Does Bush's religious faith inappropriately dictatate policy

Phoenix and Au -- If we're doing so well, why do minorities feel the pinch? If I sound tetchy, it's because I'm Goddamn Tired Of Hearing Us Congratulate Ourselves!!! Congratulations should come from others, not from MOI-meme, with some pride permitted upon receipt!

Snood, Appreciate the offer, but I'm hard to live with (bet you couldn't tell!) Now, if you look like your avatar, I think something could be arranged!

Au, I gotta tell you, you often respond with "what is, is". Maybe that feels like a rational response to you, but it just sounds lazy to me.

0 Replies

Tartarin
That is because in the real world we live with reality. Putting your head in the sand like an ostrich and wishing does not change a thing. You must deal with things as they are not some fantasy of how you wish they were.
I expect that we all have wish lists of how things should be but that does not blind us to how they really are.

0 Replies

i spent a few nights in jail in the south in '67 because things as they were, were wrong. my head was not in the sand, it was in the jail.

0 Replies

We -- especially we Americans -- have plenty of everything.

We have plenty of food. No one should ever have to be hungry because they do not have enough food.

We have plenty of clothing. No one should ever have to be cold because they do not have enough clothing.

We have plenty of shelter. No one should ever have to be out in the street because they do not have shelter.

We have more than enough doctors and hospitals -- and can easily educate and build more of each. No one should ever be denied access to adequate medical facilities or treatment.

We actually have plenty of many other things that are not necessities -- but which make life more pleasant -- access to movies; a television set; a music provider; golf courses; games, etc. No one should ever have to do without any of those things simply because they don't have the money to buy them.

All we have to do is to figure out how to adjust our economic philosophy in a way that allows for everyone to have PLENTY -- and then let the real go-getters earn the rest.

ONCE AGAIN: I am not advocating communism. Everyone should not have equal. But in a land as rich as ours, everyone should have enough -- and probably, with a bit of ingenuity, everyone should have plenty -- with some having PLENTY MORE.

0 Replies

Frank
In line with that would you
http://able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6880&highlight=

0 Replies

Quote:

ONCE AGAIN: I am not advocating communism.

If it walks like a duck.............

0 Replies

Nope, Au. I think I'm the realist and progressive and you're stuck with status quo!

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Quote:
ONCE AGAIN: I am not advocating communism.

If it walks like a duck.............

Show me a communist who advocates what I advocated.

We've got plenty - much more than enough to see that everyone has a base need plus some not so needed things.

It is counterproductive to allow unproductive people to interfere with productivity simply because they have to "earn their living."

Let everyone have a base -- so that no one has to "earn their living" -- and then allow those who can work; want to work; and are productive -- compete for the big bucks.

That is not communism by any stretch of the imagination.

But it is iconoclastic -- and that tends to frighten some people.

And when some people are frightened by an iconoclastic economic notion, they tend to cry "communism." That is why I said I am not advocating communism -- not because I think it resembles communism in any way.

0 Replies

Anyone else really tired of the constant staple-gun effect of labelling on these discussions? NEGATIVE! COMMUNIST! TRAITOR! If you can't break out of these labels, you aren't thinking.

0 Replies

Tartarin wrote:

Anyone else really tired of the constant staple-gun effect of labelling on these discussions? NEGATIVE! COMMUNIST! TRAITOR! If you can't break out of these labels, you aren't thinking.

...and let's not forget the new label, fast growing in use and popularity - "French-like".

0 Replies

Used to be "wog," Snood. SEE, WE'VE IMPROVED!

0 Replies

Excuse me, that refers to an Italian. I mean "frog."

0 Replies

Quote:

In a battle mixing states' rights with religion and a debate over the use of controlled substances, Attorney General John Ashcroft is challenging the right of terminally ill Oregonians to use physician-prescribed medication to hasten their own deaths -- a measure approved by state voters twice.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-rights-suicide.html

0 Replies

Exactly.

0 Replies

blatham<

The attorney general rules with Divine Right. (I guess as opposed to Divine Left.) :wink:

0 Replies

Really realpolitik...oil and god.

0 Replies

Quote:

Most AIDS scientists are terrified these days. They describe witch hunts by neo-Puritans in and out of the Bush administration, and many are so nervous that in e-mail and research abstracts they avoid using words like "gays," "homosexuals," "anal sex" or "sex workers."

So scientists at the National Institutes of Health and elsewhere are devising their own secret code. I won't give it away, but one term stands for "gay" or "homosexual," another for "anal sex" and so on.

"I would recommend avoiding all electronic communication to any N.I.H. office," one scientist warned in one of many e-mail notes buzzing among AIDS researchers. "Phone communication does not appear tapped at this time. Even so, I am advising staff to speak `in code' unless an N.I.H. staff member indicates you can speak freely. In short, assume you are living in Stalinist Russia when communicating with the United States government."

As my Times colleague Erica Goode noted in breaking the story last month, researchers have been told by N.I.H. project officers to avoid "sensitive language" in grant applications. A University of California researcher, for example, was told to "cleanse" the abstract of his grant proposal of words like "gay," "homosexual" and "transgender."

Since his research was on H.I.V. in gay men, this was a challenge. How can scholars investigate how AIDS spreads without using words that make the religious right blush?

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/09/opinion/09KRIS.html

0 Replies

Bernie, the NYT's article on AIDs research is a perfect example of the justified paranoia in this country. The religious right have turned the US into something unrecognizable to this 60 year old citizen.

The following link is a story of a writer who posed as a student at a house run by a Christian organization responsible at the beginning for starting the National Prayer Breakfast in 1953 (I think). They have had several names, but only go by The Family now to insure their privacy.

The house is called Ivanwald; located in Arlington, VA in a well-kept subdivision. The young men refer to themselves as The Corps.

This is a long article, but it needs to be read in order to make clear that those of us who seem paranoid are just being realistic. This is frightening reading because it describes an organization that has had hidden power for decades and continues to grow and attain more power, geometrically with this administation as an advocate.

Misc: Jesus Plus Nothing--from Information Clearinghouse

http://www.harpers.org/online/jesus_plus_nothing/jesus_plus_nothing.php3

0 Replies

WHO reports today 3,000 children every day die in africa from Malaria, does anyone give a ****?

0 Replies

I give a **** - and I'd like a verifying link, if you would.

0 Replies

Does Bush's religious faith inappropriately dictatate policy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know