AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2005 > March > 17 > Entry
Was the furor about the secret tapes of the President out of proportion to the act?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Doug Wead, who secretly taped conversations with George W. Bush, is a good man who has made several terrible mistakes. At first I didn’t feel that way — in part because I didn’t know the whole story, and was caught up in a public furor out of proportion to the incident itself.
When the story broke that Wead had secretly taped phone calls with then-Gov. Bush — and that he had recently played them for a New York Times reporter — a sense of shock and betrayal swept the conservative world. Many of us were furious. Not only did W’s trusted friend make recordings; he inexplicably played them for a famously biased newspaper! Wead’s associates wondered: was he trying to cash in on his new book? Was he not the man we thought he was?
Now that I have talked with Doug Wead at length, here is what I’ve seen: a broken-hearted man who realized instantly just how much he had erred, and how much hurt he had caused the president, his own family and others. A humble man who at the time believed he had good reasons to make the tapes but now recognizes that nothing is worth a friend feeling betrayed. (The early recordings were made with Bush’s permission; later ones, Wead says, in part because Bush sometimes gave him precise “to do” tasks and he wanted to get them right.)
I also see a man who has been condemned from afar — instead of confronted directly — by some who used to be his friends. A man who is trying to make it right by assigning the book’s total proceeds to charity, and issuing a heartfelt, painful, public apology. But as he told me, “My mistake was on page one; the apology was on page 67. Many people I care about don’t know how sorry I am. I wish I could get that across.”
Everyone makes mistakes, but not everyone makes such a devastating mistake so publicly. The president, to his credit, has apparently been willing to forgive Wead, poke fun at the situation, and move on. In a case like this, the rest of us should do nothing less.
Rebuttal
The New York Times’ front page story on Doug Wead’s Bush recordings was like reading a magazine article about “how to get flat abs.” We already knew Bush liked to party.
My response? Thank God!
At least he’s human. I’d rather spend my time worrying about repressed conservatives like Gingrich and Bakker, two flagrant icons of controversy-ripe stuffed shirts with such staunch opinions they were bound to fall from grace.
Are the conservatives the only ones surprised by Bush’s “confession?” The article taught us nothing we didn’t already know: Bush is a reformed party animal turned religious conservative. Stop the presses! Most conservatives I know followed the same path of extremes. This is the appeal of Christianity: redemption for sinners who can wipe the slate clean.
Shaunti preaches on the topic of forgiveness while scolding conservatives for their negative reactions. Pardon me — is this a column or Sunday school class? Not once does she mention the more provocative issue at hand: Should U.S. presidents’ private conversations become public fodder? In this instance, the president is a private citizen and should be treated just as you and I would be treated.
Audio taping laws should apply to him as they do to all U.S. citizens. Some states only require that one of the parties know a conversation is recorded. In this case, Wead knew he was taping President Bush. In some states he wasn’t breaking the law.
But was he morally right? Conservatives would say no, but most people haven’t lost a lot of sleep over it, either.
Liberals thought Wead was naive and self-serving. Conservatives were mostly just angry. They branded Wead a Judas and equated the tapes to a “betrayal.” The betrayal of what, I ask? The superficial mask of conformity and normalcy conservatives often parade around in? Please!
Shaunti is right about one thing — this isn’t a big deal.
Bush is human. In his youth he enjoyed his beer and recreational drugs. Wead is human. He used his friendship as a steppingstone and the tapes for publicity. Both men are probably hypocrites. We already knew this was a trait of lip service conservatives, but I guess it’s nice to get a glimpse of the man behind the curtain for validation. Thank you, Doug Wead.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By norman
March 21, 2005 07:28 AM | Link to this
It is clear, it has always been clear, that George W. Bush will do or say anything to be elected. He will use morality while himself ignoring morals, he will use religiosity while himself being a great example of a Pharisee, he will use patriotic appeals while himself avoiding real military service. He is a scoundrel. His exploitation of the Schiavo case is just one more example. This man must be removed.
By Sharon
March 21, 2005 07:51 AM | Link to this
Come on now, we all know Dubya had been in on the drug scene. He just wouldn’t admit it when asked by reporters or anyone else, except his pal Wead. Dubya’s the ultimate hypocrite.
By E. Lewis
March 21, 2005 08:31 AM | Link to this
It’s more significant because it speaks to the hypocracy of politicians or perhaps more significantly that politicians brand themselves in a marketing ploy th attract voter. Unfortunately, voters don’t do enough research and this ploy works.
By E. Lewis
March 21, 2005 08:33 AM | Link to this
It’s not like the tapes show evidence of anything that anyone who did their own research couldn’t find out.
By Archie
March 21, 2005 08:35 AM | Link to this
I agree with Norman’s comments but I don’t think Bush will be removed. It bothers me that Bush has done sinful things but noone really calls him on those things. The untruths leading to a war and his military service. People just like him because they want to. I agree with Shanti on this issue in the sense that you don’t expect your friend to put your business in the street to make a profit but since Bush has forgiven the man then we should move on.
By Kenneth
March 21, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this
I never evan HEARD of Doug Wead until reading this article. This is NOT news. We knew W was a hypocrite first class (or maybe I should say no class) Just as all polititians are hypocrites. I’m sure you’re heard the definition of “politics”— “poly”, meaning many, and “ticks”, blood-sucking… well, you get the idea.
I’ll bet the same ones who are now screaming betrayal were drooling over the tapes Linda Tripp (remember her) made of Monica Lewinsky. Again, no surprise. I notice people are already talking about more important matters like the still-dragging-on Terri Schiavo case. Should we start a pool on how long it will be before the feeding tube is reinserted? (It WILL happen— some people don’t know when to leave well enough alone and let nature finish a process that was started 15 years ago.)
By norman
March 21, 2005 08:55 AM | Link to this
The GOP is supposed to believe in privatization. But in the Schiavo case they are trying to de-privatize the whole matter. Just another instance of congenital Republican hypocrisy.
By Lyrazel
March 21, 2005 09:14 AM | Link to this
Furor? Um, gee where have I been? I suppose hidden under a rock because, I gave it no thought when the press released it. Gosh somebody taped a politician being candid—excuse me? When does that NOT happen around reporters? Or are you telling me Fearless Leader does not understand how to use media to his benefit?
The Bush administration spent $254 million in its first term on public relations contracts designed to push Bush policies. Under the Bush administration, the federal government has aggressively used a well-established tool of public relations: the prepackaged, ready-to-serve news reports. At least 20 federal agencies have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years, records and interviews show. Many were subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government’s role in their production. Fearless Leader has finally admitted that a handful of columnists wrote in support of administration policies without disclosing payments from the government. The Bush administration’s efforts to generate positive news coverage have been considerably more pervasive than previously understood. Records and interviews suggest widespread complicity or negligence by television stations, given industry ethics standards that discourage the broadcast of prepackaged news segments from any outside group without revealing the source.
As for his life on drugs while at Yale…is that in any way…an issue for anyone but Yale?
By Crystal
March 21, 2005 09:32 AM | Link to this
So, Pres. Bush had a “big” time when he was young. Haven’t heard him deny it. He certainly hasn’t marred the White House with moral scandals. Have all you tight, upright liberals forgotten Clinton? All presidents are human and inperfect. Stop pointing fingers in political frenzies. Your ambitions to smear are all too evident. (Don’t bother to say Bush’s policies are immoral. They aren’t, even if you disagree with them.)
By Sandy
March 21, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this
The topic at hand is lame, so I too will comment further on the Schiavo case. Did anyone see Mrs. Schindler’s appeal to the congressmen opposing the emergency legislation, pleading them not to use her daughter for their personal agenda? Talk about not removing the beam from one’s own eye…
As far as this talk about “building a culture of life,” perhaps our president and politicians ought to think about food, clothes, shelter, health care, jobs, and dignity for those lacking these things; about not cutting Medicaid, Medicare and social programs, even those that work, like Social Security. Revising bankruptcy laws so that a family can get back on its feet without jeopardizing the family itself. The religious right seems blind to the fact that condemning some for their lack of conformity of faith is hardly a life-sustaining culture. Frightening people into parenthood and abandoning them in their time of need is hardly a life-sustaining. This animosity and intolerance illustrates that the road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions, seen in the culture war that the religious right has waged on everyone who does not worship as they do. Condemning and judging the poor for being sinful provides neither comfort nor change for the greater good. (Remember Jesus forgiving the lame’s sins before curing them?) Injecting specific religious beliefs into our legal system puts us on the slippery slope to theocracy, far, far away from this democracy we claim to hold dear.
The fundamental complexities of humanity are almost always messy; there is no one size fits all or universal puzzle piece that can neaten up the messiness of living. My experience is that you generally don’t stray from morality and dignity when you put compassion where judgement arises. Democracy must be compassionate to survive and spread; respect and privacy, too, are part of the equation.
By norman
March 21, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this
Crystal: Bush claims he is motivated by God and morality. That makes his past fair game: hypocrisy, what the New Testament calls Pharisaism. Clinton might have been a sinner but he wasn’t a Pharisee.
By Dee
March 21, 2005 09:49 AM | Link to this
Everyne already knew that Dubya was a drunk and druggie. I’m still wondering when the real story will break about his supposed “choking on a brownie and passing out” epsidoe is gonna break open! It sounded to me more like he was “dead drunk and passed out”!!! Choking on a brownie?!? Couldn’t the White House have done better than that?
By norman
March 21, 2005 09:50 AM | Link to this
Culture of Life! I happen to be pro-Life but I know Catholic propaganda when I hear it. The Church is vs. capital punishment, having for 2000 years been the chief supporter of killing dissidents. It is pro-life for foetuses but unconcerned about the terrible lives of deformed babies and the tragedies coming to their families. It loves suffering and pretends this is pro-life. Like Mother Teresa caring for dying babies in Calcutta while the Church opposed birth control and the prevention of AIDS through condom use.
I know hypocrisy when I hear it, and it has the flavor of Catholicism in it fully.
By James
March 21, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
I agree, this was a horrible breech of confidence by Mr. Wead. Even though I am a liberal & have no faith in Mr. Bush, I do believe he should have been able to keep confidence in his friends. But, this happens. And, who, exactly, was suprised about his past? We already knew this. However, I did like the insight it offered into how he became the man he is.
As for the ‘right to die’ case, It amazes me how both majority leaders called this case a ‘moral’ issue. The basic principles of the Republican Party is less government in our lives. Hear my words folks, Bush & all the other Republicans do not have conservatives in their hearts. They are only pandering to you. They will screw you just like they did in Iraq & are trying to do with Socail Security. Plus, Terri’s husband became a nurse to help her for the last 15 years. Courts have taken allot of time to look at the medical proof. This woman is not alive, she is just exisiting. She will be much happier with the Lord. Let it go!
By Crystal
March 21, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this
Clinton was a liar, not a Pharisee. Does that make him Judas? He betrayed us. Bush says his motivation is from God. That doesn’t mean he is always correct, since we all have the ability to reason and change our motivation whether for good or bad.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this
I love it when conservatives accuse liberals of being “uptight” when someone calls attention to the indescretions of one of their own. If y’all didn’t open the door, we wouldn’t be able to stroll in.
Do we all remember when Clinton was raked over the coals becuase he intimated that he had tried pot in college? Wow, it was HUGE. Yet when Bush is asked about his coke habit, liberals are uptight.
Clinton gets his affair dragged through the public spotlight and is lambasted by Newt Gingrich, a man who was on his…what…third affair at the time? Lest we forget, Mr. Gingrich not only divorced his cancer-afflicted wife to marry his mistress, but he later dumped HER to marry a different mistress.
Morality only seems to be of importance when its a conservative accusing a liberal of violating “family values”. When it’s a conservative misbehaving, we’re “uptight” for worrying about it.
Talk about double standards…
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 10:33 AM | Link to this
I’m sorry, but Bush betrayed the nation by taking us into a war of choice. The only person Clinton betrayed was his wife.
By mit
March 21, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this
ya’ll do realize we are talking about politicians don’t you. Clinton / Bush jr.; same to me.
both lied to us more than once. Jr. can say hey I didn’t lie, i just didn’t tell you straight when you asked about drug use. Clinton was a hoot, i didn’t inhale; oh really?
what gets me is the fact that a drug user with no money is a threat to society, a drug user with money just has a problem they can get over, so no big deal.
wead showed nothing that wasn’t already known now the conservatives are mad because the same thing happened to them as what happened to clinton. You betrayed us, oh you bunch of cry babies. get off your high horse, quit playing politricks and run this country instead of trying to run and ruin everyone else’s lives.
By dee
March 21, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this
I truly believe that if Terry Schiavo woke up tomorrow and was cognizant of her surroundings she would beg her parents to please let her go — let her leave this world with dignity and grace not with fights, accusations, and allegations. If they are such staunch Catholics and such believers then they should be happy that she wishes to go and be with God.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 10:50 AM | Link to this
Dear Liberals: The President is human. He erred in his past, acknowledged that he erred, and corrected his behavior long before he was elected into office. Furthermore, when asked if he would not hire gays…he stated “No, I said that I would not fire gays”. In other words, he is tolerant and his inner core of values prohibited him from “gay bashing”, which would have been immensely popular with much of his base. Please note that this has been a frequent source of criticism of conservatives by liberals.
To label him a “pharisee” (Norman)is absurd. Christ recruited into the ranks of apostles and associates those such as Paul. The President shows a wonderful example to young men such as myself…that we must turn away from the selfish pursuits of drink, drugs, and irresponsible sexual behavior (ahem, Clinton) if we expect to become worthy of Leadership. Ideally, we should become “born again” and follow Christ, no matter how checkered our past. By the way, Norman, I speak from deep personal experience on this matter.
These tapes buttress the President’s strong character and shows just how much transformation/growth he has experienced over his life. Reaffirms that I cast the right vote, twice.
By norman
March 21, 2005 10:52 AM | Link to this
Good note about Gingrich. Did you know that moral fellow hosted a program last night on the life of Pope John Paul II?
By kimberly
March 21, 2005 10:57 AM | Link to this
Clinton lied about sex because that’s what a gentleman does. (much obliged, Sir - hee hee) If we liberals are uptight about anything, it’s not that Bush gave in to his human weakness for partying, but the continuing conservative trend to crucify a Democrat for human indiscretions while defending the humanity of Republicans for theirs. This hypocracy is beyond lame.
By norman
March 21, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
Good point Dee, if the Schindlers really cared about Catholic teaching they would be happy to have Terri leave this world. But they are in the hands of propagandists and couldn’t even wiggle a finger without permission from the evil Catholic-evangelical-fundamentalist alliance.
By cwl
March 21, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
First, anyone with the slightest iota of sense knew the idiot was a scoundrel, a drunk and druggie, yet when Bill Clinton was asked about smoking marijuana and said he’d tried it once and hadn’t inhaled, we heard crap for months about it! The Christian right will vote for any fool who pretends to share their beliefs - and unfortunately, the idiot was elected (for the first time), and we’re stuck for another 4 years.
Second, re Terry S - why does the Republican party’s mantra continue to be “less government” when they continue to intrude government into our most personal lives, ie abortion, gay marriage, the right to unplug a shell that once wss a living human. The “Big Government” approach surely has been grandized by the Reps. It’s become a sickening place to live in the last few years - hopefully many eyes will be opened before 2008!
By norman
March 21, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
Joe: you are so naive I cannot believe you are a Christian even.
By Tom
March 21, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
This situation is oddly reminiscent to Linda Tripp taping phone conversations with her “friend”, Monica Lewinsky. Conservatives were not at all concerned at the time that Monica was betrayed by a friend. Why the big uproar now?
By norman
March 21, 2005 11:01 AM | Link to this
The Vatican just condemned removing Schiavo’s tube. Not surprising. That senile old Polak wants her to suffer like he is suffering, out of sheer Catholic sado-masochism.
By Lee
March 21, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this
I guess I missed the article on the tapes of President Bush.
A few questions come to mind: What was on the tapes? (from reading here, some information about his “party days” when he was younger). Was there anything “political” on the tapes, or was it all personal Bush stuff?
Were the tapes recorded with permission? Shaunti says that at first, they were. Now, were they recorded with the understanding that they were confidential, and not to be released? My assumption is that yes, they were.
Who is angry about the tapes? Bush, who is the subject of the tapes? The right, who claim it’s a smear campaign? The left, because it reveals the blemished background of an adversary? The public, because of privacy rights and expectations of confidentiality?
Now, if Bush said in the tapes “You know, if was in a persistent vegetative state, I’d want you guys to pull the plug.” then that may be more interesting.
By norman
March 21, 2005 11:12 AM | Link to this
One does wonder to what Bush’s feeding tube is connected.
By Katie
March 21, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this
While I don’t agree with the statements the President made and find them to be saddening and disheartening, I have to disagree more with the manner in which they were obtained. At what point does it become an invasion of a private citizen’s privacy for someone to surreptitiously tape a phone conversation “just in case”? Besides, Clinton was far worse in his younger days than Bush ever thought about being. Immorality is immorality whether it be womanizing and cheating on your wife or taking illicit drugs. We looked the other way once. Why not now? People don’t really care that Bush tried illegal substances. What they are really angry about is that he is the President still. At some point, people will have to deal with the real issue and stop making all these side shows up to distract people.
By lozen
March 21, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this
Actually Norman Bush’s feeding tube is connected to oil and other big business.
By Crystal
March 21, 2005 11:33 AM | Link to this
Clinton betrayed the country by making the presidential office a porn-in-person parlor, a sad event. Sad because he has great intellect and an endearing personality, enough to be a great president. But he was weak.
George W.Bush has every chance of becoming one of the great presidents in history. He has the ability to feel the yearning for freedom in the Middle East and act on it. For liberals to overlook that ability is a loss to America. The rest of the world has already begun to recognize that President Bush’s view of the future is a force for freedom.
Some of the subjects we so profusely intone will only be the nitty-gritty of history.
By John
March 21, 2005 11:33 AM | Link to this
All the Wead tapes do is reiterate why Dubya did not want to take his flight physicals
By Joe
March 21, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this
Norman: Naive? I’m giggling…you would be surprised, my friend. By the way, folks, ad hominem arguments add nothing to your cause. Examples, calling someone a “polak” or “naive” without some substance to your comments for or against an issue.
Terry Schiavo…wow, what a tragedy. Quite the dilemma. Poor woman has suffered serious brain damage and can’t even eat on her own. On the other hand, she’s not entirely “brain dead”. I’ve read that she is functioning on the mental equivalent of a 6 to 11 month old infant. Now the poor woman has become the rope in a tug-of-war of competing interests. Parents vs Husband, conservative vs. liberal, etc. Poor woman has had her feeding tube removed and replaced several times.
My verdict: Let the courts decide. Apparently, that has already taken place. Here’s why, Congressional bodies create laws which apply to everyone. However, each case is different. So, in probate matters such as the Schiavo situation, a judge or panel of judges must decide how to apply existing laws to each particular case. They must be free to do so in a dispassionate manner, free from the influence of extremely variable political winds. For those that don’t like the judges’ decision on this matter, you need to write your congressman and ask him/her to address this matter with a law in your particular state. Keep in mind that the law will apply to FUTURE cases. The judges in this case are not mean hearted; they are just doing their jobs with the law and precedents at hand.
Also, I feel horrible for Ms. Schiavo’s parents, who appear to genuinely believe that their daughter has a chance at recovery. I pray that the Lord grants them some Peace.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this
Norman, the racial slur is unbecoming.
By norman
March 21, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this
Sorry J. Morris. I should have said the Pope was a disabled Polak.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 11:44 AM | Link to this
Joe: The courts have decided several times. What makes this latest development so disturbing is that congress is interfering in a state matter and a judicial matter that is clearly outside its purvue. Republicans stand for smaller government? I can’t imagine anything more intrusive than Congress getting involved in the private affairs of one family…well, except the Patriot Act.
Katie: How was Clinton worse than Bush? Bush was a coccaine addict and an alcoholic. He was convicted for DUI. He nearly flunked out of college and was saved only by his father’s name and influence while Clinton was making straight A’s.
Clinton isn’t guiltless by any stretch - his inability to keep it in his pants is inexcusable, but the hypocrisy of the Right to suggest that he is fair game but that their President isn’t is ridiculous.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 11:47 AM | Link to this
Pole is the prefered description of nationality…Polak is a slur.
By AllaboutME
March 21, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this
…..here is the Jesus railing against the prohibition of the use of the psychedelic mushroom Amanita muscaria: But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. â€â€? Matt., 23:13
….isnt this whole sheeebang about Bush snorting and Clinton not-toking just further PROOF the War On Drugs DOES NOT WORK?
By Joe
March 21, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this
J. Morris: I agree with you. I am quite shocked and appalled at the U.S. Congress’s attempt at influence in this case. You are correct that this is a state matter. I cannot, at the moment, find basis for federal inteference. On the other hand, I see no problem with Gov. Jeb’s recent involvement. The whole situation is strictly a Florida matter. For the U.S. Senate to subpoena Ms. Schiavo to testify, outrageous! How awful! What, pray tell, shall she testify too? Sounds to me like political grandstanding at its worst, much like the baseball and steroids “hearing”. They need to follow the President’s lead and focus on social security and tax reform.
Also, sorry to get off subject…but Mr. Morris, what are the specific reasons you are against the patriot act? Have you read it in its entirety? Just curious.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this
Sheebang…sheebang…she groove…she groove
By R.S.
March 21, 2005 12:04 PM | Link to this
Don’t blame ME; I didn’t vote for him in either debacle; oops, ELECTION. Ah, but banning homosexual marriage IS gay-bashing; it’s denying basic human rights to decent, tax-paying Americans whose only “crime” (?!?!) is having a sexual orientation not as that of the majority & treating them as second-class citizens because of that. As for Terri Schiavo, even if her brain IS functioning at human infant level, I hardly call that quality of life; a normal baby’s brain WILL develop; hers never will. What once was a person is now a sad shell that only exists as a burden & a cause of grief & false hope.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 12:10 PM | Link to this
How many politicians have not drank, smoked or snorted at any point in their lives before being elected? Let he who is without sin cast the 1st stone.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 12:14 PM | Link to this
Well, let’s just look at ONE of the provisions of the Patriot act:
Section 215 - allows the FBI to covertly spy on the private affairs of US citizens without probable cause, to investigate them based on the excercise of 1st Ammendment rights, i.e. the books they read. This is a 4th ammendment violation.
Don’t know about you, but this is pretty dang frightening. Add in the expansion of police powers, the decrease of judicial review of clandestine surveilance, the increased ease of obtaining a warrant to search and seize, and you’ve got 1984 waiting to happen. J. Edgar Hoover, anyone?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 12:17 PM | Link to this
The problem is, Jack, that all the conservatives are throwing entire quarries and then getting p** when someone throws back. Spouting biblical platitudes doesn’t change that fact.
By norman
March 21, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this
J.Morris: Polak is the Polish word for a male Pole.
You won’t even let me have a little fun!
By mit
March 21, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this
it seems some of you have personal phone conversations with the president. exactly how do you know that Bush is drug free now? That he was just using drugs in college and that he quit afterwards. assuming doesn’t mean your right. he still could be on drugs.
crystal, you say that Bush could be the great pres. of the day by forcing freedom in the middle east?
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this
Boy we are going through the topics so fast today, and its onlyy Monday!!!!
Bush has done nothing more than MOST of us has done. Its time to bury that horse.
As for Ms. Schiavo, I spent the weekend mulling over her sitatution and I belive she should be allowed to die. But could we find a more humane way?
And now the Patriot Act: If you haven’t done anything wrong why would you be so worried about it. I don’t care if the governement knows what kind of books I read, or what I do as long as it catches those who wish to do harm to those of us trying to live a law-abiding life. If it helps to prevent another 9-11 I’m all for it.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this
Norman, why give Zack and his ilk ammunition? Polak is clearly a slur in the vernacular, whatever its origins. They already call you racist - why make it worse.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this
Mr. Morris: Actually, section 501(a)(2) of the PATRIOT act states that investigations SHALL NOT be conducted based solely upon “activities protected by the first amendment”. Misinterpretation aside, I see your point. Thanks for your comment. I agree that we must be vigilant in protecting our civil rights, especially against government intrusion.
Also, allow me to point out that PATRIOT is designed to give law enforcement the power to act against terrorism similar to that which RICO grants against organized crime. Example: You are doing business with a gangster, who happens to mention your name in a “tapped” conversation. The federal agent could secretly apply for wiretaps against you. Your business may be entirely legitimate and above board, but RICO might allow investigation simply on basis of association.
I’ve heard of no significant civil rights abuse claims in RICO cases. Hopefully, PATIOT will be handled with similar delicate fashion by the feds.
By Lee
March 21, 2005 12:40 PM | Link to this
So, I guess the tapes did show the president in a poor light. No news there, he never wanted to talk about his “party” days, as he says they were behind him.
But his over-bearing politicking is here to stay. His brother couldn’t keep a person (who’s in a persistent vegetative state) alive, so he’s interfering, and signing a federal document at 1 in the morning so that a state court’s decision can be reviewed… AGAIN????
Whether you agree with the court’s decision or not, witnessing the federal actions on this case should cause great fear in where federal powers really lie. The state court’s decision has gone through all legal procedures, and even to the Supreme Court. It has lasted through a Governor’s meddling (which was found unconstitutional), and now a Presidential meddling (which will also be found unconstitutional if it proceeds).
Let Terri’s wishes be granted.
And I for one would like to hear the tape where President and Mrs. Bush talk about filling out their living wills.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 12:41 PM | Link to this
Isn’t it spelled “polack”?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this
Bruce, the “If you haven’t done anything wrong you don’t have anything to be worried about” excuse is the most insidiously frightenting thing I have ever heard. It means you are willing to lay down your freedoms and civil rights and trust that the government will do right with them. Are you REALLY so naive and complacent?
You know, as the Nazis continued to advance on Europe, many Jews thought “It will never happen here - we’re good people”. But it did happen there, Bruce. The people persecuted by McCarthy and his friends were innocent of wrong-doing too, but that didn’t keep them from being persectued.
What ELSE would you be willing to accept “if it would prevent another 9-11”, Bruce? Death camps? Jack-booted policemen bursting into your neighbors house and dragging them away? The dismantling of our legal system so that anyone can be held indefinitely on the slightest of charges?
What are you willing to stand for Bruce, what kind of police state are you willing to live in so that you will feel just a little more secure?
You don’t deserve freedom.
And yes - it is WRONG for the government to pry into your affair
By Zack
March 21, 2005 12:57 PM | Link to this
Norman—Actually, Bill Clinton did claim to be a Christian, so he also is a Pharisee.
Obviously, the term “pro-choice Christian” is as big a contradiction as it gets.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 12:58 PM | Link to this
A little irritable today Mr.Morris?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this
Joe - This does not extend to non-US citizens. The constitution applies to them, too.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this
Oh lookie - Zack’s bringing up abortion. AGAIN.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:11 PM | Link to this
Sorry if you mistake passion for irritability. I find people who don’t appreciate the freedoms they have and who are willing to throw them away because of it incomprehensible.
You know, a recent study showed that a substantial portion of high school students believe the 1st ammendment goes to far. Many believed that the press should not be able to publish opinions that were in opposition to those of the governments, and did not believe that political dissent of the average citizen should be protected. A MAJORITY believed this.
I find it terrifying that people are so willing to throw away everything that makes this country great because they are scared. Irritable? Nah - frightened of what we could become…frightened of people like Bruce who, while well-meaning, don’t think beyond their own nose, their own life.
Benjamin Franklin said: “Those who give up essential freedom to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither freedom nor safety.” He was right on target.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 01:11 PM | Link to this
Mr. Morris: You are correct. Human rights is human rights. Citizen or non. Your imagery in earlier post was a little extreme (jack-booted policemen and such) but I cannot deny that such has happened in “civilized” societies in recent history. We must be vigilant for oppression as well as terrorism so that we may defeat them. Preferably through peaceful means (court and legislative proceedings)but by other means if necessary (thank God for the 5th amendment). How about that, folks, a liberal and conservative agreeing on something here! Have a great day :-)
By Mara
March 21, 2005 01:18 PM | Link to this
FYI - Terri Schiavo has nothing left of her brain except the brain stem. There is no cognitive function. Contrary to some comments here, even a very young infant has cognitive function. How else would they learn? Terry has no faculty left. There’s nothing there but a brainstem. She is, in fact, brain dead. Shame on those who defy her expressed wishes that extrordinary efforts not be used to prolong her life. If federal legislation isn’t extrordinary effort, I don’t know what is. (Yes, I know she probably meant medically extrordinary, but….) As for the shrub, who really cares. He’s a holier-than-thou moralist who likes to trumpet his sinner-to-saint life story. It isn’t any more interesting than it was before the tapes. Though Jon Stewarts rendition of the tape still slays me…”Hey Day-deee…” HA!
By Jack
March 21, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this
I’m not going to worry about the govt. taking over until they try to take our firearms. Then I will worry.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:29 PM | Link to this
On the Schiavo case, what really amuses me is that some Congressman was quoted on NPR this morning saying that Schiavo wasn’t on life support, she was on a feeding tube.
Well, the US Supreme Court and the Florida Statutes define artifical feeding and hydration as life support…so our Congressman was spouting ignorance of the law he is pledged to uphold.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 01:31 PM | Link to this
J Morris,
Living under the “SKY THAT IS FALLING” can be pretty depressing too. This world has come a long way from the days of Hilter and McCarthy. I just don’t see something like that happening again. Call it naive if you want but I refuse to live my life in fear.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:33 PM | Link to this
Oh yes…let them remove your right to privacy, your right of association, your right to speak freely, you don’t care…but let them take your GUN away and THEN you get upset.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this
Bruce, those who fail to appreciate the lessons that history teaches are doomed to repeat them.
I prefer not to give the government the temptation. Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any government given the power to intrude into its citizens lives will continue to exercise that power to increasing degrees. It’s inevitable.
You think things have changed since the days of McCarthy? Are you paying attention? Switch “Communist” with “Muslim” and things start to seem a little familiar.
By Lyrazel
March 21, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this
Gee, the average high school student cant find Idaho on a map. Are they really the people we should listen to concerning limiting our countrys amendment rights? Certainly its after one leaves the protection umbrellas of ones parents that you learn what those rights actually involve. Yet isnt it odd the people GWB is preaching to about SSI in his big PR campaign are highschool kids…someone should have told the Bush camps to remove the kids Ipod earbuds from their ears PRIOR to the photographs taken of Fearless Leader and Hillary Duff….
By Vicki
March 21, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this
Back to Bush on drugs…Isn’t this just the ultimate hipocracy? Bush snorts cocaine and smokes marijuana and continues the war on drugs incarcerating millions of people who can’t afford effective legal representation instead of funding programs to remedy the situation, and it’s no big deal to either Shaunti or Dianne? Women in prisons for drug offenses, in many instances by just being married or dating drug dealers and/or users, has increased substantially in recent years. But, Shaunti ever the hack for Bush’s ‘Marriage’ guru Wade Horn, Maggie Gallagher’s mentor, would have us believe, as she has in previous columns, that these woman should just shut up and marry the right man, stay married to him, and have lots of children, so they can have access to daddies. Meanwhile, instead of funding drug programs, Bush & Horn et al. are throwing away millions of dollars that do nothing to help anyone, but themselves, necons, and the Christian conservatives they dupe.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 01:41 PM | Link to this
Mara: On the contrary, Ms. Shciavo has the ability to 1) laugh, 2) attempt to speak words, and 3) express emotion. All of these faculties are cerebral. I have witnessed severely autistic kids in similar states. Shall we withhold food and drink from them also? They are kept alive for the same reason that Ms. Shiavo’s parents wish to keep her alive, a glimmer of hope that somehow she will get better through some breakthrough therapy. I agree with you, however, that U.S. Congressional involvement is not called for. The judges in this case have ruled according to Florida state law and legal precedent.Their ruling should be binding.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 01:44 PM | Link to this
You should take a chill pill J.Morris. I did not say I was happy with rights being taken away from us. Do you think we should open our borders to anyone and let everyone do as they please? My point was that when a govt wants to rule totally, the 1st thing they do is take firearms from the citizenry. That is why the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Geeeezzze!
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:47 PM | Link to this
Joe, the abilities you mention are only purported by her family. Every reputable medical doctor who has examined her - the ones NOT touting their miracle cures and therapies - unequivocally state that any observed reactions are simply that - random reactions with no driving force.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:50 PM | Link to this
Yeah, sure that’s what you meant Jack. You and every other gun-toting redneck out there who thinks that owning a gun is the end-all and be-all of existence.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this
OK, I really am kind of hostile today, it seems. Sorry folks. Monday.
By Scalia
March 21, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this
You people confuse me. Who are you to decide what I can and can’t do as an adult? I am old enough to make my own decisions. The whole city curfew thing is terrible. I am an adult, but I have to be at home by 3:00 because everything is closed. I am not allowed to buy alcohol on Sunday even though I am well past the legal drinking age. What kind of society is this that we live in? Elected officials have become nothing more than elected parents. They tell you when you can do this, that you shouldn’t do that because it is morally wrong, you can’t smoke in public places, etc. What is this?
By Jack
March 21, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this
How can you call me a gun toting redneck when you have never met me? I am college educated and from the North. (and BTW we won the civil war) Go iron your dress.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this
What the hell does the Civil War have to do with anything?
And…you can be a redneck and still be from the North. I spent six months in upstate New York - I know.
Uh…and I don’t own a dress. ?
By Scott
March 21, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this
Good grief….can y’all actually stay on topic? Did you actually read what the topic is??? Between Norman railing about hating the Christians, the Catholic church is the center of all evil…to RS reverting into some kind of Tourets syndrome about gay-bashing whenever he gets the chance…to Zack tossing the religious bombs..racism from both sides in order to somehow “get a point across”…it gets a bit ridiculous… re-read the issue above. Regardless of how you feel about the Patriot act, the Schiavo case, gay-marriage, religion/faith issues, abortion or anything I may have missed, pick your battles. If you feel the need to vent in general off topic, feel free…there is a page for that. This ain’t it
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:04 PM | Link to this
Well, Scott - whenever the topic doesn’t generate much debate, we tend to drift a little off topic. It’ll be OK - really.
By Tony
March 21, 2005 02:04 PM | Link to this
I know I’m wasting my time, however:
1). First Terri: After 8 years, No not right after she was diagnosed, but not until 8 years later did it come to Michaels attention, and that of his brother and his brothers wife (NO ONE ELSE) that Terri’s wishes was not to be a burden. Seems to me, that if you going to pull the plug, you’d get-er-done then, not wait 8 years. (Again the only people who say Terri wouldn’t want to be kept alive have a definite conflict). And she’s not a burden to her family, why not walk away? What good is going to come from the removal of Terri’s tube? Is this world going to be a better place because one person on hear say claims that’s what Terri wanted? Her family, her father and her mother, brother and sister all say no, That’s not Terri’s wish. I think a lot of you are looking at it as if it was you, look at it as if it was your child. Today it appears Michael is motivated by self interest against Terri’s parents. Shouldn’t someone, from outside (Federal) look into what in the heck is going on here.
2). A convicted killer after the state sez, without a doubt this guy is guilty and deserves to die. He goes straight into the Federal Appeals Process. Now, seems to me, after all, there isn’t a written request from Terri, There’s plenty of doubt about her wishes. Why wouldn’t you give Terri her due course? You do a convicted killer. But as I stated earlier, most of you wouldn’t give an unborn child a chance yet alone someone diagnosed with brain damage. And who in the hell are you to determine what the quality of life is? That’s between Terri and her Caregiver.
Lastly, Michael has gone on with his life. If Terri is in the ground or at her Parents house, what difference is it to him or YOU?
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this
J,
You don’t even know if I own a gun or not so how can you say stuff like that. For once I agree with Jack you need a day off, go fishing, spend some time with the kids, before the government comes and takes them away. The only reason you are saying this is because we now have a repubilcan controlled congress and White House. I would be willing to bet that if this was 20 years ago when the democrats controlled everything you would not be so afraid.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this
Maybe you should wear one to look the part.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this
Tony, I can’t think of a decision that I would rather have the Federal government stay OUT of. The law is clear. One spouse has the authority to make medical decisions on behalf of the other assuming that spouse lacks the ability to do so him or herself. The parents have no legal authority here. The court has ruled time and time again. Congress has NO BUSINESS involving itslef. It is out of its JURISDICTION. It is PANDERING TO RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES for VOTES.
It’s pathetic. It’s sad. It’s scary.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this
Bruce, you are an idiot. If any government was attempting to erode my civil liberties I would have a problem. Only you are chooising to make it about parties.
Jack: go f*** yourself.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this
Oh, and Bruce, you’re right. I probably wouldn’t have been scared with Democrats in control. Democrats actually believe in civil liberties and freedoms. Republicans just try to figure out how to narrow them.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this
I love you too Mr. Morris. :)
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this
J Morris,
And you my friend are paranoid and nothing more. Be Chicken Little all you want but calling me names will not scare me either. I cannot understand why liberials are so quick to call names when they get backed into a corner. You are wrong J, and furtehrmore you have no proof the government is trying to take over your private life. I am sure this is nothing more than what Dan Rather has told you.
By Scott
March 21, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this
Thanks, J Morris…I feel much better now
As far as the gun issue (2nd amendment) while it is important, as they all are, it is likely the one that will protect you the least from agressive govt. action.
The 2nd Amendment was enacted during a time when… 1) The military was your neighbor and everyone had to particpate to survive British reprisal. 2) Most people had a gun for hunting (read as survival) purposes to feed their families. 3) Much of the United States was wilderness at the time requiring some form of self defense capability
Present day, with the capabilities of the US military, you have very little chance of resisting an armed conflict against that machine. The rest of your rights need to be guarded that much closer, since your ability to handle/own a firearm is really almost a moot point.
That being said, I do believe you should that have the 2nd amendment unfettered by government action.
By lozen
March 21, 2005 02:32 PM | Link to this
Motherhood by choice, not by force. Very simple.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this
Jack, I should apologize. I’m a little sensitive about the kind of crack you made, so I overreact. Sorry about the suggestion that you perform anatomically impossible acts.
By Tony
March 21, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this
Hold on J. There’s a witness who testified that Michael was abusive and she (Terri) was going to request a divorce. A witness on the day of the accident testified that she tried to convince Terri not to go home.
Your correct with the law. But, if there’s a doubt to his intent, than that should be investigated thoroughly. The state court dismisses her (Terri’s friends account). I don’t know why. But if your going to judge on a life or death issue, and the lower court has never ruled in favor of Terri, I think, the judge and the circus around this case should be moved and re-evaluated. IF after all a life is in the balance, move the case, hear all arguments and decide. You do it for a murderer, we should do it for the vulnerable.
By Lyrazel
March 21, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this
Hello, how many people actually read Mr Weads book/article? Just curious because I would actually like to know the years GWB was doing cocaine and pot. Please post an answer somebody….Thanks.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this
I know J. I don’t like being called a red-neck. Let us try to be nicer.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this
Well Bruce, A) The Patriot Act represents an intrusion of the government into private citizens affairs that is unnacceptable, so to that extent, yes - the government is overstepping its authority. B) The bulk of my comments concern what CAN happen when people - like you - complacently allow the government to tighten its controls over its citizens because that tightening does not directly affect you.
I am not being paranoid to say that we should be continually vigilant against government intrusion and erosion of civil rights. If we allow ourselves to ignore tiny little excisions of our freedoms, one day we will wake up and realize that we’ve lost them all.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this
LOZEN - HOPE YOU HAD A GOOD BIRTHDAY! May the Sun always be in your face and the wind at your back.
By Boscoe
March 21, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Tyhat’s why I’m convinced norman and JMorris are the same….They resort to the same tactic when cornered. They even say the exact same thing. Maybe they’re brothers.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 02:53 PM | Link to this
yeah Boscoe…like you’ve never called someone a name. Please go away and continue your bizzare fixation on Norman.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this
Really reaching on that one Boscoe.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 03:01 PM | Link to this
No J Morris, it is people like me that have served this country and am very proud of it. I refuse to believe that I should live my life afraid of the government just because you say so. Then when I disagree with you I am a gun-toting redneck and an idiot. Show me one freedom you have lost because of the PA!!!! You sir should find you another country to live in since this one has you so scared you won’t even read a book.
By Boscoe
March 21, 2005 03:02 PM | Link to this
NO JMorris, I don’t call people names.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 03:04 PM | Link to this
Regarding gun toting rednecks…I am one and rather proud of it. If by “red” you mean republican and by “gun toting” meaning the guy strolling through the mall next to you with his cute wife and 3 kids…who also happens to be carrying a Glock. Perhaps by “red” you mean a Red Blooded American who believes in defending ALL of our rights as enshrined in the Bill of Rights.
Morris, you may have used “gun-toting redneck” as a slur. But you need to keep in mind that it is guys like me who will step up and defend your a$$ if stuff hits the fan. Also keep in mind it is my Brothers who join the Marines and the Fire Departments and the Police Departments across this land.
Morris, do you not believe that there are threats to your life and liberty other than abusive government? If not review the events of Friday March 11th. It is ashame that I or another “gun-toting redneck” did not have business in the five points area on that day. Perhaps Mr. Nichols would be history by now.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this
Thankyou Joe. Good post!
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 03:11 PM | Link to this
Hey Bruce - that’s the first article of faith for the Nationalist. USA, Love it or Leave it! I guarantee I read more books in a week than you do in a year. This is evidenced by the fact that you didn’t realize that I wasn’t even talking about YOU when I called someone a gun-toting redneck.
If you did serve this country Bruce, you should be a little more concerned about preserving its freedoms than you seem to be. No one says you have to be afraid of your government, but your attitude, that as long as an unjust law doesn’t impact you it’s not worth worrying about, is contemptible.
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 03:15 PM | Link to this
The incompetence of our current Commander in Chief speaks for itself…….drugs truly damages the brain and he is living proof of that….so to compare Clinton’s infidelity to Bush’s lack of intellect and his tainted reputation of misleading the country and starting a war he has no idea how to finish is absolutely absurd…..Clinton’s indiscretions have been totally overshadowed by Bush’s……..not to mention a stolen election that has gone unnoticed…..
By Boscoe
March 21, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this
JMorris, could you give some specifics on how the Patriot Act robs us of our rights please. You must be rich in order to be able to sit and do nothing but read all those books every week.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this
How was the election stolen? Was it because your canidate lost? Maybe they lost because their platform was anybody but Bush and lack of better ideas.
By lozen
March 21, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this
Thank you Jack. I did have a good birthday. I think the feds interference in the Schiavo case is incredible! The problem is that she looks as if she is aware. She seems to look lovingly at her mother, her eyes move, she blinks. She doesn’t look brain dead. It would be hard for me to watch her starve to death. If I were her parents I might be doing everything I could to keep her alive. That is not condoning the federal gov’t overstepping its bounds, however. JMorris, I’m with you. I believe we are in danger of losing our freedom in this country. How much freedom are people willing to give up for a false sense of safety? Right after 9/11 the whole world was weeping for us and with us. Then GW blew that sympathy by going to war with Iraq based on a lie about weapons of mass destruction. And that reminds me, when did one soldier start being called a “troop”? A troop is a group. One soldier is not a troop. But the daily news is full of “…four troops - two more troops - killed today in Iraq.”
By Scott
March 21, 2005 03:26 PM | Link to this
Drugs truly damage the brain..true…but Clinton admitted to drug use as well, so is he as culpable? Clinton waged war in Bosnia, but wait..that was a “police action” with UN support….
Bush has done things that have met with public distaste to say the least. In several instances, he deserved the reaction he got. Clinton did as well. I don’t think anyone could argue with that (though I suspect someone will)
Anyone who ultimately puts their faith in any politician, be it Republican or Democrat is asking to be disappointed. Elect who you think represents you, but you had better watch them closely. None of them is beyond reproach
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 03:26 PM | Link to this
The election was stolen in 2000, do you dispute this??? Maybe I should have clarified which election I speak of……..
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 03:32 PM | Link to this
J. Morris,
It is apparent your ego is certainly over-inflated. I have and will again defend this country if needed. However I am more concerned about those powers OUTSIDE of our government than I am those inside. We are all Americans and when it comes to defending this nation I want to be first in line. However, I get the feeling you will be the one you see in the movies trying to make a deal with the enemy so you can save yourself and the H**L with the rest of us. Am I questioning your Patriotism? YES!
If this country falls it will be from within because of folks like you that want things watered down so you can do whatever you want without consequence. Freedom is not cheap my friend, and we all must pay the price. The boogie man is out there and he is coming. Now Mr. Morris what shoudl we do? Lay down and let him have it because you are afraid?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 03:32 PM | Link to this
Joe, there are Democrats and Republicans in military service, in police departments, in firehouses. There are liberals and conservatives putting their lives on the line. It’s not just rednecks or Republicans, friend, though y’all like to believe that, I’m sure. Your “Brothers”? Give me a break.
Yes, I do find the idea that a gun is somehow a holy object disgusting. I think that if you get all carried away about your ownership of a gun, you have serious emotional issues and insecurities that need to be addressed. A gun has one purpose - to kill people.
Yes. Sometimes that killing is necessary. Sometimes that killing is needed. Sometimes it helps people - I have no problem with that. I have no problem with you defending yourself. What I DO have a problem with are people who worship guns and worship war. Both are occasionally needed, but they should never be glorified.
And why on earth does a concern for abusive government equate with not thinking there are other threats?
By Jack
March 21, 2005 03:34 PM | Link to this
How many times were they supposed to count the votes in Florida? As many as it took to give Gore the win?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this
Yo, Boscoe. We’ve already covered that. Please scroll up.
By Scott
March 21, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this
Lozen - glad you had a good birthday. Just for clarification, it’s possible is using a slang term for a soldier commonly used. “Troop” is often used as a slang term refering to individual soldiers but is more correctly used to describe a cavalry unit (no I don’t mean horses for those wiseguys out there)
Royal Chic - I suspect the “election being stolen” would have been said regardless of who won. If you recall, it was pretty close and neither candidate would have had the full support of the American people
By Joe
March 21, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this
Stolen election? No, its called Electoral College. Thank God things played out as they did in 2000. I for one feel a lot safer post 9/11 with our current Commander-in-Chief. “Starting a war he has no idea how to finish” is an incorrect statement for 2 reasons, 1) Arab Islamic Terrorists started the war by killing 5,000 civilians in New York City. and 2) Elections are being held and freedom is on the march in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and Jordan. Looks like Victory is imminent as these former terrorist havens are no longer.
The analogue is World War II. Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor, not the Germans. However, we went on the offensive in both the Pacific AND Europe because of the loose affiliation and the dangerous ideology that drove both regimes. Similarly we have gone on the offensive in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Japan and Germany are free countries today. Iraq and Afghanistan will be free countries tomorrow.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this
Bruce, I am not surprised that you would question my Patriotism. People like you believe that being Patriotic means doing what the government says. It’s clear that, though you may have served the nation, you have no idea what it stands for.
I will continue to stand up for personal freedoms and personal liberties. I’m not “afraid” though you keep trying to characterize me as weak and cowardly. In fact, I have more courage than you ever will because I dare to speak out against the majority. If anyone is unpatriotic, sir, it is you.
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this
Scott, I totally agree that our government should be questioned by its citizens……I don’t subscribe to putting my faith in earthly man……only the Most High, the one who has been faithful to me…….so I’m not justifying any politicians actions….I’m simply commenting on the comparison of one to the other…..Clinton’s infidelities never interferred with his ability to perform his duties on a state or national level….he admitted his faults (as a man should) and apologized to America for his behavior and lying before a grand jury…..etc…….as for Bush he will not admit to one indiscretion or idiosyncrisy before or after his terms as President…..he does not take responsibility for his actions and thus we are left in an uncompromising situation where war no longer requires an exit strategy, explanation, rhyme or reason……in our great country starting a war under false pretenses bears no consequences……or does it??? We SHALL find out sooner rather than later:)
By Jack
March 21, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this
J- No one on this blog has said that guns are holy. Give me a break. Back when men hunted for their food, they prayed that they could shoot straight and true or their family may go hungry. Joe was right. If more people were to carry guns, Nicols would be pushing up daisies. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. You can not dispute that.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 03:45 PM | Link to this
Um…you do know that there is no link between 9/11, Iraq, and Al Qaeda, right Joe?
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 03:53 PM | Link to this
When has this country ever truly been concerned with the state of governments in foreign lands without some benefit for America and vice versa???
These former terrorist havens may not be in existence as far as you know or through the sources that you listen to, read from, and subscribe to due to this administration’s need to mislead this country into thinking that this war is about expanding a “gloabal democracy”…..a clever cover up, but not convincing, but only the intelligent shall question its authority and research for themselves……
By cw
March 21, 2005 03:55 PM | Link to this
J. Morris - I find myself agreeing with you on almost every point.
Mara - did you used to work for cryo? You sound like the smart gal I used to work with.
Shrub lives in a fantasy world - as John Lennon said, Instant karma will get hime one day.
For republicans, it’s do as I say, but certainly not as I do, ie the abortions had by the wives of both Bob Barr and Newt Gingrich, with their full knowledge and approval. And is being divorced over and over, and having multiple affairs while married, as in Newt’s life, really considered a “family value” lifestyle?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 04:00 PM | Link to this
I have a feeling that if a lot more people had guns, there would be a lot more dead people lying around.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 04:02 PM | Link to this
J,
Can you tell us one freedom you have lost due to the Patriot Act?
I have owned a gun since I was 12 years old and NOT ONCE, even while in the Marines, have I killed anyone. Althought I have killed some pretty nice deer. But they were attacking me first! Not one gun I have ever owned has fired unless someone pulled the trigger.
This is just another example of you being paranoid.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this
Lol Bruce. I’m paranoid because I actually consider what CAN happen. Ok.
How about the freedom to live my life without the Government intruding into it? That’s a pretty crucial freedom.
By Scott
March 21, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this
Royal Chic - Yes, I believe Bush should be man enough to admit his mistakes regardless of what they may be. Which I believe he has done with regards to past drug/alcohol abuse…at least as much as any politician ever will (“I did not inhale”..come on..lots of people have smoked weed and nobody buys that) I do think our country going to war with or without reasons that the world accepts will have consequences, if for no other reason than cultural differences, religious differences, etc. will change perspectives.
The diversity of this country causes much of the dissent between differing factions in this country. Sometimes that is perceived as a liability but I think it is a strength. Rather it can be a strength. Whether I agree with you or not, regardless of whether JMorris or Joe every see eye to eye is not the point. The fact that they be allowed to disagree verbally without repercussion is.
Now do I think the war in Iraq will have repercussions? I think it has and will continue to in the future.
By norman
March 21, 2005 04:10 PM | Link to this
Don’t call Boscoe’s infatuation with me bizarre. He simply understand that I know all about the Catholic Church, have dug up all its skeletons and am therefore a dangerous man.
Boscoe, I am not J.Morris.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 04:13 PM | Link to this
R.C.
Yes our benefit from going to Iraq is simple. They attacked us first. Anyone who thinks there was not ties between Iraq, Al Qaeda and Bin Liden should stop watching the evening news and CNN. Just because they cannot find evidence doesn’t mean the ties are not there.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this
J, What intrusion?
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this
Yes Bruce. There were ties between Al Qaeda and Saddaam Hussein. Never mind the fact that the Ba’athists are secular, and second only to the US and Isreal on the list of the enemies of Islamic extremism. Never mind the fact that Bin Laden listed Hussein as his #2 enemy. There were ties.
Forget logic, reason, history, the findings of every intelligence agency in existence, the opinion of Middle Eastern scholars everwhere. There were ties because your secondary Jesus GWB said there were.
By mit
March 21, 2005 04:23 PM | Link to this
just because there is no evidence that Bruce is homosexual doesn’t mean he is straight.
now see how absurd your rationalizing can be.
By Kenneth
March 21, 2005 04:25 PM | Link to this
Just because one is paranoid doesn’t mean that they’re NOT out to get you.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this
1st of all. I’m 29, so I feel comfortable describing my friends and their colleagues of my generation who fight this war for your family and mine BROTHERS. Yes, my BROTHERS are patrolling streets here and in the Mid-East. My BROTHERS are responding to fire/EMS calls and awaiting casualties here. My life may have led to a “cushy” job that allows me to sit here in my office and write diatribes with you people, but it does not mean that I don’t feel a pang of grief in my heart when one of our Bravest get shot down or blown up on an Iraqi street. Also, I have dear friends (and past colleagues) that still serve in Public Safety. I feel quite confident that the vast majority of them are REPUBLICAN. There are just not that many liberal law enforcement officers, firefighter/paramedics or US Marines. Trust me on this one…I can call it without Gallup. A MAN (OR WOMAN)WHOSE PROFESSION INVOLVES RISKING THEIR LIFE FOR ME AND MY FAMILY DOES NOT NEED TO BE KIN TO BE MY BROTHER.
2nd of all, links between 9/11, Iraq, and Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is made up primarily of Muslim Sunni Arabs. Al Qaeda orchestrated the attack on the World Trade Center. The Baath party in Iraq (i.e. Saddam Hussein) was made up of Muslim Sunni Arabs. Furthermore, Saddam made a big show of issuing monetary rewards to families of suicide bombers in Israel. We neutralized safe haven in Afghanistan. The Saudis, Egyptians, and Pakistanis were on board with us. Process of elimination left Iraq as only remaining harborage for the Al Qaeda network. How do you rid roaches from your home? Eliminate their harborage.
Other reasons for the Iraqi attack were to 1) Serve an example to other countries who might consider harboring terrorists. 2)Create a “battlefield” where terrorists who want to kill Americans can go and try. By creating this battlefield we have drawn down the manpower that terror groups could export here. Setting the battlefield is a crucial “lynchpin” war strategy. We fight them there with Marines versus here with Police and Fire/EMS. 3) Deposing Saddam Hussein and replacing his repressive regime with a representative government would create a dominoe effect throughout the troubled Middle East, thus enabling freedom and defusing the anger that fueled Al Qaeda’s recruitment efforts. By defusing the anger, I mean giving a young man a chance at a life of freedoom with a job and a girl and a VOICE in how his country is run.
I agree that the “Weapons of Mass Destruction” rationale was a public shield that did not represent the true nature of our reasonings. However, it would be tough to walk around in diplomatic circles discussing the need to “make an example of Iraq”. So “weapons of mass destruction” equates to the Lusitania sinking of WW I.
By mit
March 21, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this
Just because there is no evidence showing Bruce is not a woman doesn’t mean he is a man.
maybe you should start watching the news instead of white house video recordings.
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this
Bruce, what exactly is the benefit of them attacking us first and who is “They” in which you speak of??? Do you not think we should have evidence of who attacked us before we randomly attack an entire nation of people or terrorist group???? Simply flash pictures of random Al Queda linked individuals and make everyone of their kind a target???? You are correct the ties may be there, but are we for certain that they are or aren’t??? Just because you have balls doesn’t mean you have to flaunt them???
Scott, I have enjoyed our dialogue….I respect you for voicing your opinion in an intelligent, rational manner…..Bush may have admitted to the inconsequential fact that he once did drugs…….and Clinton should simply admit that he inhaled pot, but it simply boils down to the fact that neither one of these revelations should have any bearing on their ability to effectively run our nation……In Bush’s case, it probably has effected his ability to have sound judgement and make a comprehensible speech….lol!! One should have nothing to do with the other, but in Bush’s case it may have everything to do with why this administration is in complete chaos…..
By Steve
March 21, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this
CW, You are right, for some republicans, it is “do as I say, and not as I do”. Just like it is that way for some democrats.
No one person represents the ideals and values of a group completely. I’m as conservative as they come. And yet, the two republicans you mentioned (Newt and Barr), I find appalling. I agree with them on many issues (not all), but have little respect for either of them.
Now back to the topic…I have great admiration for President Bush. Does his past activities tarnish my current admiration for the man? No. Should the fact that he had a drinking problem in the past and may have used drugs be held against him now? No. And thankfully, people on both sides of the aisle seem to agree. The only ones that made a big deal out these tapes is the media.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 04:33 PM | Link to this
J.
You don’t give your enemy enough credit. These folks are smarter than you think. Logic and reason is what brings me to the understanding that there are ties, even today. Please don’t let CNN and Dan Rather fool you into thinking there isn’t. I mean even as smart as Mr. Bush is he was fooled into think he had a friend in Mr. Wead and could trust him.
It must be very hard coming to the realization that, with all the books you read, you are wrong about something.
By Scott
March 21, 2005 04:37 PM | Link to this
Norman - Serious question, not meant flippantly…were you associated with the Catholic Church in some way? You seem very against them in particular.
JMorris.. you should be paranoid, because this is a dangerous world these days. Sadly, we seem to make it worse rather than better no matter who is in charge
Absolutely all people should have the opportunity to own guns, but not without proving you can use judgement as well. Thinking you could have just “taken out” a guy like Nichols if he approached you is dangerously naive. Most people walk through their day without any idea of how close predators lurk. Heck most people can’t name five specific things they saw on their drive home from downtown
By mit
March 21, 2005 04:40 PM | Link to this
my actual brother is a fireman and my mom is a firewoman. both and all i have talked to do not describe themselves as rep. or dem., but bush lost a ton of possible votes from them this election. seeing how he said one thing after 9/11 (the first responder thing) and didn’t act on it. to this day, they don’t have what they were told they would get. chemical spill? my mom would rush in without protection because that’s her job and the govt. has not given her protection like they said they would. I don’t know one fireman that voted for bush in ‘04 because of this.
By Bruce
March 21, 2005 04:45 PM | Link to this
Thanks Mit, you helped prove my point about when liberials get backed into a corner and all they have is name calling. Nothing but respect to you and yours.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 04:47 PM | Link to this
Thats FIREFIGHTER. Not fireman & firewoman. Maybe you are not old enough to be on this blog. Do some reading instead.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this
Mit: Which county/city? Both Dekalb Fire/Rescue and Atlanta F.D. have new squads online for heavy rescue that can be used in mass casualty incident. Training and apparatus supplied by Federal dollars. Dekalb has increased haz mat team…also with federal dollars. I agree though that more should be done, but luckily we have not been hi again…yet.
By Scott
March 21, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this
RC - Thanks, I appreciate your candor. I don’t know that I believe that GW’s drug use has as much to do with his deceision making though I am inclined to believe that his convictions do, whether the entire American public believes in them or not. I do not agree with GW on everything but on some things I do. I did not care for everything Clinton did, but some things were good ideas and worked well. I guess my point is that if we are waiting for an American president with unimpeachable character with no skeletons in the closet….we are going to be waiting a looooonng time! Haha!
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this
“Making an example of Iraq” is one of the most abhorent reasons I have ever heard to wage war. Are you saying we sacrificed 1500 US servicemen and women and caused the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civillians to make an example? God help us if you ever get power in this country.
If we were really concerned about Al Qaeda, we would have gone after Bin Laden with the full force of our millitary rather than breaking off the bulk of the force and sending it to Iraq.
Do you understand how terrorist organizations work? By increasing anti-American hostility in the region, we haven’t created a battleground to draw out existing terrorists - we’ve created a BREEDING GROUND to create new ones. AND we’re giving them the battle training they need.
And the domino effect thing…hilarious. Do you really think that by creating MORE chaos in a region that has been characterized by chaos since the withdrawal of European colonizing governments that we are going to somehow create this miraculous democratic movement? OR, that if the nations do migrate to a democratically elected government they won’t still be dominated by muslim extremeist philosophies?
Look, if we want to create peace in the Middle East, we won’t do it by waging war. We’ll do it by economic and diplomatic means. Hussein was a monster, but guess what - there are a lot of monsters out there, and we’re allied with some of them.
You are pure NeoCon aren’t ya Joe. The US has a responsibility to wage war wherever we think there is immorality - to hell with the consequences.
By steve
March 21, 2005 04:50 PM | Link to this
mit, I know several fire fighters that voted for Bush in 04.
By Jack
March 21, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this
Peace will never be in the middle east until the holy land is vaporized. Look at Kosovo. How long have they been fighting? 1600 years. I know, we’ll send Jimmy over there and he can fix things right up.
By Royal Chic
March 21, 2005 04:58 PM | Link to this
Scott, I was joking about Bush’s judgement and incomprehensible speeches, but I totally agree that we will never have a “perfect” President, but we definitely can do without a President that intentionally misleads his country and takes no responsibility for his actions……blames the “evil doers” (lol) and uses religion and gay marriage as a tactic to gain office……couldn’t steal the election two times in a row so why not use Christianity to sway the vote your way……..neither is he the model Christian nor the model President go figure………
By mit
March 21, 2005 04:59 PM | Link to this
fireman thing is a running inside joke.
bruce, you calling me a liberal?
joe, they are city of chattanooga they have the hazmat and all that sort of stuff. but hazmat are not first responders. (just police and firefighters) the incident at emory a year or so ago. hazmat was there but the firefighters went in first without proper protection. police haven’t the protection that firefighters have.
By J. Morris
March 21, 2005 05:01 PM | Link to this
LOL - Bruce thinks that W is smart. Now we know his problem.
By mit
March 21, 2005 05:07 PM | Link to this
i think alot of things you all attribute to Bush jr. should be attributed where it is due, Karl Rove.
Iraq was his idea; dude is crazy look up on him and every mean thing that govt. does would point right at that guy.
By Joe
March 21, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this
No Morris, I am not a “neocon”. I am a gun-toting redneck, remember (others, scroll up to see earlier exchange)? I do not worship guns nor war. War is nasty, dirty business. This current war is no different.
Are you a neo-Chamberlain, Morris? Will you be the new Neville that will prance around the middle east with diplomatic this and that to cajole evil men to change their ways?
I do not like this war. However, the true “breeding ground” of Al Qaeda recruitment comes from the anger of Arab young men repressed by the current repressive order of the middle east. A young man with a vote and a voice in his community and a chance at a decent life (a job, a girl, kids, etc) will be FAR less likely to strap explosives to himself. We are acting as a catalyst in the transformation of Arab culture. Revolution is not pretty, my friend. It wasn’t here. It wasn’t in France. It wasn’t in Germany. It won’t be here. But hopefully, after the dark night of carnage, a new dawn will arise over these people.
However, Morris, I wish you were right. I wish there was a better way.
By norman
March 22, 2005 07:27 AM | Link to this
It looks like the Appeals Court in Atlanta will have the final word on the Schiavo mess. The Supreme Court has already refused to hear the case. The religious fanatics have a new argument: since the evil Vatican has disapproved of the feeding tube’s removal, what has been done violates Terri’s religious freedom! What freedom? The freedom to suffer like Jesus and that old Polak in the Vatican! Let’s put these Catholic fanatics to rest — and I mean “rest”.
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 07:37 AM | Link to this
Mit,
I have no idea if you are a liberal or not, don’t really care. You did revert to the usual tactic used by liberals when they have no other option than to admit they are wrong. But if the shoe fits wear it.
J Morris,
You admit there are ties between Al Qaeda and Saddaam Hussein. And you admit they proclaimed the US as their enemy. We have evidence that there were training camps in Iraq that trained terrorist. Now wouldn’t logic and reason allow you to add two and two and get the correct answer? Especially after 9-11. And if he wanted to cover his tracks would it be possible that Bin Laden would claim to be Hussein’s enemy? We blame Bush for taking us into Iraq but wasn’t it also the Congress (at that time controlled by liberals) that approved us going there? Didn’t they look at the evidence presented by the intelligence groups and form an opinion we needed to go? If we must blame one let’s at least blame them all.
I, like Joe, do not like war of any kind. But when we are attacked, as we were in 1942, I say strap’em up and let’s defend ourselves. You like to live in the world of “what can happen”. What do you think would have happened if we had not taken such a harsh course of action? Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 07:41 AM | Link to this
Good Morning. But not really. Student Killing 10 as the headline in my Upstate New York paper (Rochester Democrat and Chronicle) is not a good way to spend the day. Further on in our Editorial Page, the hypocrisy of Tom DeLay is laid out for all to see:
“DeLay has been leading the charge with unfair and incendiary attcks on Schiavo’s husband and Florida state judges. Meanwhile, DeLay has been silent about the case of Sun Hudson, a critically ill baby who died last week after he was taken off life support AGAINST THE WISHES OF HIS (unemployed single) MOTHER. That happened in DeLay’s home state of Texas, where it’s legal for a hospital to end life support for a patient its ethics board deems the treatment non-beneficial and the patient is unable to pay.”
So much for life-affirming culture. He has to be an idiot to think that no one would publicize this, but perhaps he’s been a little distracted lately by all the investigation going on regarding political fundraising in that life-affirming state of Texas. Now the world knows where his priorties lie.
Oh, and in case this couldn’t get any more repulsive, Glenn Beck, a former friend of Michael Schiavo, and radio show host wants to “buy” custody of Terri Schiavo from Michael Schiavo for 5 million dollars. Ah, yes, the conservative ideology that the free enterprise can solve all things… And Democrats are accused of throwing money at problems…
It’s going to be a 3-antacid day.
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 07:45 AM | Link to this
Oops- I meant to say not a good way to “start” the day. Not a good way to spend it either, but to those of us who favor gun control in this country, I suppose that’s obvious.
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 07:48 AM | Link to this
Good point, Norman. Here’s something else to consider. Everyone’s focusing a laser beam on the the relationship between Terri and her husband (usually to pint him as the bad guy), but what about the relationship between Terri and her parents. They say she’s a Catholic— is this another thing they’re in denial about? Lots of people leave the Catholic church (they’re the ones who’ve wised up.) Maybe she no longer considers herself a Catholic. From what I remember of earlier articles about this whole debacle, the parents have never approved of the marriage. (You think the fight wouldv’e gone on this long if that weren’t the case.) Why aren’t these marriage-minded conservatives asking more questions about this? Some are still going in the opposite diresction by suggesting divorce. Hmmm…
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 07:56 AM | Link to this
Sandy: about this baby in Texas. You didn’t say what color he was, but I’m willing to bet he wasn’t white. And about Glenn Beck— so now he wants to “buy” somebody. Didn’t they used to call that slavery once upon a time? WHO’S devaluing human life here? Hint: it ain’t the liberals.
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this
norman, anybody that reads your posts especially the one about how you are a dangerous man must laugh so hard they pee. Mr. Morris seems to think that our country can reason with the minds of those people in the middle east. In November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world’s most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 23 years. America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America’s inability to deal with terrorism. America’s military had been decimated and downsized/right sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start. Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued. In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut. When it explodes, it kills 63 people. Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead. Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait. The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut. Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid. Then in August a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed. US interests are continually attacked. Fifty-nine days later a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed. The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259. Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war. The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women. A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively. They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224. The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime. And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. America has been under a constant attack since 1979. You don’t have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979. The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a war. I think we have been in a war for the past 23 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough. America needs to “Get out of Bed” and act decisively now. America has been changed forever. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said “…it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant.” This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world. This is not a political thing this is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come. All those who dozed off in history class and who seem so quick to protest such a necessary military action. Time to wake up - reasoning and diplomacy have gotten us NOWHERE!!
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 08:14 AM | Link to this
Kenneth, if Micheal Schiavo is standing up for his wife’s right to die. Why did it take eight years to do so after she was supposedly in this consistant vegitative state? The only motivation he has is money!
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 08:27 AM | Link to this
There is new evidence connecting Saddam Hussein to support for al-Qaida before the Sept. 11 attacks, but even more disturbing links between the terrorist network and Russian intelligence. In addition to the covert intelligence support provided to al-Qaida, sources say Russian intelligence personnel met in early January with their Iranian and Indian counterparts to discuss frankly and candidly ways to get the U.S. out of the region as quickly as possible. According to intelligence sources, some of the talks included the acquisition by Iran of more powerful and modern weaponry to use in attacks on U.S. and U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq. But Russia’s undermining of U.S. interests in the area go even deeper, say these sources. Iraqi Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib has reportedly discovered a memo archived by the Saddam Hussein regime that shows Baghdad was supporting Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the al-Qaida terrorist thought to be leading the insurgency in Iraq today. Other support of al-Qaida is also discussed in the memo. Some suggest this memo could prove to be the smoking gun to prove Hussein’s support for Osama bin Laden’s network leading up to 9-11 and thereafter.But, not only Hussein was supporting al-Qaida, according to the memo, so was Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi. Many of the Sunni clerics in Iraq and throughout the Mideast were, too. And Russian intelligence was also lending its support. This discovery also explains why Zarqawi has pledged to kill al-Naqib. Two weeks ago, two car bombs exploded near the interior ministry, killing at least five policemen in what al-Qaida’s local wing said was a twin suicide attack meant to assassinate the minister. The group, led by Zarqawi, vowed to pursue al-Naqib, part of its campaign of violence to bring down the U.S.-backed interim government and stall efforts to form a new cabinet. But, in this case, he is not just another high-ranking Iraqi official. He’s a man who has got the goods on Zarqawi and some of his most important sponsors – including Russian intelligence. In another meeting in late January or early February, intelligence officials from Russia, North Korea and Iran discussed ways to reduce U.S. influence in the Middle East. Russia’s main motivation is not anti-Americanism. It is economic. Moscow sees big potential in the arms market in both Iran and Iraq – but only if the U.S. is out of the picture. Reports of Zarqawi’s demise are greatly exaggerated. Despite reports, including one in the Saudi newspaper Al Watan, that al-Qaida’s top operative in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has been arrested. Last week, Al Watan reported the terrorist had been arrested and that an announcement had been delayed until a new Iraqi government was in place. The purported arrest supposedly took place on the Iraqi-Syrian border, according to the newspaper. The Saudi paper said that the arrest of Zarqawi was completed ahead the recent visit of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in Iraq – a visit that took place in early February. However, according to U.S. military sources on the ground, Zarqawi is suspected of being the mastermind of deadly car bomb terrorist attacks earlier this month.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 08:30 AM | Link to this
Sandy “with unfair and incendiary attcks on Schiavo’s husband and Florida state judges”
Okay Sandy. There is no doubt that when a man and a woman accept the bonds of matrimony they become one. Legally that person has the right to deny that feeding tube. Did Michael deny the feeding tube in 1990 when Terri was pronounced PVS. Nope, not until 1998 after Michael had a mistress and two children does he decide Terri would not want to live this way. Seems to me and Tom Delay, that Michael has a conflict on his hands. But I guess you’d rather dismiss this fact in an effort to demonize Senator Delay.
I live in Texas Sandy, so I’m familiar with the case involving Sun. Sun was born with a fatal form of dwarfism characterized by short arms, short legs and lungs too tiny to sustain life. Nearly all babies born with the incurable condition, often diagnosed in utero, die shortly after birth. Texas law allows hospitals to discontinue life-sustaining care, even if a patient’s family members disagree. A doctor’s recommendation must be approved by a hospital’s ethics committee, and the family must be given 10 days from written notice of the decision to try and locate another facility for the patient. (You failed to acknowledge this fact Sandy). Texas Children’s Hospital said it contacted 40 facilities (Not 10) with newborn intensive care units, but none would accept Sun. The Texas Children’s hospital paid for all legal fees incurred by the Mother in her effort against the hospital. Texas Children’s Hospital went to extraordinary lengths to help the Mother Sandy, so your statements are slanted and one sided to say the least. But I guess your standing on the death of a child of God to make a unfair characterization of Senator Delay is your motive and that my friend is sad and unfair.
By Lyrazel
March 22, 2005 08:31 AM | Link to this
Dear Shaunti and Diane, As you can see no one is following your column and its only Tuesday. Have to say its a hard one to follow even by your comments and since there was NO information either in the NYT or AJC concerning the Wead tell-all book? column? it is avaliable at a cost at NYT.
The 70s, were full of people experimenting with drugs. Does it matter GWB did drugs 30 years ago? No and I will give him credit for honesty. He was just one of millions of American students who did. My problem with Bush on drugs stems from his absenteeism with his National Guard service—was he doing coke and pot while training to be a pilot—was he finished with his drug use by the time his father became vice president—thus invention of the drug czar by his dad was it a parent in search of answers deciding public policy.
Why not debate the drug war since the USA has more people in prison than in any other nation of the world, save Ruwanda. 700 of 100000 people are in jail because of drug laws and thats no crisis? How many billions are being taken from communities that could establish rehabilitation job training centers for low risk prisoners—in order to fund a prison system? Black youths with no prior admissions were admitted to public correctional facilities for drug offenses at forty-eight times the rate of white youths. In some states the racial disparities were even worse: in seven states (Georgia being one), blacks constituted between 80 and 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison and, in at least fifteen states (Georgia too), black men were sent to prison on drug charges at rates that were from twenty to fifty-seven times greater than those of white men. This has contributed to a situation where 46% of the prison population is black compared to 13% of the overall U.S. population.
Now, since no one is on target with Weads published confessionals I return your gaze toward what does concern this spectrum of gabby bloggers and bow out…. In fun, forever, Lyrazel
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 08:33 AM | Link to this
Boscoe: maybe he was originally in denial, too, and it took him that long to realize she wouldn’t get better. He did get her therapy at one time, and even took nursing classes to help her. Apparently it didn’t work. It’s NOT about the money. Most of it has already been spent on medical bills and legal fees. It’s already gone— just like Terri.
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 08:37 AM | Link to this
Micheal Schiavo stands to gain from a life insurance policy still in affect which is why he won’t let go when Terri’s parents say they will take care of her and incur all expenses. IT IS ABOUT THE MONEY!
By Carey
March 22, 2005 08:41 AM | Link to this
Ken, put the timeline together. Terri “collapses” and goes into a coma. Micheal sues doctors. This case takes a couple of years. He now has a million plus dollars has a little fun, meets another woman has kids, ect. ect. Eight years later Micheal has run out of money and all of a sudden Terri, in confidence (NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE THIS) has told Micheal she wouldn’t want to live this way all along. It’s about the money.
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 08:42 AM | Link to this
Lyrazel: if you’re still reading, there are times when the comments are more interesting then the columns themselves, and that’s why people sometimes get off-topic.
This is definately one of those times. Regarding Doug Wead— NOBODY CARES!
By norman
March 22, 2005 08:47 AM | Link to this
Boscoe: your theological sophistication goes only so far as to believe that money motivates everyone but yourself. And your Iraq war comments won’t please that old Polak in the Vatican either.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 08:53 AM | Link to this
I’d like to add one thing to Boscoes post.
The Clinton’s, Gore and indeed the Democratic party stated that Hussein was a threat and had WMD’s. Russia, Germany, France, Spain, the UN and indeed the entire civilized world all said he was a threat and had WMD’s. Our CIA said he had WMD’s. In FACT he used WMD’s against his own people and Iran. Therefore he had WMD’s. There where stock piles of WMD’s unaccounted for. The President went to Congress and secured Congressional approval based on the evidence to go to war. To make statements to the fact that our President mislead us, is to blatantly disregard these facts.
By Jack
March 22, 2005 08:58 AM | Link to this
Boscoe Mr. Schiavo was offered millions by right to life folks and TURNED IT DOWN so that he could try and do as she wished and pull the plug. Can you honestly believe that she would want to continue living this way? What if she really knew what was going on and was unable to communicate and has been screaming silently for years for them to end it. This really should be a non-issue.
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 09:05 AM | Link to this
Although I disagree with the way Mrs. Schiavo will die, have to agree with Jack. How many of us would want our families to have to go through 15 years of us just laying there with little or no hope of improvement? Not to mention the court battles, family fights, news coverage and such. This FAMILY has gone through enough and I believe Mrs. Schiavo, if she knows what is going on, would not want that any more than we would.
By Whiley
March 22, 2005 09:13 AM | Link to this
How many people here would want to spend 15 years in a vegetative state & kept alive by a feeding tube? How about being kept alive for 30 years & live like Terri?
Anyone?
My vote is NO, NO NO NO NO NO ! ! !
what is yours? (yes or no only)
By norman
March 22, 2005 09:19 AM | Link to this
Pull the plug: on Frist! on Delay! on Bush!
By Tony
March 22, 2005 09:37 AM | Link to this
The issue that needs to be debated is who makes the decision to pull the plug.
If Michael would have had the tube removed shortly after the accident this would not be an issue.
Michael Schiavo did not remain celibate and faithful to Terri. In Fact, Michael is living with another woman and has two children. He is a polygamist.
Would you want your spouse control over you if he/she moved on with their life and is already living with someone else?
By norman
March 22, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this
Tony: you are obviously a nut case if you find something wrong with Michael Schiavo living with a woman. Sex, my Catholic friend, is not evil.
By Carey
March 22, 2005 09:46 AM | Link to this
How do you know Teri Schiavo DOESN’T want to live? What evidence do you have that she is suffering? Just becuase she cannot live her life the way she used to doesn’t mean she wants to die just becuase you say you wouldn’t want to live that way. Her husband Micheal, cares so much about carrying out her “wishes” but he doesn’t have any shread of evidence to prove this is what the poor girl would want. A state judge decides he has all the evidence he needs and they can pull her life sustaining food source even though the court appointed doctor recommended further therapy for Terri. The Judge flatly denies this request based on Micheals testamony that it’s not want Terri would want. This from a state court that will not honor a $500 agreement without a written contract. Now there are accusations of pandering for votes. Guess what? It’s working.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 09:51 AM | Link to this
Norman, come on, be fair. I have no issues with Michael living his life. My problem arises when you allow someone authority over someone else with this conflict.
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this
Carey,
That is exactly why I have decided to have a living will and why this situtation is so complicated for me. I greive for everyone directly involved.
Whiley,
I am sorry but this is America and you only get ONE vote. Four of your NO’s were thrown out:-)
By Whiley
March 22, 2005 10:12 AM | Link to this
Bruce ! hehe Each NO was for all my personalities.
OK I repeat, How many people here would want to spend 15 years in a vegetative state & kept alive by a feeding tube? How about being kept alive for 30 years & live like Terri?
Anyone?
By lozen
March 22, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this
Uh, what is the topic of this forum? Oh, yeah. Wead… never heard of him until yesterday. So I really would like to know who picks the topics of discussion for this forum. Then I’d like to know where Boscoe got all the info he cut and pasted about Iraq and those invisible WMD.
By lozen
March 22, 2005 10:24 AM | Link to this
No, don’t keep me living as a vegetable for 15 years! But again, I have to say if she were my daughter and I had to watch her starve to death, I would probably try to stop it. I don’t understand how anyone can hold it against Michael that he got involved with another woman and has children. But why hasn’t he divorced her if he wanted to get on with his life?
By Tony
March 22, 2005 10:33 AM | Link to this
Whiley,
I would not want to live if I was Brian Dead. I would not want to live if I was PVS. I however, would not want my wife, if after 8 years and living with another man to decide my fate.
Would you want your husband who after 8 years has moved on, currently living with another woman, fathered two children and to decide your fate?
By Jack
March 22, 2005 10:35 AM | Link to this
He claims he did not divorce because he wanted to see her wishes done. If they had divorced her parents would keep her alive for a long, long time.
By Mara
March 22, 2005 10:36 AM | Link to this
Hey Ken, speaking of slavery…have you ever seen the slave state/free state civil war map superimposed over the Red State/Blue State map? If you ever compare the two, you’ll realize that the civil war ain’t over yet, darlin’
By Tony
March 22, 2005 10:42 AM | Link to this
Jack, If Terri is in the ground or at her Parents house, what difference is it to Michael. It’s about the money!
If your wife kept you alive for 8 years, meant another man, had two children. Would you want her to decide you fate?
By Jack
March 22, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this
Oh Mara lets not go there.
By Royal Chic
March 22, 2005 10:47 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, a wise man knows to never rely solely upon a BIAS SOURCE!!!!
By Tony
March 22, 2005 10:47 AM | Link to this
CONFLICT OF INTEREST - Refers to a situation when someone, has competing professional or personal obligations or personal or financial interests that would make it difficult to fulfill his duties fairly.
By Tim
March 22, 2005 10:57 AM | Link to this
Tony… if it were about the money then why doesn’t Michael take money (substantially larger amounts I might add) that people are offering to give to him if he will give the right to make decisions for Terri over to her parents… maybe because IT ISN’T ABOUT MONEY!
By Whiley
March 22, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
I wouldn’t be so selfish as to expect my husband NOT go on with his life & find happiness if I became a bed ridden vegetable. Especially after EIGHT YEARS ! ! I would hope my husband wouldn’t let me suffer for decades.
I would want him to be happy, not sitting around my bed wasting his life while I’m laying there unaware of everything.
I can’t stand waiting in line at the DMV, I can’t imagine being trapped in a hospital bed. If I knew that my family would pull that garbage on me, keeping me in a prison to make THEM happier, I’d seriously run away now & not tell any of them where I’m at.
By Royal Chic
March 22, 2005 11:04 AM | Link to this
As far as the Terri Schiavo case is concerned…..if you have known a certain quality of life for as long as Terri did…..you would never want to live in a vegetative state for 8 long years……with minimal brain activity and an inability to communicate Mr. Schiavo has to rely upon what he knew of her while she was healthy…..as far as his relationship with a new woman and two children……I think Terri would be fine with her husband moving on with his life and since legally he has the right to make her medical decisions he should be the one to do what he believes to be the best decision……..if the tables were turned I believe Terri would have let her husband rest in peace………eventually she would have moved on with her life, had babies, and benefited from his insurance policy…….there is obviously some level of commitment to his wife because he would have never spent many years hoping that she would enjoy life as she once did……becoming a nurse to take care of his wife….a selfish, money hungry husband would have pulled the plug many moons ago………I think that hope has been lost and it’s time to let her soul rest and give Mr. Schiavo and Terri’s parents a peace of mind……..
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 11:31 AM | Link to this
lozen, how do you know I cut and pasted? Does everybody who has a differing opinion than you get accused of cut and paste? Are you the only one who can form a thought? I think not - Cupcake! Yes, I remember, get over it I don’t care.
By JohnR
March 22, 2005 11:41 AM | Link to this
Apparently, this week’s topic is going to be completely ignored, which is fine because it’s a non-story anyway. The topic SHOULD be how the Republican party AGAIN subverts the rule of law in order to advance it’s own agenda, in this case namely trying to make Tom DeLay seem like an actual human being. Pathetic
By Tony
March 22, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
Tim, YOU DON’T HAVE TO SHOUT.
A witness testified that Terri was considering getting divorced. There are medical records which indicate a rigid neck and broken bones. (Never investigated). The family has requested this to be investigated. The DA as of now, has refused to investigate. Surely you would understand, considering the DA you have in Atlanta.
There’s a conflict. You and other’s refuse to accept this. It’s one thing to say that Michael has a right to move on with his life. It’s a far different issue when he has and later decides the fate of someone else’s. Michael should have pulled the tube a long time ago. He didn’t. He doesn’t deserve to now.
I will never be able to convince any of you, therefore, I will leave it in God’s hands. The federal court has ruled. The tube remains out. Terri will surely die. This world somehow will be a better place. I my forum addicts, do not see it that way.
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 11:53 AM | Link to this
Tony, I included all the information I had this morning from the short editorial article. It was a direct quote. If the media is so liberal, how come this is the first many of us have heard of this? I read three newspapers a day and it was news to me this morning.
This issue is bigger than the Schiavos, the Schindlers, and the Hudsons, so why are the president and house majority leader going to extreme measures in this case only? (It’s not the first time that Florida’s state powers have been usurped by the feds to benefit W and the Republicans.)
You can be sure that I’ll be investigating this further. After reading http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3084934), I feel compelled to ask why this woman had no prenatal care. What if she had discovered her baby’s birth defect and wanted to abort? There aren’t easy answers to these questions; perhaps that’s why they are worth asking.
As for demonizing DeLay, he’s doing a good job with that all by himself. As for you demonizing me, well, you can invent what you want. As for my “standing on the death of a child of God to make a unfair characterization of Senator Delay as my motive” and your lament (my friend) “that this is sad and unfair,” is lame. Your post seems to indicate that you feel more of an affront about my insulting DeLay (which I stand by) than you do about this child’s unfortunate circumstances and the agony his mother has gone through, than sociopolitical reasons behnd them. Your knowledge of the circumstances is impressive; your compassion, however seems lacking, my friend. I don’t believe in exploiting either family’s misfortune for the sake of politics, but apparently the federal government feels differently.
And oh, I strive to elevate the discourse with my posts, but bias is inherent in discouse, is it not?
My point is that in this fray, the politicians keep talking about “erring on the side of life,” without taking into consideration that issues like affordable health care, living wages, education (and not this BS about No Child Left Behind), affordable child care, social services, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, not bombing the wrong people for the wrong reasons, etc, are issues at over which we have control, and they are, say it with me, SOCIAL JUSTICE and they concern LIFE and quality of life ISSUES. No justice, no peace. These are the issues that create social unrest in this country, and the strong are only keeping the weak down. The poor will continue to get poorer, but the rich keep on getting richer and cutting taxes, incomprehensibly, in the middle of a war. These surreal “modest proposals” keep coming at the expense of the shrinking middle and overabundant lower classes. In this culture war, there are casualties as real as any in Fallujah.
According to my limited sources, (which I will investigate further when I can take the time from eking out my meager living), the law allowing life support to be discontinued was signed in 1999 by W. Where was his “erring on the side of life” then? Or maybe he wasn’t yet born again. Or maybe Rove hadn’t clued him into the untapped voting potential to be gained from pandering to the religious right… I do agree with him on one point, though, he is indeed erring.
By norman
March 22, 2005 11:54 AM | Link to this
How do the Republicans in an unfailing succession manage to put up such animals as Gingrich and Delay as their leaders? Can there be a special kind of Original Sin for Republicans?
By lozen
March 22, 2005 12:15 PM | Link to this
Boscoe, No, not everybody who disagrees with me lil’ limpy - just those who cut and paste long-winded posts like the ones you posted earlier.
By Lyrazel
March 22, 2005 12:20 PM | Link to this
Name one homeless person in a hospital on 15 years of life support.
Name an uninsured person being given free medical treatment by a hospital.
Isnt this case more a matter of who-has-money-lives? If MS had not sued the hospital, would his salary have paid for this kind of treatments? Chances are, his insurance company DROPPED coverage! Where is that investigation? Where is the outrage? Absent because Republicans want to make it a life-death issue when clearly it is a matter of WHO OWNS MEDICINE.
Remember, its the flag-waving life-supporting Republican Administration that has continually sought to cut Medicaid, Medicare and turning state programs over to private industry. It is the Republican administration that CAP MEDICAL JUDGEMENTS to 250,000. Democrats have repeatedly tried to get legislation for a national health care program and been LAUGHED at by the very folks screaming loudest that we should save a life. So the wealthy can have modern medicine but the poor are turned away at the front desk…how VERY american? Ever get an insurance company to cover treatments for long-term? Heck if they dont raise your premiums beyond the national debt—and you cant pay you are out of luck! Sorry sucker. I see the Medical/Pharmacutical/Insurance Establishments quietly giving razzies to all you concerned citizens….!
Second, without serious financial help from other organizations who are putting a brain-dead woman as a puppet to their cause, the parents do not have the amount of money needed to insure and sustain her medical care. And would she be getting the same quality care? Probably not and as they get older they will also need to care for themselves—and if one gets dimentia or ? where does that leave this woman? Back in court to be oogled?
I am disgusted. Disgusted by my government and by medical community who remain mute—knowing—damn well—having money buys medicine!
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this
So I’ll ask you again lozen….how do you know I cut and paste. You don’t! So clearly, and as usual, you make accusations when someone disagrees with you without finding out the facts.
By norman
March 22, 2005 12:40 PM | Link to this
Today’s Luckovich cartoon says it all. The elephants circling around Terri Schiavo’s bed.
At least people will see how “Dr” Frist deserves nothing but contempt, as a doctor and a Senator. He won’t become president unless this country is stupider than even I think.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this
Sandy: You did not have all the facts and asserted that Senator Delay was a hypocrite. You certainly do not know me, but assert my opinion is lame. You can grand stand on social justice and claim somehow if the left was in charge we’d be better, but in the end your point of view is as lame as mine.
By lozen
March 22, 2005 01:09 PM | Link to this
It just doesn’t sound like you Boscoe. “sources say…..,” “According to intelligence sources…,” “has reportedly…..,” “could prove to be the smoking gun…” Sounds like news reporting to me and not your usual assumptions that you are 100 percent right!
By Scott
March 22, 2005 01:18 PM | Link to this
Lyzrazel - If you’d like to find people without insurance get Medical care, look no further than any of San Diego’s hospitals…illegal immigrants who are injured or pregnant or sick are cared for every day. Whether you are aware of it or not, it is a very common scam for nearly due pregnant women are smuggled into the U.S., give birth and then return to Mexico…but they collect Social Security on behalf of the child, since that child is now a U.S. citizen
By Tim
March 22, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this
Tony, I can use all caps if I please… I wasn’t shouting at you… to shout at you I would actually have to be speaking to you… obviously we are not carrying on a verbal conversation… so obviously I wasn’t shouting… I used all caps to emphasize that this case is NOT about money… like you repeatedly assume… the ‘injuries’ you are referring to are comparable to those that can occur from trying to resuscitate someone (if you would actually read something other than Terri’s father’s website you would know this)… if there were actually something to investigate then the DA would investigate… obviously there is not anything to investigate… it was just one of the many attempts her parents make and changing their story… each time they lose the battle they change their argument to something new
By Zack
March 22, 2005 01:26 PM | Link to this
Lozen—Actually, it’s better to listen to someone who can speak with reason and wisdom rather than someone who just babbles opinions and ideals and hides behind the phrase “…studies say” about 100 times. Historically, Boscoe has had some of the sharpest posts on here.
By lozen
March 22, 2005 01:27 PM | Link to this
If I lived in poverty in Mexico and wanted a better life for my child, I might find any way into the US to give birth. But, Scott, how and who is it that collects social security on the child that has never worked in the US? I’m thinking of moving to Mexico when I retire but I don’t know how I’d get my ss check in Mexico, even after working here for 45 years.
By lozen
March 22, 2005 01:32 PM | Link to this
Hey Tim, it’s common knowledge if you use all caps on the internet, you’re yelling. I just discovered that myself about two months ago.
By Tim
March 22, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this
lozen… THANKS FOR THE INFO (just kidding!!) :) sorry for the confusion… I will try to find another way to emphasize a point from now on
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 01:38 PM | Link to this
Tony, none of us has all the facts. That’s why we have discourse. Neither the left nor right has all the answers. That’s why we have a balance of powers. And yes, I feel the balance has been tipped to favor the rich and religious.
I’m not willing to settle for being lame. Are you? This is bigger than us, and more important than insulting each each other. I’m not grandstanding. I’m p** off because of the lack of compassion and obvious hypocrisy our politicians are putting forth in the name of religion to get votes and wield unseemly power.
One can make this personal, about semantics, about winning the argument, and mentally masturbate all one wants. I’m hoping to get closer to the truths so we can suspend harmful judgment, alleviate suffering, and recognize the divinity in all human beings. What’s on your “to do” list? (And when I say “you” I mean it collectively.)
By Scott
March 22, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this
Maybe Mike Schiavo is a bad guy..maybe he’s not. I can’t say I know the guy personally. I have to say I have a problem with removing the feeding tube from a pull the plug standpoint, however, regardless of whose wish it might be.
Fact: Terry can’t feed herself and without nourishment she will die.
In most cases of pulling th plug it is an instance where life support, such as a respirator, if discontinued, the body would not continue. If Terry is fed, her heart and lungs pump on their own. So it isn’t the same thing.
Additionally, I have heard arguments that her “quality of life” is virtually zero, coupled with the fact that she is “brain dead”. Well, if she’d brain dead and you believe in the afterlife, then she is gone anyway. If you don’t then, well, she’s gone anyway. so the only people who might be suffering are the parents and possibly Michael. If you regard the removal of the tube as cruel death, then you acknowledge she may suffer (not an issue with the brain dead). If you worry about her quality of life then you also acknowledge the presence of a human being that is still there. you can’t have it both ways.
In either respect, Congress needs to stay out of it
By Scott
March 22, 2005 01:46 PM | Link to this
Lozen - the most common way is to set up a P.O. Box in the United States (very common near the border entry at San Ysidro, CA) and falsify the fact that the child lives in the United States
By Scott
March 22, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this
Wow did everyone stop?
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this
I find it odd that our country has only pander to the rich and religious in the last 4+ years. That only since we have a Republican controlled Congress and White House has this issue came up. Do you really believe that Republicans are the only ones in the country that are religious and rich? Do you really believe that those in power (Congress) 20 years ago were not worried about their rich friends and preachers? Give it a rest!
By Boscoe
March 22, 2005 02:44 PM | Link to this
All the religious are rich? If we have that going for us you would think that maybe you should take a look at what it’s all about rather than the sharp criticism. You’ll pardon me, but I want a new car so I’m going to go and read the bible until the money falls from Heaven.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Sandy, First of all, the balance was always tipped in favor of the rich. This didn’t happen in the last 20 years. Placing blame is useless and until Politicians do what Arnold Schwarzenegger’s is trying to do in California with respect to open the way for hydrogen fuel cell cars and is striking at the root of the problem with public education by seeking to smash teacher tenure and pay and promote teachers based on merit, just like other employees in America, then and only then will we see change.
Yesterday on the news was a story about the billions spent on our Pets. Look at Paris Hilton and her cloth line for dogs. People where parading around their animals with diamond necklaces, shoes etc. etc. I don’t know what these people contribute to charity, but if one child in the USA goes to bed at night hungry, and your dog has a feathered pillow and is over-weight something is terrible wrong and it doesn’t start and end with our elected officials.
Balance in favor of Religion? Come on. With religion sought out on a daily basis by the ACLU and removed from the public square. With abortion on demand. We can’t even say Merry Christmas, no it’s happy holidays. Children today in America will not get Creation in school, no sir, it’s evolution, they will be afforded condoms and advice on abortion, not responsibility.
With respect to Michael, Fidelity is a key component of the respect and dignity that our society expects one spouse to afford the other; yet, Michael believes that Terri’s disability releases him of his legal and moral responsibility. It should, and it should release him from the right to decide Terri’s fate. You sir may not find any conflict with that, I do, but that’s just my humble opinion.
By FIlster
March 22, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this
Just to back up a few, didn’t anyone else find it extremly ironic that the name of the man who opened up about President Bush’s earlier alcohol and durg use is named “Wead?” I mean really, it’s just too coincidental to be real. Since this blog had morphed into discourse on the Schiavo issue, I wonder how many people look beyond the immediate concern at what just happened in Washington. Despite years and years and judges and judges and hearings and motions and so forth, the federal government basically just brushed all of Florida’s rights aside and intervened. Conservatives, turn the current political makeup and see where this could be repeated down the road on issues you detest. Liberals, you’re already there so you’ve got the picture. Thnik long range folks and you’ll be surprised hos simialr your concerns are. As for whether it’s right or wrong, this is one I just can’t commit to one way or another. There’s a lot wrong in the Schiavo case on both sides, and I don’t think there wil be a winner regardless of what happens. Norman, you continue to blow me away with your anti-religous diatribes. I have to ask, were you abused by a priest or something? Not to spur you on buddy, but you are OUT THERE.
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this
Point well-taken, Bruce. Pandering has always been around. But it used to be something to be ashamed of.
The republicans are now systematically trying to alter the the checks and balances, and are not being secretive about it. The conservatives have wanted to dismantle social security for a long time, but never on the radar. They want to alter the constitution to have an amendment to prevent gays from marrying. Unheard of. The Supreme Court stopped the 2000 election count and claimed they weren’t setting a precedent, clearly usurping a state’s rights. Eliminate the filibuster to protect DeLay. A war was begun against a country who had not attacked us, and it was supposedly going to pay for itself. The president has all but given up on public schools and is pushing faith-based initiatives, clearly blurring the separation of church and state in some bastardization of religious freedom. Pollution controls have been dismantled and secrent energy meetings have been held. Womens’ medical records are being subpoaenaed and trolled through to roll back their constitutional righs of choice and privacy. o The neocons are running amok; even a conservative like David Brooks names names in the NY Times today. Let’s condone and even promote torture to foreigners we’ve rounded up without due process. Bush pretends to be pushing democracy abroad while his cronies are dismantling it here.
It used to be a dirty secret, now it’s out in the open. And the America we used to know, the one with choice, responsibility, protection of the constitution is being held hostage. And they call me un-American.
By Carey
March 22, 2005 02:57 PM | Link to this
A Reuters piece appearing in hundreds of newspapers and on news web sites Monday claimed Terri “will almost certainly never recover from her unconscious condition” and added that “neurologists agree.” The experts included a 10 year-old report on persistent vegetative cases and two doctors who have never seen Terri to evaluate her, but presumed she was in a PVS state and that she, like other PVS patients, has no chance to regain any normal cognitive functions. The Reuters news story made no mention of the dozens of doctors who signed affidavits in favor of motions submitted by Terri Schiavo’s parents to have Terri tested before she was starved to death. The article also did not feature quotes from any doctors who disagree that Terri is in a PVS state — such as Dr. William Hammesfahr, a Nobel Prize nominated neurologist who is an Internationally recognized expert on cases of brain-injured patients. “We, and others I know, have treated many patients worse than Terri and have seen them regain independence and dignity,” Hammesfahr said earlier this month. “There are many approaches that would help Terri Schiavo,” Dr. Hammesfahr explained. “I know, because I had the opportunity to personally examine her, her medical records, and her X-rays.” The Reuters article also failed to mention that Michael has withheld appropriate medical care or rehabilitative treatment for Terri for years. “From Los Angeles to Miami to New York, the press, for the most part has become Michael Schiavo’s and George Felos’ propaganda machine,”
By mit
March 22, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this
scott, i still don’t understand how someone who has a child in the US can collect SS on said child while living in Mexico. Does anyone in the US collect SS on a child? I have never heard of such things. Welfare or WIC maybe but not SS. you have to work and retire before collecting that i do believe.
all those late weekend hours congress put in for nothing. I hope this blows up in all your faces. Your being the ones on here that like to butt into some else’s business. you know who you are.
bruce, My definition of conservative needs to change i guess. but exactly how can one be labelled a conservative who doesn’t actually conserve. I like small govt., a balanced budget with no red ink, but those things are not conservative today. Bush called dems ‘tax and spend’ people. but Bush thinks its ok to spend but not tax. you can’t have it both ways. if you are going to spend all the money the US has and then some, at some point you have to raise taxes. No way around it. The next prez will have to raise taxes period. there is no way the country can keep up with a Bush budget. So what makes one a conservative in this day and age. belief in Jesus and that he was the son of god? That’s what I hear coming from the radio and websites. To believe that Bush is always right and whatever he says and does is right and if you think differently then you are a liberal? You say i am a liberal because I called you a name. what name? All i did was point out that without evidence you have no case; eventhough you suggest that Iraq and Bin laden having ties doesn’t need to have evidence, just because. yeah, there was a training camp in northern Iraq. and guess who was in control of that northern part of Iraq where the training camp was, the US. We controlled the north and south no fly zones (which should read, north and south parts of the country). if those training camps were allowed to operate it was because the US govt. allowed them to operate. We were in control of that part of the country from 1991. Saddam gave out payments to suicide bombers parents, yes. Saddam and Bin laden did have a common enemy (us) yes. but what did that have to do with the war on terror? except for Israel, who would get bombed regardless of money from saddam. saddam did that just to look more islamic than he was, hence why bin laden didn’t like him. there is no evidence for links between the two and no evidence of WMD stockpiles. So who is next before these 4 years are up?
I seriously believe some (hell most) of you side with the parents of TS just because. And that’s it; just because. just because you view the husbands’ side as liberal. Its like you don’t think about it except, if there’s a liberal over there then I am over here. The republicans have turned into big govt. with big business ties. The very opposite for which I consider myself conservative. I voted for Bush in ‘00 then saw my mistake and didn’t make it again in ‘04. But now, since I decided for myself, i am labelled a liberal. go figure. I will not be made a fool of again. just say no to voting!!
By Tony
March 22, 2005 03:10 PM | Link to this
Womens’ medical records are being subpoaenaed and trolled through to roll back their constitutional righs of choice and privacy
Sandy, is this the case in Kansas? Is this the case where girls under the age of 14 went to a doctor in Kansas to have late term (7 mos) abortion?
Kansas law states that any child under the age of 14 and is pregnant, was raped. Are you trying to say, the State of Kansas has no right in these cases?
By Scott
March 22, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this
Maybe Mike Schiavo is a bad guy..maybe he’s not. I can’t say I know the guy personally. I have to say I have a problem with removing the feeding tube from a pull the plug standpoint, however, regardless of whose wish it might be.
Fact: Terry can’t feed herself and without nourishment she will die.
In most cases of pulling th plug it is an instance where life support, such as a respirator, if discontinued, the body would not continue. If Terry is fed, her heart and lungs pump on their own. So it isn’t the same thing.
Additionally, I have heard arguments that her “quality of life� is virtually zero, coupled with the fact that she is “brain dead�. Well, if she’d brain dead and you believe in the afterlife, then she is gone anyway. If you don’t then, well, she’s gone anyway. so the only people who might be suffering are the parents and possibly Michael. If you regard the removal of the tube as cruel death, then you acknowledge she may suffer (not an issue with the brain dead). If you worry about her quality of life then you also acknowledge the presence of a human being that is still there. you can’t have it both ways.
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this
Since I was out for awhile, and recently returned to check on this, I’d like to thank those who pointed out that the schiavo case is not about the money. If it were, Michael would surely have accepted at least one of those buyout offers.
Mara: Somebody thought the Civil War was over?
This whole case is getting rediculous. You don’t know who to believe any more. I have heard about testimony from one of Terri’s nurses that raises some questions about Michael’s motivations. HOWEVER, if it IS true, why did this woman wait until now to reveal it? Why didn’t she go to the Schindlers years ago? Hell, why didn’t THEY pursue this more agressively back then if they had reason to suspect Michael abused her, as they now claim.
Something smells about this whole business, and as I said last week, I don’t think ANY of them have Terri’s interests at heart. Maybe they once did, but not any more.
And yes, I think the tube should stay out. The time for therapy was 15 years ago, not now. The longer one waits, the less effective therapy will be. Duh!
By chuck
March 22, 2005 03:27 PM | Link to this
If evidence of BRAIN ACTIVITY is required to keep from starving a woman to death I have to ask the question, “Lozen, JMorris, Norman, Lyrazel, Tim, Jack and all the other liberals out there, are ya’ll getting hungry?” Based on some of your comments I have to assume the feeding tube has been removed.
By Jack
March 22, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this
Her parents need to let her go.
By Scott
March 22, 2005 03:39 PM | Link to this
Well since this is petering out….did everyone see the tragic shooting in Minnesota today?
By Tim
March 22, 2005 03:46 PM | Link to this
har har Chuck how long did it take you to think of that one… I would have to guess well over a week seeing as that is how long we have been on this particular topic… and we wonder why Georgia schools are in the shape they are in…we have Chuck teaching these children
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 03:46 PM | Link to this
Sandy,
So just because it is now out in the open there is a problem? I contend that what is out in the open is just the tip of what our government does everyday and has been doing for years. But because the WH and Congress is Republican controlled now it is a bad thing? Do you really think all these things you talked about would be any different if the demecrats controlled everything? You forget it is about the votes that drives politicans not what side of the fence you are on.
By norman
March 22, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this
Christians need to be hooked to a tube with truth serum dispensed. They don’t seem able to face the truth.
By Tony
March 22, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this
Jack, at last we agree. “Her parents need to let her go.” I believe it should be left to them and not Michael. Don’t you?
By norman
March 22, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this
Have you noticed how personally creepy those Christians outside Terri’s hospice are?
By norman
March 22, 2005 03:51 PM | Link to this
Boscoe: don’t you know the redneck song: Lord won’t You buy me a Mercedes Benz?
By norman
March 22, 2005 03:53 PM | Link to this
Chuck: we non-believers have more than enough brain power. You believers have much in your cortex.
You could never tell if a Christian were in a terminal state or a permanent vegetative state. They all look pretty foolish to me, brainless and clueless.
By Scott
March 22, 2005 03:56 PM | Link to this
norman - I asked before but maybe you didn’t see it…just out of curiousity, what is it you hate about Christians in general and the Catholic church particularly that makes you link everything you dislike to them?
By norman
March 22, 2005 03:57 PM | Link to this
The General Assembly has just voted to remove Sudafed from store shelves since it can be used for illegal drug manufacture. Why not take bibles off the shelf, they can be used to justify killing, stoning, burning, and other barbaric practices — and they have been used exactly that way?
By Jack
March 22, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this
But Tony she is not married to her parents. They should honor her wishes not their’s.
By Tim
March 22, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this
Norman… I happen to like that song :)
we obviously have not seen eye to eye on a lot of things concerning Christianity… but I must agree… those people outside the hospice seem ‘interesting’ to say the least
By Tony
March 22, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this
Jack, do you think Michael is still married to Terri?
By Scott
March 22, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
Good idea norm..how about taking all butcher knives out of the stores too..they get used in killings all the time
By Jack
March 22, 2005 04:17 PM | Link to this
Have they been divorced? If not they are still husband & wife. (technically)Yes, I know he has fathered children with another woman but he says he did not get a divorce so that he could try to comply with her wishes.
By Jack
March 22, 2005 04:24 PM | Link to this
Why do you hate Christians so much Norm?
By Bruce
March 22, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this
Norm,
You are no better than any other hate group out there.
By Scott
March 22, 2005 04:45 PM | Link to this
Jack…I asked him, in what I thought was a nice way, but I guess he doesn’t want to answer
By Kenneth
March 22, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this
I can’t answer for Norman, but I will tell you MY problem with Christianity. First of all, it’s too much like brainwashing, or as someone once put it, a “mind virus” I know, I was there. I used to believe that crap (and it IS crap). How I got free would take too long to describe here, but I can suggest some resources by others who have: “Losing Faith in Faith” by Dan Barker (a former Evangelical minister and missionary) and “Leaving the Fold” edited by Edward Babinski (if you can find it in a used book store; I think it’s out of print— unfortunately.)
My other problem is with Christians like Randy, Zack, Bruce, and that S.O.B we’ve got in the White House, who insist that our laws have to be Christian, and that everyone else has to be a Christian, whether we want to be or not. It makes you wonder how sure they are of their faith.
By Sandy
March 22, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this
Tony, Are you saying the 14 year-old should be forced to carry her rapist’s child? Do you think that any pregnant minor will seek health care if they know that their privacy rights could be violated? Talk about double jeopardy. If Kansas is only interested in rape victims who exercise their legal right to abortion, then, no, the state has no right. Would they have any interest in records of girls who were raped but not pregnant? If the state needs some busy work, I’m sure there are other rapes they can investigate.
Tony and Chuck, While these problems did not start just over the past 20 years, Ronald Reagan sure had a lot to do with worsening them. Ultimately it’s a good thing that these issues are in the open, because it makes it easier to institute real change. We’re only going to see change if we create it. We can only do that if we’re having a dialog. That means determinining what the problems and disparities are, where the the common ground is between all interested parties, democrat republican, conservative, liberal, Christian, non-Christian. Otherwise, gee, I guess you’re right. There’s no hope. No point to any of it. Let the government do what it’s going to do whether in secret or not.
Sorry, but even I’m not so jaded as to give up. However, I may just have to give up this blog and let those who will wallow in their misery because they think they can’t say Merry Christmas, but can tell my 13-year-old she’s going to burn in hell because she’s not a Christian.
By Scott
March 22, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this
Kenneth - thnaks for your candor. I don’t know your story and as you said it is too long to tell, so I woon’t ask for elaboration. I am a Christian, so I respectfully disagree with you that it’s crap, but you are entitled to your opinion. Faith in Christ is supposed to be voluntary, hence the entire free will, love cannot be compelled stance. It should not be indoctrinated, for then you lack the ability to choose. Which also goes for any religion or dogma. I realize that with a diverse culture it the laws will refelct the beliefs of that culture as a whole, or it should. Many Christians would prefer that the world follow Christ but we can’t compel anyone, simply present the case. It is every bit as wrong for other religions to do the same thing. Islam is imposed by force in many countries in the world and not simply in the Mediterranean. That may never change in our lifetime but it doesn’t have to be the case in THIS country. You and even Norman are entitled to your own belief systems as am I. The thing I don’t get is the constant slamming and venomous rhetoric that is almost conspiracy theory-ish in nature, borderline paranoid, that blames Christianity for ever horrid occurence since the beginning of civilization.
Certainly I would concede that Christianity’s message has been twisted during times in history, but Christianity is neither alone, nor is any ideology, in the infliction of human suffering throughout recorded history. A baseball bat is meant for a game…but is a weapon if used for other purposes. The same can be said for any ideology, religious or otherwise.
you or Norman, or anyone else would be offended if I railed against your belief system simply becasue you have it, and rightly so. While I appreciate you being candid in your response, I ask for simple respect from others, whether they agree or not
By norman
March 23, 2005 07:24 AM | Link to this
Scott: what you call Christianity is the fable invented by Paul and his ilk, not the beliefs of Jesus and his earliest followers. So don’t parade your inadequate understanding of the nonsense you claim to believe.
Now that two federal courts have told the religious fanatics NO, what will the Supremes do? Will that paragon of intellectual and moral stature, pipsqueak Clarence Thomas, speak out?
Ecrasons l’infame!
By Tony
March 23, 2005 07:30 AM | Link to this
Hey Tim So you think it’s not about the money. Well then, why did Schiavo sue the doctors? Terri supposingly passed out because of an imbalance. Why should Schiavo profit from his wife’s misfortune? And Tim, do you think Schiavo will make millions on book deals and movie rights?
I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ “The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for.
By Bruce
March 23, 2005 07:34 AM | Link to this
Kenneth,
I contend that if you ever were “there” you never would have left.
By Kenneth
March 23, 2005 07:37 AM | Link to this
Scott: You are correct in saying that religion should not be coersive— unfortunately, it too often is. That’s why it’s such a problem. And while you are also correct in stating this problem is not unique to Christianity, it and Islam are the worst offenders, because of their emphasis on conversion and their literistic (as opposed to symbolic) interpretations. It’s also the religion we securlarists (at least in this country) are most familiar with. You don’t find Islamists posting here, for example.
Speaking of such, Taslima Nasrin, the Bangladeshi woman who had to flee her country under a death sentence for “blasphemy” said it best: “I believe religion is the root, and from this root, fundamentalism grows like a poisonous stem. If we remove fundamentalism and keep religion, then sooner or later fundamentalism will return.”
BTW, blasphemy is something we see as a victimless crime.
By Tony
March 23, 2005 07:47 AM | Link to this
Sandy, I can’t keep up. In Kansas and many other states. A child under the age of 14 who becomes pregnant is considered too young to understand, therefore, the person who impregnated her is guilty of rape. Typically Sandy, it’s the Father. But let’s seal the records because it was an abortion and we might violate the rights of that child, never mind how she got that way.
Oh and Sandy, According to public record, one of every three members of the Senate and one out of every four members of the House are millionaires. Despite popular stereotypes the wealthiest member of the Senate (John Kerry of Massachusetts) and the wealthiest member of the House (Jane Harman of California). Of the top six wealthiest senators, five are Democrats. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California, worth $16.3 million.
By Lyrazel
March 23, 2005 07:58 AM | Link to this
Lozen—my mother retired and lives in Mexico. She is quite happy and there are many americans where she lives. She used to prepare taxes for folks living abroad. It can be done. She has been receiving her SSI checks in Mexico…no covert plots needed.
My point Scott, was look how Americans treat Americans who are poor. Scum of the earth if they have not. I can step out in Any CIty USA and see it, Georgia too has crappy health care policies for people who work but cant keep up insurance. Its called indegent care, and even if the nurses and doctors are excellent they cannot give a homeless person 12 years of life support. So, when you name a name as I asked, I will smash my keyboard and be humbled. I always differ on the spin about Mexican babies being born in the USA for SSI. Its a crappy way to view human beings. First they cant get SSI without being widowed, or orphaned. Second, the child born in America is an American. Whatever you may think the entire history of the USA it mellows into a fact we all trace our ancestry from somewhere else unless we are Hispanic or Native…so there is quite a history of multi-ethnic culture merging. Why be so afraid of someone who wants to make their life as good as yours—ye kings on your throne?
Illegal is illegal but you folks should understand by now there are lots of illegals here and not all from Mexico or Latin American countries, thanks to look-both-ways-see-nothing-do-nothing bureaucrats pandering to big businesses who demand cheap labor—and Americans demanding cheap prices and illegal immigrants finding the pay rate is better here. My grandfather had 2 birth certificates so he could get through immigration quotas. Not legal, is it? But, when he fought in WWI he came back decorated and American. So rah rah wave your flag and I wave mine.
Wonderful new photos of Shaunti and Diane arent they?
By RS
March 23, 2005 08:19 AM | Link to this
Norman & Tim, I was just thinking the same thing, that the protesters outside Terri’s hospice seem quite creepy indeed. Now, if Michael Schiavo’s desire to let Terri go is based on greed, then why did he already spend an astronomical amount on her care & therapy? Why has he remained married to her all these years & why did he turn down a huge amount to turn her over to her parents? Even if he IS money-motivated, I can’t find it in my heart to condemn him; the money will do him a lot more good than being tied to someone, who, sadly, is no longer a real wife or even a viable human. He is not the evil, heartless monster many have depicted him as. He’s a man who’s been through 15 years of H—-, has been ripped apart by the media & the Religious Not-So-Right & only wants to be loved & move on with his life.
By Lyrazel
March 23, 2005 08:33 AM | Link to this
chuck, DO YOU have a living will? Could YOUR family pay for life support for 12 years? Kudos if you can, but the vast majority of americans cannot and with medicine getting more and more expensive along with insurance premiums getting higher—right to life will only cover the absolutely wealthy. Is that—the way you view America? How about a peek under the cloaked veil of bureaucratic pandering to insurance and pharmacutical companies getting government tax breaks but maintaining a status quo of escalating costs to consumers at the sake of profit to stockholders? Why dont more americans realize this is not a right to die/life issue but a wake up call to the frauds of our elected bureaucracy? Republicans can use this corpse of a woman for their political pandering, and claim they assist but do they change the status quo of legislation to assist other families struggling with outrageous medical bills? Not only did they NOT look at the state of medicine in America—but they passed legislation fit for 1 person and 1 person alone! Stupid, isnt it considering how many other untelevised people there are on life support facing the same dielemas or facing death because of lack of money! Soldiers can take on duty far from America but bureaucrats have cut medical service benefits to vets. Explain how they slipped that under the rug? O yeah tax breaks and budget cuts. We can funnel billions per month into Iraq but Americans at home get budget cuts. Bureaucrats can sell out social medical care to corporations more interested in profit. So take your 250,000 law suit cap and find a doctor and hospital willing to care for you. Does capitalism ever involve the preachings of jesus? Not when there is money to be made.
By Randy
March 23, 2005 08:40 AM | Link to this
I saw a Christian movie the other night with Richard Harris, the great english actor(Gladiator, etc), he made just before he died. Now he will be someone I will be interested in talking to in heaven, along with Mel Gibson, Steven Baldwin, Curt Shilling(baseball player), Kurt Warner(Football player) and the thousands of other celebrities who are Christians. I do however, only want to talk to the ones who stook up for their faith while here on earth, not the SECRET SERVICE Christians.
By Randy
March 23, 2005 09:04 AM | Link to this
Thinking about heaven, there are going to be a whole lot of interesting people to talk to when we(people who have accepted Jesus) get there. Just think about it, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, most all the founding fathers(I think 52 of the 55 signers of the Declaration of Independence were Chrisians)and the biggest one of all JESUS CHRIST himself. If you don’t go to heaven, you will get to spend time with Voltaire and Norman(if he doesn’t change his heart). No I’m wrong, the way that will work is, if you enjoy talking to people, there won’t be anybody to talk to, if you like to have free will, there won’t be any free will for you. Whatever, you want, you will not get it. You will give up all your freedoms, hopes, wants. All this just because you wanted to have it your way here on this earth. You want to play God here, instead of following him. Big price you are paying.
By Tim
March 23, 2005 09:11 AM | Link to this
Tony… NOOOOOOOOOO (yes I used all caps!) I don’t think it is about money… simple as that… if it were he would have taken one of the offers he has received AND still made movies or books or whatever else you think he is going to do to make money
now after the ruling last night we have those ‘interesting’ people outside the hospice calling the judges ‘Tyrants’… good grief first we have ‘activist’ judges and now we have ‘tyrants’… goodness… I am just glad the 11th Circuit has already ruled… some of those ‘interesting’ people were starting to make their way to Atlanta… well they can just keep on going to D.C. now… or go out and get a job
By norman
March 23, 2005 09:12 AM | Link to this
Those of you who find George Bush, Tom DeLay, and Bill Frist to be moral, ethical leaders are so brain damaged that you need desperately to have your tubes removed.
By norman
March 23, 2005 09:16 AM | Link to this
Evebody thinkin’ bout heaven ain’t goin’ dere!
What bs. Randy! Your idea of heaven comes out of Persian mythology which entered the Old Testament very late indeed. The ancient Israelites did not believe this stuff. By the time of Jesus, of course, Judaism had developed many different sects, some of which had the same delusions you do. Why not think rationally? I know it will hurt, but just try. As Nancy Reagan said about drugs, why don’t you say about heaven: Just say No!
By steve
March 23, 2005 09:35 AM | Link to this
Norman, I personally do not know the president or Tom Delay. However, I have had to privilege to serve along side Bill Frist on 2 mission trips to Uganda. He is as fine a man as you could ever meet. His credentials as a doctor are impeccable. His desire to serve and help others is undeniable. Just because you disagree with him politically, you call him immoral? I by no means claim to be his best friend, but I think it is safe to say that I know him better than you. He is as genuine as the come. Disagree with him if you will, but don’t attack his character.
By Vince
March 23, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Whoop - Ti - Doo. Who cares about those tapes? Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon. Why isn’t the media talking about this? Monica Lewinsky and the cigar got more press. Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon.
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 09:51 AM | Link to this
Norman, why do you care if anybody believes in Heaven. You don’t and have gone to great lengths to make sure everyone knows it. Norman FYI, nobody gaves a rats A if you don’t.** I do beleive in it, and even somebody as “dangerous” as you are won’t change that. The only danger you present in one to yourself.
By JohnR
March 23, 2005 09:59 AM | Link to this
Religion is a virus. These people who think that it is God’s will to keep TS alive must seriously suffer from some brain degenerancy disease that can only be caused by to much white bread, or stultifyingly stupid philosophy.
I was told by a baptist preacher when I was 12 YEARS OLD that I was going to hell because I was a SINNER! I saw 4 of my cousins die because their fundamentalist mammas preacher told her that it was God’s will that they die of appendicitis, and the mumps. She let them die in her house! What makes her less right than Ts’s parents? Is it not GOD”S WILL?
People who are non-believers need only look at the behavior of “believers,” their intolerance, self-inflicted ignorance, and blind allegiance and run the other way.
Oh, and another thing, illegal aliens pay billions of dollars in payroll taxes and fica each year that they are not entitled to recieve in refund. I believe that more than balances out their account.
By norman
March 23, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this
Steve: by their fruits ye shall know them. Frist may be a nice Princeton boy, but when he perverts the medical profession for sleezy partisan advantage he deserves to be called what he is, immoral.
By norman
March 23, 2005 10:11 AM | Link to this
John R: thanks for the personal testimony. More people should testify to the evils of religion.
Boscoe: if there is a heaven and you get in, you will be bored for eternity with dolts like yourself.
By mit
March 23, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this
bill frist an impeccable doctor?
i saw an interview where he basically said that HIV can be spread through sweat and tears.
dumb doctor if you ask me. What he said at those meetings for ts over the weekend are laughable. he diagnosed her through video footage.
By RS
March 23, 2005 10:34 AM | Link to this
John R: Oh my word! How awful about your cousins!!! Your aunt was actually guilty of child abuse (resulting in death). By all rights, the death penalty would not have been too harsh a punishment. Did you know religion has been responsible for more wars than any otehr factor? No surprise there.
By norman
March 23, 2005 10:40 AM | Link to this
Bill Frist is a spoiled rich kid who got into Princeton the way Dubya got into Yale.
By JohnR
March 23, 2005 10:42 AM | Link to this
Well, religion killed her too! So I can’t say she didn’t live by her beliefs, hell, they killed her.
By Bruce
March 23, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this
JohnR,
Non-Believer are tolerant. Read some of Norman’s post and say that again.
By Jack
March 23, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
They asked Monica if she had sex with Bill Clinton….She said “Close but no cigar”
By JohnR
March 23, 2005 11:04 AM | Link to this
Norman is not very tolerant, but he is correct most of the time.
By norman
March 23, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this
Tolerance should not extend to perverse foolishness. If someone wants to deal with illness by citing the Old Testament I don’t feel I need to be tolerant; tolerance might cause the death of a child needing a blood transfusion, for example. Those who rely on primitive bible passages do not deserve tolerance; they deserve ridicule and eventaully confinement in a mental institution.
There is entirely too much tolerance for nonsense in this country. A Newsweek poll says over 80% of American believe that Jesus rose from the dead. What further proof of mass psychosis is needed?
By Bruce
March 23, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this
JohnR,
If you agree with Norman that makes you intolerant also, wouldn’t it?
By norman
March 23, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this
Bruce: why do you expect tolerance for your mental disease? What you should want is a cure. I would be happy to prescribe a cure.
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 11:23 AM | Link to this
That makes alot of sense! It’s OK for norman to be intolerant because you think he’s right? He’s right because you don’t understand religion and choose to mock it instead. What your Aunt supposedly did doesn’t make sense either. She “LET” her children die because some “preacher” said it was God’s will? Anybody who “LETS” their children die without giving proper aid has more problems than people like you can blame on religion.
By Filster
March 23, 2005 11:24 AM | Link to this
JohnR, most illegals are paid caash under the table, so your comments about paying payroll taxes are way off base. Given that billions of dollars are involved, most of which leaves this country without paying any taxes to be included in the provision of services, this is one reason I think the national flat tax is a good idea. It won’t change the numer of illegals here, or the fact they’re paid under the table and their income not reported, but since everyone buys stuff, a national flat tax will recoup a sizeable amount of money which can be used for such pressing issues as social security, deficit reduction, etc. Norman, you rant and rave agasint religion and God and anything that remotely smacks of faith at every occasion whether prompted to or not. You must be a very sad, lonely, tortured individual to be so bitter and hateful. What happened to you man (and don’t go on about stuff that had nothing to do with YOU. I’m asking what happened in your life to make you so hateful)
By RS
March 23, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this
Correction, Norman: Those who rely on primitive Bible passages, therefore causing death to an innocent person (i.e. denying a much-needed blood transfusion) deserve a heck of a lot harsher than ridicule & institutionalism; they deserve to be treated as the murderers they are
By Bruce
March 23, 2005 11:27 AM | Link to this
Norman,
Quoting statics like that only proves just how wrong you are.
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 11:33 AM | Link to this
Jesus spoke simply to mankind in the Bible. I believe He did indeed rise from the dead. norman can’t PROVE that he didn’t whereas I at least provide evidence that he did. In year 700 there was a priest who had doubts of the real presence of Our Lord in the Most Blessed Sacrament. One day at Mass he prayed that his doubts would be removed. As he said the words Consecration the Host turned into Flesh and the Wine turned into Blood. What type of Flesh and Blood was it? In 1970 the Holy See ordered a through scientific investigation using spectroscopic analysis, high powered microscopes and advanced medical technology. The most illustrious scientist, Professor Odoardo Linoli, eminent professor in anatomy and pathological and clinical microscopy, headed the investigation and was assisted by Professor Ruggero Bertellie of the University of Sienna. The investigation showed the Host had turned into flesh, into a fine slice of a human heart, and was incorrupt, as though it had just been taken form a heart.The analyses were conducted with unquestionable scientific precision and were documented with a series of photographs, which were made public by Professor Linoli on March 4, 1971 in the church of the miracle. Other scientists were asked by the Holy See to verify these findings. When all of the data was accumulated, the scientists were in accord: “Without reservation, this is a slice of tissue from a human heart, as though it had been expertly sliced by a surgeon’s scalpel through the center of the heart. And, though subject to decay as all flesh is for 1298 years, it remains incorrupt.” These findings were published in September of 1971.
By Filster
March 23, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this
Morning RS. Nice to see you back. I think there’s little disagreement that many, if not most, of man’s atrocities have either been commited in the name of GOD or have a religious impetus, but please don’t condemn the message because the the messenger is faulty. Wish I had a snappier comeback for you. As for norman, he seems to epitomize everything he abhors about religion, only as an opposite. Funny how someone can be exactly like something they purport to hate as long as they are on the other side. In fact, norman is so extreme I am beginning to wonder if he’s real, or just someone who’s really bored and throws way out stuff at you just to incite comment. He kind of reminds me of pre-conversion Paul… Have a good day RS.
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this
To see these photos look at this web site!http://www.cmns.mnegri.it/miracolo/welcome.html
By lozen
March 23, 2005 11:58 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, Why do you claim to provide evidence when you do not? You can’t use the bible as evidence; it was written in a time of supersitition and magic acts by many, many people. The year 700 was also a time of superstition and magic acts. Anybody can say anything but that does not make it true. Between 700 and 1970 who knows what happened to the original “proof”?
By mit
March 23, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
lets do some modern day testing on this eucharist stuff. DNA testing.
they found it was real blood and it was type AB. that doesn’t say this is the blood of christ or that someone keeps replenishing the blood so it stays fresh. the piece of heart could be the same way.
you believe in stigmata, even though today we know for a fact that jesus was not nailed through his hands but his wrists.
By Crystal
March 23, 2005 12:13 PM | Link to this
Norman described as tolerant and “right”? This forum gets more laughable every day.
By Scott
March 23, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this
Sorry I’m late..I know y’all missed me (Haha!)
Just to answer a few people…
Lyrazel - I understand your point of how poor people are treated in this country. I couldn’t agree more. Poverty is a huge issue that is not addressed nearly as much as it needs to be, health care be a primary issue. I can’t and won’t argue with you there. As for the immigration issue, I have absolutely no problem with someone legally coming to this country to make a better life. Unfortunately the illegal immigrant (not to be read as Hispanic or Latin American…it’s from everywhere) populatgion is akin to invasion ini this country. To a large extent, I believe we have made our own bed there. Americans all want to be paid like CEO’s no matter what they do for a living so it ends up simply being a question of economics for business owners and farmers, etc. They make more money, the illegals have a better economic standing than they previously did, and there are little to no repercussions to either party…all the while the Immigration code created by Congress is more convoluted than the tax code. I have no problem if someone wants to immigrate to this country to make a better life for themselves, become an American and contribute to this country. Unfortunately that is not always the case. I do not, however, believe that the offer to make a better life should extend to those with criminal records (there are approx. 750,000 aggravated felons illegally in this country).
Kenneth - My point was simply to be fair, whether you agree we agree or not. I don’t believe any of the religions are inherently bad though I agree sometimes the implementation has been twisted. nobody can force conversion on you in this country (though there are several others where it can and is imposed)
Norman - you have yet to ask me WHAT I believe or even respond to questions I ask you purely out of trying to understand what basis you have for your opinion. Please give the pompous, self-righteous “I think I know more than you so you are beneath me” attitude a rest. You know zero about me or my beliefs or convictions and have NO real ability to judge them without knowing me. you will anyway, I realize, since you regard everyone who doesn’t buy off on your worldview as inept or a simpleton. As far as being “usually correct” is concerned (a way you were described earlier) to be honest it is hard to discern between you and the people you purport to hate except for which side of the fence you stand on. You act as if Christian belief is hate speech but the most hateful dialogue on here is from you. You claim to be for the First amendment, well, as long as people exercising it are agreeing with you. how hypocritical can you get?
By norman
March 23, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this
Scott: I am not really interested in your beliefs. Yes, I do think I am right, I know I am right, I know that most of the people on this posting are fools, knaves, or both. So what?
The Apostle Paul said : beware of philosophy and vain thought. He meant that Christianity could not stand against reason and should not even try.
By RS
March 23, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this
Hey, Filster! I had to read your post twice to get the complete gist & I believe you are right. True belief in a Creator is one thing, I myself believe, but so many have waged wars/murdered innocent people in His name. Prime examples: 911 & the suicicde bombings in Israel
By norman
March 23, 2005 12:41 PM | Link to this
Not only are the protester in Pinellis Park rather creepy, the Schindler family is outright ghoulish. They claim to love their daughter and that the courts want to kill her. Actually Terri is already dead, except in the legal sense. Her brain has no longer a cortex and the expressions her face seems to make are no more than involuntary refexes, like a chicken whose head has been cut off. Terri is dead and the decent thing to do would be to bury her — not to make ghoulish protests about wanting to care for her. Mr. and Mrs. Schindler seem to be parents in the worst sense of the word.
By Scott
March 23, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this
norman - if by “most of the people on this posting are fools, knaves, or both” I assume you include yourself at the top of that list. You are exactly the kind of hate-monger you purport to oppose, nothing more. Your assumption that those who don’t agree with you can’t think because they clearly don’t recognize your genius is exactly the kind of arrogance this world can do without.
Ever hear the old saying “the level of a man’s perceived intelligence is directly proportionate to how much he agrees with you” ? Seems to be your mantra
By Crystal
March 23, 2005 12:43 PM | Link to this
Fools & knaves, indeed. Too archaic. Here are the proper choices for designation: Vandal, Sweet Logic, Grandma, Snake Handler, Liberal Latte, Faulty Furious, Women’s Wear, Hippo-the-Crit, Scholarly Scoopy, Science Surfer, Political Poppycocky, Connie Constitutional, Pansy Protestor, Gay Goober, BlackHole Bob and Pompous Prof. All these led by the twittering twins, Shaunti & Diane. Please sign off under your proper title.
By steve
March 23, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this
Norman, I would assume you are referring to Colossians chapter 2:
Col. 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
You said that Paul “meant that Christianity could not stand against reason and should not even try.”
You are not even in the ballpark. Paul was referring to what is known as the Colossian heresey or Colossian error. Namely, warning the church as Colosse concerning the errors of “angel worship” (see v.18). Paul is saying that the “philosophy” of the heretics did not accord with the truth as it is revealed in Christ. According to Paul, Christ is the standard by which all doctrine is measured.
One of the principles of proper hermeneutics is to know the context.
Carry on…
By Scott
March 23, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this
HAHAHHAHA! - thanks for the laugh this morning Crystal!
By norman
March 23, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this
Steve: don’t give me redneck theology. I know you got this stuff from some place like Bob Jones University.
The Apostle Paul was a fraud who invented Christianity whole cloth. Because he disagreed with James of Jerusalem, Jesus brother, who presumably know what Jesus had intended, Paul invented the ‘Holy Sprit’ as a source of his expert knowledge about the Divine Christ. Christian theology is baloney, and the kind of study done in church-related institutions is worse than worthless.
I am neither a fool nor a knave, thank you. I study, I learn, and I profess. And I profess that many of y’all are fools or knaves. Fools for believing what is foolish, knaves for pretending you believe what you probably don’t but have some advantage in mind in pertsuading others. Most clergymen are either fools or knaves or both.
By Bruce
March 23, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
Norman, The Apostle Paul was warning us to beware of folks like Spinoza or Aristotle or Bertrand Russell. The Vainty he spoke of is your (meaning “OUR”) own.
Scott,
You are not the first to try to get Norman to provide a basis for his opinion. I tried several times last week to understand why/how he forms his opinion but he refused to let me in on his little secret. It would seem that if he had all the answers we would be willing to share them. But no… he is content in just proving just how much one man can hate another. Just pray for him, only God can soften his heart.
By Scott
March 23, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
Norman - well I suppose by that definition you would fit in both categories. You never have evidence to support you broadsweeping statements, other than the literature that supports your own philosophies. I sincerely hope nobody ever takes you seriously. We have no shortage of arrogant, misguided jerks in society. no need to add more
By Scott
March 23, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this
Norman - well I suppose by that definition (of fool or Knave that is) you would fit in both categories. You never have evidence to support you broadsweeping statements, other than the literature that supports your own philosophies. I sincerely hope nobody ever takes you seriously. We have no shortage of arrogant, misguided jerks in society. no need to add more
By Scott
March 23, 2005 01:10 PM | Link to this
Bruce - now THAT would be a miracle
By Jack
March 23, 2005 01:11 PM | Link to this
Norman, you’re doing a fine job of stirring things up. Keep up the good work.
By JohnR
March 23, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this
If you don’t believe illegals pay income tax you’ve obviously have never been in the carpet mills in Dalton, or any chicken processing plant in the state. You think illegals only work construction? Domestic work? yard work? please..
I’m not making up any stories about my family members either, in fact in 1984 the guardian of my cousin allowed him to die of appendicitis and was brought to trial for it in Tennessee for child abuse. Of course he got off for it by claiming religious freedom. You could look it up.
I don’t believe all christians are intolerant ignorant people. I have, in my life, seen numerous examples of folks who actually live by the principles laid down in the sermon on the mount. The funny thing is, there are as many non-believers that live by the same principles. I respect any peoples right to believe whatever they need to in order to give their lives purpose or meaning, and will defend that right so long as it does not infringe on my right to not believe it.
By Scott
March 23, 2005 01:31 PM | Link to this
JohnR - I am sorry the incident with your family in Tennessee happened. that truly is tragic.
Thanks for your comments
By steve
March 23, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this
Norman, When you say, “don’t give me redneck theology” is that just another way of saying, “don’t you dare correct me because I am never wrong”?
You do not have to believe the Apostle Paul. I was merely pointing out that your interpretation of Colossians 2 was incorrect.
By the way, I did NOT attend Bob Jones University.
By Randy
March 23, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this
The one consistancy of Norman is, that he is always WRONG. On everything he posts, he has not said one true thing yet.
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this
Who’s to say what IS TRUE and what ISN’T TRUE???!!!
By Scott
March 23, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this
Royal Chic - lately it seems as if Norman is that person
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 02:36 PM | Link to this
And for those who are bothered by Norman’s comments, you are simply proving him to be valid in his assertion that most Christians are neither faithful nor believers……..as soon as your religion of choice is questioned, challenged, or reckoned with there is a sudden need to justify or explain your stand………to even respond to his comments in which you do not believe proves that you’re not completely convinced in your faith, religion or beliefs………as you shouldn’t be!!! We shall not be convicted of anything beyond the fact that a Higher Power exits………nothing more nothing less……..If the bible is the source upon which you rely…..you most certainly are being misled…….
Norman is a little extreme and intolerant, but he simply does this to prove the point that he continues to make each and everyday…..I believe it to be moot if I might add….lol
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 02:42 PM | Link to this
Scott, since Norman can not say this for certain he should simply be ignored unless he makes a direct comment towards anyone in particular…….to box all Christians into being “fools and knaves” is not only far from true, but impossible to conceive…….therefore his opinion shall not be valid to those who do not subscribe to his beliefs…..
By Randy
March 23, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this
There is a village missing it’s idiot, because he is posting on this forum, where are you Norman. They are missing their Village Idiot.
By mit
March 23, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
i have to defend norman now.
the statistics about 80% believing jesus rose from the dead that boscoe disputed. True. i still don’t get why boscoe disputed it, just because it came from norman. i love those just because people.
that’s all i need to say Randy is wrong about his assumption. so…
why does all the miracles happen to catholics? i don’t seem to recall any happening like the sort to any other sect. therefore, i must be skeptical. likewise to religion as a whole. if there is only one way to heaven why are there so many different religions? wouldn’t ‘god’ tell everyone before the other religions came about.
christians hate evolution but the history of religion as a whole actually did evolve. if it didn’t i wouldn’t have the doubts i do about one religion being superior over others. When this country turns into a theocracy i wonder what protestant sect will come out on top. just think, islam has only two major sects, sunni and shiite. Christians have so many they will not know who to kill.
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
To sum all of that up: A HIT DOG WILL HOLLA!!!
By Scott
March 23, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this
Royal Chic - You are likely right, better to just ignore it. I have my beliefs and am more than willing to let others have theirs. I just get aggravated with the arrogant attitude. My opinion is no less valid simply because Norman, or anyone else says so
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 03:01 PM | Link to this
lozen, I made no mention of the Bible in this “Evidence”. If I also listen to more of what you say you’ll probably try to convince me dragons were flying around at that time. “Superstition and magic”? Those were practiced no more in the year 700 then they are today. You have no evidence that this is a fraud. The Church still has this under lock and key as they always have since the year 700. If you want you could still go and see it for yourself in Italy. I even offered evidence that a medical doctor, a man of science, tested this and concluded it is real. HE TESTIFIED THAT IT WAS. Are you a scientist lozen? Can you prove this is a fraud? I THINK NOT! Youu may apologize at any time.
By Filster
March 23, 2005 03:03 PM | Link to this
JohnR, no not all illegals work in construction and day laboring jobs, but normally one has to have a social security number for withholding, etc., and it should be beyond dispute regardless of which side of the fence you’re on that a huge amount of money leaves this country annually and no taxes are paid on it. The Nuff said? As for your personal experiences, I am sorry. Lots of weird stuff happens in the guise of religious belief, expression, etc. And I agree, you don’t have to be religious to live by the Sermon. We OK now? Norm, you are obviously too bitter about life in general, ergo all the attacks and insult regardless of what was said to you. Several people, including me, have asked you what happened, etc. All you do is spew venom and vitriol in response. You embody all the principles you say you despise. only you are 180 degrees out in your views. I guess in your world it’s OK to hate and insult and hurt as long as it’s consistent with your own little world. Pretty hypocritical of your normie. Guess your true colors are shining through.
By RS
March 23, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this
Actually, Randy, I’ve found Norman to be right about many things & typically, his assessment of Mr. & Mrs. Schindler is, sadly, right on target. They are desperately grasping straws & viewing what are involuntary muscle twitches as signs that Terri can think & feel. Terri died 15 years ago. That her heart is still beating is nothing more than a mere formality
By Brian Curtis
March 23, 2005 03:12 PM | Link to this
MIT: Good point, but keep in mind that it’s not ‘Christians’ who hate & fear evolution; it’s just fundamentalists, who are as far from Christian as… well, as any Republican who claims to be Christian too.
There are plenty of good Christians out there; they just tend not to be the loudmouthed, hateful morons who screech the loudest.
By Boscoe
March 23, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this
Royal Chic? The fact that I play apologetics with regards to my religion is by no means an admission that I am not convinced that it is the truth. Just because you don’t beleive as I do doesn’t mean I am being misled, it means you refuse to find out more about what this higher power is. That fact that you admit to a higher power makes me suspect you beleive in a higher authority to whose laws we are subject. Which makes my belief that much stronger.
By mit
March 23, 2005 03:22 PM | Link to this
i guess norman just thinks religious people are dumb for believing. i also think that most of his comments are there just to p** off boscoe and crew. hence, the non replies you all keep asking for. does norman believe what he says, sure. but the wording is inclined to p** off people, which people who reply screaming and yelling just keep him laughing for his own amusement (though i do get amused at too from time to time). this is a blog you know.
i use to go into blogs about bands (music ones) and do the same thing. they go crazy and its hilarious. go tell a bunch of deadheads that the grateful dead sucks. They get more p** than anyone on here does at norman. 10 fold.
boscoe, all that doctor concluded was that is was real blood and tissue. that doesn’t rest the case on fraud. plus it was in the 70’s. lets test this stuff now.
the shroud has been shown to be fraud. what makes you soo sure this isn’t fraud. a medical doctor? the shroud took a long time to disprove and modern technology was its downfall. i wonder if the catholics over in italy would have it tested again? they were not too happy about the shroud thing.
By Whiley
March 23, 2005 03:28 PM | Link to this
Is anyone watching the news right now concerning Terri Schiavo?? The republicans/religious right have gone absolutely TOO FAR ! That’s what you get people for voting the way you do.
This right to life garbage is rediculous.
I repeat, how many of you want to be forced to be in a vegitative state for decades?, forced BY OUR GOVT ! !?
By Scott
March 23, 2005 03:33 PM | Link to this
WHILEY - no tv in here..what happened?
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 03:36 PM | Link to this
Boscoe, you miss my point all together and I shouldn’t say that I’m surprised…..are you telling me that you are absolutely convinced that everything you believe to be the laws of the Higher Power in which you believe is correct??? We are created in the image of our Creator thus we have the innate tendency to understand his nature and be guided by our inner voice or conscience which is nothing more than our Creator working through us to fulfill his Divine Purpose….I don’t need a bible that was translated by earthly man and contains contradiction after contradiction to prove to me that my Creator exists and the nature of God is reflected through the original nature of man……God is not this spirit being that dwells in the heavens….our Creator is all around us and lives among us and we have evidence of his laws and qualities through nature, the universe, and all of his creation…..I have set myself free from religious hypocrisy and empty beliefs that have nothing to do with my spirituality and/or spiritual path……some things that seem pregnant with meaning has no meaning whatsoever???? For the record, the bible is pure symbolism and historical….that is the way in which it should be interpreted….as a historical, literary source that is not completely valid…..
By mit
March 23, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
brian curtis,
sorry about the generalization regarding christians and evolution.
i get myself in trouble generalizing sometimes.
By Whiley
March 23, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this
Too much to type Scott, but one of the scariest is that they are trying to get Terri in the custody of the state, move under state care.
I can’t believe people think it’s murder ! Scary stuff here.
I noticed nobody here said “yes do anything to keep me alive. I wouldn’t mind living like Terri for years & years.”
Terri has been FORCE fed for years. She has no BRAIN LEFT ! JUST LIKE THE REPUBLICANS ! And I’m sorry but her family is being selfish, selfish, selfish !
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 04:00 PM | Link to this
Many scientists have made conclusions that have been proven false or inadequate later in history….thus we have the evolution of science….lol
By Scott
March 23, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this
Royal Chic - Oh c’mon…you’re not actually buying into that whole “earth is round” thing again are you…plenty of scientists agreed the earth was flat…..heheeheh
By lozen
March 23, 2005 04:11 PM | Link to this
As I said before, Boscoe, who knows where this sample the good doctor tested came from, and what happened between the alledged event in 700 and the test in 1970? Who knows he wasn’t paid money or promised heaven to say what the church wanted him to say? You don’t know and neither do I. I believe in nature and the laws of nature. I’m not superstitious and I’m not religious (in your definition of religious). I do not believe virgin jewish teenage girls are impregnated by a god any more than I believe Leda was impregnated by a swan. I don’t believe virgins have children, because that goes against the laws of nature. I do not believe day and night were created before the sun as Genesis says, because that goes against the laws of nature. I do not believe the host in the year 700 turned into real flesh and real blood; it goes against the laws of nature. I don’t believe you know more about the mystery of life than I do. I don’t believe something is true just because you believe it’s true.
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
Just to clear my last post up that was in reference to Boscoe’s explanation of Jesus’ “blood” and “body”……
By Crystal
March 23, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
Attention all you fools and knaves!!! Who invaded England in 1066? Guess, guess, guess? Who invaded forums in 2005…..? Just want to keep you on your toes.(Clue—-starts with an N..)
Now, relax. Breathe deep. Remember: Boredom is a terrible thing to waste.
By Filster
March 23, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
mit - you mean you dissed the Grateful Dead around Deadheads and you’re still alive? That’s more amazing that norman’s absolute hatred….
By Sandy
March 23, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this
And now for something completely different: harmony of science and spirituality. Consider the following paraphrasing from How To Know God, by Deepak Chopra:
In all religions God is unbounded and infinite. We select a deity based on our interpretation of reality and that interpretation is rooted in biology. Religion is the substitute for this infinity, so that our brains can grasp it. Therefore the God of any religion is only a fragment of God.
Unless we can see ourselves in the mirror, we will never see God there, because the perceiver is intimately linked to his perceptions.
And for Norman: To an athiest, all forms of deity are a false projection. According to the athiest, religion is the ultimate illusion, since we are only worshipping ourselves second-hand.
My own observation is that indifference is the opposite of love and not the opposite of hate. That Norman spends so much energy in the quality and quantity of his posts is is quite telling. If he didn’t have some stake in this on some level, he wouldn’t bother.
Generally knowing thyself is a form of spirituality if you embrace that humanity and divinity merge at some point.
My buddy Deepak goes to to describe the seven stages of God, which focus on our perceptions and needs directly related to our physical experience. He gets into quantum theory, discusses the Theory of Everything, and brings together a pretty impressive collection of comparative teachings from various faiths and myths. Cool, refreshing stuff.
By Randy
March 23, 2005 04:25 PM | Link to this
1066 was William the C.
By Randy
March 23, 2005 04:28 PM | Link to this
It wasn’t Norman the abnormal.
By norman
March 23, 2005 04:34 PM | Link to this
Why do some of you keep asking for the basis of what I am saying? I have cited many books of biblical scholarship, many discussions of a purely historical nature, and I can continue. I did not make my view up out of air, Christianity was made up out of air.
Meanwhile on Schiavo: her family continues to act crazy. I expect some of the Christians outside the hospice will lose it and get violent and have to be restrained. This would be part of their effort to blacken the government and gain sympathy. Let Terri be buried, she is already dead.
By Royal Chic
March 23, 2005 04:34 PM | Link to this
I enjoyed Deepak’s explanation of knowing thyself thus knowing divinity……refreshing!!!
By Crystal
March 23, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this
Yes, Randy. You are dandy. It was Wille C. and he was a …uh oh..a..Norman. And that Norman was not intoxicated with Spanish moss and marsh grass. Maybe a little French wine, but who can blame him for that. Maybe the guy with the tapes of the Bush conversation had a little bit of the same. (See? I’m staying on topic. I know. What topic?)
By lozen
March 23, 2005 04:57 PM | Link to this
Sandy, Deepak is a wise man from a very old and wise culture. I agree that, if there is a god, it is unbounded and infinite. We don’t have to look for it in a book or a church and the God of any religion is only a fragment of God. The only thing I’d disagree with, is that we select a deity. It seems to me a deity was selected for many people by their parents, their childhood religious teachers, and the culture they just happen to land in, as was just about every thing else they believe. So many people are filled with such fear by childhood religious teachings, they can never look outside the box for fear of going to hell.
By Zack
March 23, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this
Sandy—Deepak Chopra seems to be on the right track at times but not at others. In fact, she sounds a little new age. You shouldn’t be interested in what this person thinks about God but instead trying to seek God on your own. The Bible is what you need to be reading. If I strike you as sounding condescending, I apologize and can assure you that’s not what I’m doing. I’m telling you what is true.
As for Norman, yes, he indeed is more interested in “religion” than he wants to admit, as is the case with a lot of people. This is why I encourage people to seek the truth, because when you genuinely do that, you see false teachings for what they are and have them eliminated from your mental list. I’ve been a Christian for almost 19 years, and every day I see more and more truth to Christianity. I’m already totally secure in my beliefs. I’m just experiencing deeper and deeper understanding, although I’ll never be able to comprehend certain things during my human existence (like the concept of the Trinity, but I know that my lack of comprehension changes nothing.)
By Michael
March 23, 2005 05:05 PM | Link to this
When you’re finished recounting the pseudo-science intended to prove that someone who was dead somehow became alive again, answer my earlier question: Do you still deny the existence of the Treaty that you claim nonbelievers made up to disparage religion or did you make an effort to find it in the sources I cited?
Evidence usually means nothing to the religiously committed, that is why you can’t admit that you were wrong. And that is why the posts are a waste of time. But they do furnish me with some wonderful examples of real life fallacies to use in my logic classes.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 07:10 AM | Link to this
To Crystal and other admirers of Bush,
Let’s restore the focus to the original issue, not Iraq or anachronistic Biblical distinctions that do not comport with the usage or meaning of modern moral concepts.
One area in which the now unavailable tapes might have been relevant is in shedding light on why Bush suddenly refused to take a physical while in the Air National Guard with the result that he wasn’t able to fly anymore. Rather than writing this off as his “youthful indiscretions� we may wonder if our current President broke the laws in Texas, laws that were vigorously enforced with lengthy jail sentences imposed upon poor blacks and even white graduate students who dabbled in drugs in the 1970s in that state. We do know from the portions of the tapes that were revealed that he laughed at Al Gore for his admission of smoking marijuana and implied that he would not make the same mistake by speaking the truth. This does not speak well of a man who seldom misses an opportunity to invoke his Christianity in public speech.
However, these tapes might have ended the speculation about hard drug use on Bush’s part, and perhaps in his favor. Bush’s refusal to answer questions about his past behavior will always suggest to some that he had something to cover up and remind others of Fred McGwire’s refusal to talk about his past in the Senate hearings last week. (And I would think that truthfulness in a president is more important than truthfulness about how one obtained a baseball record.)
And yes, there is a double standard with respect to many, though of course not all conservatives, in their responses to the very same kinds of behavior in people who happen to be politically liberal. Every misstep, moral failure, or mistake by a democrat is given endless scrutiny by Fox and other scream television, talk radio, and postings such as those here, or in the case of Clinton, $40 million to investigate little more than sexual activity in the White House that had no real bearing on public policy. The professional vulgarian Rush Limbaugh called for jail time for all those who used drugs illegally. What was the response when it was revealed that he used drugs illegally? “We pray for you Rush, we forgive you.� What kind of treatment from conservatives would Al Franken have received or any democratic politician if such a story was disclosed about them? The rock quarry, as Morris suggested.
I dislike Bush but I did not believe and still do not believe that there is sufficient publicly available evidence to claim that he used illegal drugs other than marijuana. But let’s not pretend that there is no double standard among many conservatives or that the president of “good and evil� is not hypocritical with respect to his private and public utterances on this issue.
By Sandy
March 24, 2005 07:45 AM | Link to this
Zack, let me clarify. Chopra eloquently puts into words what I know to be true, that there are levels of consciousness, ours to explore and grow with. I was a Christian for close to 30+ years and have read the Bible, having attended Catholic school from K to 12.
I had a hard time with the hypocrisy and closed-mindedness of organized religion, not to mention the blatant and underlying misogyny. I don’t believe in a literal translation of the Bible, nor do I believe it was written by God because there are conflicting teachings and a gazillion translations. My gut tells me God is not to be feared. I believe Christ existed and taught and lived that which is most important, to love everyone, regardless. I can’t consider myself solely Christian because Christianity seems stagnant to me. I know that Christ was not the only one to teach that love is stronger then everything. The Buddha was “kicking it old school” before Jesus was born. And it’s a little ironic to hear this referred to as New Age, when the ideas have been around for a long, long, time. It’s our understanding of the science that’s new.
I read the Tao Te Ching and it gave me so much clarity, hope, and acceptance, in ways I had never experienced in a patriarchal church. It taught me to observe and touched everything in my life. It actually made me understand Christianity better, and behave in a more compassionate and less judgmental manner (except where politics is involved, apparently). Taoism and Buddhism are kind of the like the monosodium glutamate of faith, they enhance everything they touch, but without the wicked headache.
I’m of the mind that God is really too great to fit into one narrow religion. Words, in fact can’t really convey the enormousness of it all. God is vibrant, evolving, dynamic, transcendent, and so much more than what is presented in the Bible.
I respect your faith and what is true for you, but you seem almost desperate or anxious to share it. No two people will experience God the same way. One can live one’s faith and teach it subtly without being aggressive. We are all immersed in and invited to God’s grace all the time, but sometimes we don’t recognize it, and we don’t all come to it at the same pace and in the same way. Some may never come to it, which is using the gift of free will. Those who do not come to it are not loved any less.
Humbly, I define my own truth regarding my relationship with God, who has provided me with an intuitive drive to know the mysteries of this life and the next outside the context of organized religion. I recognize your gift to do the same.
And the trinity thing is definitely worth pursuing. And I highly recommend Stephen Mitchell’s translation of the Tao Te Ching, too.
By Bruce
March 24, 2005 08:17 AM | Link to this
Sandy,
Please forgive me if I offend you but I am just trying to understand you point of view.
You said: “I don’t believe in a literal translation of the Bible, nor do I believe it was written by God because there are conflicting teachings and a gazillion translations.”
Then at the end of the post you recommend Stephen Mitchell’s TRANSLATION of Tao Te Ching.
Why is it you can trust Mr. Micthell’s translation and not those of the Bible? How many translations did you go through before you began to understand Tao Te Ching?
A Christains walk begins with them being fed milk, and as they grow they become stronger in the faith and more understanding is given to them. That is why Sunday School, Church and just general fellowship amoung other believers are so important. God speaks to us in several ways. Each way helps us grow and become more aware of His will for our lives and strengthens our faith that He is the truth.
I would suggest to anyone to attend an Experiencing God: Knowing and Doing the Will of God (Henry Blackaby and Clude V. King)course, or go through it yourself with on open mind and heart.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 08:23 AM | Link to this
Bible school again?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
By Tony
March 24, 2005 08:37 AM | Link to this
Double Standard. Michael, your hypocrisy has no bounds. With respect to drugs, you are absolutely correct, laws where in place on the use and sale of. Back than, if you where in front of a judge for a crime, even a crime of using drugs, you either went to Jail or into the Military.
Dabbling in drugs. What a joke. Back then, people where smoking at concerts, in clubs, on the streets during anti-war demonstration, on colleges campuses and in the Military, I know I was there.
No one however went to Jail for failing a physical. Back then they didn’t test you for drugs Michael. Back then, the detection methods where in it’s infancy and you’d have to be tested within three days of use or your system would be clear. Back then, marijuana (THC) could not be detected in your urine. The military didn’t start testing for drugs until the mid 70’s. It was called the Golden Flow Program, and again it was for the use of harder drugs.
Your double standard shines forth with respect to Clinton. Many CEO’s, Officers in Military have lost there jobs for sexual activity!
What College to profess your hypocrisy at Michael. I’d like to pass this BS on to Fox news.
By norman
March 24, 2005 08:44 AM | Link to this
Go to the Newsweek website. A Jesuit priest is interviewed and believes that the Schiavo case has been exploited by people inside and outside the Catholic Church. Actual Catholic teaching is that no burdensome means need be used to keep someone alive who is on the verge of death. He is Father John J. Paris, SJ, of Boston College, a bioethics professor at Boston College.
Boscoe will prefer his murderous Dominicans from 15th Century Spain, but I think a Jesuit is probably a better expert.
By Kenneth
March 24, 2005 08:47 AM | Link to this
Bruce: having read two translations of the Tao Te Ching myself, I can tell you that it does not lead itself to literalistic interpretations the way that the Bible does— and Sandy had said earlier that she does not subscribe to the literal/historical view of the Bible. Neither do I.
Entire books have been written about the many conflicts in the Bible. Anybody who seriously believes that this is the “infallible, inerrant” Word of God needs to take a closer look, and get his head examined while he’s at it. Norman is right about one thing— fundamentalist Christianity is a mental disorder. But it is treatable.
By Jack
March 24, 2005 09:15 AM | Link to this
All this bible stuff is really getting old. How bout 2008 Hillary vs. Condi? That would be good.
By Tony
March 24, 2005 09:19 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, I want to thank you for your post yesterday. Indeed, for most of your posts. Even Thomas whom walked with Jesus doubted. Encouragement is always welcomed. Thank You my friend.
Tolerance: When I think about this concept, words like patience, respect, equality, differences, will, knowledge, education, and culture come to my mind. I think that they are all in the concept Tolerance ; they are all indispensable
Tim, a few forums ago, the discussion was on Square Pants and teaching tolerance, in fact, teaching children about sexual orientation. Tim, all the teaching in the world somehow gets lost in actions. Your actions a couple of days ago demonstrates how intolerant people can be.
By norman March 22, 2005 03:50 PM | this Have you noticed how personally creepy those Christians outside Terri’s hospice are?
By Tim March 22, 2005 03:58 PM | Norman…we obviously have not seen eye to eye on a lot of things concerning Christianity… but I must agree… those people outside the hospice seem ‘interesting’ to say the least
If a child lives with acceptance and friendship, He learns to find love in the world.
Concerning Terri: It’s not a question of Terri’s parents being right and Terri’s husband wrong, The problem lies in giving anyone the power over another’s life. Michael Schiavo has fulfilled his duty. There’s nothing to gain any longer. If Terri is allowed to live, she will not be a burden to anyone. If you believe she’s brain dead, than she is not in any pain and her spirit has moved on. What difference is it to you if her shell is with her parents?
Society must not permit that a person’s life or death hang in the balance because of the way others feel about them. All human life must be defended and protected in law, not for what it means to others, but for what it is in itself.”
By Brian Curtis
March 24, 2005 09:20 AM | Link to this
One thing that amuses me about fundamentalists is their assumption that non-Christians must be ignorant and have never seen or read the Bible. Many know more about the Bible than most Christians do!
I guess it’s inconceivable to them that someone could read through the Bible and not walk away a converted Christian like them. Which makes me wonder—if you read only halfway, does it make you Jewish?
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 09:22 AM | Link to this
Norman - Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver added his voice to the fight for Schiavo’s life. “Removing food and water from a patient can only be justified if the person is terminal, and natural death is imminent. For disabled persons not in imminent danger of death and able to breathe on their own, starvation and dehydration to provoke death amount, in effect, to a form of murder. Such actions attack the sanctity of human life. They reject any redemptive meaning to suffering. They can never be justified.” Mit - The Shroud was never proved to be a fake scientifically. In other words, people protest that it is but have not been able to replicate a “Shroud” even with modern techniques. For every person of science that claims it is indeed a fake, others using the same techniques, back up claims that it is real. The key here is that the naysayers have NOT been able to make a neew “Shroud” even with modern equipment. The debate therefore is still alive and well. Lozen - as I’ve said before the resulting “Flesh and Blood” have been under the direct jurisdiction of the Church. To avoid a lenghty and futile conversation with you I will tell you I don’t care what you beleive.I think it’s clear I know more about the mysterys of life than you. You limit yourself to “Laws of Nature” without giving due consideration to where those laws came from. I’m not here telling people these things so they will believe…I’m telling you because it is the truth. What you do with it is up to you. Royal Chic yes that’s exactly what I’m telling you.
By Bruce
March 24, 2005 09:25 AM | Link to this
Kenneth,
You contend that the Bible has “many conflicts”. Have you found any conflicts within Tao Te Ching?
I would prefer that you keep your Mental Disorder comments to yourself. As I have said before I am trying to understand, however, since I am strongly ground in my faith, and what I believe, it will not be easy to sway me. Maybe you should examine your closed mindedness (is that a word?) and maybe you will not be so quick to judge others. But wait is it us Christains that do that, right? You are too intelligent for that.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 09:28 AM | Link to this
Sandy, Christianity is not stagnant, maybe you should go to a contemporary service of a different faith(methodist, baptist etc). They sing songs that are fabulous and written recently, the whole service is nothing like it was even a few years ago( you don’t even have to dress up). The service is different, but the message and mission is the same( it’s for people to have a relationship with the creator). Christianity in its essence should never change(as far as the message and mission goes) and has never changed the basic message, because it is the true message, given to us by our creator. In addition, there are great Christian groups now, Third day, FFH, Michael W. Smith, many more, that sing super contemporary music, they are great. Christianity is very entertaining and up to date.
By Carey
March 24, 2005 09:30 AM | Link to this
An eminent neurologist who evaluated Terri Schiavo for the Florida state Department of Children and Families yesterday concluded she has been wrongly diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state and urges immediate removal to another facility and the restoration of food and water to the dying woman. Dr. William Polk Cheshire Jr. found Schiavo is aware of pain and reacts visibly to it. She also reacts to the expectation of pain based on conversations she overhears in her room. Terri is consciously aware of pain, and therefore is capable of suffering, then her diagnosis of PVS may be tragically mistaken.
By Tim
March 24, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this
Tony… how in the world did what I say show that I am intolerant?! I said those people were ‘interesting’ to say the least… I don’t know how that shows intolerance… I didn’t say they shouldn’t be allowed to do whatever it is they are doing… for all I care they can stand outside that hospice and do whatever they please (as long as it is legal)… I couldn’t care less… you are seriously grasping at straws!
I must say for a ‘Christian’ it seems that you sure do try to find the worst in people… Michael Schiavo is only after money… I am intolerant… goodness
By Sandy
March 24, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this
Bruce, I actually read several translations of the Bible and the Tao Te Ching, and found the Stephen Mitchell text to be the most relevent. First of all, understand that the Tao Te Ching was written in Chinese, so not being fluent in Chinese, it would be like your trying to get inspiration from the Rosetta stone.
If the Bible holds all the answers for you, then great. If you can reconcile the “eye for an eye” and smiting one’s neighbor for working on the Sabath and such, versus “turn the other cheek, and love thy neighbor” then we are clearly on different levels of understanding. I’m not sorry that the Bible does not have all the answers for me, and nor should you. I respectfully suggest that your energies be focused where they will do the most good, and not in some attempt to bring me into your fellowship if it is not where I want to be.
Secondly, my experience is that there is a fine line between fellowship and indoctrination. I take exception to the notion that if you are not Christian, you are not moral or equally loved in God’s eyes. Why would God punish us for using God’s gift of free will? My choice of worship is made of hope and love, not of fear. Choices made of fear can result in the worst evil. If you believe that God would cast people into torment forever if you don’t belong to the right religion, that’s not a very merciful God. I don’t like to see anyone suffer, regardless; it’s not my job, nor yours, to judge and determine who is saved and who is not. There are many rooms in God’s house…
By Randy
March 24, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this
What the Schiavo case has shown me is how liberal these judges are.
By norman
March 24, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Ours is a nation where a judge may not sentence Beltway sniper Lee Malvo to death, because he is too young to die, but can sentence Terri Schiavo to death, because she is too severely handicapped to live. Schiavo continues the process of dying by starvation and dehydration, a method of capital punishment most would consider criminal if done to a pet. Ironically, as the protest to save Schiavo built up steam over the weekend, The New York Times in its “Saturday Profile” warmly featured a Dutch Dr. Dr. Eduard Verhagen has become famous in Europe for having “presided over the medically induced deaths of four extraordinarily ill newborns.” For his efforts to end what he calls “unbearable and incurable suffering,” Dr. Verhagen has been called Dr. Death, a second Hitler and worse – mostly by American opponents of euthanasia. Verhagen describes himself as a bearer of peace and happiness to children. When these suffering little ones die, he says, “the child goes to sleep. … It’s beautiful in a way. … They’re children who are severely ill and in great pain. It is after they die that you see them relaxed for the first time. You see their faces in a way they should be for the first time.” Franz Stangl could not have put it better. Hitler’s doctors may prove to have been the medical pioneers of 21st century.
By Tony
March 24, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Tim you failed to acknowledge your agreement with Norman on how creepy these people are. Tolerance indeed!
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this
Sandy, Nice to hear a point that serves a purpose AND makes sence - although your preaching to the choir with me. Ken Wilber (“A[not “The”] theory of everything” writer) has hit apon many of the same notions of pulling together multiple disiplines. Hopefully it is a sign of greater understanding on the horizon - lord knows we need it.
Wholistic thinking is where it is at - abandon Hirachical thinking people.
Till then, keep your head above water.
By Tim
March 24, 2005 09:53 AM | Link to this
Carey…
‘The neurologist, William Cheshire of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, is a bioethicist who is also an active member in Christian organizations, including two whose leaders have spoken out against the tube’s removal’
hmmm… looks like lil Bushie cannot find an unbiased Doctor
By Tony
March 24, 2005 09:53 AM | Link to this
Thanks Terry. I wish you’d post more often.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 09:55 AM | Link to this
Sandy, I asked one of the guys I go to church with(who was raised Catholic), what is the difference in the Catholic and the Protestant religion. He said one is a duty, a formality(ritual), the other one is a true relationship with God. There are billions of great(very devout) Catholic people, however, there are some that just go through the motion. What everybody needs to do, Catholic, Protestant etc is get into a church that is “on fire for the lord” like the Woodstock 1st Baptist church, which has 17 thousand members(last I heard) and is reaching it’s community for Jesus major. There your relationship with Jesus would be fun, most likely.
By Larry Fish
March 24, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this
Jesus did what no man can do–He predicted His own death in precise detail. He predicted that He would be betrayed to the Jews, condemned by them to death, and then delivered to the Gentiles to be mocked and spit upon and scourged and crucified. And on the third day He would rise again. That was exactly what happened. He was scourged inhumanly by Roman soldiers. Condemned men often died under that torture. Christ did not. He was taken to a hill outside Jerusalem, His hands and feet were nailed to a cross, and He was raised up and left there to die in slow agony. The end came with unexpected suddenness, but there was no doubt that it was the end. He himself “cried out with a loud voice, and gave up his spiritâ€?. The Jews insisted on the execution being brought to an end before the Sabbath day concluded. Consequently, the soldiers on the execution detail killed the two thieves who were crucified with Christ. “But when they came to Jesus, and saw that He was already dead, they did not break his legs; but one of the soldiers opened his side with a lance, and immediately there came out blood and waterâ€?. Pilate was surprised that Christ had died so soon. He questioned the officer in charge of the detail about it and was assured that there was no doubt. The corpse was taken from the cross and wrapped in a linen cloth. Aromatic spices were wrapped in the cloth and strewn within the tomb. The tomb was sealed. Under such conditions, no human being could have survived even if there had been a spark of life still in him. Soldiers were detailed to guard the tomb round the clock. Yet on Sunday morning before dawn the dead man in the tomb came back to life and left His burial place. Soon He began to appear to those who had been close to Him. St. Paul summarizes the evidence. “For I delivered to you first of all, what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and after that to the Eleven. Then he was seen by more than five hundred brethren at one time. There was no doubt that this was Jesus. He said to them the first time He met them after His resurrection, “Why are you disturbed, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and feet, that it is I myself. Feel me and see; for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I haveâ€? He had Thomas put his hand into His side and touch the wounds in His hands. He ate with them and walked with them. The proof was abundant and indisputable. Yet some still doubt and seek other explanations. The Jews, for example, bribed the guards to say that while they were asleep the disciples came and stole Him away. The explanation was self-contradictory. If they were asleep, how could they known that the disciples had stolen Him away? And if they were not asleep, why did they not stop them? It has been claimed that Christ was not dead, that He did not reappear, that Christianity was founded on a fraud. This has satisfied no one, and the doubters then have tried denying that there was ever the slightest degree of truth in the resurrection story. They claim it was all made up much later on, but this is also contradicted by historically provable facts. The tomb of Christ still stands empty. It must be filled either with God or with the greatest mystery the world has ever known. The facts are that Christ was God. He arose. If the facts of His life are true–and they undoubtedly are–then His teaching must be accepted as truth also. Christ made that perfectly clear when He cured the paralytic of Capharnaum. The man came to Christ for a cure of his physical disease. But the Lord saw in him not only disease, but sin. And he forgave it. The Scribes and Pharisees immediately saw the implication. “Who can forgive sins, but God only?â€? They asked. For once they spoke the truth. By His actions and words the Lord was teaching that He had power to forgive sins, and that power came from God alone.
By Bruce
March 24, 2005 10:03 AM | Link to this
Sandy,
I apologize for any misunderstanding. You presented your point of view, as did I. I was only trying to understand yours not convert you to mine. Forgive me please.
I would like to leave you with this one thought.
Since God has given you FREEWILL, it is you that choose to be cast into torment forever, God does not do that for you.
By Carey
March 24, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this
Tim I posted this earlier. Is their something wrong with this guy too? A Reuters piece appearing in hundreds of newspapers and on news web sites Monday claimed Terri “will almost certainly never recover from her unconscious condition� and added that “neurologists agree.� The experts included a 10 year-old report on persistent vegetative cases and two doctors who have never seen Terri to evaluate her, but presumed she was in a PVS state and that she, like other PVS patients, has no chance to regain any normal cognitive functions. The Reuters news story made no mention of the dozens of doctors who signed affidavits in favor of motions submitted by Terri Schiavo’s parents to have Terri tested before she was starved to death. The article also did not feature quotes from any doctors who disagree that Terri is in a PVS state � such as Dr. William Hammesfahr, a Nobel Prize nominated neurologist who is an Internationally recognized expert on cases of brain-injured patients. “We, and others I know, have treated many patients worse than Terri and have seen them regain independence and dignity,� Hammesfahr said earlier this month. “There are many approaches that would help Terri Schiavo,� Dr. Hammesfahr explained. “I know, because I had the opportunity to personally examine her, her medical records, and her X-rays.� The Reuters article also failed to mention that Michael has withheld appropriate medical care or rehabilitative treatment for Terri for years. “From Los Angeles to Miami to New York, the press, for the most part has become Michael Schiavo’s and George Felos’ propaganda machine,�
By Carey
March 24, 2005 10:14 AM | Link to this
Network news outlets across the board and national newspapers – from the New York Times and the Washington Post to the Miami Herald and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution – are misreporting the medical facts of the Terri Schindler-Schiavo story, say her family, doctors and the pro-family organization Focus on the Family.
“The media’s killing us, and they’re killing her, frankly,” said Terri’s father, Robert Schindler, at a press conference yesterday. The family and about a dozen people, including doctors and Terri’s caregivers, spent an hour trying to school reporters on the facts of the case.
Public opinion outside the courtroom matters in high-profile legal battles, as the 165,000 e-mails sent this week to Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s office and the scores sent to state legislators exemplified. The community spoke and lawmakers heard them and responded with emergency legislation empowering Bush to defy Terri’s judge-ordered starvation by ordering the reinsertion of the 39-year-old brain-disabled woman’s feeding tube.
For the Schindlers, the first task at hand in setting the public record straight regards the erroneous use of the word “comatose” by newspapers and media outlets across the country in their coverage of the emotionally charged legal battle.
The Webster’s New World College Dictionary defines comatose as someone who is in a deep or prolonged state of unconsciousness. It is undisputed that Terri does not meet this definition. Even her husband, Michael Schiavo, who sought the court order to end her life does not call her “comatose.”
By Tim
March 24, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this
Tony… I did agree that those people were ‘interesting’ (my EXACT word)… I never said that I didn’t… again (and yes I using all caps) HOW DOES THAT SHOW I AM INTOLERANT? LIKE I SAID BEFORE (please actually read my posts) if those people want to be like that I DON’T CARE… that IS tolerance… how is that so difficult to understand… again you are grasping at straws
tolerance- the capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others
By Carey
March 24, 2005 10:18 AM | Link to this
Sorry I forgot to say this was an AP story.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this
Why argue about what happened thousands of years ago? I can’t remember accurately what I did & said last week, so what makes anyone think they’ve got the bible right? The fact is WHO CARES. Focus on the NOW.
For example why is this nation’s govt. so obsessed with Terri’s right to life, but not the lives of murdered or missing women & children? I’d really appreciate it if all those people got that excited about right to life when a woman is gunned down by a spouse or boyfriend.
Why aren’t there protests when a women is stabbed to death by her husband? Why doesn’t George Bush ever rush to Washington in the middle of the night because another young pregnant woman is killed by the father of her child?
What’s the obsession with keeping this poor woman’s body alive, but completely ignore murdered healthy women?
By norman
March 24, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this
There is a fictitious “norman” on the site again. It is not me, the slayer of Christian rabble.
By lozen
March 24, 2005 10:41 AM | Link to this
Sandy I love your posts! I would prefer over every courthouse door “Know thyself.” Randy doesn’t begin to grasp how patronizing he is when he tells you you shouldn’t pay attention to Chopra. He really believes he knows the only truth, and he can tell everybody else what they should do in their spiritual life. This is why I am not a christian and why I bore Whiley to death talking about religion on this blog! Although many christians do not act in such a patronizing way as Randy, there’s no way around the basic rules in christianity. One of those rules is that Yahweh is the only god, his word is the only truth, and christians must be proselitizing and trying to convert everybody in the world all the time. Christianity is totalitarianism in religion.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this
Tony,
Why is it so often the case that conservatives go ad hominem when they encounter someone with a different view? Personal attacks are not substitutes for argument and you didn’t offer even a semblance of an argument in your semi-literate rant. Your claim about “my hypocrisy� is incoherent and unintelligible and not worth addressing.
In fact, I don’t think you even understood a thing that I said, so go back and read it again. The physical exam that Bush refused while in the Air National Guard was the first one in which drug testing was a part of the exam and he did refuse to take it and was no longer able to fly as a consequence. That is a fact, a matter of public record that not even the White House denies. Bush did ridicule Gore for his admission out the outset of his campaign for the democratic nomination that he smoked marijuana while in Viet Nam. Bush refuses to talk about his background in that regard, except for his drinking, refused to take that physical and that refusal leads many people (not his worshipers) to ask what he may have been concealing.
Texas had draconian drug laws in the 1970s and even placed a graduate student in prison for four years for the possession of a single marijuana joint. I was around then as well and saw all of what you allude to but that does not change the fact that enforcement was uneven and Texas was severe in the administration of its drug laws.
Where I teach is of no concern to you. I don’t need harassing e-mails from someone who thinks that Fox television is a credible source of news. If you are willing to read a study, and I am fairly certain that you are not, I will give you the source for one that shows that Fox viewers are the most politically poorly informed consumers of the media. That should not surprise anyone, people watch Fox propaganda because it tells them what they want to hear.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:12 AM | Link to this
What bothers people about Christianity is that is is true. The truth hurts(like if you tell a heavy person they are fat), when you tell people what is true and not what they want to here, some people are going to fight against it. If there were no opposition to Christianity, I would be concerned. I mean I know evil is working full time to prevent as many people from going to heaven as possible and evil hits us in every way he can. After all, he has 5,800 years of experience on this earth alone and knows all our weaknesses. As far as other religions go(Buddism, hinduism etc), I see no opposition to them from evil, so I assume they are not legimate.
By mit
March 24, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this
boscoe, there’s a story about the shroud in todays ajc. the thing was carbon dated to the middle ages. one scientist thinks its 1300 to 3000 years old. which could (repeat could) be in the era of jesus.
this thing was made in the middle ages, why we can’t replicate it is because we don’t know how it was made. but it was still made.
the scientist who believes the carbon dating is wrong basis his argument on the tests were run on patches to the shroud which contaminated it. a guess and nothing more. the carbon dating was done by independent labs that came to the same conclusion.
you don’t by potato chips with Mary’s face on them from ebay do you?
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 11:17 AM | Link to this
How much money do you have to give your church before you will be accepted into heaven?
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:21 AM | Link to this
Iozen, tell us again why you are not a Christian. See everyone defines their relationship with Christ( I’m a Christian, Atheist, Agnostic etc). All people don’t have a relationship with any other religious symbol. I don’t feel the need to have a designation with Buddah for example. Buddah, other religious symbols(other than Christ) are to me irrevelant. It would be like having a relationship with a tree, who cares. But look at the fight some of you non-Christians come up with here on this site, Jesus Christ is so powerful you can barely resist. It’s like you are your own worse enemy, fighting against GOOD. WHY. IT DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:25 AM | Link to this
WHILEY, Giving money to church is not a requirement to go to heaven. Where are you getting your information? There is only one requirement to go to heaven, accept Jesus as your lord and savior(in your heart). It’s a bonding thing and it will fill the hole in your soul.
By Bruce
March 24, 2005 11:27 AM | Link to this
Whiley,
God doesn’t need your money.
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this
Randy and many others, “Because it is true” is not an arguement. Neither is “if it hurts, it must be real,” or “if someone opposes you, it means you are right (or even have a valid agruement.” And lets not forget “if you feel shame for saying it in public, it must be wrong” (I know most “adults” cannot say they just “sat on the toilet” to thier own family for gods sake!)
Your speak shows no ability of inclusion of others views. This seems against ANY belief system that is structured to help one personally develop/grow and to nurture others.
Your faith, whatever you may call it - but it is not christian- is selfish and filled with judgement (proof that it is not christian). Results in your hostility, name calling, outright childishness.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 11:31 AM | Link to this
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Maybe if the church was obsessed with the living instead of the dead or when we are dead, a lot of BAD in this world wouldn’t EXIST.
By Sandy
March 24, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this
Bruce, apology accepted, though not necessary. It is difficult to discuss matters of faith without becoming adversarial, and it seems the larger the organization, the more adversarial things get. I need to think outside the box to get a better grasp on how I can best apply the golden rule, and my life is sweeter for it. I am intrigued by the scientific aspects and curious about the connection of where faith and science meet; when we discover this, it will blow all our minds…
And Whiley, I agree that we should focus on the violence against women and children. If the constant media coverage of the Scott Peterson trial did nothing else, it brought to light the statistic that murder is most often committed against women when they are pregnant. (Saw it on Oprah—must be true…)
As far as torment for eternity, why would anyone choose it? I’m certainly not choosing it. We have all we can do to learn from the misery of here and now. Alleviate misery here and now for each person, i.e., the least of our brothers and sisters, and we can prevent it down the road.
And Lozen, thanks. My buddy Deepak explains why God can have so many identities (paternalistic protector; Almighty; God of Peace; God the Redeemer; God the Creator; God of Miracles; and the God of Pure Being—the I Am, where human and God become one). Our brains are designed to comprehend all of these separately and at the same time, in tune with quantum mechanics and other fun stuff. It’s an exciting, positive way to look at our pure potential.
Oh, and this Dr. Hammesfahr who supposedly was nominated by the Nobel Committee? My husband said that the Nobel Committee does not release the names of its nominees who are not awarded for 50 years. Might be worth looking into.
Geez, I gotta get back to work.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this
The question I have for all the non-Christians is, after all your objections are answered, what do you hang on to in order not to become a Christian? Is it hate, arrogance, pride, denial. So some of you could be the queen of denial(Pam Tillis song). I know evil hits you with everything, but you still can’t see through it? The truth is so easy to see for me, it’s as plain as the nose on my face. Easy as ABC, 1,2,3,.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this
Bruce, Apparently God does. Isn’t it a requirement to give 10% of your income?
Instead of building massive churches, why not use that money & energy to make the world safer? nicer? cleaner?
Instead of all these people protesting for Terri’s right to life, why don’t they lets say work as volunteer security guards so Americans don’t get robbed or kidnapped when shopping at the local grocery store. That’s a start isn’t it?
By Tony
March 24, 2005 11:39 AM | Link to this
By Tim March 23, 2005 09:11 AM | Link to this
now after the ruling last night we have those ‘interesting’ people outside the hospice calling the judges ‘Tyrants’… good grief first we have ‘activist’ judges and now we have ‘tyrants’… goodness… I am just glad the 11th Circuit has already ruled… some of those ‘interesting’ people were starting to make their way to Atlanta… well they can just keep on going to D.C. now… or go out and get a job
Tim, if I said look at those “interesting people” at a gay parade, some of them were starting to make their way to Texas. WOULD YOU CONSIDERED ME TOLERANT? I think not.
By Lyrazel
March 24, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this
Whiley, depends on which section of heaven you want to to get into.
Very interesting legislators and Prez, have totally ignored the Sanctimonious Marriage Law to barnstorm their Err-on-Life decrees. Remember that puddle of legislative poo? Sticky fingered morality always bites back.
Got a question, and its from curiosity, if this case had happened, o say in Massachusetts, and there is a strong RC presence…would this case gone this far…or is having a brother President what made this case into such a hideous macabre carnival? Would Kerry have used this as a morality platform?
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this
Whiley, the church is obsessed with the living, have you seen all the Christian organizations that help the poor, uneducated etc. Without them the world would be in a much worse shape. Bad comes from evil, and evil will always exist on this earth. Luckily we don’t have to put up with it in heaven.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:47 AM | Link to this
Churches are only massive because they have to be, the number of members are such that they need the room to seat everyone. The massive churches donate millions to work on proverty etc. We are doing alot to fight against the bad in the world, what are you doing about it?
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this
There is only one section in heaven. Really it’s black and white. You either go to heaven or you don’t. No in between.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this
Help the poor? You mean by not encouraging sex education or birth control? Telling the extremely poor not to use birth control in the name of God? hmmmmmmm
What other living people are you talking about? Helping WHO? Adopting abuse foster kids? helping to make society safer? They are? Where because I’d like to know.
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
Randy, You and others have proved to me that you are not christian. You continually break all the indicators of a fellow christain - loving,tolerant,nurturing,humble. Just read your words and and you will see that they do not echo these values.
I and the rest of the world that would like to be able to embrace that “title” would prefer you not use it.
If you really want that to be your label of faith, you must earn it. That begins with getting humble and realizing you do not know (as the rest of us, THAT is why we are searching - and continue to search) the absolutes of everything. TRY leaving that to god.
If you need couciling on this, I am sure your place of practice will assist you.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 11:53 AM | Link to this
Whiley, There is no requirement to give anything to a church. My church and many like it, tell people if you are a visitor, we don’t want your money. If the church has it’s heart in the right place, it is much more interested in your soul(going to the right place) than any money. Does it take money to run a church, YES, just like anything else.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 11:58 AM | Link to this
Mit - the latest to claim the Shroud isn’t real is an English teacher with NO science in his background.
By Tim
March 24, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
Tony… I SAY that at the PRIDE parade every year!… and usually giggle the entire time… as long as you aren’t out there telling Gay people they aren’t allowed to have a parade… then say ‘interesting’ until you are blue in the face… thinking something is ‘interesting’ doesn’t mean you are not tolerant (so YOU THOUGHT WRONG!)… my own mother thinks that being gay is a little weird (because she doesn’t totally understand it… which I totally understand)… but she is still tolerant (well she is so much more than just that)… you can totally disagree with something and still be tolerant… I don’t agree with the people outside the hospice… but I do think they have a right to be out there… AGAIN (please read it this time) just because I think they are interesting or weird or whatever doesn’t mean I am not tolerant… if I said that they are weird and shouldn’t be allowed out there then I would be intolerant… stop grasping at straws
fyi… you don’t need to show me what I typed… I already know what I stated thanks :)
By reeder
March 24, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this
Lozen..Living in Mexico (legally) required documentation of a monthly income of $800. My research was done 3 or 4 years ago. If I were younger, etc. etc. I would trip across the border with a backpack and my ATM card and live the good life on my below poverty level USA income from SS. Lyrazel.. Would that be a covert plot? Thank you for your right on target posts. Norman..For crying out loud give these good folks some event(s) childhood trauma, anything that might allow them a “Forgive him he knows not….” Briefly keeping to topic. Let us not be too concerned that Bush was betrayed by Wead (sp) As I see it, his purported sobriety and Presidency is based on a spiritual experience. No doubt he will find forgiveness in his heart. It sure does seem he has disciples and followers more loyal and “sterling” than those of Jesus Christ. Were folks back then less critical? Or is it the advantage of 2000 years of faith based “turn the another’s cheek” Whoops, other cheek reactionary behaviour. Shiavo..My Mama has 30 years experience patient care in a nursing home. She is 89, has a living will and hopes, well, she probably prays, that she will not become one in her self-defined category of the “Won’t Die” those that continue to live in a persistent vegetative state with a minimum of life support, ie; feeding tube. I have never heard her say it is God’s will their life goes on. There must be a limit to putting the blame on God. Another blog. Thanks to all of you for an interesting morning.
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 12:11 PM | Link to this
The wind is blowing long today as in long winded. But I made an amazing discovery. Michael is a Democrat—a neodem. While Norman and Boscoe fight it out in the monastery, maybe we could try the TOPIC again. You know. The “furor over tapes” that only the AJC has a furor over. Will the neodems ever get over their post-election syndrome? I think not. They should try. PES can lead to thumb sucking and teddy bear hugging.
By lozen
March 24, 2005 12:13 PM | Link to this
Dear Randy, I feel so sad that you live in such a tiny little world. I could be there too, and I’m so glad I grew out of that childhood indoctrination. You do need a religion that is black and white with no shades of gray and that answers all your questions for you. So have it. But please don’t think you can tell others how to live their spiritual life. There are different levels of consciousness, as Sandy points out. BTW, you never told me where it says in the bible, “Thou shalt not kill unless you’re the government, then it’s okay!”
By lozen
March 24, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
Hey Reeder, thanks for that info. You don’t say how old you are, but I have a friend who is 75 and has diabetes. She goes to Mexico every year for a month or two. She prefers living in the US in Santa Fe. This year she spent six weeks in Guatamala helping to set up health clinics in poor villages. She is my role model for old age!
By Randy
March 24, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
Iozen, I didn’t go to church for 15 years. Then I thought it through and realized that God does exist and that Jesus is the way and the truth.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this
DeltaX - As Christians, we should love our enemies, not certainly in as much as they are unjust and wrongdoers toward us, but because they still remain, despite all, God’s creatures. Certainly we are obviously entitled to detest and condemn in others all those hideous feelings of wickedness, rancor, jealousy and brutality, of which we are the victims. Furthermore, we may defend ourselves, even attack, appeal to human justice, and in certain cases insist on reparation, but we must always avoid any spirit of hate or vengeance. In a word, what we love in our neighbor is not exactly the weak and perishable man, but the immortal child of the Father, the living member of Jesus, the co-heir of heaven. Beyond the veil of this poor mortality, our faith has perceived God. What we love, then, is both our brother in God, and God in our brother. Whoever truly loves his friend loves God in his friend. Learn to love the Creator in His creatures, the worker in his work, and do not let things made by Him for your use make your forget Him. So you see Delta..Christain “Love” is not loving you for being the person you are, but loving God who has made you and is a part of you whether you think He is or not.
By mit
March 24, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this
did i mention that teacher? no
but because he is a teacher and not a scientist his theory is automatically wrong, no.
so what’s your point. the shroud is real because a teacher is questioning it?
scientists have disproved the shroud, showing that it was made during the middle ages and so it could not have been wrapped around jesus. the scientist who says the dates could be wrong throws out dates that are 1000 years before jesus and 700 years after.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 12:24 PM | Link to this
Iozen, I feel sad that you didn’t have the strength to maintain your faith. Maybe you never had a true life changing experience?
By Bruce
March 24, 2005 12:28 PM | Link to this
Whiley, The Bible does say to give God that which is His. But I do not think it says 10%. (I will look further on that and get back to you.) But in the grand scheme of things I believe it is all His, He just lets me borrow it. If I use it properly His glory with shine through.
I believe God is more concerned with your availability than your ability. The only thing I have found that God requires is for you to love Him more than anything else. That I believe is where we humans have a problem. Our egos will not allow us to let God be first in our lives.
Now this is what works for me. If you do not believe it that’s fine, it’s your choice. Please don’t shoot the messenger.
By reeder
March 24, 2005 12:31 PM | Link to this
Randy You have the tenacity of a sand gnat. Do you work on commission?
By Tony
March 24, 2005 12:34 PM | Link to this
Tim you can continue to hide or disguise the meaning behind YOUR statement “interesting people.” It wasn’t just labeling these good people, you went a step further and and showed you contempt by assuming they don’t have jobs and even further advised them not to come to Atlanta. Color it any way you like!
By lozen
March 24, 2005 12:37 PM | Link to this
Randy, to answer your question about what I hang on to not to be a christian: it’s study and learning and having an open mind. It’s being a woman and seeing how woman-hating the abrahamic religions are, and how it is so divisive instead of bringing people together (a million churches because christians can’t even get along with each other or agree on anything), and how hierarchal it is (lords and kings got kicked out of the U.S. long ago but they’re still there in your holy book), and how it teaches that babies are born in original sin (based on a myth the Israelites made up to explain where they came from and why there was suffering in the world), and how people can use it as you do to believe they have “the only truth” and all the answers when they’re just simple minded and ignorant.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this
Mit - the scientists that say it is a fraud CANNOT replicate how the shroud was made. If it is indeed a fraud someone would be able to make one that can stand up to the rigors of scientific testing, don’t you agree? The detail of the “picture” on the Shroud is far to great for this to be done even with modern equipment. Carbon dating cannot pinpoint the exact date in which something was made. It can only give a ballpark to a period of time. It is not 100% foolproof. It HAS been wrong before. Thus the scientist who supports the Shroud gives a ballpark range that certainly covers Jesus’ age. If you don’t believe me about the carbon dating data study the science yourself. You’ll see that even scientists themselves say it doesn’t prove date 100% of the time. The english teacher’s theory of fraud is that the Shroud was bleached by the sun to obtain the photo negative quality that it has. If so, then further exposure to the sun would bleach the entire Shroud to the point that no discernable picture can be seen. Yet the Shroud is continually displayed in the midday sun without ANY adverse affects. How is this so if the Shroud was a fabrication?
By lozen
March 24, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this
Boscoe, there are yogis in india that are 400 and 500 years old too and they never have to die because they don’t believe in death! And the Buddha’s mother Maya had him in a pearl that came out of her side! And Isis put Osiris back together after he’d been chopped into pieces and then they had a baby!
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this
Boscoe. You managed a good number of words without saying anything besides justifying personal (warped) beliefs that flies in the face of “Only god knows a mans heart,” and are contrary to Christ’s teachings - meaning you are not a christian. You use the bible for power of self (ego).
So please learn to refrain from entering topics you have no business in - your battle is for some grotesque ego pumping faith masked as christian.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this
And you Lozen, are so enlightened because you aviod the simple minded in life. Is that it? Do you work for a corporation lozen? Most of the corporations in this country are hierarchal in their delegation of responsibilities. Are they bad? You are correct. Religion is divisive. We want to separate the goats from the flock.
By Randy
March 24, 2005 12:53 PM | Link to this
Actually I did use to work on commission for 20 years, until the lord decided to bless me beyond all my expectations(I know, he can take it all away if he decides to). Now I just trust in him and try to help lead others to him, I’m probably not doing much good. I’m sorry.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 12:59 PM | Link to this
Crystal,
Same old ad hominem abuse.
Whether I am a “neodem,” whatever that is, is irrelevant to the truth or falsity of my claims or whether my arguments are good ones or bad ones. Similarly, whether you are conservative, neocon, Christian and so forth is irrelevant, from a logical point of view, to the truth of any of your claims or whether your arguments are good ones or bad ones. Personal characteristics do not transfer to nor affect arguments.
And I noticed that you have yet to give an argument. (I invite anyone to reread your last post and see if they can find one or reconstruct one from your ramble.)
By Tony
March 24, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this
Michael, if I’m so incoherent and stupid and not worth addressing, why must you? I understood what you meant. You don’t like our President and have nothing good to say about him. How about Kerry professor? What about the fact that he never allowed his military records to become public? What about Kerry’s military discharge? Why was it that Carter gave Kerry a honorable discharge? What kind of discharge did he have originally?. But, you’d rather focus on your dislike for our President. Why don’t you move to Europe where you think they have it so much better.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
Delta - you seemed to get a little defensive about my explaination. Maybe there’s something you know to be true about what I said. You accuse me of not being a Christian when you don’t know the first thing about being one yourself. The definition I gave you came from a book with an imprimatur of someone much more Christain than myself, and most certainly more than you. Since you know so much tell me what being a Christain is.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
Boscoe,
While I’m here, I want to ask you again did you find the Treaty that you so vehemently denied existed? I gave your several sources. If you don’t care about the facts, except the highly questionable ones regarding the Shroud, then there is nothing one can say.
By Seaborn
March 24, 2005 01:12 PM | Link to this
Are we still on religion?
How about the twins new pictures? Shaunti…have you lost weight? I rarely agree with your positions, but you go girl! And Diane looks awesome as usual…love the less-than-frumpy look.
You ladies get to wear such nice stuff…mens’ clothes are just woeful…
Sorry for the superficial post but the religion talk is dragging again.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 01:17 PM | Link to this
March 1, 2005 08:35 AM - Micheal you never replied to this post. Treaty of Peace and Friendship, signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796. On 4 November 1796, near the end of George Washington’s second term, a treaty with the “Bey and People of Tripoli� was signed, promising cash and other considerations to Tripoli in exchange for peace. Leading the negotiations for the U.S. at that point was Joel Barlow, a diplomat and poet (he wanted very much to be remembered as America’s epic poet). Barlow was a friend of Thomas Jefferson and of Thomas Paine (Paine hurriedly entrusted the manuscript of the first part of the Age of Reason to Barlow when Paine was suddenly arrested by the radicals of the French revolution). Barlow was very likely by 1796 a deist, though he had served earlier as a military chaplain. There is considerable dispute about whether the Arabic version of the treaty read and signed by the representatives of Tripoli even had the famous words included (they are not present, as was discovered in about 1930, in the surviving Arabic version). No one knows why. The treaty remained in effect for only four years, replaced, after more war with Tripoli, with another treaty that does not have the famous words included. One or two later treaties even allude to the Trinity. IF the major claim of separationists regarding the treaty were a legal one, these facts might be fatal. But no one claims that the treaty was the basis for our government being non-Christian�it is the Constitution, which calls on a higher power than “We the People,� that is the necessary and sufficient legal basis. This information comes from the Library of Congress
By lozen
March 24, 2005 01:19 PM | Link to this
Oh Boscoe, being simple minded is not a bad thing in itself. children are beautiful because they are uncorrupted and simple minded. It’s only a bad thing when an uneducated, ignorant, simple minded person believes they’re entitled to tell everyone else how they should live.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 01:23 PM | Link to this
Tony,
More ad hominem abuse of the stereotypical conservative sort. It used to be if one criticized a president’s policies that we often heard “go to Russia” as a retort. Now Bush supporters have only substituted Europe as the latest bogeyman.
Actually, I was in Europe this past summer and not for the first time. I have also lived abroad and I must say, and this won’t surprise many educated people, but the level of political discourse among most Europeans is considerably higher than it is here. People know more, discuss more, and vote at higher rates as well.
Tony, Why don’t you try to actually construct an argument with reasons or evidence for a conclusion that would be acceptable to any rational and impartial person? (I don’t think you can.)
This is supposed to be a free, open, and democratic society in which discussion and expression of views is allowed, encouraged, and indeed necessary for a democracy to flourish. If you take issue with that, maybe you should find a conservative country which, to use one of the favorite Fox expressions, tells everyone else to “shut up.”
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this
lozen, has somebody here told you how to live your life. I don’t think so. I think people here have for the most part done nothing more than defend their positions on certian topics. Wouldn’t you agree?
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this
Boscoe- Defensivness has left my soul/heart long ago - when I realized that we are ALL EQUAL.
The point is that I did explain the indicators of anti-christian behavior - and you chose not to hear. Moreover - I do not want you to follow me! Follow your heart, but find it first. If at some point that changes, we may be able to have a conversation and learn from each other.
FYI - My job on this earth is to become the best and most loving/nurturing (self and external) person I can be. To do that I surround myself with those who have a relationship with christ AND ask/discuss the hard questions - in the humble arena of “I do not know.” I used to be surprised that so many christians were destructive to this process, but over time I understood that the biggest threat to christianity is from within - the bible resounds this often. Luckily those destuructive forces, like yourself, has not run me off the christian path like it has so many others. I now try to bridge that (in a non-dem christian church - as well as coffee houses, wherever I find myself) gap to those who are frustrated as I was becoming.
On the flip side, I do try - for only a bit, for I have limited energy to spend on someone who chooses (key word here) to not want to search the truth - to educate those who are doing their “faith” harm.
By Brian Curtis
March 24, 2005 01:28 PM | Link to this
And now: More wisdom from Ydnar, the Randy from a Parallel Universe!
“What bothers people about rational thought is that it is true. The truth hurts (like if you tell a fundamentalist they’re stupid); when you tell people what is true and not what they want to hear, some people are going to fight against it�in the case of Catholicism, they’ve fought it for centuries.�
“If there were no opposition to science, then I would be concerned. I mean, I know superstition is working full time to prevent as many people as possible from living meaningful lives, and ignorance hits us in every way it can. After all, it’s had tens of thousands of years’ experience on this earth alone and knows all our fears and weaknesses. As far as other religions go (Buddism, Hinduism etc), I see no opposition to them, so I assume they’re not trying to overthrow basic logic and run people’s lives.�
“Dozen, tell us again why you are not a rationalist. See, everyone defines their relationship with logic (rational, irrational, realist, idealist, etc). Of course, I like to pretend that all other faiths and views are defined to revolve around me and my beliefs only, but I know they’re not. So religious symbols (star of David, Christian cross, etc.) are to me irrevelant.
“But look at the fight some of you non-thinkers come up with here on this site; reason is so powerful you can barely resist it with all your blind stubbornness. It’s like you are your own worst enemy, fighting against what will do you the most good (thinking for yourself). WHY? IT DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE! (But of course, that’s the point; blind faith doesn’t make sense; if it did, it wouldn’t be blind.)�
“Willy, where are you getting your information? There’s only one requirement to accept logic and science, and that’s to think for yourself instead of living in fear and superstition. It’s a fulfilling thing that will fill the hole in your head.�
“The question I have for all the theists is, after all your objections are answered, what do you hang on to in order to still reject basic logic and reason? Is it habit, fear, hatred, pride, arrogance? (Surely fundamentalism isn’t running short on any of these, but which one is greatest?) I know superstition is both powerful and tempting�and MUCH easier than thinking�but still, can’t you see through it?�
“Dozen, I went to church for 15 years. Then I thought it through and realized that if a god exists, he sure can’t be the way the churches described him. Or if he does, he’s not worth worshipping. Reason is the only path to truth.�
Ahh, it’s always good to hear the smug, condescending arrogance of a true servant of Christ, isn’t it?
By mit
March 24, 2005 01:28 PM | Link to this
boscoe, you repeated what i stated. no one has recreated the shroud because they don’t know how. but it was obviously done. would you know how to recreate your computer hundreds of years from now if there were no computers, no.
you are right that carbon dating does give a ballpark date but it will not be thousands of years off, like the other scientist claims, which i might add that he doesn’t have any evidence. and independent labs would have come up with differing dates which they did not. they all came up with the same ballpark dates.
what that teacher postulated was how the shroud was made, no scientific expertise needed there. your claim that further bleaching would occur due to exposure to sunlight is not your claim, you just threw up what someone else said in the article. so I seriously doubt you know for sure that the claim of further bleaching is correct. if it hasn’t been tested then its just a claim. follow through with the teachers theory. if its wrong try another approach. regardless of the outcome you will still say its the true shroud of jesus. and if so, you took the shroud from the tomb? I thought you believe jesus rose from the dead and walked away. why would leave his shroud behind. is there a tale in the bible that says, jesus walked off naked and here is the shroud used to wrap him, never heard one.
shroud, stigmata, and the blood flesh stuff are hoaxes used by the catholic church to keep people around. yes that is a claim.
if a car drove by your house and all of sudden you hear a boom, you can speculate that the car backfired. since you didn’t actually see the car backfire you would still be inclined to make a logical explanation to the boom. why would you not be inclined to make a logical explanation for, say, the earth’s existance? for any theory on origin you can go back until the most infinite point and still not have an explanation. such as, if god created man in his image, who created god? even physics can only go so far back in time before they reach a point of more questions than answers but they don’t lose the logical explanation. Religion is a primitive science, what couldn’t be explained got attributed to god’s creation and god’s destruction. which every new year gets blasted.
By Sandy
March 24, 2005 01:31 PM | Link to this
Randy, First of all, who said all our objections are answered?
You claim to know evil, but fail to recognize that evil can be found and cloaked in your faith, and in any faith. You claim to have all the answers, but can’t figure out why I don’t want to embrace Christianity. For all those reasons you mention, arrogance, pride, and denial, etc., ad infinitum., but they’re not coming from me. Look inward for more. That masked Christian hostility is itself evil. But you claim to already know that. Why are many Christians so unhappy and hostile if they are living their truth? Leave me to my truth, and some day we’ll find the ultimate truth with our creator.
Unfortunately that day is not today. It’s not a race. And it will defy all our thoughts about the space-time continuum. See you there.
By Tim
March 24, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this
Tony… good grief… I was joking about not wanting them to come to Atlanta and not having jobs… they can come to Atlanta or anywhere else they please for all I care… and I also don’t care if they have jobs or not… IT WAS A JOKE… LIGHTEN UP! you are just on here trying to question my character for whatever reason I do not know! like I have said NUMEROUS times… I DON’T CARE what those people do as long as it is legal
and I will color it anyway I please seeing as I am the one who made the comments… I think that I would know what I meant a little better than you
if you want complain about me not being tolerant then have at it… but you know NOTHING about me… all you have to go on is a post that I made… which you obviously mis-read… NO WHERE in any post can you prove I am being intolerant of those people… like I have said before… I DON’T CARE WHAT THOSE PEOPLE DO! (read a dictionary… that is tolerance)
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this
Basically then Delta you have no idea. As I thought. If you do then you are not allowing me to be your equal by sharing it with me. Not exactly Christain now is it. So my searching the truth question to you is what is the Truth?
By Michael
March 24, 2005 01:46 PM | Link to this
Boscoe,
Sorry, I didn’t see your post that’s why I asked again.
The words you claim are in dispute are mentioned in many articles and textbooks in American diplomacy, political science, and recent journals of opinion, which strongly suggests that there is little dispute about them. Many of the “founding fathers” were really deists, including Jefferson and deism and many other sources inform both the Declaration of Independence and moreover the Constitution, as you almost certainly know.
Furthermore, I only claimed that the Treaty existed, and explicitly made no judgment regarding its relevance to whether the United States was or was not founded as a Christian nation. Finally, as you well know, the words “god,” “christ” and “christian” are completely lacking in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has never ruled that the U.S. was based on the Ten Commandments or is formally a Christian nation. I’m sure that you will disagree, at least with some of that, but I am familiar with the arguments on the other side as well and have no interest in pursuing it any further.
I don’t doubt that you are a decent person, and I won’t resort to the abuse that others have unfairly engaged in the recent posts directed against you and other religious people. In fact, my tone was probably too strong. I realize you are committed to your religious views, but I do think that they cause you to ignore and downplay evidence that conflicts with them and to go to great lengths to find evidence to support them. (Otherwise you might have read and responded to the essay in the Nation that dealt with the Treaty in some detail.)
Anyway, leaving all that aside, I have a question, nothing more. Is the Catholic Church still agnostic on the origins of the Shroud or have they taken a position? I am only curious, I have no intention of entering the issue or attempting to use an answer against you. Just curious, nothing more. I’ve been through all the literature on this as recently as last year and have formulated my own view, but I don’t recall the Church’s stance.
By Janet
March 24, 2005 01:48 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis, Thanks for the laugh, Ydnar has an interesting view point.
Sandy, thanks for mentioning Tao Te Ching… looked it up this morning and enjoyed the poetry of it. Still out on Deepak Chopra, looks to commercial. Randy, your post from 12:53 today seems to be the most Christian thing I’ve read from you.
Just comments on the postings nothing to add about the topic.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 01:52 PM | Link to this
MIT- boscoe, you repeated what i stated. no one has recreated the shroud because they don’t know how. but it was obviously done. IF THEY DON’T KNOW HOW THEN THEY CANNOT PROVE IT IS A FAKE CAN THEY? If it were indeed a fake they could replicate it but they can’t. I know you don’t believe the same as me Mit. I am not trying to get you too. What I am disputing is you saying the Shroud is a fake when nobody has proved conclusively that it is. The labs have NOT all come to the same conclusions with regards to the date of the Shroud. So somebody else is of the same opinion as me on the bleaching effect, so what? The point is his theory can’t give an explanation of why the Shroud isn’t affected by the same phenomenon he said caused the Shroud in the first place. Mit, you say they are all hoaxes but cannot prove it otherwise. If it is a hoax it can be replicated. Do so then. If it is a hoax PROVE IT. You’re wrong Mit, the Dogmas of the Church stand the test of time year after year.
By Jack
March 24, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this
HAPPY EASTER EVERYONE!!! (You too Norm)
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this
Boscoe. When you read and think upon what was said, can process it without personal ego, I will continue with you further. But to respond to your tangents and evasions:
I am not allowing you to be an equal? How much power exactly are you willing to give away?
Dissection of what Truth is not the topic, although the search for it is. When someone says “I know the whole secret of truth,” they are never farther from it. If they state that is their perminant position, they are in conflict with Jesus’ teachings. Jesus wanted us to open our eyes….more each day to the best extent we can (hence the important word “relationship” - not “dictatorship”).
By Tim
March 24, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this
same to you Jack! :)
By AllaboutME
March 24, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this
……..in heaven there aint no beer thats why we drink it here because when we are gone from here all our friends will be drinking all the beer……
what I learned in church, 1982
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 02:18 PM | Link to this
Micheal - Scientists are on both sides the question.I am inclined to believe the scientists who say that the Shroud is authentic. Since the authenticity of the Shroud is not a teaching of the Catholic Church, a Catholic is free to make up his mind based upon the scientific evidence. The Church certainly considers the Shroud to be a venerable object ( This is their stance as well). Good historical traditions trace it back quite far. But, as I said, its authenticity is not among those truths which a Catholic is bound to believe in. There are a number of relics that have long been revered for their antiquity, such as the Shroud of Turin, the Crown of Thorns, Veronica’s veil, the and the Lance of Longinus, the spear tip that was thrust into the side of Christ while he was on the Cross. While question remains as to their absolute authenticity. The purpose of relics is to remind us that, behind (or beyond or beside) this world of the seen is the whole invisible world of the unseen, of the angels and saints, of Christ reigning in heaven while at the right hand of the Father.
By Scott
March 24, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this
In an effort to change the topic….
What does everyone think abot that latest school shooting?
By mit
March 24, 2005 02:31 PM | Link to this
so you are saying, since YOU can’t make a computer then there was no such thing as a computer. that doesn’t make sense. THEY DONT KNOW HOW TO RECREATE IT. That doesn’t mean it was not created. its a piece of cloth, someone had to make.
oh, and by the way, your church hasn’t proved it to be authentic. but sense they say it is that’s all you need, right.
and you can’t say someone had the same idea you had about the bleaching effect when it was their idea and that you took from an article. you don’t know anything about the bleaching processes now do you. except it cleans your laundry.
so the question goes back to you. If it is real PROVE IT.
By Boscoe
March 24, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this
Delta - what you said is that I am not being a Christian. When I asked you to define what a Christian is then you danced around the subject. Looking back you seem to think that nobody should make any judgement against anybody else. Withholding charitable correction when called to do so is plainly against Jesus’ teaching, and against the love of neighbor. St. Thomas writes, “The greatest kindness one can render to any man consists in leading him from error to truth.� Fraternal correction is a loving act, because it seeks to help our brothers and sisters attain their greatest good and happiness, God in Heaven.
By mit
March 24, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this
no scientific evidence has pointed to the shroud as authentic. only speculation. the scientific evidence says it was made in the middle ages.
i can’t talk with a plagarizer, bye
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 02:42 PM | Link to this
Scott why aren’t gangs of girls shooting up schools?
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this
Thank goodness I have had too much work to do to jump in this week…the religious hysteria has grown to a fever pitch.
In reference to one of the tangents: As my father, who is a medieval historian and who has been a college professor for longer than many of us have been alive, always says - There was enough “Wood of the True Cross” circulating in medieval Europe to rebuild old London, enough True Nails to build a large fleet, and enough Saint’s bones to fill the Paris catacombs.
By DeltaX
March 24, 2005 02:50 PM | Link to this
Boscoe- No dancing. Straight words, which you choose to ignore. The first reply from you was dancing (I call it spinning tho - cause it is to tangle the issue.) This spinning tactic can go on for eterinity. You can choose to stop anytime you wish.
Your last words have my point in them: Leading vs Shoving/Forcing Fraternal Corrective Love vs Judgement
Once you can process what the words mean, and not only recite them; there can be movement - a relationship.
Good day Good People; time to spend time on productive activities where my good is put to use.
By lozen
March 24, 2005 02:51 PM | Link to this
Tony, that’s not nice, telling Michael to move to Europe. All my life I’ve heard that drivel; if you don’t like it, then leave. It’s so childish. If work were readily available in Europe, it would be good for every woman with children to move there. They would have gov’t subsidized child care, two to three years maternity leave, 6 to 10 weeks of vacation a year, and a 25-30 hour work week which would leave them some time for their family. In this country we give nothing but lip-service to the value of the family.
By Brian Curtis
March 24, 2005 02:56 PM | Link to this
J. Morris: Ah, but remember—“There were giants in the earth in those days….”
Maybe there really WAS a 900-foot Jesus strolling around, eh? Dude was livin’ large.
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this
OH, I just came in and Michael is still a neodem. And still stuck on ad hominem. I ad hominem to my breakfast every morning but call it grits. Don’t fret, Michael. Bush will be out of office after this term. Then we will have another Republican you will like even better. So, cheers. Now, that’s not only a constructive comment but full of happiness too.
By mit
March 24, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this
to the plagiarizer of someone’s else idea they call their own,
http://www.shroud.com/restored.htm
the shroud was restored by the church. (9/20/2002) any scientific dates obtained from it now on are invalid. maybe that’s why the image is still there. they keep restoring it. in that sense its a fake, since you the plagiarizer believe the sun would have bleached it long ago (your idea right), it probably did, they just restored it.
plagiarizer
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this
Crystal, I think I speak for all of us when I say: “huh?”
SOC worked for James Joyce, but you, my dear, are no James Joyce.
By Scott
March 24, 2005 03:27 PM | Link to this
Whiley - I don’t know but the way this world is going…stand by!
By lozen
March 24, 2005 03:40 PM | Link to this
Hey J, good to have you back. Just ignore Crystal - it only drops in once or twice a day with blanket criticism about everything and everyone on the blog and what it thinks is witty but is actually indecipherable gibberish; I think that makes it feel better about itself. (The reason I say it is because, although the name is female, the posts sound like a male to me.) Whiley, good question, why aren’t girls shooting up schools? Why aren’t girls and women beating and killing their boyfriends and husbands every day in the news? (Oh, yes a few do but the percentages are way, way in favor of males beating and killing.) Why don’t girls rape boys? Why don’t boys and men who impregnate 14 and 15 year old girls get arrested for statutory rape? Why does someone who steals a car get more jail time than someone who sexually abuses a child or rapes a woman? Who wrote all the laws we live under? Obviously it wasn’t women or children!
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this
Poor J. Morris. Definitely not a southerner. You never ate hominey for breakfast, better known as grits? Oh, well, what can you expect.
SOC??? (If that stands for something you’re ashamed to write, go wash your mouth out.) Thank goodness I’m not James Joyce. Being Crystal is more than enough. Besides, I like Faulkner better. Ever heard of him, Mr. Morris? He was from O-x-f-o-r-d, M-i-s-s-i-s-s-i-p-p-i. That too is southern.
By Tony
March 24, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
Ad Hominem
Person A makes claim X. Person B makes attack on person A Therefore A’s claim is false.
Michael proposes President Bush might have refused to take his physical because at the time young George Bush might have broke the law concerning substance abuse. Further, Michael claims the laws where vigorously enforced against blacks and even a white graduate. In addition Michael claims that then Governor Bush is some what of a hypocrite by laughing at Gore’s truthfulness on substance abuse, while he remains silent. Lastly Michael claims a double standard ” Every misstep, moral failure, or mistake by a democrat is given endless scrutiny”
I believe the OPEN TO PUBLIC records have vindicated the young Mr. Bush. The endless scrutiny of Mr. Bushes records showed that he would not be allowed to fly, therefore the need for the physical was not required. In addition The law then, AS TODAY, is at time not vigorously enforced. Certainly one can support his argument that some where jailed, however many, many more drug abusers went unabated. Indeed, look at any news reel during that time and see countless black and white anti-war demonstrators smoking pot. Look at Woodstock. Furthermore, what of Gore’s antics. Double Standard. Bush made his records public. Kerry refused. Yet the media never questioned Kerry on the Swift Boat claims. Indeed, what of Kerry’s Military Discharge? Why did Carter several years later issue a Honorable Discharge? Double Standard, YOU BET.
God uses the foolish of the world to shame the wise, if I boast, let it be for God.
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 03:46 PM | Link to this
Don’t ask me, lozen…I’m still struggling with the fact that Mr. George “Presumption of Life” W. Bush signed that law in Texas that allows hospitals to disconnect infants from life support when said infant’s parents can no longer afford it.
By lozen
March 24, 2005 03:54 PM | Link to this
Yes, Sandy that masked christian hostility is something to see isn’t it? I found this quote from a learned religious leader to be quite enlightening. “Those whose religious security is rooted in a literal bible are not happy when facts challenge their biblical understanding. The bible as they understand it, convinces them that they are right, and justifies the enormous fear and negativity that lie so close to the surface in fundamentalist religion. For biblical literalists, there is always an enemy to be defeated in mortal combat. Sometimes that enemy is Satan, the devil literalized and made very real to serve the primary purpose of removing responsibility from the one who has fallen into sin. When Jimmy Swaggart was caught in a New Orleans hotel with a hooker, he claimed the devil was being hurled back into darkness by his ministry, so the devil launched a counter-attack and lured him into a trap! If not the devil or another church, then religious liberals, secular modernists, or God denying communists become the enemy. Irrational religious anger demands a target.
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 03:56 PM | Link to this
Lol Crystal…I am in fact a Southerner, and I have in fact read Faulkner. Frankly, I prefer Welty or O’Connor when it comes to Southern lit. To each his own, I suppose.
SOC stands for stream-of-conciousness, and its what you attempt to do when you spout out your completely irrelevant and universally insulting nonsense that has not once, as far as I can tell, touched on the topic at hand.
I realize you think you’re being witty, but in reality you sound like some drunken, jaded old drag queen, Joan Crawford or Bette Davis impersonator standing on the fringe of the party distributing tired and stale bon not-so-mots to anyone unfortunate to wander too close to you. Pull in the claws, Mommie Dearest.
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 04:03 PM | Link to this
Dear Frozen Lozen, whatever you are, you’ve given my husband and children a good laugh. Sorry if I weered off the blood & guts, rapes & rituals, but boredom is just—well—so boring. Maybe I should introduce a new topic since it is Friday. Will Zell Miller be the next president of the United States? (Applause)
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this
lol lozen ! When you point out the obvious you’ll be labeled a man basher ! Someone’s going to say that women kill just as much as men, that women abuse men just as much, etc.
The only way we’ll get anywhere is true equality. Lets start blowing away our cheating boyfriends & husbands. Especially anyone that wants to break up with you. Encourage your sorority sisters to slip football players date rape drugs. Give birth & then leave the kids with your husband then disappear. Purchase porn for women as much as you can, apparently it’s a billion dollar business, so we have a lot of catching up to do. There’s too much to list here that we need to do. Hmm, this true equality thing is exciting !
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 04:08 PM | Link to this
Well, since y’all both are apparently as crazy as loons, you could be his running mate.
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 04:10 PM | Link to this
Whiley, I solemnly promise that any porn I may or may not view does absolutely nothing to degrade women. :)
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
lol J Morris !
By AngryGrlsAreFunny
March 24, 2005 04:17 PM | Link to this
Damn Whiley, have issues?
Boy vs Girl stuff? I think it is more along the terms, child vs child.
And whats the difference between little boys and little girls. Nothing if you bend them over;)
By Jodi
March 24, 2005 04:18 PM | Link to this
Um, Chrystal, it’s Thursday, not Friday. Isn’t one of the tests of sanity whether or not you know what day it is?
By Brian Curtis
March 24, 2005 04:25 PM | Link to this
From Crystal: “Will Zell Miller be the next president of the United States?”
Well, that depends. Do we have a precedent of swearing in a deranged, frothing lunatic before he takes office? (I mean, I know Reagan lost his mind to Alzheimer’s during his terms, but that’s different.)
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 04:33 PM | Link to this
Compliments on top of compliments!
I’ve never been to a party with drunken, jaded drag queens. But I bet they can’t even play bridge. Do they? Tiddly winks? And no, I won’t run for office with Zell. Hillary has already demanded that honor.
Bon nuit!
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this
Does anyone have any Thorazine that they could loan Crystal?
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this
AngryGrlsAreFunny , Why is it child vs child or women vs men? It’s not at all. It’s not a contest. Only pointing out the fact that boys are becoming more violent earlier on. Why won’t anyone address this issue? It is the root of the violence problem in this country, actually the world. Why don’t girls shoot up schools? Why aren’t neglected girls growing up to murder, rape etc?
What is going on with boys?
By J. Morris
March 24, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this
Whiley, the boys go on to become murderers, rapists, etc. The girls go on to become Crystal. And possibly Zack - I think he may secretly be a woman.
By Michael
March 24, 2005 04:53 PM | Link to this
Crystal,
Well, here is my (humorous) ad hominem for the day. I think that your grits have more intellectual substance than “W.”
P.S If you really do want to learn how to construct an argument you can take my logic course or someone else’s. There are a number of good instructors of critical thinking at Georgia State and other colleges in the area. Humor and ridicule won’t carry one very far.
By lozen
March 24, 2005 04:56 PM | Link to this
With all the children being molested by men these days, I didn’t find the joke about bending them over very funny.
By Whiley
March 24, 2005 04:57 PM | Link to this
LOLOLOL J MORRIS YOU ARE MAKING ME LAUGH MY OLE a!@#!@ OFF ! (and I think you are right)
I hope next week’s topic is better. Did we even discuss it?
By Sandy
March 24, 2005 05:01 PM | Link to this
Zell and Hillary. Two reasons I’m glad to be back in New York State.
By AngryGrlsAreFunny
March 24, 2005 05:03 PM | Link to this
I agree that trends tend to clump in a group. But to compare that group to another group that is completely different is combative. You vs me mentality. You will draw more fire than putting out.
The short of it is to compare apples with apples.
Your point that neglected girls do not do those things highlights what I am illustrating: Neglected girls will do their own things that are abusive (to self or others), which are just as sick and follow the same trend of increasing volitility.
BTW - School violence has steadly declined since 1970. The difference is that it has more of a BANG (no box cutters for those of you who remember the 80s in NYC). It has continued to be the safest place for our children. Media has cropped up a lot of hoopla.
By Vince
March 24, 2005 05:06 PM | Link to this
Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon. WAKE UP.
Since nobody seems to respond to my postings, I’ll keep posting.
Stop protesting, stop arguing and do something. If you think Ms. Schiavo’s life is worth fighting for, then go to Florida and adopt her. For God’s sakes people, how easy it must be to give your opinion. They sling around like hash browns at a diner. But, to show true compassion? Go adopt her. All life is precious, so just go do it.
If you against abortion, go to abortion clinics and adopt those unborn babies. Stem cell research? Go to the labs, and find a woman that carry that cell to term and then raise it.
I am so damn sick of the right wing “God” doers and the blantant double standards. Everyone has the right to life, and yet you can’t abort a baby when the mother’s health is in danger. It’s ok to kill the Matthew Shepherd’s of this world. (And if you think his last name is coincidence, then please, keep your mouth shut.)
While the freedom of opinion is a blessing for us in the USA, actions still speak louder than words.
By Crystal
March 24, 2005 05:14 PM | Link to this
Ah, Jodi, you caught it. I wondered if anyone would. Not another alert person in the group. Of course, you may be more familiar with the tests for sanity. J.Morris can tell you about medications. Maybe Mr. Doug Wead should be tested, he who is secretly taping his friends’ conversations. Now, that IS paranoid (but on topic!!)And Michael, thanks for all the advice. It is not hard to see that logic has led you well beyond humor. What an accomplishment!
By Filster
March 25, 2005 08:25 AM | Link to this
As none of us will ever know the actual state of Terri Schiavo other than what we read in the paper or see on TV (and yes, I know all about the judges, etc. but think about it, like we’ve never sentenced an innocent person to death), all I can say is God help us if we’re wrong, and if we’re right, she deserves better than our petty bickering and taunting and insult. How about for 1 minute, 1 lousy minute, all bloggers observe a minute of silence out of respect for the passing of another human being, which, whether she’s conscious or not, she remains. I hope we all look back after her passing at our own actions and words, and perhaps her sacrifice will help us all be better people, if just for the moment. God speed Terri. May the next world be better to you than this one was.
By Lyrazel
March 25, 2005 08:42 AM | Link to this
Actually, there has been a 25% increase of girls being incarcerated from schools and a 40% increase in women in prison. There has been significant increases in girl-gangs, and violence is escalating as America pays into its prison system of overmedication and incarceration vs education, job training and rehabilitation.
How many children are on prescription drugs? My guess is the escalating violence is directly proportional to the current trend of overmedication and physician/parent neglect. Too often children deemed unruly are given pills to calm, pills to be less shy, pills to be thin, pills to—you get my drift. Its the fix-it-with-pills factor that has permiated American culture and social services. Sometimes these medications work and other times they leave children unable to cope with normal anxiety and stress without pills. Factor in peer pressure and incidence of violence escalates because the parents are busy making money, or placed children are not receiving the therapy of professional counseling that money buys—but they get the pills. Very often pharmaceutical companies do not release negative results from their product but release positive numbers. Remember they have profit factor, and doctors are paid a bit to push these perscriptions onto their patients if they have ‘symptoms’, so its easier to overmedicate by the book and takes less time in the office=more patients=more cash. Remember also, doctors are in the business for the money. Far too often doctors perscribe by symptom and do not calculate for individuals that leave some children so overmedicated, or perhaps worse, the pills do the opposite, rather than help they stifle creativity, or make walking anti-social ghosts of selves. Children placed in social services get less attention than dogs at the pound. Small wonder they react violently when they are ignored in their development years, these kids become disruptive, argumentative, angry and—realize the truth that grandiose words of compassionate politicans and political groups mean nothing. In schools the staff is handcuffed with regulations that have zero to do with the children they serve but a lot to do with politics. A school nurse can dispense asprin, a school counselor has very little time to work with the children and very limited options. Both can warn parents or guardians but if parents arent home and guardians are exhausted by unruly behavior and too little funds WHO CARES? Politicians and elected government officials concentrate its attention on people like Terri Shivao with their political photo-op pandering. It cuts direct aid to childrens health programs, cuts counselors, cuts social services, cuts college scholarships all for tax cuts for people making over 200,000, for war, bombers, humvees, but not vet benefits, not health care. Watch tv one night and count how many perscriptions you are being marketed. You will be very surprised if you tally the results in a week. While birth control is being kept in puritanic restriction penile enhancement and sexual disfunction drugs are pushed and allowed deduction by insurance companies (but not birth control)…ever notice… o its friday. I do rant. Enjoy.
By Bruce
March 25, 2005 09:15 AM | Link to this
Although I think you are preaching to the choir, preach on. Maybe someday your concerned will be dealt with.
By Sandy
March 25, 2005 09:27 AM | Link to this
Jim Lehrer interviewed James Garbarino (Author of Lost Boys), an expert in youth violence from Cornell University. When asked about some of the reasons for Columbine-like incidents, he cited that our culture is awash in violeence; the easy availability of guns; that boys are taught it is better to be “mad than sad”; and because of the adversarial nature of American Culture.
Lyrazel has touched on the use of pharmaceuticals in our youth, which should be studied and acknowledged as a huge health issue.
Because our entertainment and games are so violent, we are no longer alarmed when kids talk about shooting and killing; they may be talking about games.
Learning that Jeff Wiese was taking Prozac hit me between the eyes; I lost my 14-year-old nephew to suicide; he too was taking Prozac. His mother, my sister, is a remarkably strong woman, but we are still learning to live with the grief, with every birthday, holiday, phantom milestone. After the Columbine shootings, she commented to me that in the most painful moments of dealing with her son’s suicide, she wondered what could be worse, and sadly agreed that his turning his violence outward before taking his own life would definitely have been worse. We’ll never know why he did what he did, but my own experience with antidepressants leads me to believe that Prozac was a part of it, as was our “adversarial society,” and diffcult-to-access mental health system that relies too heavily on drugs and not enough with counseling and teaching coping mechanisms.
Jeff Wiese and the Columbine shooters are victims, too, as are their families. The violence in the entertainment that they consumed is only piece of the tragic puzzle. In these instances and in my nephew’s, we woke up too late.
By Tim
March 25, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Sandy… I am so sorry to hear about your nephew… that has got to be one of the hardest things for a person to deal with (my prayers are with you and your family)
I just wanted to mention something about Prozac that may help you better understand… a little over 2 years ago I was clinically depressed… I was a very severe case… I stopped eating (pretty much stopped doing everything)… I am 6’1” and at the height of the depression I weighed 126 pounds… I say all this to let you know that I have been where a lot of these poor kids are… it is a scary place… what happens (and this is believed by many psychologists) is that before people are placed on medications they are soooo low that they don’t have the strength to do anything… most of these people have suicidal thoughts but are so low that they don’t have energy to act on their thoughts (I was in this position)… once a person starts taking medications such as prozac or zoloft they start regaining energy… unfortunately the suicidal thoughts just don’t go away… so now they have the thoughts and the ‘strength’ (for lack of a better word) to act on their thoughts… that is just one hypothesis of why some people do end up committing suicide after they start taking mood stabilizers… sorry for the long post… I just thought Sandy brought up something very important
most psychologists/psychiatrists/doctors will tell you that the best method is a combination of medication and counceling (I know that is what helped me)
By Janet
March 25, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this
Tim, I agree that a combination of medication and therapy is helpful… esp. for adults. But we are prescribing way too many drugs for children and adolescents. Lyrazel is correct, a lot of MD’s are only treating sysmtoms, and not getting to the root of the problem. The test subjects for these meds are usually adults and we don’t know how safe they are for children…. but they are prescribed anyway.
By Whiley
March 25, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this
Medication isn’t the reason boys are shooting up schools, murdering, etc when they grow up.
By RS
March 25, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this
Sandy, I am so sorry about what happened to your nephew; accept this cyber-hug! [ ] Yes, it’s true that the proper way to prevent this sort of thing is to address the root of the problem. Jeff Wiese folowed the pattern that the Columbine shooters did; black clothes, being an unpopular loner, admiration of Hitler & the Nazi regime. WHY did no one intervene??? I’m not excusing what these 3 troubled boys did, just explaining; they were treated terribly by their peers; some kids just can’t take that & eventually it comes to a very perilous boiling point. That’s why schools need to adopt an extremely stringent “zero tolerance” bullying policy & not only for that reason. Bullying is wrong; all students have the right to get an education without harrassment. Tim, I’m glad you’re ok now; I can really feel for what you went through. I don’t know how old you are & frankly, it’s none of my biz but when I was in high school, certain things were not out in the open to the extent they are now & once their peers found out a kid was gay, he/she went through unspeakable torment at their grubby little hands. No wonder why the suicide rate among gay & lesbian adolescents is so high..Yeah, I also believe over-medicating is not the solution; so many doctors take the easy way out; instead, get to the root of the problem. Over-medication is harmful, inneffective & causes too much dependence on the drug
By Tim
March 25, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this
Janet… oh I totally agree with you! children are waaaay over medicated and like you said these drugs were tested on adults and not children… another problem is most regular doctors are prescribing these meds to teens… a family doctor usually isn’t properly trained in these types of cases… the best is to take someone (adult or child) to a psychiatrist/psychologist… that is their specialization… I mean someone wouldnt go to a pediatrist to get their eyes checked… you said it best though… we need definitely need to get to the root of the problem
RS… thank you for the kind words ;) I am happy to say that I am MUCH better now (20 lbs heavier too lol)… I am 22 (20 when I was diagnosed)… and yes you are correct about the high suicide rates among gay teens… but kids don’t even have to know you are gay to torment you… all they need is to think they are and then they are relentless… but you know what I was one of the lucky ones that it just made me thick-skinned and strong :)… but this is also a major problem among all teens and pre-teens… hopefully we can get to the root of these problems in teens and pre-teens and help these kids!
By DeltaX
March 25, 2005 10:44 AM | Link to this
While father was living, he was a psychiatrist for the state (in South GA). He would have to cover for other Drs regularly and would often complain about how Drs would have a patient on too many meds. Not only that they were on many meds, but many would negate the desired effect of others, so the Dr would up the doses to compensate…etc. By the time my dad would get them straightened out, the Drs would shift and it would start over. Eventually the patients would ask for my father to be thier perminant Dr; this ended in Southern Good Ol Boys squeezing my father out of the area (by means of general hasseling - unkindness). We finally moved to a more progressive area of GA, cannot take up every battle.
My father had patients from up/down the whole east coast that would require him to overlook thier new Drs orders (not boasting - only showing that if you find a good Psych, you keep them).
Also, remember that people in the crisis are usually in denile - hence why no one ever sees the red flags as such. I see the work here is to not shame people that come forward on these issues - but that requires less judgement. Less judgement will lead my arguement back to religion; so I must stop;)
By Janet
March 25, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this
Tim, no I wouldn’t recommend going to a podiatrist for an eye exam… but know several people that need to go to a proctologist for one…. either that or get their heads out of their….. you know. However are you aware that there are psychologists that do not have their degrees in the area the are working? Several have their Phd’s in education… a worthy subject, but not psychiatry. (just a pet peeve of mine) If medication is to be prescribed it can only be done by a psychiatrist, or by the MD (sometimes a family practice MD) working with a psychologist.
By Janet
March 25, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this
DeltaX, your dad sounds like one of the better ones. And there are some good ones out there. You just have to find them. The good ones treat the WHOLE person, not just the symptoms…and know that what is prescribed can effect so much more than just what they are ‘treating.’
By Tim
March 25, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
Janet… first HAHA… very funny :)… and yes what you mentioned about some psychologists is a HUUUUUGE pet peeve of mine as well… I think that is why it is so important (as DeltaX mentioned) to find a good psychiatriast and good psychologist (one that actually has a degree in what they are doing)… I don’t have a problem with family doctors prescribing meds if they are working with the assistance of someone more ‘in the know’ on the subject… but there are a lot of family doctors out there who don’t know what they are doing and just prescribe something to get people out of their office… there are programs in the works now where psychologists (legit psychologists!) will be able to prescribe anit-depressants and other medications… psycho-pharmacology (I think is what it is called)… and I believe only clinical psychologists will be able to do this (so they will actually know what they are doing)
By Crystal
March 25, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
I am sorry about all the sadness in life. I expect we have all had it. I’ve had plenty, too, And thanks, Filster, for your compassionate suggestions.
This is a beautiful Easter weekend with consolation and celebration. I hope all of you enjoy it. My family is also celebrating my daughter’s birthday. I am baking a chocolate cake with cherry filling and whipped topping. I’d invite you all but the family is large and the cake is small. Maybe next time. I wish happiness for all of you (even Democrats).
By Vincent
March 25, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon. WAKE UP.
Since nobody seems to respond to my postings, I’ll keep posting.
Stop protesting, stop arguing and do something. If you think Ms. Schiavo’s life is worth fighting for, then go to Florida and adopt her. For God’s sakes people, how easy it must be to give your opinion. They sling around like hash browns at a diner. But, to show true compassion? Go adopt her. All life is precious, so just go do it.
If you against abortion, go to abortion clinics and adopt those unborn babies. Stem cell research? Go to the labs, and find a woman that carry that cell to term and then raise it.
I am so damn sick of the right wing “God� doers and the blantant double standards. Everyone has the right to life, and yet you can’t abort a baby when the mother’s health is in danger. It’s ok to kill the Matthew Shepherd’s of this world. (And if you think his last name is coincidence, then please, keep your mouth shut.)
While the freedom of opinion is a blessing for us in the USA, actions still speak louder than words.
By Vince
March 25, 2005 12:00 PM | Link to this
Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon, Jeff Gannon. WAKE UP.
Since nobody seems to respond to my postings, I’ll keep posting.
Stop protesting, stop arguing and do something. If you think Ms. Schiavo’s life is worth fighting for, then go to Florida and adopt her. For God’s sakes people, how easy it must be to give your opinion. They sling around like hash browns at a diner. But, to show true compassion? Go adopt her. All life is precious, so just go do it.
If you against abortion, go to abortion clinics and adopt those unborn babies. Stem cell research? Go to the labs, and find a woman that carry that cell to term and then raise it.
I am so damn sick of the right wing “God� doers and the blantant double standards. Everyone has the right to life, and yet you can’t abort a baby when the mother’s health is in danger. It’s ok to kill the Matthew Shepherd’s of this world. (And if you think his last name is notcoincidence, then please, keep your mouth shut.)
While the freedom of opinion is a blessing for us in the USA, actions still speak louder than words.
By Archie
March 25, 2005 12:05 PM | Link to this
Lyrazel is deep and thought-provoking. I have good thoughts about her post but this Whiley takes the feminist routine too far. Whiley asks a rhetorical question about why boys commit violent crime as men? Heck, I don’t know but it doesn’t serve any purpose to just bash men whereas,Lyrazel offered some reasoning and some facts. I read that school crime has gone down since the 70’s but it’s more violent as far as the shooting… I am just as flabbergasted by the violence of men as anyone. Hopefully we can go 3 weeks without some young man killing 4 people at one time and hopefully we can go 3 weeks without some woman having sex and then deciding it was rape 3 weeks later. I am all for women rights but they do commit crimes although not as violent as these young men. I just believe everyone needs to be called out for bad behavior and right now I am not too trusting of either sex for different reasons.
By vince
March 25, 2005 12:15 PM | Link to this
I suppose these high school shootings would be easier to fathom if the “evil doers” were gay or raised by gay parents, or gay grandparents. I thought the arguement for not allowing same sex marriage was largely due to what’s best for the children. Children are better off being raised with a mother and a father, and yet I can’t locate a single teen criminal that was raised by gay parents.
By Sandy
March 25, 2005 12:30 PM | Link to this
Thank you for the kind comments and condolences. This happened 10 years ago, and decisions were made to take my nephew off life support. One never really gets over it. Our approach has been to integrate it into our lives in some positive way. This is my hope for the Schindlers and the Schiavos. Hopefully they will receive support and caring after the media circus is over. I offer them prayers to help them cope with the traumas, past and present.
Tim, thanks for sharing your story. It does help to know of your experiences. I, too, experienced something similar with Paxil. I felt so disconnected from my own life, and finally I stopped the medication, not quite cold turkey, but boy, I sure could relate to the John Lennon song… (Throw in postpartum depression, fibromyalgia, and we had a classic recipe for a great big misdiagnosis. Oy.)
The “adversarial nature of our American culture” should receive some attention, to. This pervasive concept that we have to be the best, to get not just our fair share, but the lion’s share, at any cost, is going to ruin everything we claim to stand for, individually and as a country. Whether we’re talking about about the false reasons for this very real war, cutting services for the poor, shutting the doors on folks who come here to better their lives, pandering to big business by removing environmental regulations, torturing Iraquis citizens with no regard, the aggressive manner that the 2000 election was decided, and forcing religion and faith into areas that ought to be private and were previously protectd, we’re all affected. God bless America, indeed; we know not what we do.
Sometimes I feel like the America I knew is on a suicide course, stoned on denial, intolerance, and commercialism. Let’s not wake up too late from this, too.
By RS
March 25, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this
Tim, you’re only 22?!?! I’m shocked, you seem so mature & together & yes, of course that is a compliment. I give thanks you were, as you said, one of the lucky ones; we’re happy to have you here among us & you definately have what it takes to be a positive role model for troubled gay & lesbian teens. Crystal, Happy Easter, sounds fun & the thought is appreciated but if you saw me in a swimsuit, you’d know that a rich dessert is the last thing I need! Whiley, there are some good books out on the escalating trend of bullying among adolescent girls; one that comes to mind is “Odd Girl Out”. I forget though, who wrote it. Sorry. I also recently read an article about cyber-bullying in high school. Good points, Archie! You sound like me; a “people’s libber” as opposed to a womens’ or mens’ libber.
By lozen
March 25, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this
Whiley takes the feminist routine too far? Where did she do that, Archie? Whiley asked the question, “Why aren’t gangs of girls shooting up schools”? then, “boys are becoming violent sooner. It is the root of the violence problem in this country, actually the world. Why don’t girls shoot up schools? Why aren’t neglected girls growing up to murder, rape etc? What is going on with boys?” After you say she’s taking it too far, you then agree with her. “I am just as flabbergasted by the violence of men as anyone. Hopefully we can go 3 weeks without some young man killing 4 people at one time and hopefully we can go 3 weeks without some woman having sex and then deciding it was rape 3 weeks later. I am all for womens rights but they do commit crimes although not as violent as these young men.” So how did Whiley take the feminist thing too far? In the rare instance when a female lies about being raped only two people are directly effected and noone is killed. In the school shootings many people were killed. Although you are agreeing with Whiley basically you still feel a compulsion to say women commit crimes too. We all know women commit crimes too. They just don’t commit the violent crimes on the scale that males do. It’s so obvious but noone wants to call it what it is. Because people like you get so defensive and want to call any woman who talks about it “man bashers” or “feminists” which in your mind probably means the same thing. I don’t consider myself a man basher; I have two sons. I am a feminist which means I believe in equality for women. It does not mean I hate men, believe me. I am a realist which means I see who is on the front page of the newspaper almost every single day after they’ve molested and murdered children, beaten and killed their wives and girlfriends, shot up the schools, blown themselves and others up in airplanes, talked a group of others into drinking koolaide laced with cyanide or into suicide so they can go live on a comet, crashed their cars and killed themselves and others because they were driving recklessly, and joined the army because they say, “It’ll be fun to go to Afghanistan or Iraq.” We do need to figure out why males are so violent. That doesn’t mean I’m saying you are violent; not all males are violent. But males commit far, far more violent crimes than females. Fact. I believe Whiley is asking “Why does that happen”?
By Scott
March 25, 2005 01:41 PM | Link to this
I have to say I totally agree with the overmedication of everyone in this society we live in, particularly children. My question is, what are these parents doing (or is it not doing?) We seem to have lost the art of parenting somewhere. Parents are way too quick to rely on some outside means to solve the problems they deal with (medication, state law enforcement, state services) to solve problems that could be addressed earlier if they just involved themselves in the lives of their children and taught/lived in their own lives a sense of resposibility for ones actions and a base knowledge of right and wrong
By Janet
March 25, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this
Sandy, your comment; ‘Sometimes I feel like the America I knew is on a suicide course, stoned on denial, intolerance, and commercialism. Let’s not wake up too late from this, too.’ reminded me of an article I read recently. I think she had some good points, if you are interested here is the link. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0323-27.htm
By Scott
March 25, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this
One chemical men have that women don’t (at least in the same quantity) that partly explains the higher violent rate among men….testosterone
By Bruce
March 25, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this
These things happen because women drive men crazy. I have a wife and three daughters. So I am an expert on how manipulative women can be and it drives me crazy.
By Janet
March 25, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this
Bruce, you may be an expert on how manipulative the women in your family are…. but please don’t judge the rest of us based on your family. Manipulation is not only a female trait…. hince the first 3 letters in the word.
By Tim
March 25, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this
Sandy… I felt the same way!… I decided it was time to get off the meds… I HATED being on them… made me feel like I was walking on clouds all day long… I had to literally think about walking up stairs before I did it… if i didn’t slowly think ‘ok step up… ok step up…’… I learned the had way… feel down stairs while I was on them (lol)… definitely best if one can deal with problems without the meds… and your other comments about our nation… AMEN!!!
RS… you are always soooo sweet to me :) thanks again for the very nice words!!! ;) the feeling is mutual!!
By Scott
March 25, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this
Bruce - oh quit being such a wuss…a good buddy of mine has 4 women in his house (his wife and three daughters) All the girls are teenagers! Tell me THAT guy ain’t up to his ears in estrogen!!! HAHAHA!
By Archie
March 25, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this
Lozen you understand the word “rhetorical”? Every man knows that men commit more violent crimes than women but what is the point of asking that question. Just about all of Whiley’s posts contain a slight insult towards men that’s why I posted the way I did. I have nothing against Whiley as she posted many things that I agree with(see George Bush), but the constant men do this, men do that,just sounds like bashing versus the other women on this forum that are critical but they provide facts and reasons not just criticism. I do have a daughter and I am definitely concerned about young men but I know so many men that don’t shoot,cut, or punch women. I look at one everyday in the mirror and my point is it disappoints me that I rarely hear women accept blame when they call themselves feminist. There are plenty of strong women that don’t bash and they do call it as they see it. If I made some smart remark about women in every post then I would expect someone to call me on it. Even some traditional christians don’t blame Eve for her part in sin coming to the world. Women can do anything in a figurative sense that men can do but that also means accept criticism and don’t ask questions that no one really knows the answer to because it shows you’re trying to insult more than help the situation.
By Bruce
March 25, 2005 02:36 PM | Link to this
Janet,
I was really only joking but I grew up with a Mom and three sisters, I have been married twice, three daughters, and one grand-daughter, and have a boat load of women friends. I believe women are the greatest gift God ever gave man here on earth and thus should be treated as such. Woe unto the man that thinks he can treat one of my daughters disrespectfully. But they do drive me crazy twice a month. Full moon and you know when else:-)
By lozen
March 25, 2005 02:40 PM | Link to this
Well, Archie I do understand what you said about “don’t ask questions no one knows the answer to.” (But we did get an interesting answer - testosterone.) I was involved with a singles’ group several years ago and there was one man in the group who asked the same question at every function for months, “What do women really want?” He asked every woman in the group over and over. For a while we tried to answer his question but he never accepted an answer, just came to the next party and asked “what do women really want?” There is no way to answer that question. Each woman wants different things. We all realized after a while he didn’t want an answer. He wanted an excuse for his poor record in relationships!
By RS
March 25, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this
Tim, I say it as I see it, sweetie! XOXOXO {}
By AngryGrlsAreFunny
March 25, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Lozen - This is meant politley: Read before you write if you are serious about a view. I have already pointed out what I found as comparing apples and oranges.
One example of how women contribute. Girls have a escalating trend (esp here in GA) of wanting to have a baby (at 10yrs-16yrs) so that they will have someone who loves them. Yet they are not ready to nurture this child. What happens to these children? This is a great contribution to this direction.
Severing/super gluing of the male genitalia is another thing that has become more popular.
Driving into a lake with her children in a mass suicide.
Blaming the deaths of your kids on a non-exitstant black man.
You see how this becomes a t**-for-tat game? Therefore you should not make it boys vs girls.
By Tim
March 25, 2005 02:51 PM | Link to this
RS… XOXOXO right back at ya ;)
By Janet
March 25, 2005 02:53 PM | Link to this
Bruce, I can take a joke…and if you say it was in jest, I believe you. I just see the flip side of it, because I have 3 sons and a husband, and a boat load of male friends, and the the house were all the boys come to play… so I know men can do as much manipulating as anyone. Just ask about the fishing days when the grass needs to be cut, or the hunting days when the washing machine should really be worked on, or the ball days….. You get the picture.
By RS
March 25, 2005 02:56 PM | Link to this
Angrygrrls…Another point I’d like to bring up is that, for whatever reason(s), we are seeing more & more bullying by girls. See my previous post re “cyber-bullying” & the book “Odd Girl Out”. Why, even when I was a teenager & honey, that was a LONG time ago, girls were as vicious as an Alaskan winter is long. Not ALL girls, but a goodly number. Look, I was no angel either…
By Filster
March 25, 2005 02:58 PM | Link to this
Crystal: Though the family is large and the cake small, I seem to recall an incident where the crowd was large but the fish and loaves few. Somehow it all worked out then, as it will for you. How fitting for Easter. have a blessed birthday celebration.
By lozen
March 25, 2005 03:11 PM | Link to this
Tim, I’m glad you’re better now. Thich Nhat Hahn says suffering is good if we learn from it to have compassion and love for others. The flower is the garbage and the garbage is the flower. The flower will become garbage when it wilts and the garbage can become a flower. So our painful experiences can be flowers we give each other.
By Tim
March 25, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this
lozen… AMEN to that!! (sorry… little pentecostal outburst lol)
By RS
March 25, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this
Lozen: Wow, what you said to Tim is beautiful & right on target! He’s certainly given ME bouquets of cyber-flowers & those last longer than the “real” thing!
By Janet
March 25, 2005 03:28 PM | Link to this
lozen, that was beautiful… and thanks, gives me yet one more philosopher to look up.
Tim, thanks for being willing to share, you are truely an awesome individual! We can all learn a lot on this blog if we are willing to listen to each other. I know I have gained a lot from reading post from each of you. I don’t always agree, but enjoy it most of the time. Have a blessed weekend all.
By Archie
March 25, 2005 03:30 PM | Link to this
Thanks RS and Lozen for your responses. As men we do so many crazy things but it amazes me how many guys in the age of feminism can get women to be their mistresses. I mean Scott Peterson had a girl on the side,as did Jesse Jackson,Newt Gingrich,Clinton, and probably Bush. I mean if he smoked dope it’s not a reach to say he had a lady on the side. My point is every one of these guys are married and were well-known yet they were able to court outside the marriage. A good feminist would turn these guys down. Of course a good guy would just be loyal but with all the criticism of male behavior you would think that women would stick together when they know the guy is married. That’s one reason why I discuss accepting some blame on both sides. Of course no one knows if the President has ever had ” a chick on the side”. Lozen I hope you gave that guy the business.
By Scott
March 25, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this
Janet - couldn’t agree with you more…there is plenty to be learned from opinions, even the dissenting ones
By lozen
March 25, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this
AngryGirls, I reread your previous posts and I don’t understand what you were trying to say in your last post. And of course this is meant politely also: Little girls who are 10 - 16 wanting love has nothing to do with what we were talking about - violence and why boys are more violent than girls. Why have I not heard of all the males having their genitals super glued? I read the news every day! I only remember one case of a man having his genitals cut off. I know that case got months, no years, of publicity! If I had the time I could give you unending reports of men who cut their girlfriends and wives, kill their children (of course that never receives the same publicity as a woman driving into a lake with her children; it’s so much more common), and it was the same woman who claimed at first her children had been taken by a black man. That is one case. It has never been a t**-for-tat game. On the violence scale males have always, always won. I’m sure that you would never beat a woman or kill your children but have you ever slapped a woman? Have you ever joked about hitting a woman? Have you ever laughed with the guys that a good beating (or a good something else) would cure some woman of being a word rhyming with witch?
By AngryGrlsAreFunny
March 25, 2005 03:57 PM | Link to this
Lozen, I was pointing out that boys and girls show their disfunction differently; so direct comparison is not needed and only confuses the issue.
I can honestly say I have never joked about hitting, hinted at, actually touched in a hostile way, any female. I have gotten physical with one guy, middleschool days, hit him back which broke his nose. It scared the p*ss out of me that one could do that much damage - been anti-violent since.
The girls having children for love is only an example of how they display their disfunction.
Put it this way: Two trains moving at same speeds(boy train and girls train;) , only different in directions (not better or worse, mind you). The have both moved far from center, but each path is non-comparable. You could talk about the coal being the fuel in each, and that is where they can be compared again.
By Scott
March 25, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this
Testosterone - that magic chemical more prevalent in the male human body…increases level of muscle mass in men but iin turn also increases aggressiveness. In the end, it is one factor that causes men to die sooner (not the only factor, but one)
By RS
March 25, 2005 04:04 PM | Link to this
Archie: Oh, no doubt about it, there’s good & bad in both genders. I know married men get lambasted for getting “side action” but what about their mistresses who knowingly sleep with these married men? Plus, I read a survey stating that 60% of married women have slept with another man during their marriage. There’s another phenomena I’ve read about called “nonsexual cheating” whereby a woman has a close, heterosexual male friend she’s very intimate with, without ever even having necked (to use an old-fashioned term) with him. What I mean by that is, they always hug & kiss upon saying “hello” & “goodbye”, they hang out a lot without her husband, she discusses things with him that she doesn’t tell her husband, she discusses her marriage with him, she finds “legal” ways to touch him (i.e. brushing lint off his clothes), she has “crush-like” thoughts about him (“ooh, I wonder what he’ll think about my new hairstyle!”), they have their own private jokes, there are ways in which she’ll be around him and her husband & her husband will be the “odd man out”, they indulge in cute little intimacies like eating off the same plate, & well, you get the picture. I’ve been guilty of that one myself..
By Jodi
March 25, 2005 04:22 PM | Link to this
AngryGrls—I just wanted to point out that just because someone smokes dope doesn’t mean they are adulterers. As much as I despise “W”, there is no connection between his alleged drug use and infidelity.
By AngryGrlsAreFunny
March 25, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this
Jodi- You are mixing me up with someone else;) I would never make that jump in logic.
By Jodi
March 25, 2005 04:28 PM | Link to this
Oops, Angry! So sorry. I meant to direct that at Archie. Archie, Angry, what’s the difference? :) Thanks.
By lozen
March 25, 2005 04:36 PM | Link to this
Yes, Thay (Thich Naht Hahn, but I’m not sure I’m spelling his name correctly) is truly a wise and great teacher. Janet, he’s a monk and was in Vietnam during the war. He was kicked out of Vietnam for advocating peace. He has written several books, established Plum Center in France, teaches and has many groups all over the world.
Archie it amazes me too how many women will have affairs with married men. Maybe it’s the old “I’m nothing without a man” even if he is married. I wish women would stick together and not find it so easy to betray each other. Scott Peterson’s girlfriend apparently didn’t know he was married. I esp. can’t understand why any woman would want to be involved with Newt or Bob Barr! Wish tomorrow and Sunday could be like today! Have a good weekend everybody!