 sj |
||
|
||
BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:09 PM Rats. Stormtroopers have such cool uniforms. They look like plastic and yet they "clink" like metal on the decks of the Death Star. I'm with troll on this one (can you believe it?!). Proclaiming a "national day of prayer and thanksgiving" is hardly establishment of a religion, nor does it harm non-religious people IN ANY WAY. To me it's a little humorous. It's like, as soon as he becomes president he yells out, "Zoiks! Pray for me!" Perhaps he realizes he's bitten off more than he can chew? Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: SeanM Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:17 PM LOL... I'm not particularly for or against it either, I can just see Bert's point. The only way this can really be seen (to me, at least) as negative is in the 'incremental' approach. I do have friends who are probably livid over this, as they believe (as do their far right counterparts) that any attempt (however small) to introduce religion into public policy is an attempt to destroy the constitution. If I had been in his position making said announcement? I'd have asked for a national day of thanksgiving, and during the speech asked for prayers. That way you accomplish the same sentiment, and avoid the entire issue. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bert Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:24 PM nor does it harm non-religious people IN ANY WAY. Excuse me, but establishing a 'National Day of Prayer for Americans' is estabishing that prayer is the thing for Americans to do on that day. This means that anyone who decides not to pray on that day is not doing the right 'thing' and the "for Americans" bit also implies that if you don't pray then somehow you are not American. Didn't we have someone back in the Sixties who went on about being "Un-American". That idiot and his followers hurt a lot of people and it seems like we're heading in that direction again. 'You pray when I tell you to' Says the leader of the country. It's a short step from there to saying "and if you don't". I sincerely hope that everyone who voted for him, went down on their knees and prayed at his command. Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:26 PM The object of having a society which is directed at life rather than death would be a fine one.
Having a world in which noone feels driven to have an abortion rather than give birth to the baby would be wonderful.
But that isn't going to be brought about magically just by making it harder for women to have abortions. In fact, ity couild well mean in increase in the numbner of abortions - especially in the context of other policies which can be expected to make it harder than ever to be poor, with the only alternative to that being to desperately hold on to insecure jobs.
And I do not think that it is conceivable to move a society towards an attitude which values every living person, without turning away from state killing of all kinds.
I think a lot of people are in entrenched positions with ill-assorted package-deal policies which they have fallen into the way of accepting.
The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. And the friend of my enemy is not necessarily my enemy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:34 PM Sorry, Bert, we may have to agree to disagree. It seems to me a HUGE step to go from saying, "please pray for your government officials today" to saying "and if you don't....." Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Linda Kelly Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:37 PM Excuse me for butting my nose in where i accept it doesn't belong -but I don't understand the pro-life stance in the abortion issue -when Bush has been happy to sign the death penalty and execute God knows how many when he was Governor of Texas -I've tried applying logic to it but it didn't seem to work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:38 PM Actually I think a national day of prayer at this time is most appropriate. Or a global day of prayer..
God help America! And God help the rest of us... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bert Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:43 PM OK Alex, you win this round. But I still think it's scary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:45 PM Ickle, it's related to the difference between killing someone guilty of committing a crime, and killing someone innocent of committing a crime. If you can't see the difference between these two, the other distinction probably won't make sense to you either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:49 PM Well Icks, as they say, its all in the timing. I mean its hard to think about killing a baby, even one that is only a tissue mass. Let's allow more unwanted and uncared for children to have to suffer the rigors of poverty and lack of love and wait until the pressure forces them into societal outcasts and the resulting criminal behaviors. Then we can punish them by teaching them other criminal behaviors by incarcerating them with better and more sadistic mother fuckers and make it impossible for them ever to function in society. And when that has reached a zenith and they have victimized enough innocent people we can count on them to commit some act so heinous that we are completely appalled. THEN we can kill them and feel pretty good about the whole thing. Makes perfect sense............if you're an asshole.....like Bush. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:52 PM Believe me I'm not pro-RR. I am firmly opposed to school prayer (except the uninvited kind just before a test, which, as Charlie Brown or maybe it's Peppermint Patty notes, will always be with us), and believe we should work on obviating abortion rather than prohibiting it. But aside from the LEGALITY of it, I think the president's move shows very poor discretion. People are just LOOKING for him to do something that shows himself to be a rabid, fire-breathing right-wing fanatic, and this just plays into our hands. THEIR hands. I meant THEIR hands. But, somewhat like Susan-who-used-to-be-called-Praise, I am in the unenviable position of being a Christian who is conservative theologically, but liberal politically. No party espouses what I believe in. Which makes it easier to not get taken in by any of them. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bert Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:58 PM Well, as you are a Christian, then I can understand that you would not be upset by being asked to pray. But asking an Atheist to pray is kinda like forbidding a Christian to pray. So, for a while, live with the thought of being forbidden to pray and see if you can see why Bush Baby was wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:07 PM No, Bert. Being ASKED to pray is not equivalent to being FORBIDDEN to pray. Being forbidden to pray is equivalent to being FORCED to pray. Being asked to pray is the equivalent of being ASKED NOT TO PRAY. If the president said, "please sacrifice a chicken at midnight for my new foreign policy," I would say, "um, no thanks." Maybe roll my eyes. But hardly feel oppressed. The constitutional protections against being made to practice a religion not of one's choosing are still in place, and are holding firm as ever. So far. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:14 PM Give it time Alex......Its early yet. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bert Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:22 PM ...The constitutional protections against being made to practice a religion not of one's choosing are still in place, and are holding firm as ever... Not when the President declares a day for practicing religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:39 PM Every president has done this. Look it up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Penny S. Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:41 PM The death penalty is not always applied against the guilty. Don't tell me that America does not, as we have done, make mistakes in finding the innocent guilty. So, whatever the argument distinguishing the innocent baby from the hardened criminal, unless there is absolute certainty of guilt, the death penalty takes the appalling risk of being just as wrong as killing the baby. I am also appalled to see that during the very long periods between conviction and execution, there can be deep and lasting changes in those awaiting death. (See the thread on the subject McGrath posted today with the link to the Guardian.) Where it can be shown that even in a state where no effort is put into rehabilitation. lives can be turned around to good, it seems hopelessly wrong to kill someone who is quite clearly not the same person who committed the crime. I learned something new yesterday, preparing a sheet on Athens and Sparta. It seems that Sparta declared war on its slaves every year, so that the judicial executions by the secret police (krypteia?) of those who seemed to be likely to upset their nice little system would not be murder. Being asked not to pray would be as offensive to me as being forbidden, perhaps more so, because it would use social pressures designed to be difficult to resist. So I can imagine that being asked to pray, when one didn't want to, for whatever reason, would be offensive. There are messages being given about belonging and not belonging which are inappropriate, and in the case of the USA, seen as being so at its founding. Penny (signing off before rant) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:44 PM The death penalty is not always applied against the guilty. Absolutely. Also it is known to be applied unequally between persons of different races. Which is why I am againt the death penalty in practice, although I am not against it in theory. People are imperfect. We are far too imperfect to be given the responsibility over taking another's life. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bert Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:51 PM Alex, I tried to look that up but a websearch returned 240,000 hits, mostly from religious websites. So, I'll take your word for it. However, does that then make it right? Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Penny S. Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:55 PM The thread I mentioned was the one about Steve Earle, who was witness to the death of a man in Texas - in his case, he admitted his guilt, and the crime was a bad one. But he had become someone else, through God. The account is ... I am supposed to teach children to use appropriate adjectives in their writing ... I can't think of one for it. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:56 PM No, it doesn't. But that wasn't my point, really; only that it's no different than what's always happened. A lot of bluster, but no real attempt to infringe on people's right to not pray. Believe me, if he really starts trying to force people into a religious mold of some sort, I'll be just as targeted as you would be, and just as vocal as you would like me to be. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: SeanM Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:57 PM I can't back it up with documentation, but I'll wholeheartedly support the idea that most (if not all) presidents have ASKED for a day of prayer. Clinton did, after pretty much every disaster or major event in his presidency. The difference would be ASKING for a day of prayer and MANDATING a National Day of Prayer and Thanksgiving. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: katlaughing Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:58 PM Troll, you said, "kat, just what right does our, or any other, government have to go into another country-often unasked-to give out birth control and/or abortion information? In the places that we have meddled before such as the Sahel (Southern Sahara) our efforts have resulted in over-population and the subsequent desertification of the area. We need to study what the possible results of any kind of social or medical intervention will be BEFORE we sent aid of any kind." Are you saying that teaching birth control resulted in over population and desertification in the Sahel? If, so, please give references. Also, what do you think of Doctors Without Borders? Should they be stopped from practising their humanitarian efforts because of the possible results of their social/medical intervention? I suppose we wouldn't want to provide any kind of vaccines to developing countries, either, right? Have you read about the women in Afghanistan? Is it more correct to sit by and do nothing to help them when every girl born there is destined to either be left for dead at birth, kept in her house for life with no education, vocation, etc. until she is given to a man as a wife/slave and suffers from whatever abuses he chooses to inflict, often resulting in her murder? Or how about the famous super model who was sexually mutilated as a young girl in Africa; who walked alone, barefoot, for hundreds of miles in the desert to escape her culture where girls are castrated as young as 5 & 6, with rusty tin can lids, then sewn up until they are wed, and subsequently after each birth in order to be "pleasingly tight" for the husband's sexual appetite? Are you saying it is not okay to provide these women and hopefully their male counterparts with family planning methods? Did we study the possible results before we intervened in Kuwait for OIL? Is a condom such a threat to an emerging society? No one forces these programs on anyone. They are made available. I do not know of any instance when our government has gone into a country and mandated birth control education. And, that IS what it is, education. How anyone would want to deny that to anyone asking is beyond me. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Jim the Bart Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:03 PM I am constantly amazed at how easily a guy of supposedly low intelligence has been able to twist things around for his party's purposes. He (and the republican right)has laid claim to the high ground of "civility", after his party has been responsible (at least equally with the dems) for eight of the most contentious years that I can remember. He claims to be a "uniter, not a divider" and then immediately sets out to drag back into the political arena some of the most divisive and heated issues possible. And let's keep in mind that these are social issues, not issues that of necessity belong in the political arena. And yet he's getting away with it. There is no - N-O - great desire to reverse the policies of the last eight years. The fact that Al Gore is not our president today is in no sense a repudiation of the democratic policy of Bill Clinton. Four years ago Bill was re-elected OVERWHELMINGLY. Whatever reasons you want to give for the Bush presidency - backlash against the Lewinsky scandal, a weak and wooden campaign by Gore, the promise of a big tax cut, the Nader factor, Bush's "charisma" (oh, ick), or outright theft by the reactionary members of the Supreme Court - there is no mandate to return to the glory days of Ronnie, and Dick and George Sr. GBush junior is extremely dangerous. He has started out by raising the concerns of women. He will soon be in full attack on the environment (in the name of business, industriousness, growth and continued prosperity!). A lot of people stand to make a lot of money. But in the long run, he is greater danger to his own party and in particular to the genuine conservatives who, in their desire to regain the white house, put their faith in this charlatan. In the end, the COST to the rest of us for making his friends richer is going to be to high to bear and judging by this beginning, his end will be swift. Four years and out. And not a Republican administration to be seen for a long time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: GUEST,Rich (Bodhranai at library) Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:06 PM If asking the country to pray is a violation of nonreligious people's rights, shouldn't we abolish Thanksgiving day for its blatant disregard for the feelings of ungrateful bastards everywhere? I saw Jon Stewart on the Daily Show (Comedy Central news-based program) show GWB asking the American people to pray, and then adding "We're way ahead of you!" I personally believe that any unborn child who chooses to be aborted should have that right. I'm pretty liberal on most issues, but on Christmas I held my cousin's baby daughter Serenity in my arms after hearing how the father tried to force my cousin to have an abortion. Thank God (dare I mention His name?) that she refused. As I'm typing this from a public computer, I'll write back later with my cookie in place to assure you this is honestly me posting here. Rich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: SeanM Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:08 PM Bartholomew... GWB is already going after the environment, just currently only in speeches. His response to the California electricity debacle is that it is the result of bad law and that the voters need to deal with it (no argument there, he's right). However, the continuation is that according to his lights, the environmental regulations that have helped to rid LA of much of its smog problem need to be relaxed or removed to allow all plants to run at 100%, and that the Alaskan reserves need to be opened ASAP for exploratory drilling. Oh well. I think that the greatest concern is that he's not even putting his own spin on the issues... from what I've heard in his speeches, they're direct feeds from the RRight and corporate interests. M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: GUEST,guestguest(intruder cringing in the DEEP woo Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:19 PM the seperation of church/state (a MASONIC ideal, btw) was fixed in place because the Founding Fathers were close enough to the anti-(your hated religion goes here) riots and persecutions, et-freakin'-cetera that they UNDERSTOOD the need to make Torquemada's/Guzman's/(any frickin' papist, protestant demigogue's) hate-filled seperatist tactics and ways ILLEGAL!!! when the rads (of any stripe) re-establish public flogging and breaking on the wheel, perhaps then you will understand too. :::declines to quote a Dutch priest who survived hitler's try at this mode::: |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:21 PM Bush, nor anyone else can 'force' me to pray..etc...but he CAN put people into important positions who WISH to tell me how to live, pray, behave...etc...and who can seriously affect my well being and finances, as well as the environment we all must live in...and I do NOT believe he and his crew will have MY best interests at heart. (As to establishment of religion...the mere fact that someone placed "In God We Trust" onto our money and changed the Pledge of Allegence to add 'under God' a number of years back puts pressure on us to 'accept' that "God"...not Buddha, Allah, Mohammed, etc....but implicitly the 'God' of the Christian tradition is somehow running things in the background...as I have said before...I believe in freedom of religion...THAT is right! but...**"Freedom OF religion MUST imply freedom FROM religion for those who wish"**) NO ONE should interfere with your wishes to worship as you please...or NOT have abortions...or to tell your kids about Santa Claus....but neither should anyone tell ME that my opinion about God, abortions. etc. is wrong and try to make MY position illegal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Penny S. Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:24 PM OK, maybe my take on the asking to/not to pray issue was a bit extreme, but I suppose I was reacting to who was asking, and the tradition he was asking from. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Ebbie Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:29 PM Uh, kat, before Troll pops in, we know you mean 'circumcision'. Castration on a girl child may be difficult. But you're right- I too was wondering just how Troll is going to document that birth control causes a higher birth rate. Unless he means that they are so adamant in their opposition to our meddling that they exhort each other to get to bed? *BG* Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:36 PM The idea of "freedom FROM religion" was invented by M.M. O'Hair, and is really kind of ridiculous. What counts as freedom FROM religion? If I drive down a street and see a church, O'Hair proclaimed, I have had my right to be free FROM religion infringed. She wanted an America where you could walk anywhere, at any time, and not see any sign of religion. That wouldn't be America. That would be Albania under the Stalinists. They killed thousands upon thousands of Christians and Muslims trying to create the perfect atheist society. And when you were burying your dead, the man at the cemetary asked, "Was he a Christian atheist, or a Muslim atheist?" What do YOU mean by "freedom from religion," Bill D? alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: katlaughing Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:57 PM Ebbie, thanks, but I did mean "castration," although "circumcision" is also correct. Just to make sure I did a search on google which came up with several hits, including this one, which, imo, goes way beyond the benign implications of the latter: "While the practice of male circumcision has becom less commonly advocated and recommended by physicians in the United States today, the majority of women in Northern Africa, the Middle East, and the Far East are still being castrated...women are subjected to painful operations which include the removal of the clitoris, the clitoral hood, the labia minor, and the labia majoria. These traumatic operations are most commonly performed on pre-menstrual girls from modest and lower economic status, by midwives, physicians, and even barbers. These devastating rituals of mutilation generally occur in their homes, local hospitals, clinics, and street booths. The tormented girls suffer extensive damage to their mental, physical, and psychological health, which remain with them their entire lives. The operations are also known to lessen the sexual excitement and orgasm for these women. This is perhaps the ultimate manifestation of inequality among the sexes, and the only hope to eradicate this horrible tradition is to globally educate the people of these unnecessary and dangerous surgeries." Thanks, kat
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Stewart Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:18 PM
Last time we mixed politics with religion...
S. in Seattle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: katlaughing Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:25 PM One of my favourite bumper stickers, Stewart!*BG* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Lucius Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:37 PM I guess that I'm more conservative than most. I believe in the right of the individual over the state. Therefore, while I personally would choose NOT to have an abortion, neither would I presume the right to make this decision for any others. Of course I'm baffled as shit as to why our conservative Commander in Thief can cry for state's rights while circumventing the rights of Florida voters in the Supreme Court. Sorry, I can't wait four years, how soon can I replace my "republican" congressman? Lucius |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: SINSULL Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:55 PM Spaw, You left out one critical step in creating a monster. Don't forget to see to it that he reproduces at will and abuses his offspring just as he was abused. She applies just as well here. Then we can be sure the nightmare will continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:59 PM "But asking an Atheist to pray is kinda like forbidding a Christian to pray."
I reckon that would be the best way you get people praying. Maybe they should try it and see what happened.
Here is the link to a piece by Steve Earle in what is niow for me yesterday's Guardian.
And here is a link to Tikkun, the San Francisco Jewish magazine in which it first appeared - which looks pretty good. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:03 PM well, MT..as with all positions, organaizations, parties, etc...there is always someone on your side you wish were on the OTHER side....Ms. O'Hair was a loutish fool! She would have banned churches, if she could, I gather. I saw her on TV before she disappeared, and it HURT to garbage like that spewed to cloud the real issue. I certainly do not advocate abolishing ANY form of legitimate religion, or restricting YOUR right to go to church and worship whomever and however you please...as long as it does not restrict MY freedoms or make other religions and NONreligious folks uncomfortable..(I refer to PUBLIC prayers at sports events as an example) I am as concerned that Jews or Muslims not have to be subjected to pleas "In Jesus name" as I am about MY hearing it, as it does not directly counter some belief I have. I live near BOTH a Jehovah's Witness church, and the east coast Mormon Temple, and I get door knockers of both persuasions..(*and BOY are they offended if you mistake one for the other!)...I do NOT go 'round knocking on THEIR doors trying to get them to give up their beliefs. But they have, built into their system, the righteous attitude that they SHOULD be out bothering me and telling me that I am going to Hell if I don't change my ways. And, as you know, there are other denominations which do the same thing in different ways...(leaflets on my car window..etc.) As a child, I happily recited the Pledge of Allegance...and then 'they' said it must include the words "under God"...WHY? I will honor & defend my country without 'God' to oversee my actions, and I will tell the truth in a court without a bible...and I will refrain from crime and love my wife and pay my taxes and give to the poor...and...and.... I know people who are Quakers..(or Friends...whatever) and various other religions who worship daily, and do not expect ME to do likewise. I have attended Mass, Advent services at an Episcopal church, and a rousing, shouting singing adventure in a black Southern Baptist church in Mississippi...and while I was in THEIR place of worship, I was quiet, respectful and non-adversarial. They were nice people doing what they believed. However, if I met ANY of those folks at a public meeting not connected with religion..(such as the Wood Collectors group I belong to)wanting ME to wait while they prayed aloud and at length over my supper, I will object! So...(you DID ask) when I say freedom FROM religion, I mean just that...allowing me to go about my business without having someone insert religious concerns which should be kept within their group into my daily activities....and in return, I will endeavor to ensure that they are ALWAYS assured of the freedom to have those private places of their worship protected against any attempt to deny them........ ......I hope I came close to what you asked and what I wanted to convey....
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Troll Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:10 PM I was not speaking of birth control in the Sahel but of intervention during one of that regions outbreaks of famine. Many lives were saved but now the region is overpopulated, famine is even more prevalent and loss of vegetation means more land lost to the desert. Now constant aid is needed and the people must be persuaded to give up their nomadic culture based on cattle and goats and do...what? The area is too arid for farming and there is nowhere else for them to go since living is marginal in the entire sub-Sahara. Did we do wrong in the first place? I don't know. We interfered in a culture that took famine in its' stride and must now face responsibility for the death of a culture because no one thought of the consequences of intervention. If you can argue against Kuwait, you can argue against the Balkans. If the Balkans interventions were ok because they were for "humanitarian" purposes, where were we in Rwanda? So Bush proclaimed a National Day of Prayer. Congress has also proclaimed National Pickle Week and Mothers Day. Should I be outraged because I don't like pickles or because I grew up without a mother? If you don't believe, then it doesn't apply to you, does it? The believer has no right to push his religion on the athiest in this country. But the converse is also true. And THAT is the crucial thing to remember. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: catspaw49 Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:11 PM Yeah Sins......You got it. I have a beaut of a story to cover that very scenario. Ends up with the guy brutalizing his wife and scalding one of his kids so badly that the child (age three) screamed for 3 days before he died. Of course the Dad didn't take him to the hospital....nah, hung him on the back of a door and the other 6 kids would whack him to try to get him to be quiet. Then when he died, they had a big bonfire and burned the body. They had tried burying it under the trailer but it was hot and the smell became noticed. Do I need to tell you about the guy's parents and family life? Or do I need to tell you about his kids and what's happened to them? I guess I didn't mean to sound so harsh, but I'm fed up and this complete fool in the White House is already ripping me a new one. Spaw
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: wysiwyg Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:17 PM Bert.... I have read most of the above posts. But I'm picturing you and me sitting side by side at a baseball game, in the cheap seats. Someone comes up to the microphone to sing the national anthem, but first they come out with, "Now we are all going to pray." OK. It's you and me sitting there. What do you think we would actually do? I think we would both crack up laughing at the idea that we could be made to stop kidding around about stuff for a minute, to do what anyone told us to do, and at the ridiculosity of prayer and baseball, as an odd juxtaposition of such a lovely afternoon MADE for playing ball. I think I would rather think about that than get stirred up again today-- I've been stirred, shaken, and poured out thank you very much-- by what I have read in this thread. I see friends occupying what-if positions that bear no relation to what they encounter on a day to day basis in their own lives, as well as some others talking about hard realities they know too well. But... it's enough, already, for me. Just speaking for ME. Going further with this.... it'd be enough to bring my energy to DO something about any of this to a dead stop. There has been plenty of opportunity for friends here to find they agree or disagree, and enough gorge has risen to run right over the top. Do we need to restate ourselves more than a couple of times in order to find motivation to action? I mean, is there something that can be accomplished by everyone wrestling each other to an exhausted tie? So Bert... care to go to a game, my dear? ~Susan |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Susan from California Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:18 PM I just hope the RR doesn't become so emboldened that they try to take over my local school board again. We ran 'em out on a rail once before, but it is so darned tiring! Nice job at uniting, Baby Bush. As for the prayer in school stuff, the reason it is considered a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is that students or people being asked to/ given the time to/ pray are captive. Students cannot opt-out w/out fear of being ostracized. People at a football game in Texas(or elsewhwere) have a prayer on the PA foisted upon them w/out their consent. Personally, I pray at school frequently, but nobody has a clue that I am doing it. (and I still have parents upset with me bacause I teach ABOUT other faiths. I suppose Baby Bush has a right to ask people to pray, but as a "uniter" he should have been smarter, and more inclusive. A pox on whomever implied that 8 years of Baby Bush could be a possibility :-) The person way back there who wants to get rid of their Republican Congressional Rep -- Congressional folks have to run every 2 years. Time to make dinner :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Troll Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:44 PM Uniting requires that BOTH sides make concessions. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Charlie Baum Date: 22 Jan 01 - 10:26 PM I took advantage of the day of prayer to petition the diety(ies) to give Americans cynicism a-plenty to see through the crap that Boy George, the Commander-in-Thief, is going to try to sell the country like the second-rate snake oil salesman he is. And instead of civility, give us civilty rights--the right to speak out and the right to have our votes counted. Ambrose Bierce defined a cynic as one who sees things as they are instead of as they ought to be. (Hence the custom of putting out the cynics eyes to improve his vision.) --Charlie Baum |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Skeptic Date: 22 Jan 01 - 11:09 PM ....you go away for a few hours and look what happens..... Note: The "we" refers to the body politic, not the clearly noble, self-sacrificing and altruistic spirts that infest this forum. (with a sometimes strained "BG") The Bush ban on using aid funds for abortions or related counseling highlights the core of the issue. It's not about abortion, its a grand gesture to the RR to show he's one of them, as is the Day of Prayer. I suspect such would probably be held unconstitutional anyway. In the meantime it'll distract the RR while it gets fought out in the courts an GWB can get on with what he was paid to do: any and everything he can for big business. All our give-away programs were and are short-sighted and ethnocentric in the extreme. The assumption is that we know what's best and with enough money and the right spirit, we can make it all better. I'd have hoped we'd have learned the fallacy of that from the Brightest and the Best nonsense of the JFK years. All the issues here raised seem to be symptoms. The cause is that we don't give money, time, aid or whatever to solve a problem but to salve our conscience. When vaccines and DDT and all the rest lower the infant mortality rate, but nothing is done to change the idea of having as many children as possible because 2 in 4 will die at birth or soon thereafter, we have done more harm than good. Rather than dying at birth, more children live so they can starve to death at 9 or 10 because the land can't support the increased population. Vaccines add to the effect. The ancient admonition to doctors to "do no harm" seems a long way away when there practical result is to help children take longer to starve to death. . Before we try to "help" (and I think we should), we need to sit down and think about goals and consequences. We need to answer honestly whether we have the right to interfere at all. And if we decide we do, we need to consider what the effects will be. Looking at the world, we've done a lot more harm than good. And as easy as it is to blame GWB, WJC, LBJ, JFK and all the rest shared the same blindness (or cynicism). (Aside re JFK - the Peace Corp probably came close - glittering gem among the dross?). Throwing money at the problems hasn't helped them, just made us all feel a damn site better about ourselves. How do you stop female castration in a society that views women as chattel? That used to be the view in our culture. Look at how long it took us to start addressing the same issues. Not that we shouldn't try, it's a barbaric custom. So is slavery in the sub-Sahara but no one even talks about that. Or the 15-20% of kids under the age of 10 in some African nations who have grown up, literally, on the streets with no adults at all, no social programs or "safety net" anywhere in site and well over 50% HIV positive. People trying to set up schools, kitchens, anything can't even get money from private Foundations, let alone the Government. Programs to address these kinds of issues just aren't politically sellable; provide no political payback, don't make good copy. They are buried behind whether funds should or shouldn't be used to promote abortion. Regards, if somewhat cynically John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: wysiwyg Date: 23 Jan 01 - 02:02 AM So John.... where do you put your energy? How's it going? What needs to happen next? What is going less than well, and why? And what do you know is true and good, despite what you see? ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Skeptic Date: 23 Jan 01 - 07:41 AM Susan, Sent a PM on this. Maudlin public displays are so tacky. Regards John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: GUEST,chullainn Date: 23 Jan 01 - 09:07 AM those of you NOT from n.c may never have had the privilege of seeing the following editorial cartoon: scene: jesse helms as a child, out behind the shed, where there are many overflowing, overcrowded pens stuffed full of very, very uncomfortable-seeming rabbits. he is doing nothing to ease their condition. two adults are watching from around the corner of the shed. one says: "poor jesse... he loves to see them born but he doesn't like to take care of them." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: Skeptic Date: 23 Jan 01 - 10:19 AM Per recommendation from Susan - Maudlin public display follows: My energy (such as it is) goes first to family, then to friends, then into the environment and the sustainability effort and civil rights. (the last three not always in that in order). What goes well is that there are, still, people who care, that I have friends and family who have a strong sense of community responsibility, whether rooted in ethical (philosophical) values or belief in God. That are "good" people. Less than well is the growing idea in our society, abetted and encouraged by conservatives and liberals alike through laws and regulations, that responsibility lies outside of self. The list of good is not a what, but all the "whos". Friends, acquaintences and all the unknowns who are compassionate, concerned and involved because they believe that's what they have to do as a matter of honesty to self. The indifferent I can (usually) tolerate, the bad...no general rule there. My mother and father taught me that charity (in the sense of helping others) and self respect are required, as part of being a "good"man or woman. It's what you do. But that you do charity without strings. (simplistic version, we all need to consider and accept consequences of our actions). You don't do it to look good in Church/Community/Newspapers. You don't do it with ulterior motives. You do it because its is the right thing to do and that should be its own reward. That without self respect, there can be no expectation of respect from others. Self respect is about who you are. Not what. Regards John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: And the assault begins....BUSHwhacked From: wysiwyg Date: 23 Jan 01 - 10:37 AM Maybe Part II of this thread could focus on what we are each DOING about the messes we get so upset about. I mean, if you care enough to dump a rant, maybe you care enough to support one another in action. Maybe if we looked in that direction and supported each other as vigorously as we disagree about the details of action, we'd see more progress. Maybe. Maybe's enough for me. ~Persisting Against Discouragement in Pennsyltucky |