AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2005 > December > 15 > Entry
Should the American Girl doll company partner with a pro-choice group?
Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds.
Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
This holiday season conservatives are checking their lists twice to see who’s naughty and nice. Unfortunately for the American Girl doll company, conservatives are striking the company’s historically accurate doll collection from their Christmas shopping lists.
From the conservative right’s perspective, American Girl dolls represent an endorsement of abortion and veiled encouragement for a lesbian lifestyle. How so, you say? Well, it seems the dollmakers are manufacturing arm bands with (gasp!) encouraging messages for girls. The subversive message on these bands? The words: “I can.”
Christian conservatives have an answer for such an assertive female declaration. It’s “No, little girl. You can’t.”
Specifically, conservatives are upset about American Girl’s business link with Girl’s, Inc., a nonprofit organization that promotes academic success and leadership skills among girls but also supports abortion rights and tolerance of gay lifestyles. A portion of the band sales, which can be worn as bracelets, go to science and athletic programs sponsored by Girls, Inc. That connection prompted Christian calls for a boycott of the American Girl company for committing to doing business with a liberal organization.
Although I agree with the right to protest and certainly think it’s understandable to not buy from a company whose business practices are at odds with your beliefs, I think the hyperventilation in conservative camps about this partnership is robbing them of the oxygen needed to power even subnormal brain activity. It all seems very Grinch, and not particularly Christ-like.
Consider the “I can” bands in question.” Unless you consider too much encouragement a demonstration of liberal license, this message is hardly a call to action for girls to seek out abortions, take birth control or reject a heterosexual lifestyle. Supporting science education for girls seems pretty positive. The American Girl doll company manufactures dolls that teach and inspire. This is in keeping with the mission they have always embraced. This is something to support, not protest.
If conservatives want to support Christian values in business practices, I encourage them to continue their good works to abolish child labor. But telling The American Girl company “You can’t!” tells our girls they can’t either. With so few wholesome pro-girl messages, conservatives simply come off looking foolish here, and any victory they win is pyrrhic at best.
Rebuttal
I’m sure the alliance between American Girl and Girls, Incorporated had good intent, but the results are not — which is why family groups reluctantly boycotted American Girl products this Christmas shopping season. Seventy cents of every dollar spent on their “I canâ€? bands goes to Girls, Incorporated, which unfortunately has an aggressive, left-leaning agenda that many mainstream Americans are uncomfortable with.
American Girl is a venerable company – up until now, extremely popular with family-oriented consumers — that sells historical dolls to grade school girls. Girls, Inc. educates those girls on (among other things) the importance of access to abortion, the process of developing a lesbian identity, and the need for “safer-sex techniques of contraception.”
Girls, Inc. started out with the laudable purpose of encouraging girls – especially disadvantaged ones — to be “strong, smart and bold” through character building, academics, and athletics. As I read their website I found myself wishing that such a terrific focus hadn’t been skewed by the addition of a liberal sexuality agenda.
But since it has, it is inappropriate — and bad business — for a public company like American Girl (owned by Mattel) to sponsor it. It’s nonsense that consumers shouldn’t boycott companies for making disagreeable business decisions. It is because capitalism functions on free trade and competition that boycotts are necessary. Capitalism is voting with your dollars, and concerned parents have no better way to encourage American Girl not to support this sort of agenda.
As the American Family Association’s Randy Sharp bluntly pointed out to me, “It would be a dangerous thing to suggest that consumers should not evaluate the circumstances surrounding their purchasing decisions. To do so is not capitalism, but socialism.”
Thankfully, the capitalism vote appears to be working. Under pressure from parents, the “I can” bands were pulled from their main sales channel, the 1,700-store Bath & Body Works chain. Hopefully, American Girl will understand, and return to the core values that built such a successful company in the first place.
Even better would be if Girls, Inc. would see this as a wake-up call to return to their original focus: empowering girls to be all that they can be.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Randy
December 19, 2005 08:34 AM | Link to this
As usual Diane is a clown. If it talks like a clown, thinks like a clown, it must be a clown!!!
By Billy
December 19, 2005 08:38 AM | Link to this
Following Shaunti’s logic, we should boycott half the Christian churches sine they have abandoned Jesus’ teachings. You know, forgiveness, tolerance, humility, that sort of thing.
By Whiley
December 19, 2005 08:41 AM | Link to this
Absolutely American Girl doll company should partner with a pro-choice group. Let the religious right have their own alternative American Girl doll company. The doll doesn’t speak, has no figure at all, & is barefoot & pregnant at 20. They could name her Sally Stepford.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 08:48 AM | Link to this
I don’t see the issue. If you don’t agree with the doll, don’t buy it. Simple. Is this not a country of free market. I can make what I want to sell, either you buy or you don’t. Personally, I don’t see a problem with the doll. Seems like a mountain is being made out of a molehill as usual.
By Randy
December 19, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this
I hate to say anything, but there are so few liberals in the south that you guys are really irrevelant. Example, the Gay movie “Brokeback Mountian” is showing in one theatre in buckhead(only theatre it’s showing in Georgia). Also, 78% of Georgian’s voted for no gay marriage. Ya’ll don’t really matter. Sorry.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 08:50 AM | Link to this
I see the trolls got up early this morning. Ignorance is never far away.
By Whiley
December 19, 2005 08:54 AM | Link to this
Who’s the troll? Is this a new mole game?
By Renee
December 19, 2005 08:57 AM | Link to this
Randy = this mornings first troll
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 09:07 AM | Link to this
Laughing at the Billy comment and Whiley’s Stepford comments.
I had read of this controversy. Kinda like Donald C. Wildmon’s boycott of Blockbuster, Disney and Ford. I have not rented a Blockbuster since they kissed his butt over the NC-17 ratings. And have no interest in Disney or Ford anyway. But did write Wildmon, suggesting my next vehicle may be a Ford, since Ford did not cave in.
Kinda like our dear Prez says “You are either with us or against us” so if you support something other than the Christian/Conservative agenda(on other words, a tolerant doll), must be against them. Ain’t it great to feel so persecuted.
Sounds like I need to fire off a letter to Mattel, let them know why I will be buying less of their products.
By Billy
December 19, 2005 09:08 AM | Link to this
Randy, Brokeback Mountain is a little indie film in limited release. It’s only playing in one theater in New York right now, too. There are plenty of liberals in New York, no?
78% of Georgians are stupid. The amendment was not defining marriage as only being between a man and a woman, it was also mandating discrimination in that the state will not recognize any of the civil rights for gay couples that commonly come with marriage. This means civil unions are out.
And “Georgian’s” in your post should not have an apostrophe. That makes it possessive when what you are looking for is plural. I guess you were too busy making your millions to bother learning 5th grade grammar.
By dee
December 19, 2005 09:09 AM | Link to this
Shaunti said: American Girl is a venerable company – up until now, extremely popular with family-oriented consumers — that sells historical dolls to grade school girls. Girls, Inc. educates those girls on (among other things) the importance of access to abortion, the process of developing a lesbian identity, and the need for “safer-sex techniques of contraception.�
I think she needs to visit a Girls Inc. site and see for herself if what she’s saying is true OR better yet, actually talk to a parent or a MEMBER of Girl’s Inc. before she makes such blanket, biased, unchristian, and totally ASININE statements.
My two daughters AND my stepdaughter, as well as my god daughter are members of Girls, Inc. so I speak from experience when I say that the lies she is spouting are deliberate untruths designed to polarize an already fantical religious branch of the U.S.
How does she get away with saying these things? These are DELIBERATE misleading statements and if she is truly a “Christian” then she forgot one of those ten commandments that they want to hang all over America —- Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:16 AM | Link to this
Renee is right… If a company wants to partner with any group, they have the right to do it. But it doesn’t always make good business sense.
If someone doesn’t want to buy their products based on that partnership, in this case a new doll, or bracelet, or whatever this company makes, they don’t have to. These folks simply took it one step further and encouraged others to not buy those items through an organized boycots.
That is the way a capitalist society works. You can vote with your pocketbook. Take a look at Target. They have altered their business practice through consumer pressure to now use ‘Merry Christmas’. The power of the all mighty dollar.
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this
Billy… 78% of Georgians are not stupid?. If you make that statement, then nearly 80% of several different states (I think it was 13) are stupid for voting for basically the exact same ammendment.
In fact, I know several folks who voted for Mr. Kerry AND the ammendment you think was so stupid.
And please, come down from the high grammar horse. Many folks simply make mistakes b/c they think faster than they can type. That just makes you look trite.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 09:26 AM | Link to this
Business sense, schmisness sense. No matter what business you are in, you run the risk of somebody not agreeing with what you sell, or what you market, or who supports you, or who you support blah, blah, blah. Such as life. And people have the right to boycott. Target, in my opinion, should have stuck to their guns. If people choose not to shop there solely for that reason then so be it.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 09:31 AM | Link to this
I see Troll #2 has arrived.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 09:36 AM | Link to this
Ah, goody. Another chance for the religious nuts to get all riled up. Randy must be positively salivating.
On topic - It’s no one’s business who a company chooses to partner with. If you don’t like it, don’t buy the product. Period. No company has a responsibility to toe the line of the reigning fundamentalist jerk-offs who are trying to run everyone elses lives.
It’s a free country - deal with it. I realize that you people don’t actually want a free country - you want a religious state in which everyone stumbles around in a vapid haze all behaving exactly the same way, but that’s not going to happen, no matter how much you bang your bibles. Free…country…personal…liberties…freedom…of…religion. Deal.
Off-topic - Interesting perspective as always Randy. So…a group doesn’t matter because the majority votes against it, is that what you’re getting at?
I would bring up the concept of the Tyranny of the Majority again, but I doubt you would comprehend it.
Randy, here’s a little tidbit. As has already been pointed out, Brokeback Mountain is on limited release - it’s in 5 theatres nationwide. The fact that it’s one of those theatres is in Atlanta is counter-indicative of Randy’s typical bigoted nonsense. And just for the record, Randy, in its first weekend of release Brokeback averaged $100,000 a theatre. Do you have any idea how huge an opening that represents?
Moron.
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:36 AM | Link to this
Renee… Why should Target have stuck to their guns?
I’d be willing to bet their original stance on ‘Merry Christmas’ was an effort to be more diverse and attract more shoppers. It backfired and they altered their stance.
In their opinion it made better business sense to use ‘Merry Christmas’. Their goal is to make money, not to make social statements.
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this
John’s right… $100K per theatre is HUGE…!
And, Atlanta was obviously chosen for the limited release due to it’s large gay population. We typically don’t get the early limited release of any movie. This is the exception.
By Billy
December 19, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this
Ken — I would argue that those people, while possibly not “stupid” per se, had a moment of stupidity when voting for that amendment. Of course, that was largely due to the brilliance of the Republican party for framing it as “supporting marriage” as opposed to “denying homos civil rights”, which was the main goal all along. People voted for it because only the first part of the amendment was on the ballot:
“Paragraph I. Recognition of marriage. (a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.”
Had they included the second part, the vote may have come out differently:
“(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties’ respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship.”
And I’ll lord grammar over Randy the same way he comes on here week after week, lording his supposed millions over us.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 09:43 AM | Link to this
Hey John!
I don’t know how we got off subject Ken, but people are mad because of Happy Holidays????? There is more than one holiday being celebrated this holiday season (actually more than 2), why not be more inclusive. I don’t care if someone says Merry Christmas, but changing to Happy Holidays making people boycott????? If someone chooses to boycott over that, then in my opinion, their mind is very small. Should people say Merry Christmas because that is what you believe in, therefore nobody should deviate from it. Gimme a break.
I see the trolls can bring up gay bashing, no matter the subject. People who think so much about it, and want to vote to prevent it, may be hiding their own inner homosexual feelings. Newsflash, gay people will continue to exist and flourish no matter what you smart voting people think about it.
By RS
December 19, 2005 09:51 AM | Link to this
It’s a DOLL, for goodness sake, not a subliminal symbol of left-wing tyranny! And what’s wrong with empowering young girls at an early age & making them aware they have choices & the right to use them??
By dee
December 19, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this
This whole “Do it my way or ELSE”!! campaign that’s been happening through the fanatical tyranny of certain religious groups over the rights of the american public; has just gone too far. Pretty soon America is going to turn into another Taliban —- veils and all.
How can we say that we’re “fighting to free the Iraqi people”, (with tongue in cheek), then systemically throw away our freedoms and our choices? This smacks of STUPIDISM, (my new word for the day — not Liberalism, or conservatism, but STUPIDISM), with a bunch of Chicken Little’s running around screaming “Our Morals Are Falling”.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this
Randy. You give us trolls a bad name.
Why is this a subject. If one doesn’t agree with the company’s business ethics, don’t buy their product. Wow that was hard.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this
Anyone see Tim Rusert on Meet the Press yesterday? He said “Merry Christmas” to one guest, twinkle in the eye, and “Happy Hannakuh” to another guest. Should we boycott NBC, or just concede that it was okay for him to say “Happy Hannakuh* to the Jewish guest(Feingold/WI?) on the show? SNORT!
Donald C Wildmon: start a hoycott against NBC, one of their shows used a non-Merry-Christmas term.
By Whiley
December 19, 2005 09:53 AM | Link to this
Merry Christmas! Merry Christmas ! ! I celebrate Christmas even though I don’t attend church (due to the fact most of those people are whack.) I celebrate Christmas even though I’m not bothered if anyone is gay. (except my date). I celebrate Christmas even though I have sex, am Pro-choice & Pro-birth control, childless & not married by CHOICE. What’s next, no more Washington’s birthday or Columbus Day because they may have owned slaves? Where is Jessie Jackson when you need him?
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:55 AM | Link to this
Renee… I never said that anyone SHOULD do anything. I stated that Target made a business decision. Period.
Some people are mad about the use of Happy Holidays. Significance is based on the person. Some folks get riled up about animals (take PETA for example). The very fact you would ask that question, with condesension oozing out of the screen, is what makes most people angry. Questioning how someone would be so reverant about what you think is so insignificant.
It is also not off topic, b/c it directly relates to part of the original discussion… People choosing to not buy (or boycott) American Girl products and that consumer pressure then causing a change in business practice.
And…
Since when did stating facts make anyone a troll (as you alluded to in your previous post). I simply made a factual statement and any disection of the numbers would prove that out. 78% or Georgians voted for the ammendment but 78% of Gerogians did NOT vote for President Bush. Therefore there are people who voted for Kerry and the ammendment. That is fact.
I never indicated how I voted, nor did you ask. You ASSUMED something based on my making a factual statement, which is very short sighted on your part.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 09:55 AM | Link to this
STUPIDISM? Is that a short/abbreviated fancy way of saying my saying: The World is Full of Morons.
LMAO
By Renee
December 19, 2005 09:56 AM | Link to this
Hey Jack! Jack you are SO not a troll! I ditto your comment. I said it before. Buy it, don’t buy it. Nobody’s forcing anyone to buy their doll. I don’t see the need for the subject. GEEEEZ!!!
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 09:56 AM | Link to this
was that a hoycott I just saw flash before my eyes? beat you read Boycott. LOL
By Ken
December 19, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
Sorry… Meant “Georgians”
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
Heyyyyy Renee! ~waving~
I have no comment on this ridiculous topic… I’ll just say ditto to everything you said.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
You know, I can’t imagine that a single person went to Target or any other store and said “I’m offended that you said “Merry Christmas”. No…I’m sure that companies started using this phrase to be inclusive, to acknowledge the fact that there are more holidays being celebrated around the world this time of year than just Christmas.
When someone gets offended because a store is not giving his or her religious observance precedence over other people’s, who has the problem?
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this
I bet Target wouldn’t have been so quick to change their minds if a bunch of Jewish folks got all riled up and organized a boycott… But, I guess they have better things to do with their time than to mandate that a store wish them a Happy Holiday on their terms regardless of what the other customers celebrate.
How ridiculous all of this is… ALL OF IT.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this
Thanks Renee’. Sweet thing. :)
By dee
December 19, 2005 10:07 AM | Link to this
from Chilao — STUPIDISM? Is that a short/abbreviated fancy way of saying my saying: The World is Full of Morons?
Morons and fanatics (who are morons who actually believe what they’re saying and love to hear their own voices saying it over and over and over and …….)
By Renee
December 19, 2005 10:08 AM | Link to this
HEYYYYY JBM.
Ken - I don’t care how you voted, you could have voted for it or against it. My original troll comment was to Randy (see earlier comment) and my second one was to you based on your response to Billy (9:23am). You immediately came on the offensive (while defending) Randy (first troll).
Happy Holidays in the scope of life is very insignificant. If you celebrate Christmas, it is a holiday so it includes you. Everybody does not celebrate Christmas. There are three major holidays being celebrated. Christmas, Hanukkah, and Kwanza.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this
LOL@ Renee’s identification of “Troll #1” and “Troll #2.”
By Ken
December 19, 2005 10:28 AM | Link to this
Renee… I apologize if stating a fact is considered “going on the offensive”. And, before you make such trite statements, you should consider how I individually voted for that item, b/c tid bits like that put things into perspective.
The whole point of the post was that calling people “stupid” is a very judgemental statement. It is the exact same type of judgement that so many folks on this board rail against. Toss in the fact, it demeans many of the people who probably voted exactly the same as Billy, save one issue. Not too mention, it’s just childish, like calling someone a troll.
John… If someone gets offended at ‘Happy Holidays’ I wouldn’t say they have a problem. They simply believe that the specific holiday they observe deserves more respect than being lumped into a big catch all phrase of ‘Happy Holidays’.
I celebrate Christmas, and would much rather say ‘Merry Christmas’, ‘Happy Hanukkah’, etc. if at all possible, in an effort to give each the respect each deserves. That is being just as inclusive, without devaluing the individual holiday. Perhaps since these holidays are religious in nature, they mean less to you, but to many they mean a great deal.
By RF
December 19, 2005 10:29 AM | Link to this
My, my, did most of us get up on the wrong side of the rock this morning?? What a ridiculous topic for Diane and Shaunti to argue about (yawn…). If you don’t like Girls Inc. then you don’t buy the stupid bracelets. Once again the fundies have blown an issue WAY out of proportion. Well, at they’re consistent.
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 10:29 AM | Link to this
Want to hear the thing about the Merry Christmas issue that has me rolling?
There was a boycott about 15years ago of companies that were using it in their ads BY christians. They were hugely offended back then that a company would USE the christian holiday to boost sales! Is that not what the Peanuts Special taught us?
I say it is CHILDISHISM - not stupidism; they {anyone adhering to CHILDISHISM, which includes all groups of varying degrees} want thier cake and eat it too…
By RF
December 19, 2005 10:35 AM | Link to this
Moose- I remember that controversy. That’s why most stores started saying ‘happy holidays’ instead. Well, I guess it’s another way for the fundies to argue that the world is going to Hell in a handbasket.
By Billy
December 19, 2005 10:36 AM | Link to this
Ken, I don’t think you are a troll.
I also don’t think I was out of line with my “stupid” comment. Perhaps I should have said that 78% of Georgians were being stupid.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this
First, Ken, please don’t make assumptions about how much a particular holiday means to me.
Second, if you want to say “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Hannaukah” or whatever - more power to you! That is not the issue. The issue is why someone would be offended by a store using an inclusive comment as part of its advertising.
That’s the root of this whole manufactured “controversy”.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this
Tell me how you would know when to say Merry Christmas (short of somone wearing a Christmas Tree sweater with candy cane earrings) or when to say Happy Hanukkah (short of somone wearing the star of David or carrying a menorah). There is no way of distinguishing, so why not say Happy Holidays.
Ken, I take my troll comment back, sorry. But it still (and always will) stands for Randy.
Hey RF!!!
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 10:44 AM | Link to this
ZZzzzZZZzzZZZZZzZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzZZZZzZzZzzzZzZZzz
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 10:46 AM | Link to this
Ken,
I also do not find you a Troll; you state and debate your points well.
Yet, I do retain MY right to believe that most (78% would be about right - look at how good our schools are doing!) of georgians are idiots - but that includes ALL of georgia. Atlanta, especially Buckhead, is not an acurate sample of the whole state {Waycross, Cobb, Valsdosta, Tifton…and that is still not getting into ones like Elberton, Hull, Birbank{sp?}, Carlton and the other places that the shotguns come out before Happy Holidays OR Merry Christmas.}.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this
John & Renee - I agree with your 10:43 completely.
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 10:53 AM | Link to this
Curious:
What other winter holidays use a tree?
I am ignorant to any others; and the use of Holiday Trees at Lowes seems funny to me - especially if no one else uses them but christmas people.
By RF
December 19, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this
Hey Renee! You sound like you had an extra dose of caffeine this morning—calling people trolls that early in the day is not a good sign! ;- )
This morning’s debate is kinda like watching a dog chase his tail and waiting to see what happens when he catches it.
Moose—if you ever get the chance, spend some time in rural Alabama. If possible, the backwoods folk over there are even dumber!
Sooo, has anyone seen Brokeback Mountain yet? The critics aren’t exactly raving, but it seems to be getting a lot of Oscar attention.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
Aww Heellll naw. I don’t wanna see no dang fairy cowboys kissin’ on each other!
By Renee
December 19, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
I know RF, I don’t know what it is but I got extremely irritate very quickly. It was Randy’s stupid rant, but life goes on. (I’m usually good).
I definitely want to see it, but the big releases are not close to me (as you can imagine).
By Tim
December 19, 2005 11:01 AM | Link to this
my only comment… Brokeback Mountain was not playing in Buckhead… it was playing in midtown… by 4:30 on Saturday every showing between 4:45 and 10:00 were sold out… it was an AMAZING movie… and certainly isn’t ‘the gay cowboy movie’… playing in only 70 theaters nationwide came in at #8 for weekend sales… compaired to other movies which are playing in thousands of theaters… not bad for ‘the gay cowboy movie’… I truly hope a lot of people go to see this movie… could definitely learn something
no comment about the weekly topic that hasnt already been said… you don’t like it… don’t buy it
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 11:04 AM | Link to this
I saw a preview for it, was very interested in cowboys, cattle country, sheep herders,(mostly Basque by the way, especially out west), thought ‘this looks like a good movie’.
and then it dawned on me what it was about, went WTH? LOL
I’ll probably see it when it gets more widely seen, and it WILL open on more screens. Probably have pickets even.
MUNICH opens soon, that is a do-not-miss movie for me.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
Actually, what I meant to say was that I already have a gay cowboy movie on DVD, but in my version all the actors are nekkid. O_o
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
Renee - you do not live in Burlington? I have an uncle outside Montpelier, in Barre. I always assumed you were in Burlington, even FEWER non-whites in the rest of the state. LOL
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 11:09 AM | Link to this
Sounds like 72John is not into that ‘made-for-mass-media-in-America’ TAME (oh, oh so TAME) gay cowboy movie.
JOKING!..sorta
how I viewed the Cruise/Kidman movie EYES WIDE SHUT. tame.
By RF
December 19, 2005 11:11 AM | Link to this
Renee- I know the feeling—sometimes I snap too. I’ve just come to the conclusion that some people enjoy getting folks riled up and they’ll use whatever non-issue they can to get there. Seems like there are a lot of unhappy folks who seem to get such pleasure from being snide and stupid. You getting to come on back down to the wonderful south for the holidays or are you staying in the Arctic up there? I’m getting ready for two weeks off with my younguns—go ahead and be jealous!
By Renee
December 19, 2005 11:12 AM | Link to this
I live right outside Burlington. My partners mother lived in Barre when we moved here, but she has since moved closer to us. Burlington has more diversity than anywhere else, and they only have about 5 percent, lol. Barre has 1% or less.
By RF
December 19, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this
TMI John, TMI. sounds like you’ve read Lewis Grizzard about naked and nekkid.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this
I’m staying up here with Santa. I joke with my friends back home and tell them I see him making his trial runs already. The plus to staying here, is I am guaranteed a white Christmas, lol.
By RF
December 19, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this
I’ll just watch the snow on TV. Anything north of Tennessee is way too cold right now!! I’d love to see a snowy Christmas, but I know I wouldn’t like the shoveling, etc. I’m sooooo a typical Georgian—one icy patch on the road and I’m a nervous wreck!
5%!! How can a place be so non-diverse these days? That must be hard.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this
Yeah, it’s amazing. When first started going to the grocery store, people would stare. My partner, my daughter and I went to the mall and people stared (amazed to see three black people together at the same time). At my daughter’s school, the ethnic diversity amounts to ethiopian refugees and they have several of the “Lost boys of Sudan”.
By SouthernSanta
December 19, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this
(Certainly to be a fave of the anti-labor-union crowd)
IMPORTANT NEWS FROM SANTA CLAUS
A new contract for Santa Claus has finally been negotiated. Please read the following carefully
From: Santa Claus To: The Southern States
I regret to inform you that, effective immediately, I will no longer be able to serve the Southern United States on Christmas Eve. Due to the overwhelming current population of the earth, my contract was re-negotiated by North American Fairies and Elves Local 209. I now serve only certain areas of Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Michigan. As part of the new and better contract, I also get longer breaks for milk and cookies, so keep that in mind.
However, I’m certain that your children will be in good hands with your local replacement, who happens to be my third cousin, Bubba Claus. His side of the family is from the South Pole. He shares my goal of delivering toys to all the good boys and girls; however, there are a few differences between us.
Differences such as:
There is no danger of a Grinch stealing your presents from Bubba Claus. He has a gun rack on his sleigh and a bumper sticker that reads: “These toys are insured by Smith and Wesson.�
Instead of milk and cookies, Bubba Claus prefers that children leave an RC cola and pork rinds (or a moon pie) on the fireplace. And Bubba doesn’t smoke a pipe, he dips a little snuff though, so please have an empty spit can handy.
Bubba Claus’ sleigh is pulled by floppy-eared coon dogs instead of reindeer. I made the mistake of loaning him a couple of my reindeer one time, and Blitzen’s head now overlooks Bubba’s fireplace.
You won’t hear “On Comet, on Cupid, on Donner and Blitzen� when Bubba Claus arrives. Instead you’ll hear, “On Earnhardt, on Wallace, on Martin and Labonte. On Rudd, on Jarrett, on Elliott and Petty.�
“Ho, Ho, Ho!� has been replaced by “Yee Haw!� And you also are likely to hear Bubba’s elves respond, “I hear dat!�
As required by Southern highway laws, Bubba Claus’ sleigh does have a Yosemite Sam safety triangle on the back with the words “Back Off.� The last I heard, it also had other decorations on the sleigh back as well. One is a Ford or Chevy logo with lights that race through the letters and the other is a caricature of me (Santa Claus) going wee wee on the Tooth Fairy.
The usual Christmas movie classics such as “Miracle on 34th Street� and “It’s a Wonderful Life� will not be shown in your negotiated viewing area. Instead, you’ll see “Boss Hogg Saves Christmas� and “Smokey and the Bandit IV� featuring Burt Reynolds as Bubba Claus and dozens of state patrol cars crashing into each other.
And finally, Bubba Claus doesn’t wear a belt. If I were you, I’d make sure you, the wife, and kids turn the other way when he bends over to put presents under the tree.
Won’t be long before Christmas, so get ready.
Sincerely yours, Santa Claus Member, North American Fairies and Elves, Local 209
By Jack
December 19, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
EYES WIDE SHUT was all hype. Nicole was really hot though.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
Is that Nicole Kidman in those ChanelNo5 TV ads? She sure looks much better than she did in her early movies, say in DEAD CALM when she was hardly noticable.
Meant to look that up today, who is the blond in those ChanelNo5 ads.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this
yep, that’s her. Isn’t the web a great thing?
At £18 million, it is certainly a first in terms of budget. Miss Kidman’s £2 million fee alone (made it more than the full budget for the movie Trainspotting)
The TV ad itself cost 18 million pounds to produce.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this
It is her. She is one of my favorites. My favorite actress from the “old days” is Audrey Hepburn. Yum
By Billy
December 19, 2005 12:03 PM | Link to this
18 million pouns is like $30-35 million
By Billy
December 19, 2005 12:04 PM | Link to this
pounds, dammit, pounds!
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:05 PM | Link to this
Gosh. What are you paying per pound?
By Ken
December 19, 2005 12:07 PM | Link to this
John… I apologize for the assumption, that was very insensitive of me.
As for being offended by an inclusive statement…
Some folks don’t really care. Some folks are just out there causing debate. Some folks just don’t want Christmas lumped in with other holidays b/c it rolls something very special to them in with a bunch of other holidays. To those people it cheapens the holiday in the same manner that mass consumerism cheapens the holiday.
By Michael_D
December 19, 2005 12:13 PM | Link to this
SHUT UP and bring me a beer.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 12:15 PM | Link to this
Some folks just don’t want Christmas lumped in with other holidays b/c it rolls something very special to them in with a bunch of other holidays.
Translation: “Everyone should say Christmas because I’m Christian and I’m right and they’re wrong. I don’t care how special someone else’s holiday is to them, they’re wrong, I’m right and they need to suck it up because Jesus loves me and not them and I’m superior”.
Sound about right?
By Michael_D
December 19, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this
Howz about a Juliet Childs “blow-up” doll!!!
yea baby…
POOT
By Randy
December 19, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this
What do trolls eat, I’m getting hungry!
By Michael_D
December 19, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this
POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT
POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT POOT
By Lisa
December 19, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this
FatMoose,
The Christmas tree was originally called a Yule Tree for the Yule celebration of winter solstice (December 21st). T There are still “pagans” who celebrate. Another pagan item stolen from Christianity to convert the masses.
By Randy
December 19, 2005 12:19 PM | Link to this
My favorite Christmas movie is National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation(C. Chase). We watch it every year. It’s great.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
speaking of: mass consumerism cheapens the holiday
Did you read about the 40-50 drunks all dressed as Santa’s, who went on a rampage down-town Wellington, NZ, all in protest over the consumerisim of Christmas.
and this time of year it is summer down there, so they musta been a little hot under the collar. hahahahahaha
By Randy
December 19, 2005 12:22 PM | Link to this
Are trolls BAD??? Just checking.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this
They’re good medium-rare with a good white sauce.
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the info on Xmas Trees.
Do the “pagans” still use a tree?
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this
Jack;
But remember: You have to marinate them for 12hours to get the taste of BS out!
Nice and tender…Mmmmm Trolls!
By scott carter
December 19, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this
This country was founded so that we could have our own thoughts and not be told what to do (unless it was illegal)as it was in England. Now, it seems, that people are getting controlled by the “Christians.” The Christian police are forcing people to “think and act as the church tells them.” Do they get persecuted if they don’t? Since the “Christian police and Church” (aka-southern baptist) did not vote for nor play the lottery, I would hope that when the Hope scholarships are awarded, it does not go to these “Christians” who did not support it. As for the doll, if you don’t like what it stands for, don’t buy it. You don’t see people standing outside the “Christian” church telling people not to go inside because they may get brainwashed do you? Why don’t the “Christians” go to Africa and try to civilize Robert Mugabe’s nation and do some good?
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:30 PM | Link to this
I like to marinate in Greek Vinegrette dressing. Yum
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:35 PM | Link to this
We should send Michael_D over there to stay. maybe it would do him some good. Yule log. What a joke.
By Bill
December 19, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this
Are you that weak Scott that you think someone else could brainwash you. You have a distorted view of everything!
By Jack
December 19, 2005 12:51 PM | Link to this
Christians aren’t forcing anything on anybody. You can do whatever you want as long as it is not against the law.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this
Christians aren’t forcing anything on anybody
Like any other religious group, fanatical Christians would happily force many things on everybody. That’s not to say that most Christians are fanatics, but lets be serious - if Dobson or Robertson or some of those other wackos got power, none of us would be safe.
By isis
December 19, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this
Yes, my dears, we will have a Yule tree, a Yule log and a Yule celebration. We sing songs, do ritual, exchange presents, eat good food and welcome the return of the light by lighting candles for Winter Solstice. People celebrated Yule thousands of years before Xmas was a gleam in the eye of catholics. Actually, Xtians (Roman Catholics) took the Xmas celebration from the Roman Saturnalia which was celebrated every year at Solstice. For years after Jesus’ death there was no Xmas for Xtians. The bible does not give a date for Jesus’ birth. The Catholic Church took all that from the Roman pagans to get people to come over to their religion. As long as we all celebrate the love in our hearts at this time of year it is good! Blessed Be.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this
I’m ordering four American Girl dolls this year for little girls. I wish I could get the bracelets. How can females be impowered if they’re taught they cannot control their ability to reproduce/or not to reproduce?
By Jack
December 19, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this
Yes John. They happily would but at present are not. If you say they are using force, please explain.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 01:14 PM | Link to this
Actually, it’s the Christians who are screaming that they are being forced to do things…
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 01:19 PM | Link to this
Christians aren’t forcing anything on anybody
Could segue into: Science book disclaimers, Abortion, Pharmacists refusing BC, criminalization of THC/opium,….
But who whats that conversation (can we call it that? More like head-butting a wall…)
Naw; the Christians that practice a named Religion never try to control the populous. {sarcasm}
(and I refuse to generalize; but here it is clear and simple. FYI- I attend a Good News Church: They preach ONLY Jesus’ words)
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this
How can females be impowered if they’re taught they cannot control their ability to reproduce/or not to reproduce?
IMO - Trolling. Lozen is not looking for a rational debate/conversation; but an arguement. The slander will fly as soon as you confront the question.
Although I agree in having rights over ones body; I could present an answer to that troll question to consider for debate - but no more, Not I.
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this
Actually, what I meant to say was that I already have a gay cowboy movie on DVD, but in my version all the actors are nekkid.
now that was funny. bravo, john.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 01:38 PM | Link to this
How do you know they’re cowboys if they’re nekkid? Do they have their spurs on? LOL
By dee
December 19, 2005 01:38 PM | Link to this
from lozen - I’m ordering four American Girl dolls this year for little girls. I wish I could get the bracelets. How can females be impowered if they’re taught they cannot control their ability to reproduce/or not to reproduce?
Good for you! But be mindful that that is NOT the main core of the teachings of Girls Inc.; and any teachings on Birth Control etc. has to be approved by the PARENT. Shaunti failed to mention that in her diatribe earlier.
Below are the Girl’s Bill of Rights that are the bedrock cornerstone of Girl’s Inc.:
Girls have the right to be themselves and to resist gender stereotypes Shaunti believes this mean they are promoting “homer sexual ality”.
*Girls have the right to express themselves with originality and enthusiasm. * Religious fanatics don’t want any girl to be able to have originality that would wreck their well laid plans for the future of womanhood.
Girls have the right to take risks, to strive freely, and to take pride in success.
Girls have the right to accept and appreciate their bodies. This statement would be Shaunti’s “process of developing a lesbian identity” theory. I guess only Lesbians appreciate their bodies. Real women throw up at the sight of theirs.
Girls have the right to have confidence in themselves and to be safe in the world.
Girls have the right to prepare for interesting work and economic independence. The religious fanatics are having a field day with that one. Basically they are saying this is what “wrecks the traditional family structure”. Egads!! Girls want to have economic independence?
So this is the evil awful entity that the American Doll company is promoting, and what the religious fanatics MUST fight against at all costs! Ridiculous isn’t it?
By Renee
December 19, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this
I guess only Lesbians appreciate their bodies. Real women throw up at the sight of theirs.
I know you are not saying that lesbians are not real women? lol
By The72John
December 19, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this
They’re wearing cowboy hats and they’re in a saloon.
C’mon people, it’s not rocket science!
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 01:46 PM | Link to this
Sounds like the major danger for them cowboys are the splinters!
Ouch.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 01:48 PM | Link to this
If they have hats on they ain’t nekkid.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this
Not hard to imagine what they hung their hats on!
By dee
December 19, 2005 01:53 PM | Link to this
Ooops! Sorry! Maybe I should have said “other” women throw up at the sight of their bodies. My bad!
By The72John
December 19, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this
Well, they’re nekkid in all the right places. And that’s all I’m gonna say about that, ‘cause I’m already blushing.
By Scalia
December 19, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this
I’m confused on why Christians are boycotting the American Doll company. Don’t buy the bracelets if you feel that it is causing a problem. Would they rather have their daughters look at Barbie who has an unrealistic body type? Who does nothing but dress up and look good for metrosexual Ken?
And John, the cowboy movie in the saloon rocks.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 01:59 PM | Link to this
No prob, just confirming what you meant. Looks like the only topic for today is nekkid cowboys (this is definitely a topic I don’t know anything about, lol)
By The72John
December 19, 2005 02:02 PM | Link to this
Whereas I could discuss them all day long…;-)
By Jack
December 19, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this
There once was a girl from Nantucket…..
By Nancy
December 19, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this
What a weird world. Yesterday I went to curch, it’s a church started just a few years ago with just 4 families. Now they just built a 2300 seat church and have 3 services. The blessing was some people had to walk 1/2 to 3/4 mile to get to the service just to worship and sing about Jesus, it was such a happy and wonderful time. Now today, I read these posts and see that there are still some people who don’t have this happiness, people who don’t know the love of Jesus. But there are so many that do,probably 6 to 7 thousand people there yesterday. What a blessing.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this
Me either, Renee… sitting on the sidelines for this one. Would you believe I just nodded off at my desk? I mean, my head fell all the way back. I am officially exhausted.
By Scalia
December 19, 2005 02:07 PM | Link to this
Chilao—It is amazing what money can do. Nicole Kidman does look better than she did at the beginning of her career. Look at Celine Dion’s tranformation. Look at Jennifer Lopez’s transformation. Mariah Carey. Britney Spears. Julia Roberts. George Clooney. Brad Pitt. The list goes on and on.
And the Chanel No. 5 commercials are nice. I love Rodrigo Santoro. The Brazilian actor with her in the commercials that is hotter than a bag of Flamin Hot Cheetos. If there is any doubt see Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle. He is the surfer with the dark hair.
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this
I am officially exhausted.
Would that not be Officely exhausted?
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this
Nancy,
Yes; It is a weird world - but I do not know how much else I agree with you; but we have that - let rejoice and be thankful for it!
By Renee
December 19, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this
JBM - Exhaustion I do know something about!!!!!!
If I could I would crawl underneath my desk right now, next to my heater and cover up with coat. Unfortunately I think that would guarantee me an early Xmas present of unemployment.
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this
Scalia - not sure if is her money making her look better, (I would have to see Dead Calm again, for a young babe she might have looked nice) but I did not leave the movie going “wow, what a babe” which I certainly did after The Interpreter.
I thought it had to do with her, and defacto mine, maturity. LOL
By dee
December 19, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this
Scalia Oh no!!! Do you mean Brad Pitt and George Clooney are not naturally handsome? That can’t be possible — Say it ain’t so…
By Renee
December 19, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this
Money makes anyone look better. Chris Rock has come a loooooong way!!!!!!!!!!
By Angie
December 19, 2005 02:31 PM | Link to this
Since when is it ok to call someone a “troll” and bash them just because they are a Christian and expressed their opinion? Or is that just how liberals amuse themselves when bored? Seems very childish to me.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this
I just came back from lunch and I have say thank you sooooo much for the early christmas present Jack… the visual of a cowboy and where he could hang his hat… THANK YOU… I hope you get everything you ask for Jack
Angie… I’m not the one who called Randy a troll… but I am pretty sure he wasn’t called that just because he was a Christian… I think it had more to do with his little rant about gays being irrelevant and not mattering
By dee
December 19, 2005 02:36 PM | Link to this
Money makes anyone look better. Chris Rock has come a loooooong way!!!!!!!!!!
LMAO ROTF
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 02:37 PM | Link to this
Angie,
Since when is it ok to call someone a “troll� and bash them just because they are a Christian
I do not remember “christian” being a part of any Troll comment…You may want to re-check your facts.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this
I don’t think Nicole has had surgery. You can tell when they do. She may be like wine and improve with age. (like me)LOL
By Renee
December 19, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this
I called someone a troll earlier, and I’m not liberal.
I hate to say anything, but there are so few liberals in the south that you guys are really irrevelant. Example, the Gay movie “Brokeback Mountian� is showing in one theatre in buckhead(only theatre it’s showing in Georgia). Also, 78% of Georgian’s voted for no gay marriage. Ya’ll don’t really matter. Sorry.
This is the comment that made me call this individual a troll. I see nothing to indicate this person is a Christian (though I doubt that would have swayed my opinion much). This on the other hand is a very childish comment that had nothing to do with the subject at hand. And my use of troll is not the first time it’s been used on this blog, and I can guarantee it won’t be the last!
By lozen
December 19, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this
dee, all of that sounds like exactly what young girls need to learn. I can really understand the concern of some christians about it though. If a girl resists gender stereotypes, she may well decide to become a lesbian or even a bisexual. That would just wreck the whole planet! Girls have the right to take risks, to strive freely, and to take pride in success. And maybe learn they don’t need anyone else to take care of them, don’t need to live for or through anyone else, and don’t need to feel guilty and conflicted about striving for their own success. They might not be quite so eager to drop their own college career and go to work to support their husband while he gets his degree. It might not be quite so easy to convince them their work isn’t as important, so they have to be the one to always take the kids to doctor & dentist appts, always take care of all the laundry and all the food and all the housework. Girls have the right to accept and appreciate their bodies. It may be they’re also afraid girls would realize they and only they have the right to control their own bodies and decide when they are ready to reproduce. Girls could also take that to mean it’s fine to masturbate and we just can’t have that! Girls can’t learn it’s great to pleasure themselves; the world would fall apart! They might question the whole concept of virginity until marriage, that they aren’t allowed to have sex unless they’re married, that they must stay married to that one man and only have sex with that one man all their lives. Yeah, girls might question all of that if they don’t learn to be ashamed of their natural bodily needs and desires. Girls have the right to have confidence in themselves and to be safe in the world. This might lead to females who fight back and/or have the sense to walk away from weirdos and abusers. They might get together and start demanding from politicians that abusers be taken off the streets for good. Now this could really cause a lot of problems. Girls have the right to prepare for interesting work and economic independence. Again we would be teaching them to take care of themselves and not to need someone else to do that! Oh, my God! This is going to be the end of life as we know it under patriarchy! Yeah, I can see why they don’t like it.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this
Renee… u go gurl!
By Billy
December 19, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this
Angie might not know what the term troll means…
Whoever used it didn’t mean it like, “Randy’s a stupid, ugly, smelly ogre.” It was meant in the sense of its internet meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
By dee
December 19, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this
from Angie - Since when is it ok to call someone a “troll� and bash them just because they are a Christian and expressed their opinion? Or is that just how liberals amuse themselves when bored?
Liberals usually amuse themselves by watching Hannity and Colmes(?) and Bill O’Really. If that’s not funny and entertaining………..
By The72John
December 19, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
Ah yes, another voice of reason enters the fray. Please, feel free to randomly spout out the phrase “liberal” whenever you A) don’t understand something or B) don’t like something.
I think you may find the Lukovich forum more to your liking. It’s also full of people who can do nothing but spout labels.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Whoever used it didn’t mean it like, “Randy’s a stupid, ugly, smelly ogre.� It was meant in the sense of its internet meaning.
Tooooooo funny Billy!! I needed that! I just thought about Shrek 2, when Shrek is stomping saying “I’m an ogre!” lol.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Whoever used it didn’t mean it like, “Randy’s a stupid, ugly, smelly ogre.�
On the World of Warcraft forums, it often means both!
Sorry - totally off-topic.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
Mmm. Renee is on a roll today! :-)
FatMoose - LOL@ officely exhausted
By Jack
December 19, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this
And all this time I thought trolls lived under bridges and ate little children.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this
Oh dear angie, Randy isn’t a troll because he’s a christian. He’s a troll because he’s so self-righteous and judgemental, and, uh… well, that describes so many christians …he’s not the brightest light in the house… well, maybe you’re right.
By dee
December 19, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this
Right On Lozen!!! Right on!!
By Angie
December 19, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this
Wow! I make a small post and use the word liberal one time and suddenly I’m doing nothing but spouting labels? Wow!
By Tim
December 19, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this
nice come back Angie… totally ignore your initial statement
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this
Laughing at/with Dee - That is the way it goes, I had heard of Rush Limbaugh and had signed up for a Flush Rush newsletter, out of La Jolla, CA. Then his TV show started airing at 6:00 am, a perfect time for me to view. Not only did I learn it was pure comedy, I learned that he was the Master of Misinformation.
And I had worked with people who did not miss his radio show, them being dittoheads.
Yep, Rus taught me alot, think I got them all, though, what I learned.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 02:57 PM | Link to this
I tried listening to Rush. I got tired of hearing how great and wonderful he is so I stopped listening. I hate people who blow their own horn. (cept me of course)
By Angie
December 19, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this
Tim, for the record I do NOT believe in the mistreatment of gay people nor would I make mean spirited comments about them. At the same time I thought it was out of place to call a fellow poster a troll. If being a Chrstian was not part of the initial comment that was made then I retract that portion of MY original posting.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this
No Angie, sweetie, it’s your total package. However, in my experience anyone who comes out swinging with phrases like “Is that what liberals do…” etc. isn’t likely to be someone capable of rational discussion.
But please - prove me wrong, darlin’. If you can.
By trollstomper
December 19, 2005 03:03 PM | Link to this
Only trolls defend other trolls!!!!!
By lozen
December 19, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this
trollstomper, nobody says it better!
By Tim
December 19, 2005 03:10 PM | Link to this
Angie I never said you did believe in the mistreatment of gay people… but I don’t see anything wrong with calling someone a troll who calls gays irrelevant and that they don’t matter
that statement shows that the love of Christ is truly shining through Randy’s life… God bless him
By Renee
December 19, 2005 03:14 PM | Link to this
Tim, for the record I do NOT believe in the mistreatment of gay people nor would I make mean spirited comments about them. At the same time I thought it was out of place to call a fellow poster a troll. If being a Chrstian was not part of the initial comment that was made then I retract that portion of MY original posting.
So it’s ok to make “mean spirited” (to put it lightly) comments about gay people, but to come back and call that person a troll is taking it too far. LOL, you can’t be serious!
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:14 PM | Link to this
We love you Angie. Often people take too serious the post.
By E. Lewis
December 19, 2005 03:16 PM | Link to this
The American Girl doll company may not be making a few conservative Christians happy, but the rest either support their stance, don’t mind or don’t care.
By Billy
December 19, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this
Tim, Randy didn’t call gays irrelevant. He called all liberals in our region irrelevant.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this
BTW. Trolls have feelings too. I live under a bridge (I-85 & Clairmont). I quit eating children because my doctor said to lower my cholesterol and children now-a-days eat so many trans fat ladden foods, they don’t make as healthy a snack as they used to. It’s still fun to scare the little ones though.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this
oh ok Billy… then his statements are totally justified
By dee
December 19, 2005 03:21 PM | Link to this
from Angie — Tim, for the record I do NOT believe in the mistreatment of gay people nor would I make mean spirited comments about them. At the same time I thought it was out of place to call a fellow poster a troll. If being a Chrstian was not part of the initial comment that was made then I retract that portion of MY original posting.
Angie: Don’t take it so seriously. This is just a bunch of ordinary people expressing their opinions. No one is ganging up on you it’s just a blog! And when you read some of the posts, they ARE kinda funny!!
By Angie
December 19, 2005 03:21 PM | Link to this
So the use of the word troll and yule log stories are okay but as soon as I said the word “liberal” I’ve overstepped the bounds of a rational conversation?
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 03:22 PM | Link to this
He’s a troll because he’s so self-righteous and judgemental, and, uh… well, that describes so many christians …he’s not the brightest light in the house… well, maybe you’re right.
Lets all visit the wiki page so that the correct idea of Troll is know.
It is trolling for arguements - as in fishing; not the beast.
Too funny - never assume people understand what they are typing…
By Isis
December 19, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this
Just in the interest of education: “Saturnalia was the feast at which the Romans commemorated the dedication of the temple of the god Saturn, which took place on 17 December. Over the years, it expanded to a whole week, up to 23 December. In the Roman calendar the Winter Solstice fell in this period; in imperial times that event was celebrated in honour of Sol Invictus and put on 25 December by emperor Aurelian in 274.
The Saturnalia originally were celebrated with a public banquet. It became one of the most popular Roman festivals which lead to more tomfoolery, marked chiefly by having masters and slaves switch places, and degenerated sometimes to debauchery, so that among Christians the (lower case) word “saturnalia” came to mean “orgy”.
It has been postulated that Christians in the fourth century assigned December 25th (the Winter Solstice on the Julian calendar) as Christ’s birthday (and thus Christmas) because pagans already observed this day as a holiday. This would sidestep the problem of eliminating an already popular holiday while Christianizing the population. This is supposition however and it is also possible that the early Christians sought to replace the Pagan celebration in an act of triumphalism.
The Romans also practiced many traditions similar to Christmas; specifically the “christmas tree”. The Romans often cut down evergreens and decorated them to pay homage to Saturn, the god of farming. This was to honor the fact that the evergreens remained alive during the harshness of winter. It was also traditional for Romans to exchange gifts during this holiday.” Perhaps Xtians should realize this time of year is not exclusively their holiday. It isn’t and never was.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 03:24 PM | Link to this
Angie… yeah when you are not correct
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:24 PM | Link to this
EVERYBODY gets ganged up on at one time or another on this blog. I’ve gotten into it with just about every regular on this blog and love all of them. Just laugh and say “Bless your hearts”.
By amber
December 19, 2005 03:28 PM | Link to this
FatMoose, I was wondering how long it would be before you found something, anything, lozen said to make a big deal about. I think you should forget about her. She obviously doesn’t like you the way you like her. You remind me of boys in the 5th grade who didn’t know any way to get the girls to notice them except to pick on them and hit them and make fun of them. Move on FatMoose. There’s someone else out there somewhere who will appreciate you.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 03:30 PM | Link to this
The use of liberal was only one small portion of your comment, and I only slightly touched on that fact. It was moreso over your misunderstanding about the whole troll name calling, the use of Christian when it didn’t apply, his negative gay statements (which were bad, but not as bad as the troll name according to you), and the list goes on and on. But it doesn’t matter now. He is a troll then, he’ll be a troll when he comes back. Not to mention it didn’t bother HIM that he was called a troll.
By The72John
December 19, 2005 03:31 PM | Link to this
Darn it Jack, don’t you Bless my Heart, dangit!
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:34 PM | Link to this
LMAO 72John!
By FatMoose
December 19, 2005 03:36 PM | Link to this
Amber,
I do not have a dialog with her at all now-a-days; but I am not going to stop pointing out ridiculous notion: from her or anyone else - that is what part of a blog IS - plus, that would be an equally bad REACTION of avoidance.
The fact that I do not respond to EVERY post of hers is proof enough that it is not irregardless of her notion - just as not every one of Randy’s posts gets attention; just the insane ones {although a majority}.
Thanks for noticing the progress though - the positive re-enforcement is nice;)
By Billy
December 19, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this
This is a tangent, but this isn’t actually a blog, is it? I mean isn’t a blog basically someone’s web-based diary/journal, just written with the reader in mind?
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this
A little Christmas humor:
There was a man who worked for the Post Office, whose job it was to process all the mail that had illegible addresses.
One day, a letter came to his desk, addressed in a shaky handwriting, to God. He thought he should open it to see what it was about.
He opened it and read:
Dear God,
I am a 93 year old widow, living on a very small pension. Yesterday someone stole my purse. It had $100.00 in it, which was all the money I had until my next pension check. Next Sunday is Christmas, and I had invited two of my friends over for dinner. Without that money, I have nothing to buy food with. I have no family to turn to, and you are my only hope Can you please help me?
Sincerely, Edna
The postal worker was touched. He showed the letter to all of the other workers.
Each of them dug into his wallet and came up with a few dollars. By the time he made the rounds, he had collected $96.00, which they put into an envelope and sent to the woman.
The rest of the day, all of the workers felt a warm glow for the kind thing they had done.
Christmas came and went A few days later, another letter came from the old lady, to God. All of the orkers gathered around while the letter was opened. It read:
Dear God, How can I ever thank you enough for what you did for me? Because of your gift of love, I was able to fix a glorious dinner for my friends. We had a very nice day and I told my friends of your wonderful gift.
By the way, there was $4 missing. I think it must have been those thieving bastards at the Post Office. Merry Christmas!
By Renee
December 19, 2005 03:39 PM | Link to this
tooooo funny Jack!!!! LOL!!!!!
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 03:40 PM | Link to this
what a disappointing topic. i was so looking forward to some spirited debate on the board this week, right before so many of us will be taking off for respective holiday breaks (don’t anybody say christmas - ha). instead we get this stinker of a topic.
how ‘bout them falcons? way to lay an egg last nite on national tv? when are they going to wise up and start playing schaub? or am i troll to suggest the birds would be better off w a QB who can actually complete a forward pass?
By Chilao
December 19, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this
Good Laugh, cannot win for trying, could they.(USPS)
Web Log - blog, not necessarily a private diary, this one qualifies as a blog, since it is on the web and we log our posts. These activities are considered blogging.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
Don’t ya just love it? Xtians running around upset because somebody says “happy holidays” when they stole the whole xmas thing from the pagans. And they might also remember if there were no Chanukkah, there would be no Xmas! Jesus never, ever said “merry christmas.”
By The72John
December 19, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
Let’s not even talk about the Falcons. I’m just gonna have to be happy with the Dawgs in the Sugar Bowl.
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
blablabla. I being a troll agree. One man doth not a team make. They will lose against TB and Carolina. Sorry but the troll is usually right about football.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this
The Falcons played terrible last night!!!!!! But, Vick is good, true, he’s not the team, but the team needs him (in my opinion).
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this
ROFL!!!! Good one, Jack!!
Hey guys, maybe tomorrow we can get a head start on what’s sure to be next week’s topic… “Should President Bush continue his domestic spying ‘program’?”
By Renee
December 19, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this
Lozen - I don’t the argument of Jesus not saying Merry Xmas is a very good one. It wouldn’t make sense for him to have said Merry Xmas.
By Netbanker
December 19, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this
Oh SURE, RS…it’s just DOLL….so was Chucky, but that didn’t stop him from killing people and being EVIL. hehehehe
What is sad is that the portion of Girls, Inc about which christian panties are wadded up is just a tiny little portion of the benefits they offer girls and it’s definitely not their main mission. From the reaction one would think that each doll comes with directions to the nearest women’s health clinic that is also the closest location to a gay community group. Shheesh! Talk about overreaction. I’d like to see this put into perspective such as how much of their annual budget doesn’t AG, Inc. spend on the ‘offensive’ materials, what is that percentage, and what is the percentage of the donations from the I Can armbands. I’ll bet this is the case of turning an anthill into Mt. Everest. Regardless, conservatives have every right to boycott.
By marti
December 19, 2005 03:53 PM | Link to this
blablabla, blablabla…. how disappointing the only thing you can think to talk about is the falcons! What did everybody think about the Bush speech last night? What do some of the moderate christians on the blog think about the fact that christmas is originally a pagan holiday? And then there’s always sex. I just keep visualizing where the cowboys hang their hats! Then I remembered a cartoon I saw somewhere that said “How to use a condom after 60.” He had blown it up like a balloon and tied a string around it to hold it up…
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 03:54 PM | Link to this
LOL@ NetB
By Jack
December 19, 2005 03:59 PM | Link to this
It’s really a pain when you try to put it on backwards. Thank God for opposing thumbs!
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:05 PM | Link to this
marti, sorry i don’t live up to your high standards. the topic is boring to me.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 04:11 PM | Link to this
Renee I see you understood my point. Of course it wouldn’t make sense for Jesus to say “merry xmas.” He was a jew. He would have said happy holidays - meaning happy chanakkah! That is unless what some people believe, that his mother was a pagan queen and he was the last pagan sacrifice, is true. Then he would have said, happy holidays - meaning happy Yule or happy Saturnalia!
By Netbanker
December 19, 2005 04:12 PM | Link to this
MerryHappyChristmaHanaKwanzica Everyone! Isis..what is the appropriate Pagan greeting for the coming solistice so I can throw that one in there too?
TIM!! Where have you been? I’ve asked about you, but nada. How was the trip to SoCal? I was just there at the beginning of last week.
Wouldn’t one just wish Jesus Happy Birthday instead? Of course, since it’s not likely that was really His birthday he might be a tad non-plussed about forgetting the correct date…but He is Jesus so he’ll forgive you anyway.
By Renee
December 19, 2005 04:13 PM | Link to this
Ummm, lozen, that was not why I was saying it wouldn’t make sense for him to say Merry Xmas.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 04:15 PM | Link to this
Netbanker… I have a new job… started after I got back for SCAL… so not a ton of time to be on here… I had a GREAT time out there… sooooo nice… want to move out there now
my mom made us say happy birthday to Jesus before we were allowed to open our presents… one year she made us sing happy birthday… I was like whatever I have to do to get the goods!!!
By E. Lewis
December 19, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this
Why of all of the much more important issues that Christians should be worried about are so many concentrating on non-issues like “Happy Holidays” versus “Merry Christmas” or whether or not a toy maker is supporting causes that promote the empowerment of girls?
What about the people who were displaced by the hurricanes who have absolutely nothing, the soldiers in Iraq who are dying for only God knows what, the increase in poverty, the exploitation of foreign workers, etc.?
By dee
December 19, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this
Netbanker: Here is their, (Girl’s Inc.) website. They talk a little about the controversy and they seem mostly perplexed as to why it’s a controversy in the first place! (http://www.girlsinc.org/ic/)
By Netbanker
December 19, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this
Snap out of it, Tim! You do NOT want to move there. It’s great on vacation, but working out there is a completely different experience. Dealing with LA traffic, housing prices, etc isn’t fun. I’ve also spent enough time there to have gone through a few earthquakes (thankfully minor) and wild fires (not so minor and evacuating in the middle of the night wasn’t really a good time)
Now that you’ve been lectured by your gay elders…Congratulations on the new job! How’s your hubby? House decorated for Christmas?
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:28 PM | Link to this
jack, i agree, they’re probably going to lose to the bucs and panthers. 8-8 will look like a step back since they’ll miss the playoffs, but people forget last year’s sched was a joke.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this
Lozen what in the heck are you talking about?
By Renee
December 19, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this
LOL JBM!!!!
By lozen
December 19, 2005 04:33 PM | Link to this
Hey, this may be pertinent to the xmas discussion (or it may not!) Barbara Walters is doing a two-hour special “Heaven: Where Is It? How Do We Get There?” 9 p.m. EST Tuesday on ABC. She poses some questions sure to become Walters legends: “Is there sex in heaven?” and “Would you like me to go to hell?” The former elicits some interesting cultural differences. Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop of Washington, said there’s no need for such earthly delights in a place where the Lord will give joy. Meanwhile, Muslim suicide bombers are often told that martyrs will be rewarded with 72 virgins in heaven. One man seduced by that vision, Jihad Jarrar, told Walters from a Jerusalem prison that unless she became a Muslim, hell would be her final destination. “It’s not what I want,” he said. “It’s what God wants.” The special also includes a probing look into the rise of evangelical Christianity. In an interview with Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, she uncovers a similarity to Jarrar: both men believe that following their own God is the only guarantee of entrance into heaven. In Haggard’s case, it’s Jesus Christ. Don’t miss it!
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:34 PM | Link to this
thanks, e.lewis, for telling all the christians what they should be worried about. do christians get to tell you what you should worry about?
What about the people who were displaced by the hurricanes who have absolutely nothing, the soldiers in Iraq who are dying for only God knows what, the increase in poverty, the exploitation of foreign workers, etc.?
did anybody say christians aren’t worried or didn’t care about any of the above-named individuals? are you suggesting that christians can only worry about one thing at a time?
yawn.
By Tim
December 19, 2005 04:35 PM | Link to this
Netbanker… hahaha… well it is either going to be there or probably Ft. Lauderdale… I have to have the sun again… I grew up in Fl… I am a beach boy and have to get back around the water and sunshine
Thanks… I LOVE the new job… sooo much better… the hubby is just fine… we celebrated Christmas yesterday (he will be at his parents and I will be with mine for Christmas)… opened presents… then last night went to Neiman’s to pick out our 2005 ornament… and then went to Emeril’s for dinner… I really liked that… it was sooooo good
of course the house is decorated… I LOOOOOVE Christmas… I started putting stuff up the weekend before Thanksgiving… I can’t help myself lol
By norman
December 19, 2005 04:37 PM | Link to this
ELewis, I’m afraid the issues you think Christians should be worried about are a tad too complicated for most evangelical Christians with their 5th grade educations.
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:37 PM | Link to this
Lozen what in the heck are you talking about?
lol. she doesn’t know either, jbm.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 04:40 PM | Link to this
JBM, could you be a little more specific?
By dee
December 19, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this
Oooh Norman….that was BAD……….
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:42 PM | Link to this
told ya she didn’t know… ;)
By Billy
December 19, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this
If there’s no sex in heaven I don’t want to go.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 04:47 PM | Link to this
Sure, Lozen.
You said: And they might also remember if there were no Chanukkah, there would be no Xmas! Jesus never, ever said “merry christmas.�
Then, Renee said: Lozen - I don’t [think] the argument of Jesus not saying Merry Xmas is a very good one. It wouldn’t make sense for him to have said Merry Xmas.
Then, you said: Renee I see you understood my point. Of course it wouldn’t make sense for Jesus to say “merry xmas.� He was a jew. He would have said happy holidays - meaning happy chanakkah! That is unless what some people believe, that his mother was a pagan queen and he was the last pagan sacrifice, is true. Then he would have said, happy holidays - meaning happy Yule or happy Saturnalia!
Again, what on earth are you talking about?
By lozen
December 19, 2005 04:47 PM | Link to this
bubba-blab-butt, you’re the only one who thinks you’re so funny I think.
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this
ROFL @ Blablabla
By Just Being Me
December 19, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this
No. I thought that was funny. I guess that makes 2 of us.
By lozen
December 19, 2005 04:51 PM | Link to this
JBM, Jesus was a Jew and would have said “happy chanakah”? Or some people believe Jesus was a part of a mystery pagan cult, his mother was a pagan goddess and he was a pagan sacrifice? I’m still not quite sure what it is you don’t understand.
By blablabla
December 19, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this
witty comeback, lozen. it seems jbm is laughing with me.
By Netbanker
December 19, 2005 04:59 PM | Link to this
Tim…I love Lauderdale. We couldn’t afford to buy there a couple of years ago so we ended up in Hollywood…not that we could afford our place there now either. I’m definitely a beach boy. It’s hard to believe that 2 weekends ago I was on the beach in S. FL and then out to SoCal for a few days…warmth and sunshine (in combo) seem like such a distant memory already. And besides, it was only 65 during the day in Malibu and around 48 at night.
A question for the ladies about Women Muslim Martyrs…would y’all REALLY want 72 MALE Virgins? Sweet Jesus that’s a LOT of fumbling and follow up training you’d need to do. You could spend all of eternity trying to get that many inexperience men up to speed.
By E. Lewis
December 19, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this
blablabla this Christian thinks that if MORE Christians were worried MORE about MORE important issues, they would be the ones receiving the press.
When was the last time you heard a conservative Christian group condemning the increase in the number of children living in poverty in this country?
By Renee
December 20, 2005 08:26 AM | Link to this
Okay, lozen, I will explain why I said it wouldn’t make sense for Jesus to say Merry Xmas and it had nothing to do with him being a Jew and saying Happy Hanukkah.
If Christmas is a holiday set to signify the birth of Jesus, why would he say Merry Christmas to himself, after the fact. During his life, there was no celebration of his birth, because it was only after his death, that many came to understand the significance of him on Earth.
My disclaimer (because this will start a deep religious discussion): This was condensed, and not meant to give an in depth explanation of the Christmas holiday.
By Lyrazel
December 20, 2005 08:37 AM | Link to this
Ok, my question is: Can little girls perform abortions on these dolls? Is it one of those teaching dolls, do the male versions come with a p*** that comes with its own condom or not thus the ability to impregnate said dolly? If not, would an average 5-12 year old girl find out about this company and its abortion support policy before she asks Santa for one? Does the average 5-12 year old girl know what abortions are? Will she play: abort the fetus while little Timmy is blasting out in endless hours of Warcraft or that new electronic killing combat game provided to millions of school children by the US Army Recruiter? How does a doll give a 5-12 year old girl a lesbian identity?
What would happen if marketers sold a crucify-your-own Jesus game—Shaunti? Would you buy it? With its Christian theme?
Actually she wouldnt because her little boys would stake out Jesus on her saved-from-childhood-for-her-daughter Barbies Dream house lawn! And gosh, has not Shaunti heard was Ken actually gay? Was it all that plastic hair or all the makeovers that he made the people at Mattel nervous? Is this the reason Shaunti is intolerant of gay marriage: because her gay Ken fell in love with Allen the boy next door. Allen had a Midge thing going on but actually it was more a cover-up and he left with Ken in the pink Cadillac. Midge was last was seen at the ADC office for money…to support all the unwed parents children in the hood: Skipper, Kelly, Tommy, Lorena et. al.
Note: most citizens of Georgia are now from somewhere else.
Happy ho all that crap!
By Billy
December 20, 2005 08:38 AM | Link to this
Netbanker — Do female “martyrs” get 72 male virgins? Is that saying it’s OK for Muslim women to enjoy sex, but only in the afterlife? Does Allah restore the c****** to its pre-FGM condition?
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 08:39 AM | Link to this
Renee…I’m with you on the explanation. As I asked yesterday Wouldn’t one just wish Jesus Happy Birthday instead? Of course, since it’s not likely that was really His birthday he might be a tad non-plussed about forgetting the correct date…but He is Jesus so he’ll forgive you anyway.
Care to take a stab at the women muslim martyr question?
And Good Morning to all! Time to go jump in the shower so I can show up in the office not looking like a wild man…and I hear the puppy tearing into something which means she’s getting herself in trouble.
By Kim
December 20, 2005 08:42 AM | Link to this
Hrmm … when was the last time that a boycott changed ANYTHING? The Christians boycotted Disney because they give benefits to gay couples … and HELLO! They are still in business and STILL GIVING BENEFITS!
If the company wants to endorse a “You are responsible for you” view, then more power to them. This country has become lax, and is great at blaming everyone else but themselves.
And to those who believe that this is the beginning of moral decline, hate to tell you, but you need to be teaching morals at home, and teaching your child to consider all options before they jump … if you are not doing this, then you are contributing to the decline of morals!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 08:48 AM | Link to this
Lol Netbanker.
And to the women muslim martyr question, I have no use with 72 male virgins, but come to think of it, I don’t want 72 women virgins either. Imagine the hormones, the fights etc. lol
By Tim
December 20, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this
actually… only Southern Baptists were the only ones that boycotted… I grew up in Orlando and every year we went to “Night of Joy”… which is a huge Christian concert at disney… (You don’t see gays boycotting b/c of that)… hey maybe that is what turned me gay… DAMN YOU DISNEY!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 08:52 AM | Link to this
too funny Tim!
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 08:53 AM | Link to this
Speaking of “boycotts,” due to a boycott of a different nature, New York is going to be a commuter’s nightmare today… and indefinitely, as the bus and subway workers walked off the job at midnight declaring a full-blown STRIKE.
NetB: I doubt that reward is meant for women as sex with a virgin is unquestionably more of a man’s fantasy than a woman’s.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 09:04 AM | Link to this
LOL Tim!
By nancy
December 20, 2005 09:16 AM | Link to this
American Girl began as the independent “Pleasant Company” when my daughter and I were fans. Mattel’s stewardship, laudable in some ways, has diluted the messages of strength, self-reliance and the need to hold on to childhood by associating with a group-Girls Inc.-that began with a similar message but has allowed itself to become the “junior NOW”. Girl’s Inc. should have stayed on message, it was not exclusive of anyone or any belief, but now it is.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 09:20 AM | Link to this
elewis, you can do better than that. i’m not even close to being a religious zealot and it is painfully clear that your position has major holes.
blablabla this Christian thinks that if MORE Christians were worried MORE about MORE important issues, they would be the ones receiving the press.
if you pay any attention, elewis, you’d realize lots of christians are worried about more important issues every day. click on p’tree presby’s website and you’ll get pages upon pages of community ministry and outreach programs. go to ebenezer baptist church you’ll see more programs where people volunteer to donate their time, talent and $$ for the betterment of society. ditto for the georgia baptist convention. that’s just a few churches/organizations in the atlanta area. it would be easy to come up with hundreds of examples. ever hear of the salvation army? how about habitat for humanity?
so truly, elewis, what are you talking about when you say christians ought to be focused on more important things? it seems to me that if you pay even the slightest bit of attention, you’d realize that christians are focused on more important things. they don’t get press bc it isn’t news; so many of them do it every day.
By Happy
December 20, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this
It would seem that when we start discussing religion, or lack thereof, everyone gets so defensive of their stand that they begin bashing the other side. That completely invalidates you stance, whichever it may be. Speak your mind without dumbing down someone else’s statements or making them feel unheard. We all have the right to be heard, but only if we are respectful. I would say that goes for those who are left OR right! Stick to the facts and quite trying to lessen someone else’s views.
I believe the doll company should support whatever they want, but realize that there will be some ramifications for it.
Personally, I find empowering our children to be a wonderful thing and, since they don’t understand abortion, [at least at that young age, I hope they haven’t been subjected to such adult issues]why make this their issue. I know that those who are against it feel that they need to step up because letting things slide simply leads to other things down the road, but I cannot help but wonder what good we could ALL do if we started attacking the truly horrific issues facing our world. In my opinion, these include, sex trade of our children, poverty, homelessness, hunger. What COULD we do if we all worked together rather than constantly bashing each other with no hopes of changing each other’s minds?
By Jack
December 20, 2005 09:25 AM | Link to this
They should fire them all. There are plenty of people who would do their jobs for less pay in a heartbeat. Unions do nothing but keep sorry workers in thier jobs and bleed companies dry.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:26 AM | Link to this
I think it as a society for us to tell a company that they should not gear towards a certain belief, whether it’s religious or political is not fair. Owner’s and CEO’s of companies do have their personal belief which they may or may not convey through their business, usually depending on how it will affect the overall progression of the company. When it boils down to it, it’s all about the cheddar. The only “business” which is to have no bias regarding religious or political beliefs is the media (and that isn’t even always true. As a company, you are always going to upset one side or the other. Look at Ford. They said they were pulling ads for their luxury vehicles from the gay magazines. Should they have the right to do that? Certainly, however, I would have never bought another Ford (I wouldn’t anyway) and I would have let every gay person know (who already didn’t) if I had to march in the pride parade spreading the news. So to say Mattel should have stayed “on message” and not swayed to any particular belief is a very subjective comment, additionally it’s going to happen, sometimes in our favor, sometimes not.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:32 AM | Link to this
but I cannot help but wonder what good we could ALL do if we started attacking the truly horrific issues facing our world. In my opinion, these include, sex trade of our children, poverty, homelessness, hunger.
The problem is, nobody will ever agree what the horrific issues of the world actually are. While some may feel homelessness is, others may feel it’s not a major problem, but abortion is. Depends on who you are talking to. Additionally, while two people may think the same problem is horrific (such as homelessness) they will have two different solutions to the problem, hence neither solution get’s implemented, or the bigger bully gets their way.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 09:33 AM | Link to this
Happy, your first paragraph is great.
By Chilao
December 20, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this
Ford ‘caved’ to Wildmon? Last I heard they had not and had no plans to. Hadn’t planned on a Ford anyway, but….
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:35 AM | Link to this
No, Ford agreed to continue running their ads.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 09:35 AM | Link to this
renee, did you see this?
http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 09:36 AM | Link to this
Jack, first off, if they fire them all, they lose eons of experience. Secondly, what kind of integrity would it show for an employer to fire its employee because someone else will do it for less money? And, ultimately, that’s what it comes down to. Sure, someone with less or no experience will do the job for less money, but what about loyalty to the employees who have been working for you, serving your customers for years and years.
By RF
December 20, 2005 09:38 AM | Link to this
As Dolly Parton said, “whatever you say you’re gonna p** off half the people who hear you.” I doubt Mattel, or any other corporation for that matter, is going to be overly hurt in the long run by a little negative press. As Tim said, look at Disney- still making money in spite of years of conservative protest.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this
As a Ford Explorer-owner, I was incensed to read that article. My plan was to trade it in next year for the 2007 Explorer, but now I need to find another truck… ~sigh~ Nothing in life is simple anymore…
By Chilao
December 20, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this
What would happen if marketers sold a crucify-your-own Jesus game—Shaunti? Would you buy it? With its Christian theme?
Would it come with either Depeche Mode’s or Marilyn Manson’s Personal Jesus?
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this
The problem is, nobody will ever agree what the horrific issues of the world actually are. While some may feel homelessness is, others may feel it’s not a major problem, but abortion is. Depends on who you are talking to. Additionally, while two people may think the same problem is horrific (such as homelessness) they will have two different solutions to the problem, hence neither solution get’s implemented, or the bigger bully gets their way.
Absolutely brilliant - and well worth repeating! Well said, Renee.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this
No I hadn’t blablabla, I just skimmed through it right now, I’ll have to read it more in depth at home (when my mind isn’t such a mush). Those are interesting findings on the Drudge Report though.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this
~~taking my bow~~ LOL, now if I could only be brilliant at work today! I have no motivation today, lol.
By Chilao
December 20, 2005 09:44 AM | Link to this
I was at a family funeral last week out of town that had Jews, Catholics, Fundamentalists, Evangelists, Mormons, Atheists, and Agnostics in attendance. Strangely (?), religion conversations never came up. LOL
By Renee
December 20, 2005 09:44 AM | Link to this
hmmmmm…maybe if I stopped blogging….nahhhhh can’t do that, lol
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 09:46 AM | Link to this
jbm, the strike in nyc is illegal according to ny’s taylor law. that’s why they’ll get fired, and why bloomberg has threatened to dock a lot of them two days pay for every one day they strike. most of the points of disagreement are over future employees, not even current ones. the union’s position is pretty preposterous, imo.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 09:47 AM | Link to this
Hi JBM. They ashouldn’t fire them because they can be replaced for less. they should be fired for going on strike and hurting millions of New Yorkers. I have zero sympathy for them.
Regarding CEOs and their beliefs, look at Chik-fil-a. Closed on Sundays so their employees can go to church.
By Curious the Cat
December 20, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this
Good morning to all!
I have lived in the South and in several “bible belt” states for the past 20 or so years except for 4 long years north of the Mason-Dixon line. I grew up in a town of about 25,000 who were mostly white Protestants. I knew one Jewish family because I went all through school with them. I never really thought about there being other religions - other than Protestant - until I moved to New Jersey. As a manager, many of my employees were Protestant, Catholic and Jewish. It was during the “holiday season” that I had an epiphany: Not everyone shares the same religious beliefs as I do. WOW! Yes, we had holiday parties instead of Christmas parties and I didn’t have a problem with that. Why intentionally make others feel excluded? At my 20th high school reunion, I asked my Jewish schoolmate how he felt in elementary school when we had our Christmas pageants portraying the birth of Jesus. He said he felt “excluded but that’s the way things were back in the ’60s.” I sure hope we can show more tolerance 40 years later.
Just my two cents worth.
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this
Secondly, what kind of integrity would it show for an employer to fire its employee because someone else will do it for less money? And, ultimately, that’s what it comes down to.
Cosco works on the novel premise that if they pay their employees a decent wage and provide decent benefits the employees will be happier and work better and stick around. How inventive!!! And it works; yes you have to think big-picture and not plan to go bankrupt before planing off - but who plans for that anywho…
Also, there are tons of studies proving that a nucance employee, although a great sales-person, etc., is a liability to a company. But companies (mom&pop as well as large Corps) still do not get it.
Maybe the rest of the US will slowly take notice; but the denial runs deep, and we still think in the short run.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this
check it out when you have a chance, renee. i think you’ll like it. they had an interesting explanation on the drudge report near the end.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
I was trying for satire with the Jesus would not have said “merry xmas.” He would have said “happy chanakah” because he was jewish. It is ridiculous to me that fundamentalists evangelicals are upset because Target says “happy holidays” (therefore including jewish people who are celebrating channakah at this time of year and who shop at Target too) when jesus himself was a jew. I guess I’ll have to work on my satirical skills! There are people who have written books about their belief that jesus and his mother were part of a pagan mystery cult and that whole story means something entirely different than the way we interpret it. Just as there are people who believe jesus was given a drug that paralyzed him and made him appear to be dead so that he could return from death to be the awaited messiah. Just as there are people who have written books about him marrying Mary Magdalene and having children whose descendants are hiding from catholic organizations determined to wipe them out. Renee, you’re right. Somewhere around 400 years after jesus’ death, the pope and cardinals of the roman catholic church co-opted pagan holidays and turned them into a celebration called christmas to celebrate the birth of jesus. It was also those leaders of the roman catholic church who ruled, after years of debate, that mary was a virgin. jesus, they thought, could not possibly be tainted with what they had decided was the original sin of sex.
By RF
December 20, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this
JBM- get the Chevy or GMC SUV’s. They have the Explorer beat by a mile. I used to have an Explorer and changed to Chevy last year. Ford just ain’t all that anyway!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 10:01 AM | Link to this
I will!
On the strike in NY, I don’t care at all for unions, but I think Jack and JBM both have points. I know how much they are asking for (which from what I understand is for new hires), but I don’t know how much they get now, and how good their bread is or is not buttered. Seems to me though, they have a right to be heard, and if the only way is to strike (since they are part of a union), then so be it. A strike affects everyone, the worker, the consumer, it comes with the territory. But there’s a lot I don’t know. And if they are in a union, I don’t understand the law saying they can’t strike.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:02 AM | Link to this
BlaBlabla - it won’t be the first time MTA workers have gone on strike with that law in place. The law IMO is unfair anyway - there should never be a law mandating that employees report to work oif the employer isn’t negotiating a fair deal.
And, I’m willing to bet they won’t get fired, and they definitely won’t have to pay that fine. Based on history, more than likely the TWU will pay any fines assessed - IF, and that’s a big if, the fines aren’t negotiated out as a part of the agreement. Also, the argument goes far beyond just negotiating for future employees - it also deals with the MTAs stinginess toward the very people that ensure they make money in the first place - we’re talking about a $1 BILLION surplus. Too many employers want to keep the wealth to themselves. Why not share it with the people who helped you get the wealth in the first place? This is a huge problem in our country - failure to appropriately value employees. Employers are thinking that the only thing you have to do is give folks a paycheck and then they’ll be happy to take whatever crap they get as long as they get a check. That is untrue. They deserve dignity, something EVERY NEW YORKER knows that they don’t get!
Jack - From another perspective, MTA workers aren’t hurting NYers, the MTA Management is.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this
Just as there are people who believe jesus was given a rug that paralyzed him and made him appear to be dead so that he could return from death to be the awaited messiah.
What??? I must be out of the loop, this is the first I have heard of this!
By Jack
December 20, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this
Unions allow senior employees to sit on their butts and get full pay while the younger employees do all of the work. The minute they become vested they hang on forever doing NOTHING and BLEEDING the company. They fired the air-traffic controllers and they should fire the transit workers.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this
RF - Aren’t those both gas guzzlers? That’s what my partner says…
On the union thing… another thought just came to my mind. Here in Atlanta, I ride MARTA every day. I take the train to Buckhead, and the BUC shuttle to my office. From time to time, if my partner has other plans, I take the bus home from the train station. For the most part, I see the same employees every day. At the station I board, I see the same gate lady, I see the same MARTA police officers, and a number of different train conductors - many of whom I see regularly. I see the same BUC shuttle drivers, and the same MARTA bus drivers.
They take me where I need to go safely, and they’re usually pleasant, kind, and helpful. If I were to learn that they were being mistreated by their employers, and underpaid, etc… I would ENCOURAGE them to strike - regardless of the fact that it would be a tremendous inconvenience for me. In fact, if they did strike, I would be right out there with them fighting for their rights. Why? Because they work for me, and they deserve better.
NYers shouldn’t be angry with MTA workers, if they rely on the MTA to take them where they need to go, they should support fair treatment, fair benefits and fair wages for those workers.
To you, these are just faceless workers. To me, they are real people who take me to work so I can earn a fair living - and they deserve one too.
By Now but not then, a spoiled lesbian
December 20, 2005 10:13 AM | Link to this
Whiley, your comment “has no figure” really struck me. Why are most, if not all, of these right wing women so ugly, wrinkled, haggard and/or fat?
I am not trying to be mean. I am middle aged, but look great and so does my partner. I take care of my appearance. I don’t understand why all of these housewives and women (both married and single), my age, look like he**. I look around at most of my co-workers. Fat, out of shape, face full of wrinkles, dowdy dress, hairstyle from the 50’s. I don’t get it. Most of the women that look that way are these radical conservatives.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:14 AM | Link to this
A rug that paralyzed him???? Say what??????
Jack - No. SOME unions allow SOME senior employees to “sit on their butts and get full pay…” And, as a former union representative, I can assure you that even tenured union members can get fired. Trust me, I’ve represented several of them at their hearings.
Instead of ignoring the problem and just hiring new workers (who will end up doing the same thing in 10 years), why not fix the problem and treat these employees as they deserve to be treated? You don’t have to be a fan of unions to do the right thing by employees.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 10:14 AM | Link to this
I just thought about something else (imagine me thinking lol).
NYC is in a state of chaos right now. After September 11th, is this smart? All a terrorist needs to see, is that New York City is in a state of self-induced chaos.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this
And, furthermore, if employers treated their employees right from the beginning, there’d be no need for unions!!!
By Jack
December 20, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this
JBM. I’ve worked for the 2 biggest unions in the USA. They did nothing for me. You have OBVIOUSLY never worked in a union shop. The MTA folks are NOT being mistreated nor are they underpaid. Maybe someday you will own your own company, the workers you pay will organize, and then tell YOU how much to pay them and how much vacation YOU will give them. After all, their philosophy is”the man makes all the money, we want our share”
Sorry for the rant but I look at sorry a$$ union workers everyday.
By RF
December 20, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this
There was a time when unions were needed because there were no laws protecting workers. In most cases these days, unions just gum up the works and demand unrealistic things for employees who already do only a minimum level of work and expect maximum pay. Federal and state lawmakers need to be pressured to find ways to write into law more specific fair practices regarding company benefits and profit sharing. It varies too much from company to company and should be standardized. That would basically negate the need for unions and the hassle strikes can cause. As for MTA, I bet they get what they’re asking for now. They can’t fire all the strikers- there wouldn’t be anyone left to run the transit system.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 10:18 AM | Link to this
jbm, if the TWU pays the fine, that is the same as the worker themselves paying the fine, since their dues support the TWU. and just bc you think a law is unfair, doesn’t make it any less a law, and doesn’t mean it can be broken without consequence. their jobs are largely already protected from competition bc they’re gov’t employees.
if you need any help as to deciding whether or not they’re getting a fair deal, just read the nytimes. all the articles i’ve read on the issue from the times hint strongly that they’re siding with the MTA. when the times doesn’t side with the union, you pretty much know the union is out of line.
and if you want to talk about how much money is at stake, start thinking about how much money is being lost by companies whose workers can’t get to work, or employees who won’t get paid bc they can’t get to work. the union has basically put their interests in front of everybody in nyc and said, “if i don’t get my way, nobody goes to work”, in an attempt to bring the city to its knees and enhance the union’s leverage at the negotiating table.
i have no sympathy for them. they have a good paying job that’s free from competition with benefits and guaranteed annual raises. if they want the respect of this native new yorker, they’ll go to work and quit their b*ing.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this
Renee - Some of the main points of disagreement is that the MTA is proposing that new employees should have to wait until age 62 (instead of 55) to retire with their pensions. RIDICULOUS. I do not want my mother driving a bus or train at the age of 62! Especially not if she’s been working for MTA since the age of 21. It’s just UNFAIR, and it’s a sucky way to treat your loyal employees!
In NY (and I’m sure you know this), public trans is the single most common way of getting around. According to the AP, 7 million people ride the trains or buses every day! The MTA reported a $1 BILLION (not million) surplus!!!
Yet, they still want to quibble about giving their employees a fair raise. And, want to delay the time that a person can retire regardless of how long they worked for the MTA. That’s just ridiculous.
And, it’s impressive - not deplorable - that these people are willing to fight for their future co-workers (which could be their sons and daughters) to have equal or better benefits!
By RF
December 20, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this
JBM- the bigger SUV’s are guzzlers regardless of who makes them. The Envoy and smaller models by GM are as fuel efficient as the Ford and have a much longer life expectancy. I haven’t been to the shop once with my Chevy, but my Explorer seemed to always have some little something wrong. I’m overall much, much more satisfied with the price and quality of the Chevy.
Moose said it earlier. If every company took the simple approach to employees that Costco does, there wouldn’t be any need for unions or legislation to guarantee what is common sense to most of us.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this
By Chilao December 20, 2005 09:44 AM | Link to this I was at a family funeral last week out of town that had Jews, Catholics, Fundamentalists, Evangelists, Mormons, Atheists, and Agnostics in attendance. Strangely (?), religion conversations never came up. LOL If that group had started discussing religion, Chilao, there might have been yet another funeral!
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 10:24 AM | Link to this
RF - shopping for a full size suv next year. in your opinion, who makes the better ones, gmc or chevy?
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 10:30 AM | Link to this
RF,
Are you all talking american made only?
If not; my Sante Fe rocks. Stay away from the fourwheel drive (purely for MPG reasons - and the only times I EVER needed 4wd was when I was driving one and thought: “I can make it through that!” and on my Costa Rica trips one is needed.)
Sorry to jump in ignorant if I am off base.
By RF
December 20, 2005 10:33 AM | Link to this
GMC and Chevy are really one and the same now. Chevy sometimes offers a less dressed up version. I bought a Chevy and a friend bought GMC, and the only difference we could find was different body trim and upholstery pattern. I got a better deal I think on the Chevy. From the look of things, GM is shifting it’s SUV line more to GMC anyway. Shop the stickers and features. The seven passenger Envoy is a nice compromise between the gas guzzlers and the five passenger models.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 10:34 AM | Link to this
GMC and Chevy are about the same. GMC has more bells and whistles.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 10:35 AM | Link to this
The unions are the only voice for workers against greedy companies that don’t care about the workers. Unions came into existence for that reason; they continue to exist for that reason. All the countries to which US companies have fled because they can pay those people slave wages and give them no benefits, need unions. Unions may not be perfect, but they’re better than nothing. Renee, I’m trying to find the title of the book that set forth that drug theory. It was a top seller in the 60’s.
By RF
December 20, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this
Moose- I’ve stayed with American mostly…I like the Santa Fe but it was a bit smaller than what I needed. How’s the long term quality on that one? They seem pretty durable from what I’ve heard.
By Now but not then, a spoiled lesbian
December 20, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this
Whiley, your comment “has no figure� really struck me. Why are most, if not all, of these right wing women so ugly, wrinkled, haggard and/or fat?
I am not trying to be mean. I am middle aged, but look great and so does my partner. I take care of my appearance. I don’t understand why all of these housewives and women (both married and single), my age, look like he**. I look around at most of my co-workers. Fat, out of shape, face full of wrinkles, dowdy dress, hairstyle from the 50’s. I don’t get it. Most of the women that look that way are these radical conservatives.
By SUZAN
December 20, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this
NO! NO! NO! What is wrong with people!!!!!! why can we not let children be children without all of this cra….. being shoved on thier shoulders at such a young age. I do not care which side of the fence anyone sits on with this issue, it should not be shoved down the throats of little girls that dont have a clue yet.
I get so tired of maniacs on bothsides of this issue trying to puch thier way into everyones house. I am not for abortion, but that is my personal belief. Until more churches and programs are available to help unwed women or women with out means to support thier children on the abortions are going to keep happening. the fact that starting sex too early is not a good thing is just ignored and until people start accepting responsiblity for thier actions like an adult, I guess we are stuck with the huge number of abortions that happen every year Why because it is now just another form of birth control. That is the choice of someone who should be an adult for all pratical reasons. I can not fathom why the left or right deam it necessary to screw up kids heads with this kind of garbage at such a young age. cant we just ket children be children!!!!!!!!
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this
JBM. I’ve worked for the 2 biggest unions in the USA. They did nothing for me. You have OBVIOUSLY never worked in a union shop. The MTA folks are NOT being mistreated nor are they underpaid. Maybe someday you will own your own company, the workers you pay will organize, and then tell YOU how much to pay them and how much vacation YOU will give them. After all, their philosophy is�the man makes all the money, we want our share�
Actually Jack, I worked for the Service Employees Int’l Union for over 5 years before moving to Atlanta, and for a year after I moved here. I worked for the largest union in the entire state of NY, the second largest in the country. I’ve also worked with AFSCME, AFA, the Teachers Union and a couple of others. How can you say that the MTA workers aren’t mistreated? Have you ever, EVER, seen one of their grievance files? They are GROSSLY mistreated. They get written up for the littlest things - sometimes things they don’t even have any control over. Often times their vacation days aren’t approved as requested for no stated reason - which is often a result of a manager who abuses his authority. The list goes on and on. I’ve worked with these people. I know their complaints, and many (not all) of them are VALID.
And, as for them not being underpaid, MTA has been successful for the past umpteen years. I can’t recall them ever having major financial difficulties. Yet, the workers (again, the people who make the money for them) have not seen any significant increase in pay or benefits. To me, that’s underpaid. If my company pays me $50K (which, by the way is not a lot of money in NYC), and with my help brings in a $5 million deal, I would expect a raise, or bonus.
They get neither.
And, my partner and I do own our own company, and we currently have 8 employees. I highly doubt that they will EVER organize because I make sure that they are treated fairly. They don’t need a union.
Blablabla, I’m not as interested in how much money private companies are losing. They should be encouraging MTA to treat their employees fairly.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 10:47 AM | Link to this
Billy…very good questions to which I haven’t the slightest clue as to the answer. I’ve only ever heard that muslim martyrs will receive 72 virgins as their reward. Somehow I can’t imagine that being much of a selling point to convince a woman to become a martyr, but maybe there is another reward for them.
By SUZAN
December 20, 2005 10:47 AM | Link to this
sorry for my temper tantrum all but I really get po’ed at people trying to screw up kids with all of this crap when they really should be concerned with school work and catching fire flies, maybe making snow angels not worrying about are they gay or should they have sex or waht about abortions. I hate that we do this to babies now. cant we just let them be kids a little longer. Why the games with all the murder, shooting, killing, not gay or not abortion rights or not. this is so out of control. It just makes me so sad for the children now.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this
Lozen & JBM. Unions are one of the main reason for out-sourcing. They have out priced themselves.
By Billy
December 20, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this
Maybe the reward for women is that they won’t be forced to have sex “at the whim of a hat” (to quote President Bush) like they do now if their husbands want to.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this
but jbm, the private companies have no stake in the argument, yet they’re losing bigtime. that causes you no problem? who’s to say they aren’t trying to get the MTA employees treated fairly…
i respect your opinion and your experience on the issue, but i think the union’s position is out of line. by not going to work, they’re destroying tremendous value. nyc is in complete upheaval this morning. that’s why those workers aren’t supposed to be striking, by law.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this
RF, I agree with you and FatMoose about the Costco approach. They know what they’re doing - I’ve also heard good things about Home Depot’s fair treatment of employees.
And Renee, I just read your comment about the state of chaos NY is in. I agree that things are definitely chaotic in NY right now, but the Mayor and the MTA should have thought about that before refusing to give those workers what they deserve.
And EVERY SINGLE TRANSIT RIDER needs to be on the line with them this morning, and every day until it is resolved.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 10:54 AM | Link to this
Lozen & JBM. Unions are one of the main reason for out-sourcing. They have out priced themselves.
one of the other significant reasons why you’ve seen outsourcing of jobs, and why many companies set up their HQ’s outside the US is due to US tax policy, which is hurtful to companies domiciled in the US that generate income in countries with lower corporate taxes rates than those in the US.
not to mention other obvious factors like the economic principal of comparative advantage…
By Jack
December 20, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this
JBM’s opinion would change if she had a high work ethic and had to work in a union shop. If she had a “slacker” work ethic, she would be right at home.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 10:57 AM | Link to this
SUZAN, you have got to be kidding. I guess your kids don’t watch any television.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 10:58 AM | Link to this
Blablabla - I’m glad we can disagree respecfully, and I respect your opinion too. If you think the workers are out of line, what do you recommend as the alternative? Would you suggest that the workers just continue to work while hoping that the MTA one day comes around and sees their worth? Should they just keep on clocking in, demonstrating trust, faith and confidence in their employers that they’ll do the right thing? What’s the fair solution?
By Jack
December 20, 2005 11:00 AM | Link to this
I’ll agree to dis-agree with you JBM. The right thing for the workers to do is to go back to work and be very thankful that they even have a job.
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this
RF,
How’s the long term quality on that one?
I bought one the first year they were out -it is four years old now and running like new.
Plus, the 100K/10year warranty is nice - but as I always though; it is better not to have to need it, and I havent;)
SUSAN; First off, no one is promoting THOSE notions - but we do promote leaving the door open for when they arise. And they ONLY can arise if we give them the power to speak their needs/wants.
I also have to ask, and bring up, where do we, as a society, get the idea that children are so unable to handle reality? All the children I am in contact with have a better reaction/soltion to dealing with reality than adults. It used to be that young girls {boys too, but that is not the topic} were educated by being involved in adult-female activities {all animals still do this but humans}. Where has this sheltering got them? Confused as to what it really means to be an adult? Entitlement to be a child forever?
I do not think children should be exposed to the harsh ends of reality {choosing what BC is right for them - but they can OWN their bodies and not be puppets}; but I would not consider being an adult harsh either.
By Reverend Lovejoy's wife
December 20, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this
The children…oh the children…please…can’t someone think of the children??!!!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
And Renee, I just read your comment about the state of chaos NY is in. I agree that things are definitely chaotic in NY right now, but the Mayor and the MTA should have thought about that before refusing to give those workers what they deserve.
JBM, before you bite me head off (lol), I think you have made some valid points. About your comment above, I think that the workers should be thinking about it also. New York is the last city that needs to be chaotic right now, and if for even one instant a terrorist cell sees an opportunity, I have no reason to doubt they will jump on it. I think putting a law into place, preventing harm to the city, would make sense. (Now, please take in mind, I dont know when or the reason for the establishment for the law.
I also do think with a situation of this magnitude it becomes everybody’s problem. From the private companies, to the children going to school, to the person going to work. I heard in Lower Manhattan they are only allowing cars in that have more than 4 people, to prevent gridlock. On the news, there was a man in an electric wheelchair at 5 in the morning, trying to get to a dialysis appointment, that he could not drive to, because it would only be him in the car. Subsequently, he had to leave at 5 in a wheelchair. For some people this amounts to life or death, or whether they will be able to put food on the table or not. Even if the workers get what they want, it seems to me to be a lose, lose situation.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying they have been treated fairly up until now and they are tripping. I have no idea to really make an assertion either way, but the possible breach on safety to the city, our country does bother me.
By RF
December 20, 2005 11:07 AM | Link to this
MTA, like Delta, has given its profits to the top layer of folks who are already overpaid and grossly overcompensated for doing nothing. The gap between management and the ‘little man’ has gotten wider and wider. I don’t agree with striking, but I see the point when management isn’t willing to give a little to get a little. I also agree that unions have forced unreal expectations on companies and shut many down. I used to work in wholesale and saw increased importing because unionized industries overcharged for goods and consumers weren’t willing to pay the higher and higher prices. The answer is that we need legislation to protect more than just minimum wage and overtime rules. We need to make sure that companies profiting the way MTA has are sharing the wealth with all employees. I can dream right? It’ll never happen.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this
JBM’s opinion would change if she had a high work ethic and had to work in a union shop. If she had a “slacker� work ethic, she would be right at home.
Not true. The majority of my career was spent working with union members. I’ve represented the slackers, and the hard workers. In fact, I’ve represented the hard workers who filed complaints against the slackers. I’ve worked with management to get rid of the slackers. Slackers don’t make it easy for anyone - and the union dislikes them as much as management does.
You seem to think that it is absolutely true that no union “shops” have the ability to fire or discipline union members who slack on the job; and this is simply not true. As I said earlier, it is true that some contracts make it nearly impossible for management to fire workers, but this is becoming more and more of an exception - and has been negotiated out of more and more contracts since before I started with the union in 1998.
Although it happens, the union’s purpose is not to protect slackers’ jobs. It is to ensure that employees are treated fairly. I’ve led union members into a walkout for all kinds of things - but only once because of failed contract negotiations. You wouldn’t believe some of the things employers try to get away with. I actually had 64 year old worker who had a heatstroke because the nursing home owners took their time to replace the cooling system in the kitchen and essentially told the employees to dress lightly and keep the door open. The entire membership walked out - nurses, doctors, CNAs, housekeepers, kitchen aides, recreation workers… all of them. I had a male juvenile worker who was falsely accused and arrested of raping and soxomizing a male patient in a home for troubled teens. When the case completely fell apart (witness testimony, physical exam showed no entry, cameras showed the object allegedly used to sodomize him propped up in the corner for the entire evening, boy’s parents testified in pre-hearing that their son was a chronic liar and told his girlfriend he was doing that to get out of there), the employee was fired anyway - for bringing bad press to the home. Every single employee walked out until he had his job back.
I’ve had walkouts because CNAs are working a 1:60 patient ratio - and getting written up for not properly caring for the patients.
Believe me, unions have its problems - but in many cases, they are NEEDED.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 11:18 AM | Link to this
truthfully, jbm, i think that yes, they should continue to come to work while their elected union leadership continues to work through a plan with the city. first of all, that’s the lawful thing to do, since technically speaking these workers don’t have the right to strike. secondly, i read this morning that the city made a last gasp proposal to the union yesterday that was very close to what the union was seeking, and the union turned them down and marched out. it would appear (at least from my far-off vantage point) that the two sides aren’t that far apart, and by continuing to work, the MTA employees and the WTU would have generated significant goodwill and positive PR, which is an important to chip to be cashed in when appropriate (especially in a town like ny). contrast that with the ill will that they chose to create instead by stranding millions of new yorkers this morning (five days before christmas - how convenient), and perhaps the union would realize that this move may well backfire on them by giving the mayor appropriate impetus to fire all the employees. by stranding all these people, all they’ve done is pi** everybody off, which may ultimately prove to be counterproductive.
from your post, you seem to indicate that you believe the employer is acting unfairly in this situation. are you so certain of that? i’m not.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this
Renee, the book is The Passover Plot by Hugh Schonfield and was published in 1965. Schonfield is a historian and earned high praise for the book’s explanation of history at the time of jesus. His fictional plot was that jesus got caught up in the messianic fervor of his day and plotted his death on the cross to fulfill the teachings about a messiah for the hebrews. The plot was to appear to be dead; the sponge given to him to drink vinegar was a drug which made him appear to be dead. Then he would be revived by his friends and appear to be the risen messiah for the jews and lead them to overthrow roman rule. His plot failed when the soldier pierced his side with the sword which is what killed him. Some people commented that it was too fantastic a plot, but still more believable than the biblical story.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 11:30 AM | Link to this
Fat Moose…the treatment of employees that you point out with Cosco used to be the norm…think Gold Watch after 30 years of employment. My hypothesis is that it was the rise of the 401K that killed fair treatment of employees and turned them into resources. It seems that it wasn’t until the value of stock and dividends paid became the drivers for how to manage a business that employees ceased to be human beings. You can pretty much see the change in message to employees from being valued members of the company to “Anyone can be replaced.� That just really isn’t true. There are many employees that carry ‘tribal knowledge’ and the history of how companies ended up where they are that provide a great deal of value. I happen to be one of those people in my company and it’s been acknowledge that if I were to just quit they’d be royally screwed because no one else knows what I do about our products. I’ve been trying to give that info away for years so that I can stop being overwhelmed by quests for info, but since people cost money the staffing hasn’t been there to actually have someone else to pass the info along to or even to hire someone to document what’s in my head. My 3 peers are also in the same situation. We’ve even joked about all quitting at the same time and forming a consulting company.
I’m not necessarily supporting unions, but it seems that the ‘moral’ decline of the nation has been driven by greed. People no longer have loyalty to their companies and it seems like businesses are constantly screwing both employees and customers. If Republicans really want to be the families values party they claim why aren’t they pushing for better family medical leave policies, providing incentives for companies to supply on-site daycare (for a fee of course), looking at bringing back Blue Laws so that most everyone is guaranteed a day off to spend with their families, providing incentives for employers to allow employees time to volunteer in school systems? Why? Because there is no money in it! Businesses don’t really want to have to think of their ‘resources’ as living, breathing, humans. It is only the fortunate few who have managers who recognize these things that are lucky. Company policies and most laws favor the business not people. If half the money spent buying members of Congress went into employee programs we’d have a better, happier, more productive, more loyal workforce in America.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 11:35 AM | Link to this
Blablabla - Not a bad solution, but if the workers continue to work, the MTA has no incentive to resolve the difference. To answer your question, I think the employer has the right to negotiate for the best deal for them, but at the same time, they have the responsibility to make sure that their employees are being paid adequately and fairly. My p and I own two businesses and have a small few employees. All of our employees agreed to start off with a lower wage than they would like to have, with the understanding that as we grow, they will receive bonuses and fair wage increases. This is fair treatment. I can’t see my company growing to a $1 million surplus (let alone a $1B surplus) and not sharing that wealth with the people who helped me to achieve it. How on earth is that fair? Why do the bigwigs keep getting all the wealth while the people who drive the success (pun intended) get next-to-nothing?
Furthermore, their day-to-day treatment (employee relations/morale) is horrible. Ask any MTA worker, and they can give you a story of a good worker being put on disc. action or terminated for nonsense.
RF - Very well said, and I completely agree with you. (Even on the unfortunate truth that unions have played the major role in shutting down a great number of companies).
Renee - Am I biting off heads today? No wonder I have no appetite! LOL! It is everybody’s problem, but the one who could’ve solved it before it became a problem is the MTA (and the Mayor). They allowed this to become an out-of-hand problem, and should’ve resolved it before it got to this point. Everybody plays a part in keeping the city safe, but ultimately, the responsibility falls on the Mayor, NYPD and NYFD.
The greatest obstacle to resolution here is the MTAs refusal to share the wealth with the people who really deserve it. MTA should show the money. I feel badly for the guy who had a rough time getting to dialysis - and the hundreds of thousands more with equally disturbing stories - but what is the solution? Should the workers sacrifice their dignity, fair pay and fair benefits so that the city is happy and safe?
By lozen
December 20, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this
The minimum wage in this country is $5.15 an hour. Who can live on that? Many working Americans still don’t have medical coverage. We need more union, not less. Please read One Nation, Underprivileged, Why Poverty Hurts Us All - by Mark Robert Rank.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this
netbanker,
i think that most companies now offer 401(k)’s instead of pensions to avoid the defined benefit going on into the future. it’s much easier to forecast a defined contribution, and usually it’s less costly. furthermore, if you look at the cost of items that are produced by companies with pension plans (autos come foremost to mind), you see that an inordinate amount of the money paid for the product is used to fund legacy costs of employees who no longer work for the company. additionally, by providing a 401(k) as opposed to a pension, workers could do significantly better for themselves than simply what would be paid out in a pension. the flip side is they could also do worse, but in reality i view this as the transferance of the responsibility to save for your retirement from the employer to the employee, which is where i believe that responsibility should lie. just my two cents…
By RF
December 20, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this
Net- what’s going to happen is that more and more companies are going to be forced out of business by disgruntled employees who will leave to go to Costco-like companies. I think the pendulum will begin to swing back as more people like yourself leave companies for better places. Unions offer one alternative. The other comes from competition. Some business folks are realizing what they need to do to compete. Hopefully, HOPEFULLY, more will.
What’d the puppy do this morning? Sometimes I think training a puppy has GOT to be easier than raising a child. My 7 yr. old managed to get up ill and had himself in the ‘dog house’ before 7 a.m.! Thank God it’s the last day of school for a couple of weeks!
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 11:41 AM | Link to this
And, despite how it appears, I’m not a union-supporter per se. Just like I don’t always support Democrats, and I don’t always support Republicans - I vote on the issues and for the people who best represent my issues. Same thing goes here. I don’t always support unions. Sometimes they’re right, and sometimes they’re wrong. That’s actually one of the reasons I was so successful when I worked for the unions in NY - the management loved working with me because I was always fair and often known to risk my own job if I didn’t think the union was taking the fair stance.
I lean on the side of RIGHT. Not white, black, union, non-union, democrat, republican, conservative, liberal… but RIGHT. To me, the MTA is wrong. TWU may not be right, but they’re a lot closer to right than MTA is (IMO).
By lozen
December 20, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this
Advice needed. I can’t get a CD to eject from my car stereo. Anybody know how to get it out?
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this
The minimum wage in this country is $5.15 an hour. Who can live on that?
the better questions, lozen, are who would try to live on that? and why?
By Jack
December 20, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this
NetB. One thing I’ve learned over the years is that everyone is expendable. You have a good thing going but if God forbid you were to fall gravely ill or die, your company may hurt for a short time but they would survive.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 11:47 AM | Link to this
The minimum wage in this country is $5.15 an hour. Who can live on that? Many working Americans still don’t have medical coverage. We need more union, not less. Please read One Nation, Underprivileged, Why Poverty Hurts Us All - by Mark Robert Rank.
I don’t know if you this comment was pertaining to the strike????? but I have a response anyway. There should be no minimum wage in my opinion, companies should be allowed to pay as they see fit, I don’t think this should be something the government regulates. Of course, nobody can live on minimum wage, which is why most of us go to school to increase our skills and subsequently get paid more than minimum wage. Minimum wage in my state is significantly higher than the federal standard, which is good for my daughter, but in my opinion, bad for the economics of the state.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 11:50 AM | Link to this
Jack - your 11:46 spells out the benefit of unionization. One person is expendable - and as you said, companies may suffer from your departure, but they’d survive it. 7,000 people are less expendable.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
blablabla…I pointed to the 401K not as an employee benefit or even a discussion of who should be responsible for saving for retirement (and I agree that it should be the individual), but as the tipping point for when there was a great influx of $$ into the stock market and when the change in paradigm started. It shifted the focus of how a company was valued to the price of stock and the bottom line. It was at that point that we began to see ‘productivity’ being pushed harder and harder as well as the shift in business language (not employees, but resources) that reflects that change in mindset. This shift also favored those at the top of the corporate food chain because they are still typically the ones who receive stock options and have the ability to make decisions that will drive up the value of the company stock…thus earning more for themselves generally at the expense of the workers.
A review of most bonus programs at companies shows that management receives them over workers and as a general rule the higher up in the company the higher the percentage used to calculate the bonus. The net result is that those farthest removed from the actual work that is needed to achieve the bonus earn the highest salaries and their percentage in the bonus programs is higher. It’s been the case every place that I have worked…Sr. Mgmt bonus is calc’d on 20% of salary while Jr. Mgmt is 12%, supervisors 8%, and if lucky the employee is 4-5%. So the guy at the bottom of the food chain who is earning the least, but doing the work also gets a much smaller bonus for driving the company across the goal line.
By Kyle
December 20, 2005 11:55 AM | Link to this
ok, i’m lost (guess that’s what happens if you don’t keep up with this blog from day one). i was expecting to see some comments about the boycott of american girl - but i see were talking about the strike in new york. guess i’ll just throw out my two cents on both issues:
-the first few comments on this blog seemed to be missing the point entirely. everyone was so worked up claiming that the religious right was trying to push their values on others, but in reality they were just utilizing the free capitalist society that we live in. people were saying things like, “there will always be gay people, this is a free country, deal with it.” yes, there will always be gay people - yes, this is a free country - and yes, people are dealing with it - they are dealing with it with the very freedom that this “free country” provides. they are not forcing people to boycott. those who boycott do so on their own volition. they simply disagree with who american girl chooses to do business with, and the boycotters refuse to give thier money to support this business partner. I don’t get the problem here. would you rather these boycotters be forced to buy these doll/bracelets? nobody is saying that american girl can’t do what they want, but just keep in mind that the buying public can do what they want as well (which includes not buying certian products)
-as for the ny strike, those workers are a*******holes for pulling this at this time of year. maybe they are treated unfairly by their employer, i don’t know. but by striking at this time, they are harming so many people just to prove a point. if the employer is breaking any law through their employment practices then sue him. if there needs to be new laws on the books to stop the employer from operating the way are, then petition your elected officials for those laws. but don’t screw over and entire city just to prove a point.
By Ken
December 20, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this
Interesting statements about unions from a variety of folks across the board. Here’s a slightly different perspective…
I grew up the son of a union president. It was a large AFL/CIO affiliate, not as big as the Teamsters, but still about 750 employees. In my young eyes, it was the toughest years he spent at work and I can only assume why since he didn’t talk too much about it. Here is sampling of those assumptions based on what I coulod observe and know about my father:
What so many people do not understand is that unions break the very nature of the free market. People are no longer compensated based on their skill or fair market value. They are paid based almost entirely on seniority. In addition, most are not paid based on productivity, but based on hours worked. Over time that breeds an entitlement attitude and stifles hard work and creativity “Paid by the hour, not by the power”.
Sure there was a time when unions were necessary, but with the labor laws currently on the books, are they really necessary? I do not know the situation in NYC, so I will not venture a comment other than people need to assess their own definition of “fair.” That word is loaded with your own personal biases and points of view.
In my perspective, very few things in life are fair, so why would I expect my employer to be any different. My employer offers me a wage and I have the option to work for that wage or not. Every year I get an opportunity to make that same decision. At some point I will choose to leave rather than stay. It may be retirement, or another job, or something else, but that day will come. The transit workers have the same option. They can stay or go.
Here’s another thought to consider… Unless the vote was unequivocally unanimous, there may be some people in that union who WANT to go back to work. They want to take the pay and don’t have that choice. They must stay out b/c the union voted to go on strike. So, now who’s hurting whom?
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 12:13 PM | Link to this
Kyle - they’re not just trying to “prove a point.” They are trying to get what they deserve, what is fair. Striking is, and has been, their last resort. Their contract expired on Friday. I’d bet they’ve been negotiating for 3-6 months without reaching an agreement. If TWU follows the pattern of most other unions, they’ve written petitions - signed by customers, they’ve had picket lines on their non-working hours, they’ve done letter-writing campaigns, and a host of other activities designed to encourage the management to do the right thing. Striking was their last resort, and they showed a good faith effort to resolve this without striking by delaying the strike deadline - something most unions don’t do.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 12:14 PM | Link to this
JBM. Tell that to the air-traffic controllers who were fired for going on strike. The Eastern Airlines pilots did right too didn’t they?
By Chilao
December 20, 2005 12:15 PM | Link to this
I tried to post the link but censors considered it objectionable content.
at the daily n-e-w-s website,(new york paper) there ia an editorial about the strike, writer thinks union president should be jailed for this(to him) extortion-walkout.
I have to agree this time of year, one week before Christmas, not going to make any friends for the union, that’s for sure.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this
What do you think JBM? Did the Eastern Airline pilots do the right thing? They were told that if they went out, the company would fold. They did and it did. How do you think all of the non-union folks who’s lives were ruined by the pilots think?
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this
RF…you are absolutely correct about puppy vs child although they’re about the same amount of grief for the first few months of their lives. Of course the puppy quickly becomes easier because DCFS won’t be knocking on my door for locking her in a cage for the night or even to leave the house for a few hours. I won’t have homework to check, worries about bullying, dates or possible pregnancies, no driving lessons, etc.
Little Miss Curious got into the pantry and was attacking a case of water to get to one of the bottles. She just LOVES to chase and push them around the floor and then POUNCE while growling as fiercely as a 6.2 lb pup can. It’s hilarious to watch her.
Jack…yes, everyone is ultimately expendible, but it’s NOT a motivating statement to make to employees. I’ve also noted a decline is employee training and development programs. The underlying message to employees now seems to be along the lines of ‘you can all be replaced, we aren’t going to train you or help you develop new skills or reimburse your tuition to go to school on your own time, and times are tough so we need you to work even harder and faster with less for basically a cost of living raise.’ The effect is to demotivate your own work force especially in light of the compensation packages at the top of the food chain.
Kyle…strategically now is the BEST time to strike because it does affect almost every NYer and applies a great deal of pressure on the decision makers to get this situation resolved pronto!
By Jack
December 20, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this
NetBanker. You are very sharp. Possibly the sharpest on the blog. (I’m not being sarcastic)
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this
The transit workers have the same option. They can stay or go.
You forgot about their other option: to walk out.
Here’s another thought to consider… Unless the vote was unequivocally unanimous, there may be some people in that union who WANT to go back to work. They want to take the pay and don’t have that choice. They must stay out b/c the union voted to go on strike. So, now who’s hurting whom?
Ken, that is completely untrue. If any workers want to work, all they need to do is contact their manager for an assignment. They do not HAVE to strike.
And, it sounds like your father didn’t enjoy his job very much (unless you’re just leaving out the positives). Perhaps he should’ve pursued another line of employment so that he could actually have a career he liked and respected.
I can often be heard saying that working for the union was indeed the most positively rewarding career I could have had, and by far, the best job I ever had. Before I even knew what a union was (did not grow up in an active union family), I had a heartfelt passion for justice. Even as a youth, I got into more trouble defending people’s rights, defending what I defined as justice, than I care to admit. My hunger for justice was completely filled and satisfied when I began working with the union.
I do NOT think that unions are great - in general. But, I do think that they are unfortunately necessary. In fact, I left my career because of the many flaws in unions. I’m sorry your dad had such a negative experience leading the union (and I’m also so sorry that those workers had a president who didn’t like his job), but my experience has been the exact opposite.
I got to defend employees who were terminated, disciplined, or had retaliation efforts made against them for no reason.
I got to assist “slacker” employees in their deficiencies, and help management get rid of them when they wouldn’t try to improve their performance.
I got to help workers get fair wages, excellent benefits, and safe and pleasant working conditions. (You have no idea how many business owners will cut corners to save money, not caring about whether the employees are safe or comfortable - many of them only make changes when they get the notice that OSHA is coming).
I got to negotiate contracts with employers that helped ensure only qualified individuals got hired.
I got to negotiate in the best interest of the workers, not the Union.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this
Jack - I don’t know much about the Eastern Airlines strike. What were the points of disagreement?
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this
NetB - My Savannah (a 2-year old Shih Tzu) loved to play with empty water bottles when she was a puppy too! It was so entertaining to watch her go - she’d go for hours at a time just chasing that bottle all around the living room, and attacking it like it was her prey! LOL! Now she’s given up bottles to harass her feline sisters and brother!
By dee
December 20, 2005 12:53 PM | Link to this
*from Jack - Lozen & JBM. Unions are one of the main reason for out-sourcing. They have out priced themselves. *
I think GREED is the main reason for out-sourcing. If the companies who took their business overseas were actually paying their workers what they were worth, instead of a measly pittance for having the honor of having a job, then I would probably agree with your statement. But once an American company outsources overseas they don’t have the stringent guidelines that are enforced here. Guidelines like no child labor, and over time pay for over time hours, and breaks after a certain number of hours worked.
American companies have proven in the past and present, (Enron, WorldCom, Phillip Morris) that they are only intersested in profit — nothing else.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this
netbanker,
this: but as the tipping point for when there was a great influx of $$ into the stock market and when the change in paradigm started. It shifted the focus of how a company was valued to the price of stock and the bottom line.
is an excellent point, and i agree w you.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 12:59 PM | Link to this
That is very kind of you Jack, but I’m no sharper than most on here. As a kid my Dad used to tell me I was “sharp as a marble!” or sometimes it was a bowling ball. I apparently stopped listening after the word sharp because it was quite a while before I responded with a “Dad, marbles aren’t sharp!” He laughed and told he was wondering how long it would take me to clue in to that little detail.
By Kyle
December 20, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this
Netbanker - clearly stiking now affords the union the “best” opportunity to apply pressure to the decision makers - but that doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do. case in point; how about the eastern airline situation that jack is talking about. those pilots were also in a very good situation to apply pressure - they took that opportunity, and in the process they put a company out of business and thousands of people out of work. i have to say that i agree with ken on this one. the workers know the situation when they take the job. as harsh as it may sound, they can go somewhere else if they don’t like the conditions of their employment. our law makers set minimal standards that employers must follow, and that is all the employers are required to provide. if it is found that these standards need to be raised, so be it, change the laws. however, it is entirely up to the employer whether they want to provide more than the minimum requirements for their employees and attract better employees. sure, workers can strike - but employers also have to right to fire those employees (and i think many should be fired in the current situation)
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 01:02 PM | Link to this
Oh, and Ken:
Sure there was a time when unions were necessary, but with the labor laws currently on the books, are they really necessary?
On Friday, a new Postmaster asks a mail carrier to work an extra shift on Saturday to cover for an employee who begged to take an unscheduled vacation day. The vacationing employee is a favorite of the managers, and the customers love him too. Everyone goes out of their way to give him what he wants, because he’s clearly an asset to the USPS, and plus, his coworkers genuinely like him too.
The other guy, a Seventh-Day Adventist has never worked a Saturday in his life. He is very serious about keeping the sabbath, as he puts it. He’s been with the USPS for 7 years, and everyone knows he doesn’t work Friday evenings and Saturdays. He was actually offended that the Postmaster would even ask him to work on Saturday, but kindly told him that he was sorry and he couldn’t do it. He explained that he is a strict sabbath-keeper, and that he doesn’t work on Saturdays. He went on to say that his daughter’s birthday party was on that day. He apologized again and reiterated that he couldn’t do it.
After about 10 minutes, the Postmaster returned with the employee’s file in his hand, and said in front of other workers something to the effect of, “you may have gotten away with this religious stuff under Joe’s watch, but I’m here now, and you’re gonna work whatever schedule I give you. Now, you’re scheduled to work tomorrow, and you can either find a replacement or get a write-up.” That Monday, his route and hours were changed.
Does that answer your question, Ken? I have plenty of those if you want more.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 01:03 PM | Link to this
American companies have proven in the past and present, (Enron, WorldCom, Phillip Morris) that they are only intersested in profit — nothing else.
dee brings up an interesting thought: do companies have an obligation solely to their shareholders, or do they have an obligation to the shareholders and other “stakeholders” (i.e. employees, the community, etc)?
By Ken
December 20, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this
JBM… In all actuallity, you cannot be further from the truth. My father LOVED his job. He was (and still would be if working in that occupation) very good. In fact, he was one of the best, most skilled artisans in the entire shop. He also enjoyed being the Union president, at first, until he had to do many things in the name of the Union that he disagreed with.
You see, as Union president, he worked hard to ensure that the good employees were protected, but he also had to protect the bad employees. That is the problem with Unions, the protection of the bad employee. And regardless of what you might think, there are a crud load of them. Unfortunately, the large amount of time is spent protecting the bad employees. Why? Because the good employees do not need protecting. In the vast majority of cases they are not the ones with the grievances.
BTW… What do you think would happen to a worker who crossed a strike line, especially in a city like New York? I can tell you what would have happened to anyone who would’ve crossed the strike lines where I grew up, and can assure you many of them would not have been able to go into the facility to work.
One other thing… The option to walk out is the same as my option number 2. As long as the company has the ability to terminate the employment of the striking employees and hire new ones, then let them walk out.
By RF
December 20, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
Eastern went the way Delta is headed if something doesn’t change soon. They outgrew their ability to effectively manage money and when the greedy didn’t get even more, they walked out and shut down the airline. Most of those pilots didn’t work again for years as pilots, if ever.
Just like Delta, those at the top are almost unaffected either way. Delta execs created an independent fund for themselves to retire on that is completely outside the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction. Even if the airline closes, they will still be guaranteed a healthy income. Those at the bottom who keep the line flying are the ones who will lose pensions, benefits, and then their jobs altogehter. Eastern signaled what was coming for us corporately. We just couldn’t see it then. The top layer is financially shielded at the expense of the average worker ‘in the trenches’. Only when more companies figure out what Costco and others are doing will we see an appreciable change. Over the last 2-3 decades more and more companies have done what Eastern did. Keep the upper layer protected and let those at the bottom rant. That’s the problem with MTA, Delta, and basically every other major corporation. They’re robbing the poor to pay the rich and SOME unionized groups are calling them on it. Delta went from a 14billion profit (post 9/11/2001) to being in the red because of bad management decisions and greedy pilots. They’re losing money because they’ve spent it poorly and there was no checks/balance system for what management was doing.
By Kyle
December 20, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this
my 2 year old labrador eats water bottles
By RF
December 20, 2005 01:11 PM | Link to this
JBM and Net- my nine year old Sheltie mix chews and chases anything plastic! My backyard is a mine field of toys, bowls, cups, anything plastic she can get. She’s 5 times the size of the cats, but they rule the roost.
blablabla- you weren’t asking me, but I think companies feel their main obligation is the black/red ink. What many have lost is the idea that they are responsible to all the stakeholders, be it investors, employees, or consumers. Many have lost the balance, but will have to find it again to survive.
By Ken
December 20, 2005 01:13 PM | Link to this
JBM… For every example like that you give me, I can give you one where people are defended for consistant tardiness, drunkeness on the job, sleeping on the job, etc.
This discussion is not about a t** for tat, but we could make it that way. In fact, your example does not illustrate any options that a union provides, only a simpler mechnism to obtain them. Any employee, regardless of the union, would have been able to fight that action. The union simply gave him the means to do so.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 01:13 PM | Link to this
my 2 year old lab eats leather shoes (and couches). unfortunately he has expensive tastes.
By lozen
December 20, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this
We should eliminate all the government regulations on business, and the unions and go back to the good ole days. U.S. businesses could just put those 8, 9, 10 year olds back to work in fire-trap factories, pay them 25 cents an hour, and work them 12 or 15 hours a day. They didn’t have to out-source back then! We could also save a lot of money that we now spend on public education. This would eliminate a lot of our problems. Kids wouldn’t have time to buy American dolls or join Girls, Inc. Ummmm. I think I just solved all the problems we’ve covered this entire week. Oh, but I forgot. That’s what U.S. businesses are doing now in Mexico, Puerto Rica, Taiwan, etc.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 01:17 PM | Link to this
Ken, your father and I obviously had very different experiences. The majority of my time was not spent “protecting the bad employees,” nor would I agree that “good employees” don’t need any protecting. I didn’t (and I doubt if many other union reps) put a lot of effort into protecting members who didn’t pull their weight. And, almost all my grievances came from members who were either stellar employees mistreated, or from the regular folks - but most of them were backed up by some strong witnesses who stood with the grievance-filer. Like I said, your dad and I had very different experiences.
dee brings up an interesting thought: do companies have an obligation solely to their shareholders, or do they have an obligation to the shareholders and other “stakeholders� (i.e. employees, the community, etc)?
Bla, when I left the union here in Atlanta, I changed careers altogether, joining a publicly traded company. I can honestly say that there, the stockholders were more concerned about the employees’ job satisfaction than the company was. I can’t really answer the question, but I think companies should have an obligation to their employees - whether or not they do is another story altogether.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 01:27 PM | Link to this
Kyle…I don’t really think it’s the right thing to do either. I was just commenting on the timing from a strategic standpoint. I know several people who lost in the Eastern deal and being in Atlanta know a few Delta employees who are worried right now too. I still think greed is driving what is happening at almost all levels. The Delta execs got greedy and protected their own rear ends at the expense of employees. (See my comments on how NOT to motivate your workforce) To pilots I would advise them to very seriously consider if a smaller paycheck isn’t a much better option than NO paycheck. They are at the very top of industry pay so to go elsewhere would guarantee a lower rate of pay along with a loss of seniority. With the company’s financial situation now is the time to approach all decisions and actions from a ‘lesser of evils’ point rather than a ‘get all we can’ point.
You can Click Here to see pictures of the bottle eating rugrat.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 01:28 PM | Link to this
blablabla - I had a black lab (she’s in doggie heaven now) and she chewed up one side of my black leather sectional while I was at work one day. ONE DAY! I was livid. I can laugh about it now, but then, I was not laughing. She also chewed up shoes, not the bad ones, the good ones.
RF, your 1:05 post is on point. I do have to agree with NB, strategically, now is the best time. I don’t think anyone will win though ultimately.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this
Netbanker, how positively cute!!!
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this
Ken:
Any employee, regardless of the union, would have been able to fight that action. The union simply gave him the means to do so…
Not all employees have the means to do so on their own, hence the union.
And, I’m sure you could bring up examples of slackers who are protected by unions. If you read all my comments today, you’ll see that I acknowledge that this happens. However, it is not safe to say that this is the majority of cases. My point is that unions have flaws, but they do serve a purpose - and a necessary purpose. That has been my point since the beginning.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 01:40 PM | Link to this
NetB - what a doll!!!! (Not you, the dog!) LOL
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 01:50 PM | Link to this
renee,
my black lab is now 2 and still chews on leather goods whenever he determines that my wife and i haven’t paid him enough attention. i don’t know what his gripe is since he plays with his larger, younger, chocolate “brother” all day long. he chewed up a leather chair a week after it had arrived on special order, and right before my parents came to visit their son’s first new house. i was trying to be impressive for them, but my dog decided to ruin the chair before anybody could ever enjoy it.
i laugh about it until i come home once every four months and find another pair of nice leather shoes chewed up and a pile of “shoe vomit” off in the corner stinking up the place. whatever…i guess it is my reward for rescuing him from the streets and giving him a loving home. the positives outweigh the negs by such a wide margin. :)
By Mara
December 20, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this
The lawyers on the blog can correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that officers of a publicly traded company have a legally binding fiduciary duty to their stockholders. They would be in violation of that duty if they made executive decision knowing that those choices would likely result in a loss of revenue or company worth. Again, I could be mistaken. I am not a lawyer, just an avid reader.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this
When it comes to foot gear the new pup seems mainly interested in attacking my slippers and athletic shoes. I do tend to keep the nice leather ones on the shoe shelves in the closet which just happen to be out of her reach.
I am quite fortunate to work for a company that actually does value their employees and does some nice things for them such as: provide breakfast every Friday, several ice cream socials per year, annual pancake breakfast with Sr. Execs cooking for employees, annual Welcome to Spring event (this year it was at 6 Flags and open to all employees and their family members), we just had our Holiday Party at Villa Christina, and they had a 10 year celebration this past fall with dinner/drinks at the Ritz Carlton downtown. From the CEO to the janitor everyone is on a first name basis, we have pool tables, ping pong, and foosball in the break room. There is a small gym in the building. And I just found out that all employees who are not part of an incentive program will receive bonuses this year for outstanding company performance. Mine worked out to roughly 75% of a normal semi-monthly paycheck.
Shoot…now MY moral dilema is to spend the $$ on the flat screen TV my husband has been wanting or put the money toward the laser eye correction surgery I’ve been wanting or pre-pay a 2007 raft trip down the Colorado River to celebrate our 40th Birthdays.
By Ken
December 20, 2005 01:59 PM | Link to this
JBM… That is where you and I can agree to disagree. I do not believe that unions are necessary. I would never make them illegal, but I do not believe they are necessary.
You illustrate some compelling services they provide, but IMHO, they adminster more detriment to the members and our economy in general than can be balanced by the good that they bring.
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this
Lozen,
Advice needed. I can’t get a CD to eject from my car stereo. Anybody know how to get it out?
Did you get this taken care of?
If not: There is a small hole on all CD players for use as a manual eject. What you do is straighten a paperclip, and slowly but firmly push it in. You will feel it push a lever and the CD will eject as it gets depressed. I would recommend you do this while the CD player is off.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this
Dee. If you owned a company wouldn’t you be interested in profit? If you say no, you wouldn’t be in business long. Employee loyalty died long ago, that card cannot be played.
By Eirik
December 20, 2005 02:15 PM | Link to this
Netbanker,
Is your company hiring? (just kidding). We had our party at Villa Christina also…pretty awesome place.
My partner and I just got a dachsund puppy…he’s taken to shredding toilet paper. He wants to play with my 13 year old other dog, but she can hardly muster the energy..but she’s trying. He likes pulling her tail.
Has your dog had any problem with coughing or what they call reverse sneezing? Our dachsund gets the hacking, huffing fits…the vet has given him something which worked but the cough has come back. Doesn’t slow him down though.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this
Thanks…she’s my little heart breaker….as if I had anything to do with it other than show up to see which pup picked us. I started taking some pics last night because it’s been a few weeks and I pretty much missed a lot of the puppy stages from my previous dogs. I was gone for a week and could see how much bigger she had gotten. I’ll let you know when I’ve added a few more.
Mara…The fiduciary responsibility is to act in the best interest of the stockholder which may not necessarily mean no negative effect to stock value or income. Execs do make decisions that negatively affect these areas without personal consequences. Most often these are the settlement of lawsuits or taking a large expense hit up front in order to better position the company for longer term growth.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 02:17 PM | Link to this
I have a minature daschsund now. Energy is an understatement!!!
By RF
December 20, 2005 02:18 PM | Link to this
Net- puppy’s toooo cute!
I just read the article online about former Delta exec who left with 8.2 million in severance pay and benefits (including free first-class flying benefits). That’s the kind of stuff that makes the average Joe become disgruntled and willing to strike. Raise retirement age for the grunts to 62 while the execs sit on a multi-million dollar golden egg regardless of when they leave or retire.
Is it just me or has the gap between the haves and have nots widened considerably in the last 10 or so years?
By Eirik
December 20, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this
Renee,
We had a miniature dachsund when I was growing up also…he liked to burrow down in the middle of the bed at night…just like our new pup.
He’s like the Engergizer bunny…he just goes and goes…and he’s in that nippy stage…then he just crashes until his next reign of terror…
By Renee
December 20, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this
RF I read about that too. Amazing isn’t it.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this
NetB - go with the Colorado trip. I love pre-paying for stuff! It’s like a free Christmas!!
You’re so fortunate to have a company that really values its employees. Those are nearly extinct! The only “good” employer I had was the first union I worked for. After we merged with another union, it became a nightmare (I actually had to file my own grievance! LOL!) Haven’t really worked for a “good” employer since 2000.
By dee
December 20, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this
from Renee — There should be no minimum wage in my opinion, companies should be allowed to pay as they see fit, I don’t think this should be something the government regulates. Of course, nobody can live on minimum wage, which is why most of us go to school to increase our skills and subsequently get paid more than minimum wage.
What if everyone went to school and got their college degree then went to graduate school and got their masters; would they find a job that would benefit them? Can college graduates, coming straight out of college find them now? Do you know of any college graduates who are on jobs that are beneath them because they can’t find a job in their chosen careers? What should they do; go back to school and retrain for something else? Let’s say they went back to school and retrained to be a computer programmer — stayed with the job for a few years, got the company up on their feet then the company outsourced their work to India — should they AGAIN go back to school and retrain in another industry? How long should they do this? What if they’re older and any employer looking at them in this new genre are not willing to give them a chance to prove their worth? What then? They’d probably take a “menial” low paying job just to make ends meet.
I was once told by an investment counselor that I should always think of the worst case scenarios when it came to my future money. When I asked her why she told me, “How many senior citizens do you see working at WalMart? Do you think they frittered away their pension, or do you think something unexpected happened to them and forced them at an age that they should be enjoying their retirement, to come out of retirement and become a greeter at a WalMart?
That made me think about all these people on minimum wage, maybe not because they don’t have the “brains or skill or degrees”, but because they don’t have a choice.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this
It ain’t you RF. You would think these corp exec’s were professional athletes! We know they are worth the money.
By dee
December 20, 2005 02:24 PM | Link to this
from By RF — Is it just me or has the gap between the haves and have nots widened considerably in the last 10 or so years?
It’s not just you!! And what’s so spooky about it is these are the types of things that destroys countries!!! When the “haves” forget that they have because of the “have nots”.
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this
Since we are sharing; My Yellow Lab (Roe) is currently learning to play hide/seek with his toys.
We sit him down in another room and hide a toy we have him smell/see. Then we tell him to go find it. Currently we can hide it in closed drawers (not pants;) and boxes - but he has not learned to look/sniff above chest high. That will be next.
He will find it within 10mins each time and is SO HAPPY with himself when he does.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 02:33 PM | Link to this
My pup will shred any piece of paper (be it toilet, news, wrapping, tissues, or otherwise) in about 10 seconds flat! Cardboard tubes are another great source of joy to her.
We’re not having a cough problem. She does occassionally have a short-lived coughing fit, but it seems to pretty much only happen if she’s thirsty and drinks too quickly or sometimes gets to playing too hard at attacking chew toys. It’s more along the lines of when my body decides breathing and swallowing at the same time IS possible.
Any votes on how to spend the extra $$? NO less than 20% will absolutely be going to Youth Pride.
By RF
December 20, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this
dee- there are plenty of college grads out there who haven’t handled finances well taking the jobs at Wal-Mart to make ends meet. I’ve almost been there myself. Do you think it’s harder for people to plan for the future these days? I see soooo many people whose income barely covers the bills, much less saving for retirement. I think in the next generation we are going to have a major poverty problem among our elderly—worse than we do now.
My sheltie loves more than anything else to herd the kids playing in the yard. She circles them and moves them to the area she thinks they should be in. It’s hilarious to watch and she is happier than a pig in sunshine doing it. She’s 9 but moves like a puppy when she has a group to herd.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this
I’m not saying that everyone on minimum wage is due to them not going to school. I am speaking of able-bodied and able-minded people who are making minimum wage because that is the path they chose in life. I do stand by my previous statement that I don’t think the government should be regulating minimum wage. When a company offers a salary, you can either take it or look for employment elsewhere. If I have a company, why should I be forced to pay my employees 5.00 an hour when their job is worth 3.00 an hour. Another thing is competition, the need for a workforce will for the most part continue to keep salaries competitive.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
Good post Renee’. Those in favor of unions should put themselves in the company owner’s shoes.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this
NB - I’m loving your donation to Youth Pride!!
My vote is for the laser eye surgery. Do something for you sometimes. I have had to learn to do that.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 02:53 PM | Link to this
does it ever occur to anybody that perhaps low skilled workers have higher levels of unemployment bc of minimum wage? renee indirectly hits on it with this comment:
If I have a company, why should I be forced to pay my employees 5.00 an hour when their job is worth 3.00 an hour.
exactly…employers aren’t going to pay 5 bucks for a 3 buck an hour job. minimum wage keeps some low or unskilled workers from ever getting jobs they’d be willing to have and work for.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 02:57 PM | Link to this
Thanks Jack!
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 02:59 PM | Link to this
Eirik…seems like most puppies go until they crash. My little monster was all worn out last night having spent the afternoon playing with the german sheppard next door (and then falling in the pool while my partner was wrestling the leaf net off the pool). Today she’s a puppy ‘day care’ to wear her little furry butt out and to make sure that she’s well socialzed with other dogs.
Moose…I’ll have to try that game. She’s very big on fetch. She runs back at full tilt and if you’re kneeling keeps going until she rams into your stomach.
RF…you are on the money. Studies have shown an approximately 450% increase in executive pay since 1990 with average worker pay increasing approximately 9% during the same time period. HELLO! Has the average executive really added 450 times more value to the company?
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 03:02 PM | Link to this
Just curious - what job is worth $3.00 an hour?
Those in favor of unions should put themselves in the company owner’s shoes.
Many have, and are still in favor of unions.
NetB - I voted at 2:21.
By blablabla
December 20, 2005 03:05 PM | Link to this
RF made an interesting comment:
I see soooo many people whose income barely covers the bills, much less saving for retirement.
herein lies the problem. for most people, it’s not an income issue, it’s an expense issue. you could pay most people 50% more than they currently make and they still wouldn’t be saving for retirement. their expenditures would go up commensurately with their income.
people who live paycheck to paycheck should be looking for ways to trim their expenses to allow for a reasonable cushion as opposed to saying “my boss doesn’t pay me enough”. but it’s easier to blame your employer than it is to look in the mirror and conclude you’re not “entitled” to have all the world’s niceties that you think you can afford.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 03:05 PM | Link to this
Corporate executives should be paid on performance. No profit/no pay. How did their salaries get so out of hand? They put their pants on one leg at a time.
By FatMoose
December 20, 2005 03:10 PM | Link to this
Moose…I’ll have to try that game. She’s very big on fetch. She runs back at full tilt and if you’re kneeling keeps going until she rams into your stomach.
So is Roe (big on frisbee - We call it the “F” word, bc he gets excited just hearing that or “park”).
Hide/seek is great for inside since his breaks do not work well on hardwood floors….Crash!
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this
Dee…some didn’t plan well and some people don’t really want to stop working. I know a few seniors who work part-time because getting up and going to work makes them feel like they’re still able to contribute to society. They also enjoy interacting with young workers. McDonald’s has been a great employer for older people.
Renee….what I really need to do is get myself down there and start volunteering. Being a gay teen in early 80’s suburbia totally SUCKED!! There are still too many gay kids who feel like outsiders and are not accepted by their families and who don’t have any positive influences. The greatest thing any person can do is to make a positive difference in the life of a child. If I can help just one gay kid know that the all stereotypes they’ve been fed about gay people aren’t all true, that long-term gay relationships do exist, to not feel so alone, or to realize that the sexual self is only a tiny portion of what defines a person then mission accomplished.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this
JBM - a full-time blogger, lol.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this
herein lies the problem. for most people, it’s not an income issue, it’s an expense issue. you could pay most people 50% more than they currently make and they still wouldn’t be saving for retirement. their expenditures would go up commensurately with their income.
people who live paycheck to paycheck should be looking for ways to trim their expenses to allow for a reasonable cushion as opposed to saying “my boss doesn’t pay me enough�. but it’s easier to blame your employer than it is to look in the mirror and conclude you’re not “entitled� to have all the world’s niceties that you think you can afford.
Blablabla - I agree, I completely and totally agree. My partner works around low-income people, and the stories she comes home with just amaze me! $50 spent on lottery tickets, Louis Vuitton luggage (which, even if it’s faux - which I doubt it is, is expensive), flashy cars, and alllllll name-brand clothes! It just amazes me. It brings me to mind of my daughter’s biological mother (and her mother) who have both been on welfare for as long as I can remember - and every month around the 1st, they’re having crab legs for dinner, fish fry for the whole neighborhood, seafood gumbo, etc… and, of course by the second week in the month, they’re crying broke!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 03:32 PM | Link to this
NB - You are so right!! I think it takes the “elders” (for lack of a better word) to make the difference in the community. When I first “came out” my daughter was a member of a group for children with gay parents. That really made a difference for her, to let her know she wasn’t the only one, and to express herself with others who could relate.
Youth pride is so important, and I think it gets overlooked by so many especially in our community. You are really making a difference in many children’s lives right now!
blablabla - you did hit the nail on the head!
By RF
December 20, 2005 03:36 PM | Link to this
Jack- their salaries got so out of hand because they realized noone was watching or holding them accountable beyond the stockholders, and they can screw them in bankruptcy court. That’s been my basic premise all day. We’ve got to find some way to hold execs accountable for the kind of financial stunts they pull at company expense. I don’t mind paying the ‘bigwigs’ more, but there’s no limit on how high that can go. Companies need to cap salaries at management levels. Give a little more to the lower end, they’ll be happy and more productive, and the company will make more in the long run.
blablabla- you are soooo right in your 3:05. I know a pilot who makes multiple times more money than I do who just built a mega-house and mortgaged it interest only!! He’s taking a HUGE financial risk just so he can have bragging rights. Many, many people are just not even trying to be reasonable and think about the future. They’ll be just as bankrupt as anyone else in a few years.
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 03:39 PM | Link to this
LOL @ becoming the professional blogger!!! Don’t tell my boss that, Renee!
By Renee
December 20, 2005 03:45 PM | Link to this
I would have a lot of nerve talking to your boss lol! Plus I would lose valuable blogging time.
By dee
December 20, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this
Renee my point was if everyone went to school and EVERYONE got a degree, maybe even several degrees, who would take minimum wage jobs? The people who take these jobs do so because those are the types of jobs that are beneficial to them. Not everyone wants to be a custodian or a maid, but by the same token, we NEED these services in our society.
If NO ONE took minimum wage jobs, who would make up the beds at the hotels, cut the yards for people who are too busy, etc? I think by saying, not directly but indirectly, that “by going to school Sue is guaranteeing that she won’t have to work a minimum wage job” is a bit pompous. The minimum wage worker is needed in society just as much as the teacher is needed. I don’t think what they do should be devalued.
I also believe that as the cost of living goes up, the minimum wage should go up. Senators, Congressmen, CEO’s, etc. get a cost of living increase — (with Senators and congressmen VOTING for theirs every year), why can’t the people who pick the fruit so that we don’t have to go out in the field to pick our own, and the people who clean the toilets get one too? By mimicking Marie Antionette and saying “Let Them Eat Cake”; and turning a blind eye to the needs of the minimum wage worker is only igniting a volatile situation. We can’t denigrate and demean the “little people” because we can. Nations were made and destroyed, (King George V & the American Revolution, French Revolution, Russian Revolution, etc.), by the “little people”.
By dee
December 20, 2005 03:49 PM | Link to this
By Netbanker — Dee…some didn’t plan well and some people don’t really want to stop working.
And some got wiped out by one illness to either themselves or their spouse and the cost of living had went up expotentially from what they planned it would 40 to 50 years ago.
By Jack
December 20, 2005 03:56 PM | Link to this
Dee. If you get an education and work a minimum wage job, why did you get the education? Renee’ was not a bit pompous. Minimum wage jobs are for the UNEDUCATED or under educated. You probably think the govt. should control everything. That way we can all be sheeple.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 04:02 PM | Link to this
Bla…Bulls-eye on your 3:05 comment! People do raise their standard of living when receiving a raise, but most do not also think about the consequences of doing so. Fortunately, I learned the lesson to pay your self first and while my standard of living has increased with my salary increases I know that I worry far more about retirement than most people apparently do. Every now and again I have those moments when I feel like I’m the squirrel gathering nuts like the next Ice Age is coming and all the other squirrels think I’m crazy because the forcast is for a mild winter. The only time I feel even slightly validated is when the other squirrels fall over hearing that we have no debt other than the house and it will be paid off by the time we’re 50. It can be done, but it’s about choices and values. For us, having that financial security is worth living below our means.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 04:09 PM | Link to this
Of course there will always be “minimum wage” jobs. My point is why should it be up the government to regulate the minimum pay scale for these jobs.
Let’s say I am a secretary and the government says secretaries can only be paid between 25,000 and 26,500 annually. No more no less. How is that fair to me or the employer. Let’s say I am a secretary but my duties consist of light typing and light phone answering with a lot of down time. My boss may feel I should only be paid 18,000 based upon my job duties. But the government has regulated this is not the case. Yes of course I’m making out like a bandit, but it shouldn’t be for the government to mandate.
Also I’m not pompous at all. I have had to stretch a paycheck until it pops. We all have made decisions with our lives and are paying for it now, some positively, some negatively. And every person on minimum wage is not elderly or had some bad luck in life. There are many who simply want no better in life (which is by far their right). People will make beds, be housekeepers, cashiers at Burger King, KFC what have you, I just choose not to live my life in that fashion.
By RF
December 20, 2005 04:10 PM | Link to this
Net- don’t you think the definition of “means” has changed a lot in recent decades? Our parents had the idea to have a home and stay there until you paid it off. If you needed more room, you bought bunk beds or enclosed the carport. Most families today move up whether they need to or not. Look at the average house size today versus 40-50 years ago. Even the most basic house now is 3 bedrooms and 2 baths. I remember having one bath and six people and we lived to tell about it! Apparently you’ve been the smart squirrel—I won’t go for the tasteless joke about the nuts I’m thinking of right now!! I think we have to get back to training people how to live financially and how to accurately determine their ‘means’.
Have a wonderful week (however you choose to celebrate it). I’m out of here for the two week break with my boys. We’re going to cook, wrap presents, and go to The Nutcracker on Christmas eve. They’re what this time of year is allll about for me! Enjoy all!
By RF
December 20, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this
JBM and Renee- keep ‘em under control around here. I’ll be in and out over the next two weeks reading mostly I’m sure. Have a wonderful, blessed time with your families. I’m looking forward to the time off with mine!!
By Miguel
December 20, 2005 04:23 PM | Link to this
I just read Ms. Glass’ opinion article regarding the Christian boycott of the American Girl company. In the article, she states that the protesters do not seem very “Christ-like.” To the contrary, to millions (hopefully) of free-thinking Christians, the actions of Girls, Inc. (and by implication, their supporters) do not seem very Christ-like in promoting an abortionist’s right to murder an innocent, unborn child. That is the crux of the matter for Christians. It is not an attempt to be mean-spirited, just an attempt to stand up for one’s principles and to protect the most defenseless among us, even more defenseless than the girls that Girls, Inc. purports to support. In this modern age, such contrarian thought on the part of Christians tends to go against the grain, I know. And if that is not free-thinking, I don’t know what free-thinking is.
Merry Christmas.
By Renee
December 20, 2005 04:25 PM | Link to this
Have a great Holiday RF!! You’ll be missed!!
By Just Being Me
December 20, 2005 04:25 PM | Link to this
NetB - I’m obsessed with retirement planning too!! And, over the last few years, my salary has almost doubled (which isn’t a huge deal because my salary drastically decreased when I moved to ATL, so it’s just getting back to where I was before). But, I’ve been pretty good at putting nearly all of my increases into my 401K, investments, and money market accts. Usually, the only money I splurge with is bonus money (one-time payment that was completely unexpected).
LOL@ Renee.
Jack, don’t forget the illegal aliens, many of whom have to “take what they can get.”
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 04:29 PM | Link to this
Dee…point made and taken. Our Congress passed that ‘wonderful’ (please read with ALL the sarcasm you can muster) bankruptcy law without considering that the majority of people declaring bankruptcy do so due to an illness. What makes this all the more terrible is that the majority of those people actually have/had health insurance. They weren’t dead beats who went out spending while knowing they couldn’t possibly pay for the stuff. They were average folks who are now getting screwed twice.
I know this can easily happen as my own partner is still struggling back from an illness that pretty much meant he didn’t work at all for 2 months, can only work part time now, and will stay part time for at least another 6 weeks. When owning your own business that hits HARD because no work means no pay. And realistically what my bonus means is despite wanting the TV, eye surgery, and to prepay for a milestone birthday celebration the rainy day fund we’ve tapped while he’s been sick will be repaid faster than we budgeted…the charity will still get their money though because this is ‘mad money’ and they need it more than I do.
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 04:57 PM | Link to this
Merry Christmas, RF! Enjoy the time with the boys extra for me! I’m not traveling back to the family ‘homestead’ so it’s a childless christmas this year…the very best Christmas gift I can get is seeing the way my nephew’s eyes light up when he opens a gift and to watch him jump up and down, clapping his hands while cheering YEAH when it’s something he really, really wanted! That makes the whole season for me.
The definition of ‘means’ has changed over the years. I still have to catch myself every now and again when thinking about those things. Mostly I see it in real estate and the sizes of rooms and numbers of bathrooms. I was reading about a book a gentleman wrote (CRAFT disease has wiped away the author and title) who suggests that TV has significantly changed people’s perception of ‘means.’ Before TV became common place with things like MT Cribs, Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous, even Love Boat people didn’t really have a concept of all the stuff they didn’t have or the non-fabulousness of their lives. Being exposed to all the products people didn’t know about has led to a general decline in people’s satisfaction in life and an increase in spending to obtain those things. I think that keeping up with the Joneses has existed since the first cavewoman noticed that the neighbors had a bigger, dryer cave, but mass media has significantly raised the stakes.
JBM…excellent move! I did the same thing with every job move and increase. I figured that even though my net income would rise less by saving that way I was still going to see a bigger check.
By Decaturparent
December 20, 2005 05:00 PM | Link to this
I’m buying a total of three American Girl dolls this month for my two girls (one for a birthday - two for Christmas) and a whole load of accessories. And can you believe that I’m a church-goin’, Sunday school teachin’ C-H-R-I-S-T-I-A-N????
Frankly, I’m disgusted by what I see so-called Christians spouting these days. Why is it any of their business if someone else has an abortion or has a different sexual orientation than they do? If they disagree with it (actually I am opposed to abortion myself) then don’t do it - but how do they get off telling other people what to do?
Ugh…. Well, I’m all for Girl’s Inc. - so all you scared fundamentalists better keep your kids away from our house because surely we will corrupt your children somehow! Who knows.. I might even be teaching them in Sunday school!!!!! ;)
By Netbanker
December 20, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this
One last thought today Renee…I was somewhat fortunate to be exposed to the ‘elders’ shortly after graduating from college. After moving back to the home town area and starting a job I realized that I didn’t really know any gay people and bars were not my thing. I signed up for a Buddy Program to help people with HIV (this was 1989 when people were dying left and right) and met all kinds of really amazing people (gay, straight, rich, poor, middle age, older) who taught me a great deal through their experiences. It was all very life changing and affirming. It also made me extremely intolerant of young gay agists who don’t want a thing to do with anyone over 30. IDIOTS! Those are the people from whom you can learn the most (and are the ones who can afford to throw really nice parties, invite you to their vacation places for the weekend or out for a day on their boat, and have connections to help find a job/apartment/etc.)
By dee
December 20, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this
By Renee - Of course there will always be “minimum wage� jobs. My point is why should it be up the government to regulate the minimum pay scale for these jobs.
Right now the government, (Senators and Congressmen) are regulating THEIR pay scale, why can’t they regulate it for the minimun wagers?
Also I’m not pompous at all.
I SPECIFICALLY worded my email so that you wouldn’t think that I was calling you pompous. I said quote I think by saying, not directly but indirectly, that “by going to school Sue is guaranteeing that she won’t have to work a minimum wage jobâ€? unquote is a bit pompous. This was not directed at you. I DON”T KNOW YOU. This was just directed et al.
And every person on minimum wage is not elderly or had some bad luck in life.
No as well as not everyone is SMART ENOUGH to go to college!! Some barely had the brains to finish high school!! Should these people be devalued becuse of it?
There are many who simply want no better in life (which is by far their right). People will make beds, be housekeepers, cashiers at Burger King, KFC what have you, I just choose not to live my life in that fashion.
This is what I’m talking about! Perhaps you, in your deepest heart, look down on people who aren’t educated as well as you are. Not everyone is smart enough to do any better, I just don’t feel that they should be devalued because of it.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 07:53 AM | Link to this
Dee… Do you really think Renee is/was looking down on people who aren’t educated as well as her? I know I didn’t think that.
The issue with wage scale does not revolve around education, at least not in s atandard definition. The issue is about skill and the need for that skill. There are many “uneducated” folks who make lots of money because they have a skill in carpentry, plumbing, auto repair etc. Their skill has value. The general population will pay to use that skill. I know many “educated” folks who graducated with philosophy, psychology, or some other liberal arts degree and can’t feed themselves b/c they have no marketable skill to the general public.
No employer should have to pay more for employees than the market will bear. If I can hire quality individuals to flip burgers for $2/hr, why should I pay $6? As a business owner, I want the best staff possible to make the profit I choose to make. I have heard so many stories about Netbanker’s company, or Cosco, or many others, about how they treawt their employees. I LOVE those stories. I think those business owners have done things the RIGHT way, probably the way I would do business. However, it is not the government’s job to force business practice on the business owner.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 07:58 AM | Link to this
Wow can’t type this morning, hadn’t yet had my coffee… I meant: “a standard”, “who graduated”, “they treat”
By Renee
December 21, 2005 08:41 AM | Link to this
No as well as not everyone is SMART ENOUGH to go to college!! Some barely had the brains to finish high school!! Should these people be devalued becuse of it?
Devalued, no. Should they be paid accordingly, yes? I don’t see how me saying the government should not regulate minimum wage is devaluing minimum wage earners. If you are not educated and/or skilled enough to earn a wage that would allow you to take care of you and your family, how is that my problem, your problem or anyone else’s problem besides you. There are people are not smart enough to go to college, they have no skill but flipping burgers or cleaning rooms (this are just examples). So what do you propose, raising the minimum wage to 10.00 to accomodate these people, thus devaluing the larger earned income of others?
This is what I’m talking about! Perhaps you, in your deepest heart, look down on people who aren’t educated as well as you are. Not everyone is smart enough to do any better, I just don’t feel that they should be devalued because of it.
Sweetie, I don’t look down on anyone. I don’t run around on a daily basis feeling sorry for minimum wage workers, or uneducated people. Nor do I spend my day wishing I was a millionaire and envying those that are. The poor and uneducated are part of society, some are there by choice (or because they won’t make good choices), and others are there for reasons beyond their control. Either way, it’s not up to the government to control private businesses. And Senators and Congressman pay scale is regulated by their employer - the government and we the taxpayers who fund the government agree that this should be regulated. This should be in no way confused with the government regulating a private business.
By E. Lewis
December 21, 2005 08:47 AM | Link to this
Again, where are the Christians who are more worried about children and the elderly living in poverty, working families without health care, etc? The leaders who get all publicity aren’t too worried about these issues. They seem far more concerned about whether or not a Teletubbie or SpongeBob is gay.
By E. Lewis
December 21, 2005 08:52 AM | Link to this
Just look at George Bush. He is a proud conservative Christian. When he was running for re-election he asked the Pope for help in getting the Catholic vote, but when the Pope rebuked him over human rights and the war, I didn’t hear any Christian groups stand up in support of the Pontiff.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 08:59 AM | Link to this
Extremists in any group get the press E.L.. You average everyday Christian doesn’t give a flip about some stupid dolls or who makes them.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 09:07 AM | Link to this
I’m an average everyday Christ-follower who doesn’t give a flip about some stupid dolls or who makes them.
If those extremists put half as much energy into self-reflection and self-examination as they did into making all these ridiculous political statements and demands, they’d be a lot better off (and probably get respect from all sides, instead of just each other).
By Renee
December 21, 2005 09:12 AM | Link to this
Hey JBM! I thought about you when I watched House last night. It was pretty deep.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 09:21 AM | Link to this
Jack,
I agree with your statement:
Extremists in any group get the press E.L.. You average everyday Christian doesn’t give a flip about some stupid dolls or who makes them.
But did you watch the Barbara Walters special on where/what is heaven? Notice the HUGE number of Evangelical Christians in America, and that they can (did) control the vote?
Why are the average everyday Christians standing by while their religion gets hijacked? {I know I am not - standing by, that is}
By Jack
December 21, 2005 09:26 AM | Link to this
I didn’t watch it. I wait and see Heaven for myself. (if I make it!)
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this
Renee - I half watched it!!! :-( Had it on the whole time, but was doing some work so I wasn’t paying close attention.
FatMoose, what did you mean by this: Why are the average everyday Christians standing by while their religion gets hijacked? (particularly, the use of the word “hijacked”)
By Tim
December 21, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Jack… now you really wouldn’t want to leave your home under the bridge to go to heaven would you?
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 09:56 AM | Link to this
JBM,
I use the word hijacked bc they (evangelicals) have no formal connection with any other sect of Christianity. They do not even have their own hierarchy.
If you hijack a car; you take and use what is someone elses without compremise - that is what they are doing with Christianity. They interpret the bible without any systematic process or check/balances - inside or outside the “organization.” They also fit the scheme for a cult in those and other aspects.
The same has already been done to Islam.
Does that answer your question? Or is there someething I am missing about your Q?
By Jack
December 21, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this
Tim. Trolls don’t live forever. I’ve been good and haven’t eaten any children in quite some time so I hope to journey upwards when my time comes.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this
I think I get it, FM. Now, on to the other part of your question, what do you suggest Christians should be doing while their religion is getting hijacked?
By Jack
December 21, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this
Hey. I can guarantee my way in to Heaven by simply giving money to the evangelists. Cool.
Getting unwanted solicitations from charities? Simply send back their postage paid envelope with a note asking them to take you off their mailing list. They have to pay the postage and get nothing in return. The letters will soon stop. It took three times before Creflo got the message.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this
Jack, how did Creflo get your address?
By Jack
December 21, 2005 10:11 AM | Link to this
I have no idea. I just started getting mail from world changers. I thought I would be safe being under a bridge and all.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this
FatMoose… In your opinion, who is out there and NOT hijacking Christianity?
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this
Now, on to the other part of your question, what do you suggest Christians should be doing while their religion is getting hijacked?
Educate them. If one can start from the perspective that they all agree that they are Christians - begin to show individuals that what they state and pursue is NOT actually in the bible. And if it is in the bible, it is not humans that are charged with the tasks.
Above all, start by denouncing the concept. {The above examples are only what I do}
As for further routes of dealing with this; there should be concern that leads to brainstorms asking that same question that you posed. Gathering all the other sects of Christianity with a unifide goal of exposing them would be a good start.
By Chilao
December 21, 2005 10:21 AM | Link to this
I have heard the best way to make the opposing side(whichever that may be) really use up their resources, is to sign up for a few newsletters from a few of them. By the time they share your address with all of the similiarly-minded organizations, (one again, whatever that might be), and you get on all their junk-mail mailing lists, well…..
only downside really is all the junk-mail you have to wade through and discard.
By Renee
December 21, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this
I thought I would be safe being under a bridge and all.
Too funny!!!!!
By Ken
December 21, 2005 10:29 AM | Link to this
FatMoose… Can you please clarify a few things…
What concept should be denounced?
Who is stating things and pursuing things not in the Bible?
What things are being stated and pursued that are not in the Bible?
By Jack
December 21, 2005 10:42 AM | Link to this
And life is like a song….been singing that all day. Mercy.
By blablabla
December 21, 2005 10:50 AM | Link to this
glad to see that people liked what i had to say yesterday afternoon. it really is scary what people do with an extra fistful of dollars. nobody seems to remember what franklin said: a penny saved is a penny earned. with the magic of compounding, a penny saved can be more like four pennies earned over a number of years.
but as somebody mentioned (perhaps netbanker), you have to pay yourself first. so true.
i have this group of friends that are just all missing the boat. they all went to wharton or some other name school undergrad, some to biz school after that, and they all have low six figure salaries. they all live like they’ve “arrived” with the loaded (leased) bmws, rented apartments in town, expensive dinners, etc. it’s funny, and sad, to see all these smart business majors running around spending every last cent and not saving a thing. they’re all around 30 and still have significant school debt, rent their homes, lease their cars and have nothing saved. 30 years old and negative net worth. and these are smart people. watching stuff like this unfold has reminded me of two things: 1) perhaps schools should teach the basics of money management to children at a young age, and 2) the best lesson my parents ever gave me was the value of a dollar.
i won’t be on the board much today, and will be leaving town this evening, but wanted to say merry xmas and happy holidays to you all. here’s to a safe and prosperous 2006.
-bla
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 10:55 AM | Link to this
Jack - that’s a good idea, though.
Chilao - for lack of a better word, that’s kinda like indirect stealing. I know it’s not really stealing, but I can’t think of an appropriate term for accepting something with the intention of wasting it without the giver’s knowledge of this.
FatMoose - I’m with Ken on this one, I have no idea what you mean. If you mean that Christians should try to show other Christians that what they believe isn’t in the Bible, I’d have to disagree with you on the grounds that (1) that’s a waste of time, (2) that’s not what Christians are charged to do (3) who’s to say which Christians have the right “Biblical” belief and which don’t?
And, I also have Ken’s questions. What concept should be denounced and who is stating things that aren’t Biblical and what things are they stating?
By dee
December 21, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this
By Ken — Dee… Do you really think Renee is/was looking down on people who aren’t educated as well as her? I know I didn’t think that.
No, I said PERHAPS. All the time I’ve read her posts she seems to be a reasonable and rational lady.
No employer should have to pay more for employees than the market will bear. If I can hire quality individuals to flip burgers for $2/hr, why should I pay $6?
I understand your argument, but I just can’t believe you would do that!! Maybe I’m being naive — but what type of employee would you get? Would you get one that was happy and concerned about the product that they sent out, the product that represents you? Or do you think you’d get someone who drops the burgers on the floor, spits on them, then gives them to your customers?
As a business owner, I want the best staff possible to make the profit I choose to make. I have heard so many stories about Netbanker’s company, or Cosco, or many others, about how they treawt their employees. I LOVE those stories. I think those business owners have done things the RIGHT way, probably the way I would do business. However, it is not the government’s job to force business practice on the business owner.
The government HAD to step in because not ever owner actually CARES about anyone but themselves and their bottom line. Besides why are people so upset about the MINIMUM WAGE? What about these people making MILLIONS and paying the MINIMUM on their taxes? Why isn’t anyone concerned about them?
By Jack
December 21, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
We are Dee. Unfortunately they have lawyers (sharks) who can tie anything up in court long enough to see the second comming.
By dee
December 21, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
By Renee — Devalued, no. Should they be paid accordingly, yes? I don’t see how me saying the government should not regulate minimum wage is devaluing minimum wage earners. If you are not educated and/or skilled enough to earn a wage that would allow you to take care of you and your family, how is that my problem, your problem or anyone else’s problem besides you. There are people are not smart enough to go to college, they have no skill but flipping burgers or cleaning rooms (this are just examples). So what do you propose, raising the minimum wage to 10.00 to accomodate these people, thus devaluing the larger earned income of others?
I understand your argument and I respect your view point - we’ll just call a stalement because it’s one subject we won’t agree on.
By Chilao
December 21, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this
LOL at JBM - yes, they are forced to send me junk mail as a result of thievery.
Actually I have never done that, but since I do not fit the liberal/conservative simpleton labels, I am on both sides of the fence in organizations I belong to, which means I get a ton of stuff I have absolutely NO interest in. from both sides.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this
Dee… The statement was IF I can hire a quality employee for $2/hr why would I pay $6? The point being, I will not, and should not as a business be forced to pay higher than the fair market value for an employee.
You are correct in implying I probably would not get a quality employee for $2/hr, but guess what… It’s my business so I should be able to make that decision. If I hire poor employees b/c I’m cheap, then my business will falter.
BTW… The business owner cares chiefly, and in many cases only, about the bottom line. That is why they open a business, to make money. Very few businesses open for any reasons other than to make money. The business owner cares for the employee only to the point that it benefits his business.
Again, I agree that showing more loyalty through benefits and better pay helps the bottom line. That is how I would run a business (depending on the venture), but not everyone believes in that philosophy and should not be forced by the government to run their business that way.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this
What concept should be denounced? An Evangelical religion
Who is stating things and pursuing things not in the Bible?
Evangelicals (Calling for the assasination of a leader???!!!?!)
What things are being stated and pursued that are not in the Bible?
Too many to note - but the absolutist notions covers many of them.
Rather not be bombarded with questions in all directions; a volly (one ball/back and forth) would be more productive.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this
Dee… I am concerned about the taxes… Flat tax fixes everything.
By dee
December 21, 2005 11:18 AM | Link to this
When my church started going nutso last year because of the Gay marriage bunk, and the “minister” was standing in the pulpit and saying that we should go out and vote against it because GOD would’ve wanted us to — I just left that church. I now consider myself “religious” and not a “christian”. Some groups have given the label “christian” a bad name.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 11:25 AM | Link to this
Ken,
I am a drummer. If a group of drummers formed that made assertions about what it is to be a drummer in absolute terms, it would be my job to open their eyes.
JBM,
To say it is not worth the energy will only allow the ignorant to run with an idea. The constitution has the ACLU (although I may not believe in ALL of there efforts) to call out what is a violation of our rights. I believe Christians should have some similar internal check/balance organization - whether on a local basis or larger. The individual churches/religions get together to protest companies/people; why is it not possible for that same thing to happen regarding evangelical practices?
BTW - Evangelicals do not feel the pope has any authority. That is enough to show a schism on a basic level.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this
People give the lable “christian” a bad name.
FM - Two people asking you the same questions is equivalent to being bombarded??! Okay, I’ll let Ken take it from here. I wouldn’t want you to feel bombarded.
By Renee
December 21, 2005 11:30 AM | Link to this
I understand your argument, but I just can’t believe you would do that!! Maybe I’m being naive — but what type of employee would you get? Would you get one that was happy and concerned about the product that they sent out, the product that represents you? Or do you think you’d get someone who drops the burgers on the floor, spits on them, then gives them to your customers?
People making minimum wage aren’t always exemplory employees, either. Competition would still be the driving force determing what people are paid. If the going rate for burger flippers in Atlanta is 4.00 hrly it would not make business sense to pay your workers 1.50. You wouldn’t be able to hire anyone, when they can go elsewhere and make more.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this
Dee,
I just left that church. I now consider myself “religious� and not a “christian�. Some groups have given the label “christian� a bad name.
Good for you, except:
I did the inverse: I call myself a christian, but not religious or affiliated with a religion. I am not going to alow a group to spliter off and say they are the rue christian way - and that is not what I am promoting. To be christian SHOULD be more generic than being X {insert: baptist, protastant, evangelical…} - but they are forcing a reversal of roles.
JBM, The statement above in italics is what I am refering to as being hijacked - many people are looking at different specific “religions” to right the wrongs to the notion of being “christian,” and are discarding the notion of being Christain because of the mar they are putting on it.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this
FatMoose… What in the world do you mean by an “Evangelical Religion”? I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
If you’re referring to the different sects of Christianity then you will have a diffciult time trying to eliminate them. The Roman Catholic church tried and failed in that endeavor several hundred years ago and thank goodness for that. Had they succeeded we would know nothing about Martin Luther or his philosophies. The same ones that have shaped the last half a century.
By Ken
December 21, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this
FatMoose… In your drummer example, what are you opening their eyes to? Did this drummer group make asertions that excluded you? If so, perhaps you really aren’t a drummer, perhaps you are something else, or just a different kind of drummer than they are.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this
We should all dance to the beat of a different drummer. Or should we?
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this
FatMoose - I, too, reject the label of “Christian,” but not because of any organizations or fundamentalists, fanatics, or evangelicals (whatever that was supposed to mean). I reject the label because I know way too many people who have no idea what it means to be like Christ. At the risk of sounding holier-than-thou or judgmental, I would venture to say that the majority of “Christians” I know are no more Christ-like than the devil on a good day.
As for Dee’s church, her pastor (or whoever it was) has a right to say what he said if he has a reasonable belief that this is what the Bible teaches. And of course, Dee has the right to leave if she disagrees.
Christianity has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with who teaches what, and what battles particular groups choose to fight. It has to do with living like Christ did. PERIOD. No more, no less. Too many “Christians” know nothing about that. Too many “Christians” don’t study the Bible and get to know Christ. They have Grandma’s religion, or Pastor Peabody’s religion, but they have no clue who Jesus is and what He taught, nor do they know what He really wants from His followers.
By Bill
December 21, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this
I agree with most everything the Christian Church does, I don’t however agree with not having female pastors/priests as some churches adhear to. I don’t expect to agree with everything any pastor/priest would say butI’m more of a loyal person and wouldn’t let that keep me from going to church.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 11:47 AM | Link to this
JBM. A Christian is one who believes in Jesus. That’s all you have to do to be a Christian.
By dee
December 21, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this
By Ken — BTW… The business owner cares chiefly, and in many cases only, about the bottom line. That is why they open a business, to make money. Very few businesses open for any reasons other than to make money. The business owner cares for the employee only to the point that it benefits his business. Again, I agree that showing more loyalty through benefits and better pay helps the bottom line. That is how I would run a business (depending on the venture), but not everyone believes in that philosophy and should not be forced by the government to run their business that way.
That’s why, not just this government, but the majority of governemnts in an industrialized nation, have minimum wage guidelines. Because of man’s inability to realize that total power corrups totally. Check out the history of rich men who had that philosophy before you. THEY are the reasons that we have mandatory minimum wages — when they had the helm they proved their only loyalty, love, ambition, passion was to the dollar. And every chance they got they abused others so that they could achieve more wealth.
By Bill
December 21, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
We need to look to Jesus himself and use him as the example of what Christianity is, all us Christians have flaws and say and do the wrong things. Don’t look at us, look at Jesus when deciding on if you want to follow Christ or not. When you become a Christian, you probably won’t be perfect either, but at least you should be trying to be closer to Jesus like.
By Bill
December 21, 2005 11:57 AM | Link to this
Jack, To be a Christian you have to believe in Jesus and accept him as your savior and lord. Let him into your heart, accept his favor/gift. Bond with him.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
did anyone read the article in the paper (I believe it was Saturday) in the ‘religion’ section of the AJC… about being more inclusive to others beliefs systems… I thought it was pretty interesting… and one of the people the article was about, Carlton Pearson, I have seen in person before… probably one of the most knowledgeable people in reference to the Bible… he lost almost 90% of his congregation and Oral Roberts University (where he went to school) has denounced him… as has most everyone within the evangelical circle… because of his new stance
By dee
December 21, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this
By Jack - JBM. A Christian is one who believes in Jesus. That’s all you have to do to be a Christian.
Faith without works is dead. Just to call yourself a Christian without living, showing, practicing the fundamental beliefs of Christ means nothing. A Christian should not judge; (or at least TRY real hard not to); should show charity and kindness; etc. Not spout ridiculousness from a pulpit filled with hate and discord. The KKK considers themselves as Christians. Are they Christ Like? What about Jim Jones, (Jonestown Massacre in Guyana), was he a Christian? Was John Brown, (Harper’s Ferry), a Christian? Just giving yourself a name, in the bible’s view, means nothing.
By Bill
December 21, 2005 12:03 PM | Link to this
FatMoose, On your 11:25 post. We Christians do have an organization that opposes the ACLU in court cases, it’s called the ACLJ(American Center for Law and Justice), it’s located in Washington DC and headed by Jay Sekulow. It’s not as big as the ACLU but it’s getting there and does a great job.
By Bill
December 21, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this
We just need to do what Jesus would do. Forgive everybody and welcome them into the family of Jesus Christ. We need to stop judging people(my weakness) and let God judge them on judgement day. I mean God has given us the rules(10 commandments)and we know ourselves if we have broken them or not and if we have been forgiven, by accepting Jesus into our hearts.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 12:11 PM | Link to this
Jack, we definitely disagree on the definition of a Christian. With your definition, even some Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus are Christian.
To me, a Christian is one that strives to live/be like Christ.
By dee
December 21, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this
Christianity has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with who teaches what, and what battles particular groups choose to fight. It has to do with living like Christ did. PERIOD. No more, no less. Too many “Christians� know nothing about that. Too many “Christians� don’t study the Bible and get to know Christ. They have Grandma’s religion, or Pastor Peabody’s religion, but they have no clue who Jesus is and what He taught, nor do they know what He really wants from His followers.
That’s a very interesting point. One that touches close to my door. My father is Catholic and my mother is Methodist; both took me to church to commune with their religions and neither forced me to make up my mind which religion I wanted to choose when I became an adult.
When I mentioned this to a friend when I was a teenager he was stunned and told me that I HAD to choose. When I asked him, why is he the religion that he is, he answered because that’s the way he grew up, (mother, grandmother,etc.) he didn’t choose his religion he was born into it. A lot of people have no idea why they stick to a particular religion — they never question their doctrines, or look at their own church’s charter they’re just born into it and just stay into it for comfort.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this
Disagree all you want. It is your right. Before casting stones at me, look up Christin in the dictionary. I believe what I believe and it won’t change. I do not need a sermon from anybody on this blog. If I did, I would just re-read posts from Zack, Randy or Chuck.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 12:20 PM | Link to this
I meant to spell it Christian.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
Let me clarify: One who believes in the teachings of Christ. That better?
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
Just went to read it, Tim. I’ve never been a fan of Carlton Pearson, but I am very familiar with his being alienated from the Church due to his new beliefs. Very interesting article.
A lot of people have no idea why they stick to a particular religion — they never question their doctrines, or look at their own church’s charter they’re just born into it and just stay into it for comfort.
So true, Dee. And, most of the gay-bashing “Christians” fall right into this category. They have no clue (and no desire to get a clue) about what the Bible really says about homosexuality. They just know it’s wrong because Grandpa said it’s wrong, Daddy said it’s wrong and Rev. Righteous said it’s wrong. Then, of course, Sunday School Teacher Sally showed them the scripture that proves it’s wrong - so it must be wrong!
I’d rather be gay than ignorant any day of the week.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this
JBM… I was not a fan of Carlton Pearson the first time I saw him on tv… but after I met him in person (before any of this happened) I found him to be a GREAT person who is very kindhearted and warm… and VERY funny!
They have no clue (and no desire to get a clue) about what the Bible really says about homosexuality
I think you would enjoy this book “What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality” by Daniel A. Helminiak
By Kyle
December 21, 2005 12:34 PM | Link to this
Well, since everybody is all geared up to talk about the pro/cons of religon and what is and what isn’t religon - anybody have any thoughts on the federal court’s ruling not to allow “intelligent design” to be taught in school as an alternative view to evolution?
-proponents of intelligent design claim that it doesn’t promote christianity or religon - i would call myself conservative, and am on the right on many issues, but from what i know about the intelligent design theory, i find it hard to belive that the theory has nothing to do with religon
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this
Tim, read it twice for a class I took. In fact, just last week I recommended it to another blogger. :-)
By Jack
December 21, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this
Dee. Your last post describes sheeple very well. The bible is an excellent guide to live by but it was written by man not sent down from God. Certain things were added and omitted. They put in the bible what they wanted all to believe. Did you know they removed reincarnation from the bible? They did it so people would not commit suicide. If they omitted that, what else did they omit?
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this
Disagree all you want. It is your right. Before casting stones at me, look up Christin in the dictionary. I believe what I believe and it won’t change. I do not need a sermon from anybody on this blog. If I did, I would just re-read posts from Zack, Randy or Chuck.
Whoa, Jack! Who’s giving you a sermon? Don’t be so touchy, all I said was that we disagree. I didn’t cast any stones or try to change what you believe. You should know by now that I never try to change what people believe (except maybe Jehovah’s Witnesses - but that’s just because so many of them are just so self-righteous!).
And for the benefit of all who may be interested, here’s how Dictionary.com defines “Christian,”:
Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus’s teachings. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
n. 1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this
JBM… awesome… :)… I gave it to my mom a couple years ago to read (with a few other books)… I think it’s a great book to lend to some of my family memebers
By Renee
December 21, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this
JBM - Did you see the article in the AJC about Whiley Jackson and his foreclosures?
By Renee
December 21, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this
oops I meant Wiley.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 01:39 PM | Link to this
Whiley is one of my favorite ladies on the blog. Kimberly too.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this
Renee - Yep. Saw it and forwarded it to some of my friends too. It was also on the TV and radio news. I know quite a few ppl who work for Jackson, including my partner’s best friend. I’m just really curious to see how it’s going to play out. Even this past Sunday, Pastor Jackson was saying he didn’t know what this was all about because all his notes are paid to date. ???????? yeah, okay Jack! LOL! At least I can say with confidence that he’s not one of the ones “stealing” the money for his own personal use.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 02:15 PM | Link to this
Tim, don’t you just wish every “Christian” in the world would read it? Hey, I should give one to every adult member of my family for Christmas… wouldn’t that make a shocking “coming out” statement?!!! LOL
By Tim
December 21, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this
JBM… I think my grandmother would start having heart palpatations if I gave her that for Christmas… but I do agree… I think it is a great book for a lot of people to read
By lozen
December 21, 2005 02:26 PM | Link to this
Ken, loved your statement: The business owner cares chiefly, and in many cases only, about the bottom line. That is why they open a business, to make money. Very few businesses open for any reasons other than to make money. The business owner cares for the employee only to the point that it benefits his business. And this is exactly why we need unions and government regulations to protect workers!
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 02:28 PM | Link to this
{been busy}
In your drummer example, what are you opening their eyes to? Did this drummer group make asertions that excluded you? If so, perhaps you really aren’t a drummer, perhaps you are something else, or just a different kind of drummer than they are.
The point is that there is a definition of a drummer that exixts (like you all have pointed out about being a christian). If someone or some group comes along and says the real or new definition is “X,” it is our job to refute that assertion - after studying their assertion of course since we all can be at fault.
I do not refrain from calling myself christian; that would be giving to the tide of this crap tha you must jump through hoops xy and z to be a christian when it is in plainly explained by Jesus what is to be done: which has been posted.
There is nothing about being gay in that list or the multitute of constraints created by religions; especially evangelical leaders (it is difficult refering to this group - they are not a FORMAL religion; but make up the largest group of religios people).
Bill
We Christians do have an organization that opposes the ACLU in court cases, it’s called the ACLJ That is not in what I was saying - I was saying that religions, local or larger, should have a body that opposes these fanatics)
Back to christianity being HIJACKED - see what I am saying? As more followers of Christs words (not interpretations or OT) denouce themselves as christian; and these groups continue to: they end up riding our good name as a proponet of mean crap evil.
By Renee
December 21, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this
I think I want to read that book. I’m going to check Barnes & Noble tonight.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this
Renee… it’s a great book… I have, like JBM, read it twice… and have used it as a reference multiple times
By Renee
December 21, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
And this is exactly why we need unions and government regulations to protect workers!
To make business owners care??? Businesses are into business to make money, and to make money only. They may enjoy the business they are in but they want to make money. Unions and government regulations do not care either, don’t be fooled into thinking they are working for us. They also are working for their best interest.
By NotMyProblem
December 21, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this
This year for Christmas my daughter is getting an Ann Coulter doll, rather than an American Girl doll. After all, it’s just a doll, right?
By Renee
December 21, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this
I need to give one to my partners mother for Christmas, she spends all her time printing Bible Verses that she says we need to read (about how wrong our relationship is etc…..)
By Jack
December 21, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this
Lozen. You sound like a socialist. Why not let the govt. run everything, then we wouldn’t have to worry at all.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this
Renee: It’s pretty hard to find in stores, you may have to order from Amazon.com (and you’ll probably get a better price there anyway). Here in Atlanta, I had looked in all the major bookstores before I finally got it from Amazon. Outwrite also sells it - not that you’ll be going there anytime soon… lol
But, it’s an EXCELLENT book, and really answers some oft-thought questions.
By Renee
December 21, 2005 03:01 PM | Link to this
Lol, no I won’t be in Outwrite any time soon. I can order from Amazon though, thanks for the info!
By lozen
December 21, 2005 03:05 PM | Link to this
FatMoose, thanks for the info about the CD player; I’ll look for the manual release this afternoon. I understand what you’re trying to say about evangelicals hijacking the christian faith too. They are the only christians you hear anything about. There are moderate christians who stand up to them and disagree but their views don’t get so much publicity. I belong to the Interfaith Alliance because they are standing up for a different kind of religion. Evangelicals/fundamentalists are very frightening to anyone who knows history at all - anyone who sees what’s happened in the past when these groups get any power. That seems to be what’s happening in this country now. In frightening times (like the terrorism we’re dealing with now) people turn to religion to make them feel more secure. Unfortunately, the millions of evangelicals are the loudest group today. The evanglical minister Walters interviewed last night said there are three parts to being an evangelical: Taking jesus as your savior and knowing he’s the only way to heaven, literal belief that the bible is god’s word and the men who wrote it were inspired by god, and making this message available to everyone in the world. Of course he also said anyone who doesn’t follow jesus (millions of jews, muslims, buddhists, etc.)he believes will go to hell. Of course he didn’t say, “Abortion and homosexuality are sins and we’re going to change the laws in this country so that even people who don’t believe that are forced to comply.” But that is exactly what they are actually doing. There are many christians who don’t believe in judging others, changing laws to force everyone to live by their religious rules, and who believe it is important to try to live like jesus. Most of the fundamentalists/evangelicals I know skip right past jesus and what he taught (no matter what they say) and quote the old testament with it’s angry, judging, slaying god. And all christians to some extent are viewed as being that way, because they don’t refute the evangelical view. The most interesting thing revealed in Walters mostly very shallow program, was the fact that a muslim man in prison for trying to blow up people in Israel believes that his religion is the only “true” religion and the only way to paradise. He and the evangelical minister believed the same: his way was the only way and everyone else was going to hell. It is that narrow minded, self righteous belief that your way is the only way that leads to crusades, terrorism, and taking away the rights of people who believe differently.
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this
Great Book! I found it about 5 years ago and then gave it to my Dad to read. He’s very firm in his beliefs and it definitely changed his view of what’s said. It may also have helped that he was in a Bible Study class at the time that was looking at the Old Testament from a more socio-political-economic view to see how a modern understanding of a parable could differ from the intended message…which is basically the entire premise of the book.
Personally, I don’t agree with teaching Intelligent Design in science class to contrast the Theory of Evolution primarily because there is NO possible way to test the hypothesis posed by ID. Further, Evolution doesn’t address HOW life began or the origins of the Universe or Life which is the basis of ID. Evolution attempts to explain the diversity and changes to life once it started.
Newsweek did an article on Darwin and I think one of the greatest things I’ve read about the debate was in a letter to the magazine from a reader. His point boiled down to ‘If God created the Universe and everything in it, then how can science find anything except what God intended in the first place?’ Kind of knocks the wind out of the fundamentalist’s sails for me.
By Jack
December 21, 2005 03:07 PM | Link to this
Even if the bible says homosexuality is wrong, doesn’t God say we should love all? The bible says not to kill yet abortion clinic doctors are murdered in the name of God. What sense does that make? I try to live life as Jesus wanted but I am for capital punishment. Does that make me a hypocrite? The arguement is God is to be the judge and not man. I think God judges after we leave this world. We didn’t judge Tookie. We sent him to meet God so that God can delve out what is comming to him. Ranting………
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 03:11 PM | Link to this
Renee, wait until the next time your p’s mother gives you some scriptures to read. Then, tell her, “Oh, you know, that reminds me… I have this really good book you might be interested in!” Even if she’s not interested in reading it, she’ll get the message that if she’s asking you to read something, it’s only fair that she read whatever you ask her to.
By Renee
December 21, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this
Good idea!!
By lozen
December 21, 2005 03:29 PM | Link to this
Well, Jack, that might be the way to stop a discussion with some people by calling them a socialist! I don’t care if you think I’m a socialist, there are things much worse than being a socialist IMO. I think Renee and Ken are describing business exactly. Business has no heart or soul. Business is to make money no matter what happens to the little people who actually do the work for the business. We’ve seen that in the past when factories did hire 10 year olds to work 15 hours a day with no breaks and slave wages. Therefore, we need an omsbudsman for the little people and right now the closest thing to that is government regulations and unions. No, they can’t make business care about their employees. There are a lot of people who would pay employees $2.00 an hour if they could, knowing full well nobody could even pay rent and eat on 2 lousey bucks an hour… Business owners have have a tendency to look out for their interests and not care about the best interests of the workers. Workers had to come together in a group (unions) and those unions had to lobby the gov’t for decent wages, decent working hours, breaks, safe working conditions, health benefits, holidays and vacations. And still, workers in this country don’t have the vacation time, 35-hour work week, maternity time off with guaranteed return to your job, subsidized vacation, etc. that ALL those socialist european countries have.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this
Lozen,
Yes, the simalarities bw the evangelical leader and the muslim terrorist is the exact point I was driving at.
Good post.
Jack,
Because of the contradictions that exist if God judges…These are my personal revelations of what being judged comes down to: In the afterlife you have the knowledge of what TRUELY drove your soul here on earth. No one will NEED to judge you - there will be no denial available to you. If you loved well and were compassionate; you will know it each day; yet if you hurt others and yourself - that too will be ever present in your head.
Think about if you never forgot anything coupled with not being able to rationalize away your faults in any manner. That is heaven/hell for me and no one will “send” you there. It is a place we are all creating as we speak.
(Given that notion; no booze/drugs that works to create denial will exist - leaving the notion of a buzz off a beer possible, but it will not be a vehical to separate yourself from what is/was)
That is my rant;)
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this
LOL Jack… I know you weren’t kidding, but it sounded funny anyway.
Here’s my take (for what it’s worth):
Even if the bible says homosexuality is wrong, doesn’t God say we should love all?
Yes, He does.
The bible says not to kill yet abortion clinic doctors are murdered in the name of God. What sense does that make?
To fanatical (fundamentalist) Christians, it doesn’t have to make sense to you or me. It kind of goes back to not knowing Christ for oneself, but knowing Grandma’s God.
I try to live life as Jesus wanted but I am for capital punishment. Does that make me a hypocrite?
Nope. It doesn’t mean that you’re a hypocrite, it just means that you either have a view that is in conflict with Biblical teaching, or you believe your view is supported by Biblical teaching. Either way, there are a whole bunch of Christians that’ll agree. To add my two cents, I don’t think Jesus himself would ever have taken part in executing a criminal regardless of their crime. I often say that I won’t decide what side of that debate I’m on until it hits close enough to home (God forbid).
We didn’t judge Tookie.
Well, we kinda did… not we, but the jury and judge kinda did. The whole idea behind execution is that the judge/jury does not believe the person can be rehabilitated, he’s beyond redemption, he can’t be useful to society. That’s a bit judgmental… predicting a person’s future based on their past…
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 03:41 PM | Link to this
Given that notion; no booze/drugs that works to create denial will exist - leaving the notion of a buzz off a beer possible, but it will not be a vehical to separate yourself from what is/was
Hey FatMoose, how do you know that?
By lozen
December 21, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this
Renee, is there a feminist book store where you live? Atlanta has Charis and they are really struggling. Most feminist and individually owned bookstores are struggling to survive. Charis has been here for 30+ years they are slowly being surrounded by big bookstores that can order big and price their books so low they are losing sales. Charis offers many programs, has a great selection of children’s books, supports the right causes IMO, and I buy all my books there to support them. Just another of my socialist activities , I guess ;->.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this
Business is to make money no matter what happens to the little people who actually do the work for the business.
Although I agree this is a mentality; I also believe that it does not serve the business in the long run. So, as time moves on, and businesses learn that what Costco does serves its money making needs also - they will come around.
But to keep the sweat-shops from opening; policy has to be put in place until this understanding does take hold.
Who should create this policy? Like in ANY other situation as this, someone OUTSIDE of the organization.
This leads the same issue if it is the unions though, since they will be in their best interest and could do harm also (although a lesser one - which IS better). That leaves us with the govmt doing the job - which I would agree with, but it is not too trustworthy and can be bought BY the businesses.
We need a system change-up until people can conduct themselves better. So, maybe we do not deserve the amount of freedoms we have until we grow up a bit….I agree that sucks.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this
lozen… I am with you… the first place I look for a book is Outwrite… more cute guys need to start reading though lol
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 03:51 PM | Link to this
Tim, I was there a couple of weeks ago (for only the second time ever) and it was jam packed! (And, gay guys never offer their seats to a lady, so I had to stand all night… lol). But, anyway, there were plenty of hotties… you gotta try going on a Friday night.
By lozen
December 21, 2005 03:51 PM | Link to this
the muslim paradise includes rivers of wine, FM. And young virgins to serve you. They believe we will have sex in paradise; we’ll have everything good there that we have here. It don’t sound half bad to me.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 03:51 PM | Link to this
JBM, Hey FatMoose, how do you know that?
Did not say I know…
These are my personal revelations of what being judged comes down to:
But can discuss why I come to the conclusions I have if you would like - or is there a Q I am missing here?
By Renee
December 21, 2005 03:53 PM | Link to this
lozen - as far as paying people 2.00 an hour if they could, that may happen. Some jobs (don’t ask me to name any, because this is just an example) may only be worth 2.00 an hour. But we don’t have slaves, therefore, someone can accept the job and the wages or move on to another employer who may pay more, or offer more benefits, or whatever. I’ve taken a considerable pay cut when I moved here, I have yet to find a job in my field, at the salary I know I’m worth. Until that time, I’m working for less wages. Should the government step in to help me?
Also, I’m not sure about any feminist bookstores in the area, I’ve never frequented one anywhere actually.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this
FM, stop being such a smart aleck, geez. Don’t you know how to have a healthy discussion without jumping on the defensive?
Now, you talked about your personal “revelations” of heaven/hell (which left me to wonder who or what revealed that to you). Then, you said that according to your notion (or belief, opinion), drugs that work to create denial won’t exist, except perhaps beer - which still won’t allow you to be separated from what is.
And, my question (paraphrased now) is what makes you believe that this is true? ~sigh~
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 04:00 PM | Link to this
Jack…excellent job on illuminating the contradictions of religion in general. The rules say one thing, but often our actions as humans are contrary or justified by circumstance. The thou shalt not kill is in direct conflict to many conservative christians’ support for the war and yet there doesn’t seem to be much soul searching going on over the fact that lots of innocent people end up dying in a war. For me one of the greatest contradictions is the use of the Old Testament by evangelicals to justify their beliefs and positions. Uhhh..forgive me if I’m missing something here, but the reason there is a New Testament is because Jesus was the new covenant and all the old rules were thrown out. If the old rules are invalid then why do you keep using them to do things like verbally bash gay people and to justify your belief system. The other thing is all kinds of pastor yahoos are always claiming that God wants his people to do this or that…well why hasn’t God told them himself instead of relying solely on the pastor? He hears every prayer, knows when a sparrow falls from the sky, and yet HE can’t communicate effectively with millions of His followers directly? I take this as further proof of my belief that fundamentalists diminish the very God they claim to support so fervently with every rule or constraint they place on Him.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 04:02 PM | Link to this
Renee, some might argue that the government already has stepped in to help you by making sure that you get at least $5.15. You haven’t yet found a good-paying job in your field. What if the only jobs available in VT were jobs paying $2.00/hr?
On another note, hang in there. The same thing happened to me when I moved to Atlanta. I’m now making nearly twice what I was making a couple of years ago. When I moved to Atlanta, I took a 60% paycut and was not working in my field.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 04:08 PM | Link to this
Hey NetB, I can answer one of your questions (based on opinion, of course). God speaks to those who are listening for him. Ideally, pastors spend a lot more time in prayer than lay members (of course I realize this isn’t true in these days), and they are more available to hear God’s voice than the average Joe. So, it’s not that God doesn’t want to speak to others, or that the pastors imply that God only speaks to pastors. He speaks to all those who listen.
The other piece to that is that the belief is that God communicates effectively to all His people through His written word. Apostolics believe that it (the Bible) does not change, and that this is how God speaks to us. Pastors (according to the Apostolic belief) are there to provide teaching and guidance to the people, based on their interpretation of the Word. (This has, of course, gotten wayyyy out of hand).
By Tim
December 21, 2005 04:12 PM | Link to this
JBM… I will have to try Friday night :)… and fyi… know that if there are no seats and no one offers you theirs then I am not there… I always offer my seat to others if there is no where else to sit ;)
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this
JBM,
Beer was purely an example that anything may exist - even heroin, but they will not shield you from truth like they do here.
I was not being a smart aleck or on the defensive. I was explaining that I am not going to talk under the presumption that I KNOW this - but these are some of the notions I have come upon that fit with the bible and its teachings.
I would have thought you would have gotten that since I left the door open to understand your question better.
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 04:19 PM | Link to this
Netbanker:
The thou shalt not kill.
Originally read: The thou shalt not murder.
Homosexuality was replaced by the act of having pre-teen boy-slaves for sex….etc
It has unfortunately been warped by people in power for their own devices.
Fact: Every single sect of christianity started out to be a device to regain POWER from another country/sex/etc. Not one began out of love and truth.
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this
Okay, FM, thanks for the response but you still didn’t answer my question. You seem to believe that drugs may exist, but not the ones that “work to create denial,” and if the ones that work to create denial do exist, they won’t be effective in “separating” a person from “what is/was.”
I’m just really anxious (and curious) to know what gives you the notion that this is true? Who/what gave you this revelation?
By Just Being Me
December 21, 2005 04:24 PM | Link to this
And, when you get up, I’ll stare at you in disbelief and say, “Tim????!!!!!” LOL!
By FatMoose
December 21, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this
JBM,
I’m just really anxious (and curious) to know what gives you the notion that this is true?
No, I believe that given the system put in place by god - all drugs COULD exists, since their greatest harm is denial/separation of ones actions/feelings. That is why, like lozen pointed out, the Coran can state there are rivers of wine - it is not a contradiction of values if the wine cannot create a wino - only a buzz.
Who/what gave you this revelation?
Many things/readings/places/people and meditations - not limited to, but including: bible, physics, people - but mostly trying to understand the contradictions/paradoxes in the bible. If there is a contradiction/paradox, either I have an incorrect understanding, or it has been tampered with - so I meditate on it and think and talk it out.
God very well could be the name of the system people before us that have ascended (Jesus) gave it - Good Orderly Direction.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this
JBM lol
By lozen
December 21, 2005 04:39 PM | Link to this
Netbanker, that puppy is cute, cuter, cutest! I want one too. Did you get her here in GA? You the man on this blog! Your 4:00 post is golden.
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 04:40 PM | Link to this
Tim…cute is in the eye of the beholder and Friday night is quite popular at Outwrite. Half the time though I only seem to encouner young, cute, airheads hoping to meet a cute smartie. My preference is brains over cute because all you need is one tragic accident and the face is never gonna recover. That said, I do LOVE eye candy…and the best thing about it is you can indulge ALL day long and yet you never feel full, don’t gain a pound, and won’t rot your teeth!
I do find it interesting the way people have talked about business as if it is sentient. Business doesn’t care about employee, but then again business itself doesn’t have feelings or care about anything. It is the business owners or managers who set the tone for the organization and determine what to care about.
By lozen
December 21, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this
Ah, yes, the contradictions of religion in general … and that’s why we cannot force our understanding of religion on others because they have their understanding of religion. And it’s why we cannot allow evangelicals/fundamentalists to force their beliefs on everyone in this country.
By Tim
December 21, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this
I like the way you think Netbanker!! :) I sure hope I am not one of the airheads you have seen there ;)
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 04:58 PM | Link to this
Hey Lozen! Abby is a true Southern Belle from Buford, GA. If you want a Westie you need to move quickly. The pups seems to go quickly and if you want a female you really need to move fast. We were the first people to see the pups in her litter and 3 other people called about females while we were there.
Hey JBM…I get what you’re saying since both things your said are also my belief. It just seems to me that those who listen to people claiming to know so much about what God wants them to do would be much served by asking God themselves and listening for an answer. I suppose it gets hard to hear Him when you’ve got a yahoo screaming and pounding his Bible in front of you. If find God ‘talks’ to me most when I’m out walking with the dog…either in a field or the closed road through the woods. Then again it might just be the other people in my head fighting for control. :)
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 04:59 PM | Link to this
What time at Outwrite? Then can we go around the corner to Blake’s for a drink?
By Netbanker
December 21, 2005 05:03 PM | Link to this
I’m blond and my partner will verify that I have lots of moments myself. Sooooo….I’m going to have to call glass, houses, stones on myself over that airhead comment.
By Bruce
December 22, 2005 07:38 AM | Link to this
From reading your post I can see that there are several folks that have this Chritianity thing all figured out so I have a few questions. If you guys know what the Bible is supposed to be saying and how TRUE Christians are supposed to believe why aren’t you in the pulpits sharing your revelations of God’s word? Why aren’t you in the Sunday School classrooms teaching the young and old what it means to be a Christian and how to follow Jesus’ teaching CORRECTLY?
By Ken
December 22, 2005 08:29 AM | Link to this
Lozen (and others)… I totally understand your points about what you believe employers SHOULD do, and how you believe employers SHOULD treat employees. In fact, I personally agree with you on many of them.
However, others in the business world would not agree b/c their concern is about profit, not taking care of their employees. The run the business in the best way they know how to generate the highest profit possible. That is the entire point of a business… TO MAKE MONEY.
Your position, or the way you are currently presenting it, makes me believe you look disparagingly at people who take that POV. You would want people with the means to operate business in such a way to more equally share the wealth of the company. You want the owner to voluntarily take less so he/she can give their employees more. Many employers do that, many don’t. However, should the federal government legislate ideas like that? I say a resounding NO!
That type of legislation is merely another attempt by the federal government to legislate morality. Sure, it is not a hot button topic like sexual morality, but it is morality none the less and he government should not be in the business of governing morality.
To the best of my knowledge, no one in this country is forced to work in particular job. From the time I came of age, I could choose my career path… Learn a trade, go to college, flip burgers, do nothing. My choices led me to my current profession and will carry me to the next one, if another one awaits. B/C that choice exists, the government does not need to set a minimum wage. The free market will sort itself out.
Why do you think that we have so much outsourcing? Do you think that companies want to take business to foreign shores and higher foreign employees. Of course not. But, the American worker (and real estate, etc.), in many cases, has priced themselves out of the marketplace. We see IT professionals from India/Pakistan/etc. Call centers are moved overseas or to very rural parts of our country. Manufacturers are moved overseas. This is b/c Americans cost too much.
Take the striking workers in NYC. Did anyone read what those folks got paid…? $45K-$60K/year (per the article I read). Are you kidding me? The starting salary for teachers can be less than $30K/year. The transit workers are striking b/c they want 8% raises and keep retirement at 55 (again per the article I read) for new employees. The current employees would still be able to retire at 55. If I had such a plan, I would feel fortunate to have that job. This is yet another example of American workers trying to gain more for themselves.
Please, don’t get me wrong… I am all for going out to get the most pay you can. In fact, I will be going through some negotiations in 2006 with my employer. And if they don’t go the way I hope, then I can go get another job, just like those transit workers in NYC.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 08:43 AM | Link to this
Bruce… I am not going to force my beliefs on anyone else… and I highly doubt the local Southern Baptist church would be pleased with me teaching their precious lil cherubs my take on what the Bible truly says about homosexuality
By Ken
December 22, 2005 08:59 AM | Link to this
Tim… What does he Bible “truly” say about homosexuality?
I am curious, b/c as a pretty knowledgable dude when it comes to the Bible, I don’t think I am even sure. At the very least, I could easily defend multiple viewpoints.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 09:10 AM | Link to this
Ken… it would take a lot more than this forum to explain… but in the simplest form… I take the texts in reference to the culture and people it was written for and also have to find the original language it was written in (as with most anything in the Bible to get the true meaning)… and IMO when you do that with any scriptures that supposedly address homosexuality it seems to be more of a cultural issue than something that God views as ‘sin’… when looking at original text there is not one scripture that flat out says that having a relationship with someone of the same sex is a sin
and also… like jack said before… the Bible was written by man… I do use it as a guiding factor… but it is certainly (in my own life) not the final word
I hope that makes sense… if not I would suggest the book that JBM and I were talking about… even if you don’t agree I think most anyone who reads it would find it interesting and would at the very least get one thinking about the subject… because it’s not wrong to questions ones faith… if one isn’t strong enough to question their faith then their faith probably wasn’t that strong to begin with
By Ken
December 22, 2005 09:22 AM | Link to this
Tim… The point of the question was to challenge your statement of “what the Bible truly says.” Truly being the instigating word.
What you just wrote is your interpretation of the Bible through the logic of cultural context, language translations, etc.
I’m not sure if I need to continually question my faith, b/c, that is the nature of faith… you believe without being able to prove. What you are questioning is the way of life your church professes to champion. You are questioning whether homosexuality is a sin. Others question the same things or many others. But questioning those conventions does not question my faith in who Christ was, what he did and how I believe God has redeemed me.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this
Ken… that’s the name of the book
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 09:25 AM | Link to this
Bruce;
From reading your post I can see that there are several folks that have this Chritianity thing all figured out so I have a few questions.
Nope - not all figured out; just some good ideas that seem to fit AND make sence that came out of studying/learning/listening/etc…{read my post on this of you want more}
If you guys know what the Bible is supposed to be saying and how TRUE Christians are supposed to believe why aren’t you in the pulpits sharing your revelations of God’s word?
These are not MY word of how TRUE christians act, but Jesus’ words on how TRUE christians should act - Which I can clearly see is not how many/most operate; and most blatently ignore.
As for sharing in the pulpits: I do.
Why aren’t you in the Sunday School classrooms teaching the young and old what it means to be a Christian and how to follow Jesus’ teaching CORRECTLY?
I am. Maybe not in your church; but I am - and more importantly: I share with those around me, not just people I know, but those I run into all over the place - Like this blog for instance. God is everywhere and it is all a church.
But my point was, why are you and other people not standing up for the Word in YOUR churches when obvious wrongs are stated? Why do you all have such an obvious need to follow an incorrect notion and turn your head blindly?
I shared answers to your questions, now I am waiting for your answers to mine.
For example, why does it not matter to you that the actual translation of homosexuality is so terribly incorrect? Why do you refuse to even STUDY it for yourself? Why do you allow OT to be sermoned to you, when JC came to start a new contract? Why do you not question Corinthians {which is in the NT}, when it refers almost soley to the OT teachings?
By Tim
December 22, 2005 09:26 AM | Link to this
if you are reading my statement where I was addressing Bruce… you seemed to left out the first part of that (same mistake a lot of people make when reading the Bible… don’t look before and after a particular verse)
“my take on what the Bible truly says about homosexuality”
was my actual statement
By Kyle
December 22, 2005 09:31 AM | Link to this
-i think Ken’s 8:29 post pretty much sums up my stance on the union/gov’t regulations issue - couldn’t have said it better myself
-Tim, i certianly agree with you that one must remember that the bible was written by man and inevitably (sp?) subject to some biases or agendas - but as far as homosexuality is concerned, are you saying that jesus and god would approve of a homosexual relationship? or are you simply saying that homosexuals would not be hated simply b/c of thier choice? - while reading this question, keep in mind that i do not consider myself to be very knowledgable about the bible, just curious
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this
Ken,
continually question my faith, b/c, that is the nature of faith
How can you be OK with choosing to not continually LEARN what the bibles message is?
Faith is not the topic of what should be questioned. I have faith, therefore I trust if I keep reading/learning, the parts/notions I have incorrect will be cleared up for me - but patience is needed and humility.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this
Kyle… in my own (very humble) opinion… I don’t think God or Jesus would have a problem with a homosexual relationship… not from anything that is or is not in the Bible… that’s just my own personal belief from my own life experiences
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this
For example:
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders
This refers to the OT, which is its first hint of untruth. That reference in the OT is referring to young-boy-slaves; not two men/women in love - hence the total omission of lesbianism throughout the bible.
Kyle: Yes I think two people who love and help each other are totally accepted; no different than a male/female relationship.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 09:43 AM | Link to this
Ken… when I was talking about questioning… faith was the wrong word to use… should be beliefs… and if you don’t agree with questioning ones beliefs then we will have to agree to disagree
By Jack
December 22, 2005 09:43 AM | Link to this
If we don’t change the subject, Zack, Randy and Chuck will be here soon and will dominate the blog. How bout that guy they connected to 12 unsolved rapes with DNA? They should put a shock belt on him and give all of his victims the button.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this
Tim, don’t you just love when ppl take a phrase from your statement and not the statement in context…
Ken, I too, suggest you read Daniel A. Helminiak’s What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. And, in response to your other comment about the striking workers, the average pay for MTA workers is $50K. In comparison to other public service employees in NYC, and in comparison to other transportation workers across the country, this is not an unusually high salary. In fact, there are very few places you can live in NYC on a salary of $50K. As a former NYer, I can assure you that $50K in NYC is not much money at all. I made that right out of college at 23 years old.
Also, a few years ago, a university on the west coast (don’t remember any of the particulars, only the bottom line) conducted a study to prove that the transp. workers in California, namely San Fran - I think, were among the highest-stressed employees in any industry in the country. The study found that NYC’s transit workers have stress levels that are 2x higher than stockbrokers’, and 20-something percent higher than San Fran’s transit workers, matched only by NYPD employees.
They deserve every penny they can get.
By kimberly
December 22, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this
Tim, I don’t have a problem with who you are or whom you love, and I’ve never read anything in the bible that says I should. I DO have a problem with a—h—-s, however, who think they have the right to judge.
That being said, this holiday SUCKS, people are evil, the world is a mess, the country is like a home where the parents are so busy fighting and trashing each other they don’t have time to pay the bills or care for the kids. (BTW, the entire neighborhood hates us and the pets are just SOL). Narcissism and consumerism reign supreme, and now we’re all supposed to make JOLLY?
Screw jolly. I’m depressed. Not even coming here to pick apart the righties is cheering me up today.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 09:49 AM | Link to this
Jack - that would make a very appropriate punishment. Better yet, they should pull an Abner Louima on him and shove a… nevermind.
Kyle - I know you weren’t asking me, but I’d like to weigh in anyway if I can. Anyone who studies the Bible in depth (and in its original languages) will tell you that there is nothing there that indicates that Jesus would disapprove of a homosexual relationship.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, depression is common during the holiday season. Try to focus on the positive, and work on neutralizing negative thoughts.
By Ken
December 22, 2005 09:58 AM | Link to this
Tim… I purposely left out the “my take” portion in an effor to make you reiterate it. If it is your take, you can not say “truly says”. In your statement, those terms are contextually paradoxical.
What you wrote is your interpretation of what the Bible says. Nothing more. Nothing less. And if your church asks you to teach Sunday School, then you should teach those ideas with conviction and without shame or remorse, otherwise, I question your true belief in those statements.
FatMoose… You are absolutely correct that faith is not the topic to be questioned. Which was my statement entirely. Questioning the conventions and the meanings of the scripture is one thing. Questioning my core “beliefs” is not necessary (think of the Apostle’s creed if you ever attended a mainline denominational church).
I am interested, however, in what you define as LEARNING what the Bible’s message is. If one emerses oneself in the text of Bible and knows it backwards and forwards, is that learning? Does one need to read the various translations, b/c they are different? Does one need to read outside literature from more learned authors? Does one need to attend different churches? Where does it end? Does it have an end? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t.
You see, your last statement is where you and I differ. I do not believe that I myself, through my actions can ever read enough, or learn enough to complete my faith or make things clear. God does that, I simply need to be open to the message he gives to me.
He created us all. He created everything. God loves me (and everyone else out there) as I (they) am (are). Period.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this
Cheer up Kimberly. As least we’re seeing another Christmas!
By Ken
December 22, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this
JBM… I guess you have studied he Bible in it’s original languages…? And even if you did, you would have studied them in the original language, but creating your own translation since there is NO WAY you could have transported your thought process to be a person of first century Palestine.
Also… I appreciate the suggested reading, however, I believe that my faith and conduct in this world transends a particular issue like homosexuality. I believe that puts faith in a box and hurts in the long run.
Whether or not I believe homosexuality or any other issue is a sin or not a sin SHOULD NOT and CAN NOT alter the way I treat people. I am called to care for them, to love them, regardless or what they do or don’t do.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 10:07 AM | Link to this
Ken… just a couple of questions… who are you to say what I can and cannot say? I stand by my statement “my take on what the Bible truly says”… I find nothing wrong with that statement… also, when did I say I wouldn’t teach a Sunday School class… the other thing I said was I highly doubt the local Southern Baptist church would be very pleased with me teaching their lil cherubs that homosexual relationships are ok… I do stand firm in my belief and if someone asked me to teach those to others… I would gladly do so (just not 4 and 5 year olds… last time I taught the 4 and 5 year old Sunday School class a 4 year old boy proceeded to inform me that Eve ate the apple and that is why women hurt when they have babies… during the very first class… those lil mongrels are scary lol)
By Chilao
December 22, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this
Merry Christmas, Kimberly
it is just a ‘that time of year’ thing, happens to many. You will probably feel much better in about 5 days. LOL
I know I always did…..
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this
Ken, I think you’re either wrong or misunderstanding what Tim is saying.
There is nothing paradoxical about the statement. Paraphrased, he’s saying that he doesn’t think the local church would be pleased with his teaching what he believes the Bible is really (or truly, as he put it) saying about homosexuality.
And, his underlying point (I’m making an assumption here) is not that he wouldn’t teach those truths, but that the local church would never allow him to teach those truths. Doesn’t mean he can’t teach them without shame or remorse.
By kimberlyl
December 22, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this
Jack, thanks, but what the heck does THAT mean? Yes, we’ll see another Christmas…. As a single parent that means sleep deprivation, lots of work, debt, and the overwhelming sense of guilt for all the people who are cold, hungry, sick, poor, bereaved, and this year, and especially, for all those who lost everything in the storms. Can you even imagine? I’d be happy to celebrate humbly and quietly, but NOOOOOO… I have to go shopping now. My extended family will accept nothing less than a plastered fake smile on Sunday and lots of forced positivity.
Oh yeah… “Santa” doesn’t love me anymore. He says he still wants me, you know, but he wants me to “find someone else.” HO-HO f-ing HO.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this
Kimberly. You are a sweet thing and we love you. :)
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this
Ken, the only reason I suggested you read the book is because of your 8:59a, in which you said: Tim… What does he Bible “truly� say about homosexuality?
I am curious, b/c as a pretty knowledgable dude when it comes to the Bible, I don’t think I am even sure. At the very least, I could easily defend multiple viewpoints.
I don’t just go around telling people to read that book. I suggested you read it because you asked what the Bible truly says about homosexuality, and Tim didn’t think he could effectively discuss it via the blog.
And, to answer your other question, I haven’t studied the Bible comprehensively in its original languages, but I have taken a couple of courses in Greek and Hebrew translations of the Bible - even took one sponsored by a Jewish synagogue. Often times when I study the Bible, I use my Greek and Hebrew dictionaries, and it helps a great deal. I don’t pretend to know the intentions of the Biblical writers, but one would be a fool to think that being familiar with the original languages won’t help.
All in all, I completely agree with your third paragraph.
By Beth
December 22, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this
Girls Inc. Is a much needed organization that gives girls empowerment over their lives. That includes accepting who they are, whether mainstream conservative Christians do or not.It includes teaching them about sex and it’s consequences and how to make good choices for their lives. The group is centered mostly in inner cities where numerous girls are educated only by their peers on the street, and they face enormous pressure to do what’s “cool”, including have sex. Girls Inc. is a place they can go to get out from under that pressure, and to learn that they don’t have to have sex to be “cool”, or have baby very young to be loved. They support legal abortion, yes, how could you counsel a young girl pregnant from rape or incestuous molestation, and not support legal safe abortion for her? The concept is legal, safe , and rare. If conservatives truly wish to conserve they would support that instead of insisting abortions be illegal while providing no help to make them less necessary. So, from me, Yes, little girl you CAN. You CAN be yourself, you CAN be strong, you CAN be educated, and you CAN be safe!
By Nikki
December 22, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this
Because there are “few gay people” or “few liberal people” in the South (which is a huge assumption, but whatever) doesn’t mean we “don’t matter.” That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard in a while. Everyone matters, even people with whom you disagree. Liberal sexuality message? What? Please, someone explain to me why it’s wrong or bad or harmful for girls and young women to have a truthful and complete understanding of their bodies and how they work, so that they are able to make better choices? Ignorance is not a better choice. Getting pregnant due to misinformation about condoms or lack of a complete and accruate sex education is not a better choice. And intolerance, hate, and bigotry aren’t better choices either. I’m as heterosexual as the next person, but I’m not under the impression that it makes me better than anyone else, or that it gives me the opporutnity or right to abrogate the rights of others. People who are not exactly like you exist, and they have rights, too. Get over it already. No one wants to take your Jesus from you.
By Kyle
December 22, 2005 10:30 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, that was a pretty depressing and scroge-like post - if it makes you feel better, you can make fun of me all day (i would probably qualify as one of the “righties” that you were speaking of). just do what i do every year around this time and watch chevy chase in christmas vacation, that should cheer you up - at least a little
-as for the several responses to my questions about homosexuality, i generally agree with all of you. as long as one person isn’t harming another, i don’t think its any of our place to judge and/or hate others for any lifestyle they choose - live and let live
By Jack
December 22, 2005 10:33 AM | Link to this
OK. But Santa really does love you. Now, put on that plastic smile and go shopping. When I said at “least you’re seeing another Christmas” I meant that you are still alive and can see your children smile on Christmas morning. I gotta go, they’ve brought a bunch of food into the office and it is calling me.
By Renee
December 22, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this
JBM & Tim - I ordered two copies last night!!!!!!!
By Tim
December 22, 2005 10:39 AM | Link to this
Renee… woohoo :)… I am sure you will like it… take a pic of your “mother-in-law’s” face when you give her her coby ;)
By Ken
December 22, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this
JBM and Tim… People proclaim the Bible to “truly” say/mean lots of things.
The point is when someone uses the term “truly” it implies they know the meaning and others don’t, which is EXACTLY what those same people are fighting against. The same can be said for any book title “What the Bible Really Says About … (anything)”. It is simply one person or group’s interpretation, more than likely defending a particular position.
Based on the suggested reading from this BLOG I can assume it gives a pro-homosexual stance. I do not need to read a book to understand that point of view, I can read the Bible on my own and see it. Just as I would not need to read a book about the opposing POV, b/c I can read the Bible on my own and see that one as well.
The point is, it does not matter to me if it is or isn’t a sin, b/c I am going to provide the same care and attention to a homosexual or heterosexual given the same opportunity. When we get to place where that is the prevelant point of view, we will be a lot better off.
Continual disection of the issue, like the book you suggested, in my opinion only hurts that process. When we stop making issue about homosexual/heterosexual or whatever other things make us different, we stop ackowledgment of our differences. Once we stop acknowledging the differences, we are free to see that we are all humans, created by God. Only then will we ever see true harmony.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 10:44 AM | Link to this
copy*
By Renee
December 22, 2005 10:47 AM | Link to this
Tim - I will. Cell phone will be ready as I hand the book over!
By Tim
December 22, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this
LMAO @ Renee
By Jack
December 22, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this
Renee’ & JBM. Y’all are sweet things too. :)
By Tim
December 22, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this
Ken… it’s great that you believe that… but the problem is that there are still people who will stand and harrass people at a pride event… or will stand outside a gay wedding and protest… b/c of what they believe the Bible says about homosexuality… and I don’t think that is becasue of some book that I have read… the problem isn’t with a book I read… the problem is with that people I just mentioned
By kimberly
December 22, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this
Jack… um.. you’re too sweet today. Hittin’ the hot buttered rum already? Lil’ egg nog? Lil’ holiday puff puff? Please tell me your secret, ‘cause I haven’t found anything to assuage my desire to lock myself in a closet with a shopping bag over my head.
By Renee
December 22, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this
Thanks Jack!!!!!!!!
By The72John
December 22, 2005 11:34 AM | Link to this
You know, there’s no reason to bury yourself in crushing guilt because others are less fortunate. It’s OK to enjoy your own life. It’s not OK to be callous about others, but it IS OK to think about yourself once in a while - it’s all part of a balanced psyche.
So, Merry Christmas or Happy Hannukah, or whatever you say about Kwanza.
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this
Does one need to read the various translations, b/c they are different? Does one need to read outside literature from more learned authors? Does one need to attend different churches? Where does it end? Does it have an end? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t.
Yes, Yes, Yes, It doesnt end until death.
I FEEL I receive wider vision when I am ready - which usually means having more data.
Example: You learn the quadratic equation, completing the square, simplifying an equation…etc; only AFTER those instances of learning do you attain the concept of solving/understanding “A 6ft tall man walks at 5m/sec away from a 50m lightpost at a nw direction. How fast does his shadow grow/shrink? What path does his shadow follow…etc…
Is it work? Yes; but that is what we are here for: to grow and learn the concepts - not the instances, and it is infinite. And since it is infinite; we always have work to do, we will want to resist that work bc we are human, which is why we are sinners that are always in recovery.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this
Kimberly. I’m feeling my oats! (whats left of them!)
By Jack
December 22, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this
I feel wider vision after consuming certain substances that are not socially acceptable. (well, acceptable to some)
By Kyle
December 22, 2005 11:55 AM | Link to this
Beth, i think your kinda missing the point here. i know nothing about girls inc., but i don’t really think the orgiinal question on this blog was directed at judging the qualities of this organization, but rather one’s rights to disagree with a company’s position and one’s right to voice that disagreement with their dollar; i.e. capitalism. the question was whether or not the american girl should partner with a pro-choice group (girls inc.). well, the answer to this question is yes - if they are prepared to accept the reactions of some of their customers. boycotters aren’t claiming anyone is taking away their religion nor are they trying to push thier religion on others - they simply disagree. american girl, you CAN make your own business decisions, you CAN make bracelets with positive messages for little girls, and you CAN even partner with a pro-choice group; however, customers CAN choose to not buy from you if they strongly disagree with a position/belief of your business partner. the only alternative would be for the public to either be forced to by from american girl or be kept in the dark as to their business practices (neither of which seem appealing). haven’t you ever decided not to buy a product or service b/c you didn’t like the practices of that company?
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 11:55 AM | Link to this
Ken I agree with almost everything you said in your morning post about business and morality with the exception of the American worker (and real estate, etc.), in many cases, has priced themselves out of the marketplace. I’m not sure I fully agree that it is the worker who is responsible since they have no control over the rates of inflation (thus cost of living raises) and definitely not the outrageous rises in health care costs. American businesses are not on a level playing field with most other industrialized countries primarily due to tax treatment and more importantly health care. Most other industrialized nations have some form of nationalized health care so businesses are not paying any cost nor are they impacted by changes in health care costs. A clear example is GM (I hope I picked the right car company because it might have been Ford) advising that $1500 of each new vehicle is purely employee health care costs that they pass on to consumers.
I haven’t really put much study or research into nationalized health care to fully stake a position or consider various implications. That said, my morals lead me to believe that we should have some minimum level of guaranteed health care for every legal citizen and resident of the U.S. For me it is similar to our approach to free education for children. This is done because it is good for the nation as a whole to have a somewhat educated workforce. (I use the term somewhat educated since how educated one becomes depends on the effort and value one personally places on education) If this is a good thing for our society then why wouldn’t we also make sure that at the very minimum every child has guaranteed access to health care? Why shouldn’t every adult have some level of guaranteed health care? Taking a preventive care approach would certainly save us a fair amount of costs for missed work, cheaper care than using an Emergency Room, etc. One of the major contributors to the rising cost of health care is administrative costs. Oddly enough the admin costs for both the VA and Medicaid/Medicare programs runs LESS than the costs for private insurance. The ratio I read was roughly 4% for the gov’t programs and 12% for private insurance admin costs. I support the ability to purchase private insurance that goes beyond the guaranteed minimum. I ultimately believe that we’ll end up with some form of socialized health care due to pressure from businesses rather than political parties or individuals. It will become a matter of competitiveness in a world economy.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this
(I think he’s a bit sharper than a marble.)
By amber
December 22, 2005 12:04 PM | Link to this
I applaud American Girl for their decision to partner with Girls, Inc. I will support them with my dollars. And I’m going to send them an email and tell them that, ask why they took the bracelets off the market, and tell them I want them back!
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
(I think he’s a bit sharper than a marble.)
Curious as to who this is refering to; and if it is a complement - Want to be sure I am laughing for the right reasons;)
By Jack
December 22, 2005 12:23 PM | Link to this
NetB of course. His Dad was wrong.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this
Did I hear you say that there must be a catch? Will you walk away from a fool and his money? Sorry! If you want it, here it is. Come and get it. Mmmmmmm.
You better hurry cause it’s going fast.
Better get more posts or I’ll keep singing!
By lozen
December 22, 2005 12:28 PM | Link to this
Happy, happy holidays everyone. Today is our last day at work until Jan. 3! Life is sweet. And a very happy, healthy, filled with love, and prosperous new year.
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this
Lozen,
Happy holidays to you too.
Get the CD out?
By Jack
December 22, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this
Sugar is sweet my love, but not as sweet as you.
By Ken
December 22, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this
Netbanker… Can’t agree with you more that most of us American workers are not much of a factor in the rise of health care cost and some other increases to the cost of living. However, wouldn’t you agree that many of us can mitigate the increases through better planning and living below rather than at or above our wage allows?
Also, interesting statistics about the administrative costs of VA and Medicare/Medicaid? Not sure what they are for the company my employer uses, but what I do know is that the service I receive, and the choices I have are the best of any insurance plan I have ever been a part of.
By dee
December 22, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this
By Bruce — From reading your post I can see that there are several folks that have this Chritianity thing all figured out so I have a few questions. If you guys know what the Bible is supposed to be saying and how TRUE Christians are supposed to believe why aren’t you in the pulpits sharing your revelations of God’s word? Why aren’t you in the Sunday School classrooms teaching the young and old what it means to be a Christian and how to follow Jesus’ teaching CORRECTLY?
Living your life the right way, (leading by example), is alway the best teacher.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the sweet comment, Jack!
Netbanker is wayyyy sharper than a marble. Jack, didn’t you disagree with the concept of nationalized health care?
By Jack
December 22, 2005 12:53 PM | Link to this
Litigious (sic) people and their lawyers have a lot to do with the high cost of heathcare. Tort reform is in order. If one brings forth a frivolous lawsuit such as the lady suing Mickey D’s for her obese children should be made to pay all cost associated with the suit. If the plaintiff cannot pay, their lawyer should.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 12:59 PM | Link to this
No. I disagreed with the folks wanting the govt. to regulate everything. However, I do not endorse universal healthcare provided for with our tax dollars. Just the cost of the medicare prescription program is going to cost our children 1/2 their paychecks.
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this
Jack, my Dad and I still joke about that every now and again. The other day we were dicussing some things happening at my job and he told me it boggles his mind sometimes that people actually pay his little boy to make big decisions and set the direction of the company. It’s not a matter of The Peter Principle, but for him and my Mother I’ll always be “The Baby.”
I have been very lucky to have grown up in a family full readers that always encouraged discussing and debating current issues. It makes for very lively family gatherings which is one thing I’ll miss about not going ‘home’ this year. One year my cousin’s boyfriend remarked after his first post-holiday dinner Jeopardy viewing that he’d never seen an extended family watch a quiz show and that between us someone knew every single answer. The verbal exchange after was basically Aunt…”Yes, between us we all do seem to be able to cover a lot of territory” Great Uncle teasing…”Are you trying to say we’re full of s**?” Brother…”Of course not…it’s just that our brains are cess pools of useless information”
Chin up, Kimberly! It’s hard not to be overwhelmed by the commercialism of the holiday and even harder to spot that true spirit of Christmas. Which is why you need to show it to others even if it’s in very small ways like letting someone else in line in front of you, stopping to help them pick up a dropped item in the store, holding open a door, being extra nice to an overwhelmed store clerk and being sure to give them a smile and heart felt “Merry Christmas.”
Christmas spirit is like that part of Midnight Mass when the lights are out, the priest lights a candle from the Advent Wreath and then brings the flame down to the congregation and lights the candle of person at the end of the very first pew. From there the light slowly spreads throughout the nave until the entire church is filled with light. Taking a moment to be kind to someone during this stressful time is just like touching your candle to theirs to spread the light. Look at their eyes and you’ll see that flicker of Christmas in them.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this
I may not agree with him but I recognize intelligence when I see it. (even though I’m lacking it.)
By dee
December 22, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this
Being a single parent at ths time of year can be depressing and trying to understand someone’s imminent desertion, (leaving) can do that also. But please remember, that you are not alone and there is always someone who is willing to help you pull it together and keep it together (at least until all the relatives leave).
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 01:15 PM | Link to this
Ken…adjusting how we live and spend is a good exercise to make sure one is prepared for ANY emergency or situation. I think people have forgotten to ask if they have enough, if buying the bigger or more expensive (Fill in the blank) is really that important or will improve their life, and most importantly is it something I want or something I need. In my household we make sure that our needs come first (especially the need to save for retirement because I don’t trust that SS will survive to my retirement) before satisfying a want. And we scrutinize our wants.
Actually Jack the medical tort reform done here in GA didn’t solve the problem at all. Research shows that there really are not that many malpractice suits filed and for the most part the sums awarded to victims aren’t all that outrageous. that justification is a smoke screen. The majority of rising health care costs are administrative and drug cost related. Anyone notice the skyrocketing profits of drug companies? Who here noted a recent government study that showed drug companies spend more on direct consumer advertising (Think “The little purple pill” ads) than on R&D? This same study also noted that most major pharmaceutical breakthroughs come from either Universities or research done with government grants.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this
Oh yeah, I didn’t mean it that way. I know you can disagree with a person and still admire the intelligence with which they made their argument.
My asking if you disagreed with the concept of nationalized health care should’ve been a different paragraph.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 01:19 PM | Link to this
OK. Should have bought stock in the company that came up with the little “blue” pill.
By Jack
December 22, 2005 01:21 PM | Link to this
This workday is going sooooooooooo slowwwwwwwww. Mercy.
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this
That medicare program is a load of $$ for the drug companies! Why is it that the VA is allowed to negotiate drug prices to recieve bulk discounts, but Medicare can’t? What brilliant politician decided to not follow one of the basic principles of business which is to negotiate the best price possible? OH right…the politicians who got big, fat checks from the drug companies and who also won’t ever need to worry about the plebian health care systems due to the congressional system they’re guaranteed for life.
By Tim
December 22, 2005 01:23 PM | Link to this
This workday is going sooooooooooo slowwwwwwwww. Mercy
AAAAAAAAAAMEN Jack!
By Ken
December 22, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this
Netbanker… I would be interested to know how much of the prescription drug increase is due primarily to greater number of prescription drugs available?
I am fortunate and have not had to take too many meds, I only know what I see through reading articles, watching TV, etc. It appears there is a drug available for everything. For example… I now see multiple cholesterol medications on the market. There was a time not too long ago when we didn’t have any. The simple use of this new drug, regardless of it’s actual cost, will raise prescription drug costs. More prescriptions, higher costs.
Perhaps we are in a society that simply relies too much on meds? I mean, in the previous example. if folks simply ate better, stopped excessive behavior and exercised, would we see acceptable reduction in cholesterol levels? Would we then only prescribe the previously mentioned meds for folks who need it after all of the “natural” methods have been exhausted. Not sure, but just a thought.
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 01:31 PM | Link to this
Perhaps we are in a society that simply relies too much on meds?
Unquestionably. Obviously, there are many more medications that are available today which are quality-of-life-enhancing, or even life-saving. But, too many in our society rely on medications in place of preventive care (i.e. proper diet, excercise, etc.).
By Ken
December 22, 2005 01:40 PM | Link to this
JBM… But does that reliance cause the prescription drug costs to increase…?
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this
Ken - I would bet that drug reliance is a small factor (but a factor nonetheless) in the increase of prescription drugs. Supply and demand. But, I also think it is based on (their) insurance rates, advertising - as NetB mentioned earlier, and the need for greater profitability.
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 02:02 PM | Link to this
Ken those are very good thoughts. Sadly the more simple a solution the less likely it seems to be implemented. Getting people to eat better and to be more active would resolve a great many of our nation’s health issues. I still believe that Americans are basically getting screwed by the drug companies. Why is it that they can see the same drugs much less expensively in other countries? Why do Americans spend more on health care than any other nation even when there are millions of us with no insurance and no health care? To some degree America is the cash cow for the drug companies. Why else would they spend billions on direct consumer advertising? It used to be that those $$ were only spent marketing to the people who could write prescriptions.
Our system is now about money and not providing the best care to patients. I’ve had conversations with my own doc and also experienced my own problems. For example my insurance company made an unannounced change to the drug formulary. Ambien is no longer covered, but other sleeping pills that work differently are covered because they’re older and cheaper than the Ambien. The problem is that, for my partner, these other drugs don’t work and according to our doctor they are highly addictive and stay in the body for 8-10 hours which can result in sleeping pill ‘hangovers.’ So he’s forced to take a drug that doesn’t work as well, is addictive, and generally results in being sleepy the next day when he needs to be driving to work so that the insurance company can save a few $$ up front. When I called to complain they didn’t really give a hoot and the lady even agreed with me that in the long run covering drug rehab and/or the cost of an accident from being sleepy due to the cheaper drug will cost the insurance company far more $$ in the long run than they’ll save now.
By Netbanker
December 22, 2005 02:24 PM | Link to this
Ok kids…I’ve had enough of this work thing today so I’m going home! Actually what I need to get done isn’t anything that I can’t do from my home office so I’m scooting out to avoid traffice. I might drop back in later today.
For members of our blogging family who won’t be around tomorrow…MerryHappy ChristmaHanaKwanzica to All!
By Just Being Me
December 22, 2005 02:33 PM | Link to this
LOL@ NetB! Have a MerryHappy one of those yourself! :-)
By Jack
December 22, 2005 03:27 PM | Link to this
Merry Christmas and much love to everyone. Hope Santa brings all everything wanted.
By Bruce
December 22, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this
FM,
I apologize but work carried me away this morning.
From you post this morning am I correct in assuming you are a preacher? If so, what church, maybe I can stop by one Sunday.
And you are a Sunday School teacher also? Impressive! If Christians have it all wrong wouldn’t it best to START there and have a few more folks helping you right the wrong?
As for your questions: When I study the Bible I open my heart up and allow the HOLY SPIRIT to translate what I am reading and its TRUE meaning. I do not rely soley on preachers, teachers, or other books that are driven by personal opinion. God speaks to me through His written word, through circumstances, and sometimes even other people. But mainly I allow the Holy Spirit to TEACH me what the Bible says and how I am to apply it to my own life. But when I try to share MY good ideas that seem to fit I am called a FUNDIE. If Zack, Chuck, Randy or I try to stand up for what we believe just look at the names we are called and how we are treated. All we are trying to do is stand for what we believe. Where’s the tolerance we are asked to show?
Can I assume that you are including yourself in the phrase “Which I can clearly see is not how many/most operate; and most blatently ignore.”?
Jesus Himself said: I come not to do away with the OT but to fulfill it. The OT cannot be thrown out just because Jesus died for my sins. The OT layed the ground work for what Jesus was to do when/after he came. It is the foundation for what Christians believe. Jesus came to show us how to apply its (OT)teachings to our lives. Once He assended back to heaven He sent the Holy Spirit to help guide us, through His word, both OT and NT. But as a preacher you knew that already, right?
By Bruce
December 22, 2005 03:53 PM | Link to this
I hope each of you have a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Signing off until next year. God Bless you every one.
By FatMoose
December 22, 2005 04:09 PM | Link to this
Bruce,
Been busy also.
From you post this morning am I correct in assuming you are a preacher? If so, what church, maybe I can stop by one Sunday.
You derive a lot from my words; hence my assertion of followers reading into the bible what is not there and making it ONE-DIMENTIONAL {black/white}.
I said what I said in my post; no need to re-iterate, but you are welcome to re-read it:*As for sharing in the pulpits: I do.
Why aren’t you in the Sunday School classrooms teaching the young and old what it means to be a Christian and how to follow Jesus’ teaching CORRECTLY?
I am. Maybe not in your church; but I am - and more importantly: I share with those around me, not just people I know, but those I run into all over the place - Like this blog for instance. God is everywhere and it is all a church*
As for stopping by; I do not think it productive/healthy to have kids a part of this discussion.
Curious, never have come across the line: I come not to do away with the OT but to fulfill it
But do know of: Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.
Which are two totally different meanings - Yours encapsulates the whole OT; where-as the second only states that THE LAW (Ten Commandments) and Prophets are not invalidated.
He states clearly that the laws of MAN are void - as are those scholars that wrote/made them.
Fulfull has some intersting meanings also. One fulfills gradeschool by graduating, and goes on to middle school; but one no longer needs to walk single file along the right of the hall Or need a hall pass in college - think deeper - it does not state it is culmative, quite the opposite;)
I will continue talking with you IF you refrain from putting words in my mouth - and keep your snot free;)
{sorry for any spelling, but in a rush at work}
By Bruce
December 23, 2005 07:55 AM | Link to this
FM,
I do apologize if I offended you in any way. But you did give the impression you were a preacher and Sunday School teacher. And since I had that impression, taken from what you wrote, I do not feel I put any words in your mouth. But again, I apologize.
Even if I did not quote the scripture word for word apparently you knew what I was talking about. Since the Prophets are the ones who wrote the OT and Jesus validated them then wouldn’t that scripture, you quoted, say pretty much the same as what the Holy Spirit lead me to believe that scripture says?
By the laws of man can I assume you mean the many religious laws that were in place during that age? Maybe that is why Jesus said the greatest laws were to love God first and your neighbor second. But as you have said we have a problem putting God first, even before ourselves.
This leads me to believe that is why so many people are so willing to use other writings than the Bible to justify their lifes. Instead of allowing the Holy Spirit to translate what the Bible has to say, on any subject, we turn to other men and women and get their opinion. That is why I do not go to any church function without my Bible. So I can read the scripture for myself and open my heart to the Holy Spirit.
What did you mean by adding kids to the discussion? I’m a bit lost on that one. You say you talk the talk but when I suggest I come listen to to you I am called a kid? Did I misunderstand?
By RANDY
December 23, 2005 09:33 AM | Link to this
To all the Christian commentators on this site(Chuck, Bruce, Boscoe, Zack, Suzan), GREAT job, anyone who doesn’t understand God and Jesus after your super intelligent discussions, must not want to know. Which I’m sure that’s their intention. MERRY CHRISTMAS.
By Netbanker
December 23, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this
Is it time to go home, yet?
By Netbanker
December 23, 2005 10:01 AM | Link to this
Randy…Merry Christmas and best wishes for a healthy, happy New Year. And shame on you at the same time for the snide remark about the intentions of those who don’t subscribe to your brand of belief.
Faith is like a wheel with God at the center and the spokes being the various religions/beliefs that lead us all to Him. A wheel only remains stable when all the spokes are in place. Please consider this before denigrating the other spokes and the people who follow a different path to reach God. Our relationships with Him are personal and He speaks to each of us individually.
By Bruce
December 23, 2005 10:18 AM | Link to this
Netbanker,
I must respectfully disagree with you on your last post. The Bible teaches that there is but one way to God and that is through accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. You can be part of whatever religion you want and believe whatever you want but unless you have that relationship with Jesus you will never reach God. That is not my judgement but God’s.
By Jack
December 23, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this
I just love getting sermons. Especialy on this blog. Thank you Bruce for your dedication Your’s and Randy, Zack, Chuck, and Boscoe’s posts have been quite enlightening and entertaining. Please continue for 2006 and convert as many people as you can,after all, since very few are going to make it to heaven you should work really hard so that you have company up there. Merry Christmas.
By Jack
December 23, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this
It’s time to go home Net. All work and no play makes NetB a dull boy.
By Atheist
December 23, 2005 01:29 PM | Link to this
Merry Christmas
By Netbanker
December 23, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this
The Boss just gave us the get out of here signal! Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all!
‘See’ everyone next week or next year!
By Renee
December 23, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this
Merry Xmas everyone. I’ve been so busy today but I should be back on next week. Be safe!!!!!!!!!!
By Denise
December 28, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this
I’m a doll collector. I celebrate Christmas, and I don’t go to church. I bought an American girl for my 9-year old niece. I hope she grows up in a world where her decisions matter. I want to guide her to be her best…no matter what she chooses to become. So if she ends up being a lawyer for a gay rights activist who sent pregnant Barbie to all her republican friends, so be it. Watching them cringe would almost be worth the expense. :-)