christian" is a made up definition, rather than the true definition, you also appear to be holding Christians to an unreasonable and impossible task, perhaps because you have misconceptions about what it means to be "Christian". Interesting, however, that using your definition and 'holding people to what they profess to be {the} truth' conveniently facilitates your contempt for anyone who falls short of the imaginary mark you've made up in your mind, which you hold Christians to. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Christine. How convenient that you've created a way to continue to feel good about practicing contempt against Christians by demanding that we all live up to a standard by which none of us is capable. The truth is, we do our best to practice Christian principles, which, according to you, appears not to be good enough to make the grade on your imaginary 'list'.

"In my mind, that would include being good stewards of God's creations, and feeling that everyone, regardless of earning power, should have access to medical care. It would also mean advocating that all who work hard should be able to afford food and shelter."

You lost me with that last statement. From Christian bashing to commenting on social issues, you just lost me. I'm not following your line of thought here now.

Don

[Clancy]

So who are they? I'd like to see some unbiased news sources.


Great point, now that you mention it, Christine. The unbiased news sources left are very few and far between. Politics and business has forced it's way into virtually every one.

What I was referring to, however, is news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning.

Don

[Braggi]

Great point, now that you mention it, Christine. The unbiased news sources left are very few and far between. Politics and business has forced it's way into virtually every one.

What I was referring to, however, is news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning.

Don

This answer is why you're barely worth communicating with, Don. You didn't answer Christine's question and you know it. If you gave some examples of sources you approve of, those who disagree with you could bring up some articles from those sources to support their arguments. By not stating what sources meet with your approval you prevent others from presenting evidence. And so it is. Just play it safe and others will always be frustrated with you. You must be a peach to live with.

Here's how it works in practice: if someone posts an article you don't agree with, you can dismiss it by saying "consider the source." That way you don't have to address the facts or opinions presented. That way you don't have to learn anything that doesn't agree with your preconceived notions and you never have to agree with someone who disagrees with your opinions.

If you narrow your focus to only those sources you always agree with you'll live out your life in ignorance. You've already exposed your ignorance of world events in other posts. Now I understand that.

I know your position well because I have a brother like you. I'm sure you and he would get along well. You could share your narrow views and you'd find few places to disagree because neither of you are aware of the greater realities. I once sent him an article from the New York Times and he responded, "We all know the Times prints fiction." There you have it. Source dismissed. The fact that I could support the Times article with dozens of other sources was meaningless, because he no doubt could have dismissed all those sources as well. Actually, now that I recall it, the article wasn't even from the Times, but was written by a writer formerly employed by the Times. That association was enough for him to dismiss the source.

Let's look at the situation with AIDS and condoms in Africa. How many sources that you consider unbiased will report on the results of Bush and Co. policies in Africa? I'll guess none. Therefore you never have to learn about the problems. Fine, issue solved. Remain ignorant and go about your merry way.

Minds are like parachutes, the bumpersticker says. They do their best work while open.

-Jeff

[ChristineL]

Actually, yes I do question the accuracy of words used in Homer's Illiad or Odyssey and other ancient Greek authors. The thing is no one is using these works as "THE TRUTH" to live by. Before you ask, yes I did study ancient Greek writings, particularly plays.

No I don't expect perfection from anyone. However, I do hold people who profess to be "Christian" and in possession of "The Truth" to a higer standard than I would someone who "doesn't know any better", just as I would hold a two year old less accountable for certain behaviors than a twelve year old. I also hold people who profess to believe in any higher power that sets standards for behavior to a higher standard. If you proclaim you know what's right, I expect you to conduct yourself accordingly, and, accept responsibility and admit when you haven't.

Before you ask, I do hold myself to a higher standard as well. I don't always succeed in completely living it, definitely slip up, but do admit it when I do and try to make it right.

As far as the social issues...Conservative Christians push for changes in legislation, such as cutting access to abortion, therefore they're involving themselves in social issues and want to legislate "The Truth". To me, then the attitudes towards the "social issues" are fair game.




"However, I do question the accuracy of words used in books translated from ancient languages no longer used into gutter greek and from that into English."

Oh, really? Do you "question the accuracy of words used in" Homer's Illiad or Odyssey? Other ancient Greek authors? How about the accuracy of words written by Plato or Socrates? Do you question those?

Or is it just CHRISTIAN authors of Biblical text that you question, Christine? If you're being honest, sister, I think we both see that your bias against Christians is showing again.

"I don't claim to have all the answers, nor would ever believe I do, I just like to hold people to what they profess to be their truth."

Let's be honest about this, then: There is no such thing as "their truth", Christine, if it doesn't line up with THE truth. What you refer to as "their truth" is, in reality, "their opinion", unless it is THE truth.

"In the case of "Christians" that would mean living by the principles of not judging others, having compassion, and practicing charity and forgiveness."

Just as your definition of "Christian" is a made up definition, rather than the true definition, you also appear to be holding Christians to an unreasonable and impossible task, perhaps because you have misconceptions about what it means to be "Christian". Interesting, however, that using your definition and 'holding people to what they profess to be {the} truth' conveniently facilitates your contempt for anyone who falls short of the imaginary mark you've made up in your mind, which you hold Christians to. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Christine. How convenient that you've created a way to continue to feel good about practicing contempt against Christians by demanding that we all live up to a standard by which none of us is capable. The truth is, we do our best to practice Christian principles, which, according to you, appears not to be good enough to make the grade on your imaginary 'list'.

"In my mind, that would include being good stewards of God's creations, and feeling that everyone, regardless of earning power, should have access to medical care. It would also mean advocating that all who work hard should be able to afford food and shelter."

You lost me with that last statement. From Christian bashing to commenting on social issues, you just lost me. I'm not following your line of thought here now.

Don

[ChristineL]

Again, Don, please name some. What are your news sources that you consider unbiased? You've commented that I should do research (and have also stated that some of Jeff's and I's postings are untrue, that we're minsinformed), so, please infom us of where to go for unbiased news reports.


This answer is why you're barely worth communicating with, Don. You didn't answer Christine's question and you know it. If you gave some examples of sources you approve of, those who disagree with you could bring up some articles from those sources to support their arguments. By not stating what sources meet with your approval you prevent others from presenting evidence. And so it is. Just play it safe and others will always be frustrated with you. You must be a peach to live with.

Here's how it works in practice: if someone posts an article you don't agree with, you can dismiss it by saying "consider the source." That way you don't have to address the facts or opinions presented. That way you don't have to learn anything that doesn't agree with your preconceived notions and you never have to agree with someone who disagrees with your opinions.

If you narrow your focus to only those sources you always agree with you'll live out your life in ignorance. You've already exposed your ignorance of world events in other posts. Now I understand that.

I know your position well because I have a brother like you. I'm sure you and he would get along well. You could share your narrow views and you'd find few places to disagree because neither of you are aware of the greater realities. I once sent him an article from the New York Times and he responded, "We all know the Times prints fiction." There you have it. Source dismissed. The fact that I could support the Times article with dozens of other sources was meaningless, because he no doubt could have dismissed all those sources as well. Actually, now that I recall it, the article wasn't even from the Times, but was written by a writer formerly employed by the Times. That association was enough for him to dismiss the source.

Let's look at the situation with AIDS and condoms in Africa. How many sources that you consider unbiased will report on the results of Bush and Co. policies in Africa? I'll guess none. Therefore you never have to learn about the problems. Fine, issue solved. Remain ignorant and go about your merry way.

Minds are like parachutes, the bumpersticker says. They do their best work while open.

-Jeff

[ChristineL]

Donc1955, I would appreciate it if you stopped calling me "sister". In my upbringing, this is not courteous or respectful and I find it a little offensive.

Thank you,

Christine

[thewholetruth]

No offense intended, Christine.

In my upbringing, it's neither discourteous nor disrespectful. I consider every person on the planet to be my brother or sister.

But since you find it offensive, I will not use that term in my posts to you again. :wink:

Don


Donc1955, I would appreciate it if you stopped calling me "sister". In my upbringing, this is not courteous or respectful and I find it a little offensive.

Thank you,

Christine

[thewholetruth]

Like I said, what I was referring to are news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning. For example, citing articles from plannedparenthood.com as an argument to defend one's proabortion position would not be considered an "unbiased" news source. Citing RushLimbaugh.com wouldn't be unbiased, either. The New York Times is out, as it's openly liberal and biased as hell.

Also like I admitted to Christine, unbiased news sources are few and far between, but don't waste anyone's time by using biased news sources which are already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning.

Don


So who are they? I'd like to see some unbiased news sources.

[thewholetruth]

"This answer is why you're barely worth communicating with, Don. You didn't answer Christine's question and you know it."

Intentionally personally offensive, angry, combative and rude. How attractive. Certainly not the elements of intelligent discussion, Jeff. Let's take a closer look at your approach to intelligent dialogue here, shall we?

"This answer is why you're barely worth communicating with, Don."

Personal attack. Next?

"You must be a peach to live with."

Personal attack. Next?

"I know your position well because I have a brother like you."

BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahaha! I see: You've never met me, but because of how your brother is, you think you know me? LOL Wow, Jeff. That's deluded, sir. A totally insane line of thinking which has no fact or even logic in it's basis. Talk about being "a real peach to live with", Jeff. Pot. Kettle. Black.

Like I said, what I was referring to are news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning. For example, citing articles from plannedparenthood.com as an argument to defend one's proabortion position would not be considered an "unbiased" news source. Citing RushLimbaugh.com wouldn't be unbiased, either. The New York Times is out, as it's openly liberal and biased as hell.

Also like I admitted to Christine, unbiased news sources are few and far between, but don't waste anyone's time by using biased news sources which are already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning.

Please try to kick it up a notch Jeff. Perhaps try approaching the discussions here as if this WASN'T a bar, and as if you WEREN'T prone to just shooting your mouth off, as if you really WANTED to engage in intelligent dialogue...unless that isn't what you want. Then keep doing what you're doing. :wink:

Don

[Braggi]

...
Like I said, what I was referring to are news sources that aren't already identified as openly Liberal or Conservative leaning. ...

Please list some so we know what you're talking about.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

Gosh, Jeff, for someone who purports to be so much more educated and informed than I, I'm surprised you're asking me anything about anything. You've gone out of your way to insult me and insist I don't know what I'm talking about, yet you're so ignorant of which news sources are considered biased and which are considered not-so-much that you have to ask me to educate you?

Wow. Perhaps you're just ignorant, too...you know, like you called me a few posts ago.

The problem I have with filling your request for me to educate you, Jeff, is that I find it hard to be willing to help people that do nothing but throw rocks and insult me...you know, like you do here.

Don


Please list some so we know what you're talking about.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

Before you start whining, Jeff, as you do so often here at people you disagree with, I've already acknowledged that unbiased news sources are few and far between. That alone should have been enough concession. To a reasonable person, that would have been enough to let it go. Not so in your case, however. LOL

That said, I've noticed that both Conservatives and Liberals complain about CNN and the Press Democrat. That's a good sign, that perhaps Onethink isn't steering those news services completely, all the time.

I hope you can relax now, Jeff. Well, I mean after you get done throwing that rock you have in your hand right now. :wink:

Don


Please list some so we know what you're talking about.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

"You've commented that I should do research..."

I don't recall stating that. Please refer to the post number in which I made such a suggestion to you.

"...(and have also stated that some of Jeff's and I's postings are untrue, that we're minsinformed)..."

I don't believe I've stated such things, unless your postings actually weren't supported by facts. Please, refer me to the post numbers in which you've read such things.

You have a tendency to offer your opinions in such a way that you think we should find them of amazing value, Christine, as does Jeff. The truth is that we all have opinions, and while many might be interesting, if they aren't supported by the facts then they aren't of much value. We could exchange opinions all day every day and never touch on the truth. I'm not interested in unfounded opinions. I'm interested in opinions which are founded and supported by facts. Those have amazing value, IMO.

Don

[MsTerry]

.I watch the news (CNN, FOX, ABC/NBC/CBS, ESPN - hey, it's news!

Don

Jeff, always consider the source

[ChristineL]

Don, you've never met me and don't really know me. No, I don't think my points of view should be found amazing. I enjoy a good discussion and/or debate, and even hope to learn something as I have in past exchanges on this site.

I don't profess to have "The Truth" and people who do make me a little nervous. Extremists, of any type, scare me especially when they push for policies and legislatioin that effect the rest of us.

I once asked you if you consider those who follow The Great Spirit, Buddha, Allah, etc. to be Godless? You didn't respond to that and I'm curious as to your perspective on it.

I do consider anyone who follows a path of "Treat thy neighbor as you would have your neighbor treat you" to be on a "Godly" path regardless of the name they have for God. My close friends are far from perfect, but they all keep their word, hold themselves accountable for the things they do and have empathy and compassion for others. I'm more concerned about how people's actions affect others than in their beliefs, sexual orientation, what they call "God", or even if they believe in God.

I don't find myself amazing, I just try to be thankful for the good times, face up to, and get through, the bad times and behave in a manner that allows me to look in the mirror every morning and feel good about who I see. No, I'm not successful 100% of the time.

Yes, I'd like to see people, en masse, rebel against our medical system and push to take our country back from the corporations. I'd like to see the people who actually do the work be appreciated and rewarded with the ability to afford housing, food and medical care.

Maybe my writing style gives the impression I'm overly impressed with myself. I feel things strongly and can certainly sound self righteous at times. Sorry everyone.






"You've commented that I should do research..."

I don't recall stating that. Please refer to the post number in which I made such a suggestion to you.

"...(and have also stated that some of Jeff's and I's postings are untrue, that we're minsinformed)..."

I don't believe I've stated such things, unless your postings actually weren't supported by facts. Please, refer me to the post numbers in which you've read such things.

You have a tendency to offer your opinions in such a way that you think we should find them of amazing value, Christine, as does Jeff. The truth is that we all have opinions, and while many might be interesting, if they aren't supported by the facts then they aren't of much value. We could exchange opinions all day every day and never touch on the truth. I'm not interested in unfounded opinions. I'm interested in opinions which are founded and supported by facts. Those have amazing value, IMO.

Don

[Braggi]

...
Please try to kick it up a notch Jeff. ...

I will. I'll stop feeding the troll.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

...

Maybe my writing style gives the impression I'm overly impressed with myself. I feel things strongly and can certainly sound self righteous at times. Sorry everyone.

Christine, please don't feel the need to censor yourself here. I always enjoy your writing which is all the more valid because it obviously comes from the heart as well as from a sharp mind.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

You've got a little something on the end of your nose there, Jeff. :wink:

Don


Christine, please don't feel the need to censor yourself here. I always enjoy your writing which is all the more valid because it obviously comes from the heart as well as from a sharp mind.

-Jeff

[thewholetruth]

"Don, you've never met me and don't really know me."

I've never pretended to imply that I really know you.

"No, I don't think my points of view should be found amazing."

When one posts their unfounded opinions with anything less than humility, it reeks of arrogance and suggests the individual isn't aware that opinions are a dime a dozen: sometimes interesting, but not the foundation that truth is built upon, by any means. When someone does combat on a message board, using their opinions as their weapons, it appears that they think very highly of their opinions, as if they are worthy of battle...and they aren't. We could trade opinions all day every day and never even come close to establishing the truth about a given topic. Opinions, in regards to winning arguments, are really useless - again, interesting, perhaps, but without any real weight.

"I don't profess to have "The Truth" and people who do make me a little nervous."

Yet, the truth exists. I've always concluded that those are "nervous" about those who profess knowledge of the truth are nervous because there is a reason they don't know the truth. The truth interferes with some folks' personal agendas. The truth sometimes causes guilt or shame or fear, depending on the circumstance. Those who live a selfish life don't like the truth, because they don't want to hear things like "lack of principles" or "selfishness" or, Heaven forbid "self-centeredness", yet we're all prone to such behavior. Some of us have surrendered to the fact that we all fall short of the glory of God, and have taken an interest in not letting our feelings and thoughts dictate our behaviors. Some of us are interested in becoming principled people who live principled lives, which sometimes mean personal sacrifice and charity and selflessness. So some of us become interested in the truth, and become wary of personal agendas and see less value in opinions, and recognize the difference between truth and opinion. Of course, this doesn't make us any better than anyone else (the common retort; I can feel it coming). It just means we're interested in the truth and we can see it when someone dilutes it or calls other things "truth".

"I once asked you if you consider those who follow The Great Spirit, Buddha, Allah, etc. to be Godless? You didn't respond to that and I'm curious as to your perspective on it. "

I make no judgement on other folks' relationships with God. How can I know if they are calling the Lord "Buddha" or "Allah" or "The Great Spirit"? His name is what it is, and Jesus is the only person of any religious persuasion who said He was God. I called my uncle "Dad" once, because they look almost identical. Did that make him my dad? Was I judged because I was mistaken? No. Are beliefs facts? No. Is everyone entitled to their own belief? Yes. Am I grateful for EVERY person who seeks God, no matter who they think God is? Yes. Does that answer your question, Christine?

"Yes, I'd like to see people, en masse, rebel against our medical system and push to take our country back from the corporations. I'd like to see the people who actually do the work be appreciated and rewarded with the ability to afford housing, food and medical care."

We agree on those things, then. :heart:

"Maybe my writing style gives the impression I'm overly impressed with myself."

I didn't say that. I said you opinions, offered up as arguments, are still just opinions. That you use them to defend your position about anything is like using a sheet of paper to defend yourself. I said it appears you must really value your opinions, Christine, and while I find both yours and mine interesting at times, I don't value them as anything more than they are: opinions. Everybody's got them.

"I feel things strongly and can certainly sound self righteous at times."

Feelings just are, Christine. Again, I, too, am fascinated sometimes by how powerful they are, yet I try not to let them dictate my behavior, because feelings are subject to change without notice. They are like the wind. Interesting, perhaps, but not worthy of hanging my hat on.

"Sorry everyone."

No apology necessary, Christine. We're just having a conversation here. It's not like you've actually thrown a rock at anyone. :wink:

Don