The Political Junkie
I would rather someone be wrapped in the Constitution burning the flag than wrapped in the flag burning the Constitution. In other words, as Patrick Henry famously said, "Give me liberty or give me death."
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Thursday, May 09, 2013
God, Christianity, Global Warming, the Environment and Earth.
The following quotes are from a article written by Eric W. Dolan, for "Raw Story" news -- Wednesday, May 8, 2013 22:57 EDT:
"And the nations were enraged, and Your wrath came, and the time came for the dead to be judged, and the time to reward Your bond-servants the prophets and the saints and those who fear Your name, the small and the great, and to destroy those who destroy the earth."
I was always taught as a Christian that "God" let's humans make their own mistakes, and that we must answer for them. If you owned some land, and you let your teen-ager camp on it with his friends and they burned it down, or dumped toxic chemicals on it, would you be happy or angry? Would you prevent that teen-ager from facing the consequences of such poor decision making? Not if you wanted them to learn how to respect people and their property. So, again, why would "God" prevent us from facing the negative consequences of ruining the home he benevolently granted to us? He was furious with Adam and Eve enough to throw them out of his perfect "Garden of Eden" for just eating fruit from his special tree. Imagine how happy he'd be if they (Adam and Eve) dumped toxic chemicals into the rivers and streams of that garden!!
Therefore, we shouldn't treat the Earth like our own sewer system and dump. If even a tattoo defaces the "God's gift" of a human body, then how much bigger of a desecration is ruining "God's" gift of the Earth?!!
In conclusion, ignoring the harm we are doing to the environment while claiming "God" will prevent us from ourselves is pure greed and arrogance wrapped in a delusion.
In a nearly 17-minute speech on Wednesday evening, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) blasted an unnamed senator for saying God would protect the Earth from climate change. “I was recently at a Senate hearing where I heard a member of our Senate community say, ‘God won’t allow us to ruin our planet,’” he remarked on the Senate floor. “Maybe that is why we do nothing.” “Where in the Bible are we assured of safety if we do? I see no assurances of that. So why then, when we ignore his plain, natural laws, when we ignore the obvious conclusions to be drawn by our God-given intellect and reason, why then would God, the tidy-up God, drop in and spare us?” he added. “Why would he allow an innocent child to burn its hand when it touches the hot stove but protect us from this lesson? Why would he allow a badly engineered bridge or building to fall, killing innocent people, but protect us from this mistake?”James: I'm not a Christian, but I use to be. I never understood why some Christians oppose environmentalism--even during the time that I was a Christian!! Why would "God" save ourselves from ruining Earth? Does he save society from terrorists blowing up innocent people? Nope. Does he save us from criminals burning our houses down? Again, no. How about wars that not only destroy the Earth, but countless innocent lives? Not a chance. Therefore, if "God" will punish us severely for doing something like lying, then isn't it logical that he would punish us for destroying his garden? The only home he gave us? This from Revelations in the Bible (Rev. 11:18):
"And the nations were enraged, and Your wrath came, and the time came for the dead to be judged, and the time to reward Your bond-servants the prophets and the saints and those who fear Your name, the small and the great, and to destroy those who destroy the earth."
I was always taught as a Christian that "God" let's humans make their own mistakes, and that we must answer for them. If you owned some land, and you let your teen-ager camp on it with his friends and they burned it down, or dumped toxic chemicals on it, would you be happy or angry? Would you prevent that teen-ager from facing the consequences of such poor decision making? Not if you wanted them to learn how to respect people and their property. So, again, why would "God" prevent us from facing the negative consequences of ruining the home he benevolently granted to us? He was furious with Adam and Eve enough to throw them out of his perfect "Garden of Eden" for just eating fruit from his special tree. Imagine how happy he'd be if they (Adam and Eve) dumped toxic chemicals into the rivers and streams of that garden!!
Therefore, we shouldn't treat the Earth like our own sewer system and dump. If even a tattoo defaces the "God's gift" of a human body, then how much bigger of a desecration is ruining "God's" gift of the Earth?!!
In conclusion, ignoring the harm we are doing to the environment while claiming "God" will prevent us from ourselves is pure greed and arrogance wrapped in a delusion.
---End of Transmission---
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Pictures and Video of Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects.
From CNN: The FBI on Thursday released photos and video of two men it called suspects in the deadly bombings at the Boston Marathon and pleaded for public help in identifying them. If you have seen, and/or know the men in the following pictures, call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324).
SUSPECT #1:
SUSPECT #2:
VIDEO:
IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING CONTACT: 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit, bostonmarathontips.fbi.gov
Saturday, April 13, 2013
A Compromise Between the U.S. Federal Government and State's that Legalize Marijuana.
NEW YORK -- Republicans and Democrats in Congress are coming together in defense of states' rights -- and marijuana. Rep. Dana Rohrbacher (R-Calif.) introduced a bipartisan bill on Friday to protect marijuana users and businesses from federal prosecution when they are following state laws.
The Respect State Marijuana Laws Act would shield both medical and recreational pot users. "This bipartisan bill represents a common-sense approach that establishes federal government respect for all states’ marijuana laws. It does so by keeping the federal government out of the business of criminalizing marijuana activities in states that don’t want it to be criminal," said Rohrbacher, in a statement.TPJ: As a ardent supporter of the right to use recreational cannabis (marijuana), I think this compromise might work. It respects the will of citizens within their states while maintaining federal law. I prefer legalization on the federal level but until that happens, there must be a way to protect both states and federal authority.
I liken this to the prohibition of alcohol. When the ban on booze was over-turned, there remained "dry counties." These were counties that were allowed to maintain a ban on the sale of alcohol. Believe it or not, there are still some "dry counties" in the U.S. If you believe in freedom of body and mind, as I do, then please email your congress member in support of the "Respect State Marijuana Laws Act."
Sunday, April 07, 2013
Study Suggests Suicide Linked to Gun Ownership and Conservative Politics.
(Science Daily: Apr. 4, 2013) - Residents of states with the highest rates of gun ownership and political conservatism are at greater risk of suicide than those in states with less gun ownership and less politically conservative leanings, according to a study by University of California, Riverside sociology professor Augustine J. Kposowa.
Kposowa, who has studied suicide and its causes for two decades, analyzed mortality data from the U.S. Multiple Cause of Death Files for 2000 through 2004 and combined individual-level data with state-level information. Firearm ownership, conservatism (measured by percentage voting for former President George W. Bush in the 2000 election), suicide rate, church adherence, and the immigration rate were measured at the state level. He analyzed data relating to 131,636 individual suicides, which were then compared to deaths from natural causes (excluding homicides and accidents).
With few exceptions, states with the highest rates of gun ownership -- for example, Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Alabama, and West Virginia -- also tended to have the highest suicide rates. These states were also carried overwhelmingly by George Bush in the 2000 presidential election.
---End of Transmission---
Friday, April 05, 2013
Increasingly Out-of-Touch Republicans Desperately Cling to "Slippery Slope" Arguments.
Whether the issue is gay marriage or gun control, Republicans increasingly find themselves on the losing side of public opinion. It's getting harder for traditionalists to defend dogmatic beliefs in an world that is better informed. Therefore, the tendency for conservatives to use the fear-based, "slippery slope" argument. For the rest of the editorial, I'll abbreviate "slippery slope argument" to "SSA."
According to the "Fallacy Files" website, there are two type of SSA:
1). If "A" happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through "B, C,…,X, Y," eventually "Z" will happen, too. "Z" should not happen. Therefore, "A" should not happen, either.
2). "A" differs from "Z" by a continuum of insignificant changes, and there is no non-arbitrary place at which a sharp line between the two can be drawn. Therefore, there is really no difference between "A" and "Z."
For example, a lot of Republicans who still oppose gay marriage rely heavily upon the slippery slope argument. Often they say that we shouldn't legalize same-sex marriage because it could lead to allowing people to marry horses or children. This one really annoys our sense of humanity. It's ludicrous to think that allowing two adults of the same gender to marry will lead to adults marrying animals and children. Obviously, marriage is between two, consenting adults. Children are not adults, nor are they capable of consenting to marriage. No civilized society is going to allow such marriages because it is abusive to one of the parties involved. That is because no civilized society would allow abuse of innocents. No one is being abused by two, consenting adults of the same-sex getting married.
Another debate in America has also been about guns and gun control. The majority of Americans support gun safety reforms. However, a lot of gun-owning conservatives say that we shouldn't pass any reforms because it won't stop all gun deaths from happening. By that logic, we shouldn't have a speeding limit because people willfully break the law by driving too fast. In fact, why have any laws at all?
SSA rely upon ignorance, therefore, knowledge is the best defense. Fear is the last refuge of the ignorant. Thus, the next time a fear-mongering conservative uses a SSA, you'll be ready for them.
According to the "Fallacy Files" website, there are two type of SSA:
1). If "A" happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through "B, C,…,X, Y," eventually "Z" will happen, too. "Z" should not happen. Therefore, "A" should not happen, either.
2). "A" differs from "Z" by a continuum of insignificant changes, and there is no non-arbitrary place at which a sharp line between the two can be drawn. Therefore, there is really no difference between "A" and "Z."
For example, a lot of Republicans who still oppose gay marriage rely heavily upon the slippery slope argument. Often they say that we shouldn't legalize same-sex marriage because it could lead to allowing people to marry horses or children. This one really annoys our sense of humanity. It's ludicrous to think that allowing two adults of the same gender to marry will lead to adults marrying animals and children. Obviously, marriage is between two, consenting adults. Children are not adults, nor are they capable of consenting to marriage. No civilized society is going to allow such marriages because it is abusive to one of the parties involved. That is because no civilized society would allow abuse of innocents. No one is being abused by two, consenting adults of the same-sex getting married.
Another debate in America has also been about guns and gun control. The majority of Americans support gun safety reforms. However, a lot of gun-owning conservatives say that we shouldn't pass any reforms because it won't stop all gun deaths from happening. By that logic, we shouldn't have a speeding limit because people willfully break the law by driving too fast. In fact, why have any laws at all?
SSA rely upon ignorance, therefore, knowledge is the best defense. Fear is the last refuge of the ignorant. Thus, the next time a fear-mongering conservative uses a SSA, you'll be ready for them.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Marijuana Legalization Hasn't Destroyed Colorado.
Our schools are still drug-free and no one is complaining about the extra tax money created from medicinal marijuana helping to balance our state's budget. There has been no mass "exodus" of churches from the area due to legalization. The police aren't complaining too loudly since it means less crime and less paperwork for them.
The medical marijuana dispensaries are hidden and discrete, far-away from schools or playgrounds. A lot of the clinics are hard to even distinguish as a medical marijuana dispensary. These clinics often have the feel of a doctor's office, and are very clean and professional. The security to enter these places is very restrictive. You have to show not only a valid state driver's license but also your valid medical marijuana license, just to get in the door. The transition has been so minimal and smooth that most Coloradans don't really think about it anymore.
So, when the same naysayers came out in 2012 to oppose the legalization of marijuana for recreational use, they used the same fear-mongering tactics. And, yet again, voters saw through it as "crying wolf." So, it was legalized and once again, the state hasn't turned into a narco-state. Our streets aren't full of drug gangs shooting it out because there's no incentive to sell marijuana in Colorado on the black-market when people can get it legally. Legalizing marijuana means less crime.
If Colorado is a test-case for marijuana legalization then the results are positive for marijuana advocates and those who support a safe and crime-free society.
---End of Transmission---
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









