Showing posts with label common sense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label common sense. Show all posts
Monday, September 15, 2014
Friday, December 13, 2013
THE MARS UNDERGROUND
This documentary makes the case for why mankind/NASA should travel and eventually colonize Mars. The title is about a "underground" movement of scientist (who became the Mars Society) that want to go to Mars. They talk about the stagnation of NASA for the last thirty/forty years. How not having a clear goal and leadership has stop them from going back to the moon and been detrimental to Mars missions. If you have an interest in space travel, in the idea of Mars missions and colonization this is a video for you.
Friday, July 26, 2013
EARTHRISE
This is SEASON FOUR of EARTHRISE. This is a show on Aljazeera about green technologies and solutions from around the world.
Aljazeera has decided to stop putting this show in my area. So I will place another on when if ever they decide to place such programming in Aljazeera America.
I don't know if this still plays outside of the US. Someone let me know. EPISODE ONE
EPISODE TWO
EPISODE THREE
EPISODE FOUR
Aljazeera has decided to stop putting this show in my area. So I will place another on when if ever they decide to place such programming in Aljazeera America.
I don't know if this still plays outside of the US. Someone let me know. EPISODE ONE
EPISODE TWO
EPISODE THREE
EPISODE FOUR
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Breaking the Taboo
This is a documentary about ending the "War on Drugs" globally. Narrated by Morgan Freeman, which partly makes it worth watching alone. In this film Ex-Presidents of many countries speak on their efforts in fighting the Drug War and how none have succeeded.
Colombia - Drugs fund the Cartels and their kidnapping and guerrilla attacks.
Brazil - Drugs fund the favelas drug lords and their guns.
Mexico - Cartels fight for trafficking routes. Government fighting war against Cartels ends in many deaths of soldiers, polices, cartel members and civilians.
USA - Worlds largest consumer of illegal drugs. Five percent of the world's population. Nearly twenty-five percent of the world's incarcerated. A prison industrial complex. More prisoners than China (They have a BILLION people) think about that for a moment.
Afghanistan - After the war it has become the World's largest producer of Heroin.
Russia - Heroin is the biggest threat out of Afghanistan not Terrorism.
Portugal - Decriminalized ALL DRUGS. Drug user don't go to court when arrested but before a board of social workers and psychologist. They have been doing this for ten years.
Switzerland - AIDs was a problem from needles by Heroin users. They gave free needles and placed health above criminalization.
Holland - Where they sell marijuana in cafes. Also place health before criminalization.
Latin American countries regionally are starting to create their own solutions to the drug problem without the United States.
Nixon declared the "War on Drugs" in the united states. Yet his own commission created federal recommendations.
1. Possession for personal use no longer a criminal offense.
2. Non-profit distribution of small amounts no long a criminal offense.
Under Ford decriminalization almost happened. Ten states began to decriminalize.
Under Reagan it became a cluster f@#k. Put more people in prison and create the "just say no" campaign.
Under President Obama no change in the war on drugs, even though he has said it is a utter failure before he took office.
America learned during Alcohol Prohibition that prohibition didn't work. Yet for some reason believes that drug prohibition is working or will work eventually.
I agreed with much in this film but nothing more than this presented idea. Don't be drug free because it's illegal. Be drug free because it takes away the most important thing you have. The ability to decide, the ability to choose.
Colombia - Drugs fund the Cartels and their kidnapping and guerrilla attacks.
Brazil - Drugs fund the favelas drug lords and their guns.
Mexico - Cartels fight for trafficking routes. Government fighting war against Cartels ends in many deaths of soldiers, polices, cartel members and civilians.
USA - Worlds largest consumer of illegal drugs. Five percent of the world's population. Nearly twenty-five percent of the world's incarcerated. A prison industrial complex. More prisoners than China (They have a BILLION people) think about that for a moment.
Afghanistan - After the war it has become the World's largest producer of Heroin.
Russia - Heroin is the biggest threat out of Afghanistan not Terrorism.
Portugal - Decriminalized ALL DRUGS. Drug user don't go to court when arrested but before a board of social workers and psychologist. They have been doing this for ten years.
Switzerland - AIDs was a problem from needles by Heroin users. They gave free needles and placed health above criminalization.
Holland - Where they sell marijuana in cafes. Also place health before criminalization.
Latin American countries regionally are starting to create their own solutions to the drug problem without the United States.
Nixon declared the "War on Drugs" in the united states. Yet his own commission created federal recommendations.
1. Possession for personal use no longer a criminal offense.
2. Non-profit distribution of small amounts no long a criminal offense.
Under Ford decriminalization almost happened. Ten states began to decriminalize.
Under Reagan it became a cluster f@#k. Put more people in prison and create the "just say no" campaign.
Under President Obama no change in the war on drugs, even though he has said it is a utter failure before he took office.
America learned during Alcohol Prohibition that prohibition didn't work. Yet for some reason believes that drug prohibition is working or will work eventually.
I agreed with much in this film but nothing more than this presented idea. Don't be drug free because it's illegal. Be drug free because it takes away the most important thing you have. The ability to decide, the ability to choose.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
The Atomic States of America (2012)
The Atomic States of America. President Obama and a number of politicians have said for years that nuclear power is GREEN. The craziest thing is there are people who believe this industry propaganda. This video speaks about the true state of nuclear plants in America.
After Japan one would think the politicians of America would wake up to the problems and threats this industry creates. Money, power, and status seems more important than the oath to protect against threats foreign and domestic.
After Japan one would think the politicians of America would wake up to the problems and threats this industry creates. Money, power, and status seems more important than the oath to protect against threats foreign and domestic.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
We are Legion
We are Legion - The Story of the Hacktivists is about the group Anonymous and those that came before, and those that sprang from it. It tells the story of how they began as internet pranksters and became global activist.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
AGORA
The movie Agora is about the philosopher of Alexandria, Hypatia. I believe she is considered the first female mathematician. She believed in math, philosophy and questioning. She taught in Alexandria, at or near the Library of Alexandria. For a woman in the fourth century that must have been almost impossible. Her story is inspiring but also tragic. The movie is beautiful. I recommend you watch if you like films based on true stories about thinkers, persons of integrity and people of principle.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Burning the Future: Coal in America
A few years ago I learned about Coal Slurry deposits. I also learned about coal slurry dams breaking and flooding homes and areas. In America it would seem many don't know about this or don't care. I know coal is a necessary evil but that doesn't mean it can't be extracted responsibly but then again that would cut into the industries profits.
Best thought that came from this documentary and I'm paraphrasing. "It's easy to be ignorant and deaf to what's wrong when their pay check rely's apon it." I would say complacency come from ones comfort as well. It would appear more than just liberal hippies want sustainable power in America.
I will attempt to place this up again when I find another source.
Best thought that came from this documentary and I'm paraphrasing. "It's easy to be ignorant and deaf to what's wrong when their pay check rely's apon it." I would say complacency come from ones comfort as well. It would appear more than just liberal hippies want sustainable power in America.
I will attempt to place this up again when I find another source.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
The Cartel
I don't understand how someone can defend bad teachers or the system that allows them to stay employed. A Voucher system is the way to go. What are Vouchers? Basically instead of public (tax) money being attached to the school. The public (tax) money is attach to the student. Which mean when you move your child to a different school the funds follow him/her. This has been done in many European school systems for years. It is a logical and better system for all involved, that is except teacher unions and the administrations that syphon off money from children's educations.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
OWS LEADER
If I was the leader of the Occupy Wall Street movement. I would ask for new laws or reforms of old laws that are agaist corruption of politicians and institions.
I believe what protestors truly want is an end to corruption and irresponsibility by our society as a whole. I believe what they want is change, change that has been talked about but not implemented. The world is changing technologically and socially. Everyone knows it but the society as a whole doesn't seem to be moving forward. Progress. Progress is what we seek. The promise that our potential holds, the advancements we know of but don't come to fruition. We want that Progress, that world, that America.
I intend to write reasons for each of these statements but for now I thought I'll put them out there.
These statements aren't written in any order or importance.
1. Corporations do not have more legal rights or standing before the law then natural citizens. Corporation are not equal to a natural citizen before the law.
2. Money is not voice.
3. GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. Only natural persons should and must be able to donate money to campaigns.
a.Congressmen only receive money from the natural citizens of their district.
-Money from others that live in their state would be limited based on what the average person can afford living in that congressmen's district.
-Money from out of the state would be a one-fourth of the amount that those from the native state can afford to contribute.
b.Senators only receive money from the natural citizens of their state.
-Money from outside of the state would be one-tenth that what the average person from the native state can afford to contribute.
c. The President is the only branch that is acceptable to receive sizable donation nationwide from all natural citizens.
d.No foreign money in campaigns from individuals or companies. This include illegal immigrants.
3.Regulations/laws should only be made with the intention of the common well being of all natural citizens.
4.More resources to Regulate the banking sector, pharmecutical companies, food production, and all industries that affect the common well being.
5.More resources to cleaning old polluton sites and regulating the enviromental damage being done by companies now. Companies must take responsible for the proper destruction of waste. Companies must take responsibility for past waste and pollution.
6.Bottle/plastic recycling in every state.
7.No more off the book wars. Lower the defense budget (by a third).
8.Free Healthcare for all citizens.
9.Lower or absolve all student loans interest or debt.
10.Massive Criminal Inquiries into all to big to fail banks. And politicians connected to them for criminal misconduct.
11.Stop foreclosure on homes that were given based on predatory lending. On homes that the banks in question can't produce their own paperwork of ownership.
12.Make any financial incentive given to politicians illegal. Ex. giving IPO stocks, offering jobs after service if they place favoring legislation, etc.
12.Independent bodies with the sole purpose to seek and judicate corruption in politics.
13.Invest in Green Technologies, jobs, sustainable living, and infrastructure. Make clean, green, and sustainable the new building code, and production code for industries. Sustainable the new law of the land.
14.Amend the constitution to say Men and Women are equal.
15.Amen constitution that all citizens have the right to vote and that all voting shall be held on three day weekends (Friday, Saturday, Sunday).
16.All politicians can be recalled if believed they are not acting on behalf of the common good for their constituents. If they are believed to be or have proven to be corrupt or been corrupted. Or are acting on behalf of any other than the natural citizens they represent or country as a whole.
17.All money given to candidates should be open to public.
18.All corporations native to this land should pay their taxes. No exceptions.
19.All wealthy citizens should be paying 39% in taxes after all loopholes.
20.Tax reform, simplify code. Make it more efficient. Less to no loopholes.(More money you make more money is taken.)
21.Change Usury laws to protect the citizens (consumers).
22.Corporations, lobbist can not write legislation. Only legislators.
23.A Technocratic branch of governement (or at least a independent permanent committe) to write laws and protocols dealing with science, engineering, environment, etc.
24.Industries should not be trusted to regulate themselves. If Corporation makes goods or items that can do physical (including medical) harm in the short or long term view they may not regulate themselves. Ex. pollution, chemicals, sanitation waste, etc.
25.No exception to a written law can be given to a politician or corporation that could not be given to the average natural citizen.
26.No nukes. No nuclear weapons, no nuclear power plants, and the proper safe destruction of all nuclear waste created thus far.
27. Lower or stop the outsourcing of jobs.
28.Enforce illegal immigration laws. Reform visa laws to allow to lead to citizenship.
29.Amend Constitution that only those born of citizens are natural citizens.
30.Rebuild American Infrastructure. Roads, bridges, waterworks, sewage works, water works, etc to sustainable levels.
31.Veterans and citizens given at least the same healthcare as those in Congress.
32.When a new law is written the goals and expectation are written with it. If law doesn't meet goals or expectations, goals written can be sited to easily dismiss the law if it fails to meet them.
33.Independent commitee that only task is to go over laws five or more years old to see if they have been productive or are of any use or standing.
34.Pledge from those in office. No full scale wars until America is clean, sustainable and has a strong renewed infrastructure. Any to break this pledge or law, grounds for dismissal.
35.Clean drinking water an alienable right for all citizens.
-Clean breathable air an alienable right for all citizens.
-Clean soil and earth an alienable right for all citizens.
36.NO BAIL in courts. Person should be sent home unless there is evidence that they are a danger to the common wellfair. If such evidence is there then one can be held against their will. Innocent until proven guilty.
37.Stop the war on drugs.
Will add more as I think of them. Or they are presented to me.
I believe what protestors truly want is an end to corruption and irresponsibility by our society as a whole. I believe what they want is change, change that has been talked about but not implemented. The world is changing technologically and socially. Everyone knows it but the society as a whole doesn't seem to be moving forward. Progress. Progress is what we seek. The promise that our potential holds, the advancements we know of but don't come to fruition. We want that Progress, that world, that America.
I intend to write reasons for each of these statements but for now I thought I'll put them out there.
These statements aren't written in any order or importance.
1. Corporations do not have more legal rights or standing before the law then natural citizens. Corporation are not equal to a natural citizen before the law.
2. Money is not voice.
3. GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. Only natural persons should and must be able to donate money to campaigns.
a.Congressmen only receive money from the natural citizens of their district.
-Money from others that live in their state would be limited based on what the average person can afford living in that congressmen's district.
-Money from out of the state would be a one-fourth of the amount that those from the native state can afford to contribute.
b.Senators only receive money from the natural citizens of their state.
-Money from outside of the state would be one-tenth that what the average person from the native state can afford to contribute.
c. The President is the only branch that is acceptable to receive sizable donation nationwide from all natural citizens.
d.No foreign money in campaigns from individuals or companies. This include illegal immigrants.
3.Regulations/laws should only be made with the intention of the common well being of all natural citizens.
4.More resources to Regulate the banking sector, pharmecutical companies, food production, and all industries that affect the common well being.
5.More resources to cleaning old polluton sites and regulating the enviromental damage being done by companies now. Companies must take responsible for the proper destruction of waste. Companies must take responsibility for past waste and pollution.
6.Bottle/plastic recycling in every state.
7.No more off the book wars. Lower the defense budget (by a third).
8.Free Healthcare for all citizens.
9.Lower or absolve all student loans interest or debt.
10.Massive Criminal Inquiries into all to big to fail banks. And politicians connected to them for criminal misconduct.
11.Stop foreclosure on homes that were given based on predatory lending. On homes that the banks in question can't produce their own paperwork of ownership.
12.Make any financial incentive given to politicians illegal. Ex. giving IPO stocks, offering jobs after service if they place favoring legislation, etc.
12.Independent bodies with the sole purpose to seek and judicate corruption in politics.
13.Invest in Green Technologies, jobs, sustainable living, and infrastructure. Make clean, green, and sustainable the new building code, and production code for industries. Sustainable the new law of the land.
14.Amend the constitution to say Men and Women are equal.
15.Amen constitution that all citizens have the right to vote and that all voting shall be held on three day weekends (Friday, Saturday, Sunday).
16.All politicians can be recalled if believed they are not acting on behalf of the common good for their constituents. If they are believed to be or have proven to be corrupt or been corrupted. Or are acting on behalf of any other than the natural citizens they represent or country as a whole.
17.All money given to candidates should be open to public.
18.All corporations native to this land should pay their taxes. No exceptions.
19.All wealthy citizens should be paying 39% in taxes after all loopholes.
20.Tax reform, simplify code. Make it more efficient. Less to no loopholes.(More money you make more money is taken.)
21.Change Usury laws to protect the citizens (consumers).
22.Corporations, lobbist can not write legislation. Only legislators.
23.A Technocratic branch of governement (or at least a independent permanent committe) to write laws and protocols dealing with science, engineering, environment, etc.
24.Industries should not be trusted to regulate themselves. If Corporation makes goods or items that can do physical (including medical) harm in the short or long term view they may not regulate themselves. Ex. pollution, chemicals, sanitation waste, etc.
25.No exception to a written law can be given to a politician or corporation that could not be given to the average natural citizen.
26.No nukes. No nuclear weapons, no nuclear power plants, and the proper safe destruction of all nuclear waste created thus far.
27. Lower or stop the outsourcing of jobs.
28.Enforce illegal immigration laws. Reform visa laws to allow to lead to citizenship.
29.Amend Constitution that only those born of citizens are natural citizens.
30.Rebuild American Infrastructure. Roads, bridges, waterworks, sewage works, water works, etc to sustainable levels.
31.Veterans and citizens given at least the same healthcare as those in Congress.
32.When a new law is written the goals and expectation are written with it. If law doesn't meet goals or expectations, goals written can be sited to easily dismiss the law if it fails to meet them.
33.Independent commitee that only task is to go over laws five or more years old to see if they have been productive or are of any use or standing.
34.Pledge from those in office. No full scale wars until America is clean, sustainable and has a strong renewed infrastructure. Any to break this pledge or law, grounds for dismissal.
35.Clean drinking water an alienable right for all citizens.
-Clean breathable air an alienable right for all citizens.
-Clean soil and earth an alienable right for all citizens.
36.NO BAIL in courts. Person should be sent home unless there is evidence that they are a danger to the common wellfair. If such evidence is there then one can be held against their will. Innocent until proven guilty.
37.Stop the war on drugs.
Will add more as I think of them. Or they are presented to me.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Can Science Determine Morality?
Author Sam Harris discusses how science can and does show what is morale.
To me this is simple. Science is about observation. When you observe that certain behavior brings about better human well being then it is morale. If it does not it is immoral. There is behavior done by the individual, then how those individual relate to one another as a community, then as a greater society. Values are and should be the Universal behaviors that allow humans to thrive as individuals, as a community and as a society.
To me this is simple. Science is about observation. When you observe that certain behavior brings about better human well being then it is morale. If it does not it is immoral. There is behavior done by the individual, then how those individual relate to one another as a community, then as a greater society. Values are and should be the Universal behaviors that allow humans to thrive as individuals, as a community and as a society.
Fixing Broken Government
Author Philip K. Howard talks on how to fix laws and budgets in Government. We need Government Legal Reform.
The Constitution is the highest law in the land. Yet written very simply on sixteen pages. So why can't most laws be written just as simply?
The Constitution is the highest law in the land. Yet written very simply on sixteen pages. So why can't most laws be written just as simply?
Thursday, February 10, 2011
believing in God
One argument I see over and over between Atheist and Theist is the belief in God. The Atheist gives the impression that if they had proof of God they would know he exist, so then believe. The Theist give the impression that believing in God is automatically knowing he is real. Both are wrong. Knowing something is real doesn't mean you will Believe in it. And Believing in something doesn't mean you know it is real.
For example, I will use the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Not because I thought it was so special he became president... I have Boondocks reaction to that. I use him because many in the world know of him and many in the world believe in him, some both.
In the United States election over 40% of the population, that voted, did not believe in Barack Obama. They voted for McCain, they knew Obama existed but didn't believe in him. While over 50%, that voted, elected Obama because they knew he existed and many would say they Believed in him.
Knowing someone exist is easy, you are simply aware of them. However believing in someone means you have faith or understanding they will do something that will favor you or be pleasing to you or others, and that they have a plan that you accept. Many voted for Obama cause they believe he would be a great leader and bring change to many of the problems facing America. Even though they give way to much credit to the power of the Office he holds
So God... even if many Atheist knew God existed. The truth is they still wouldn't believe in him. For example, let's say God was standing next to you right now (If you're a believer technically you already think this). Now if you're a non-believer you may have questions. If God wanted you to believe in him, you would ask, just as you do any leader, what believing in him would mean for your present and your future? God (let's use the bible God, but this works for any of them) would say these are the rules I have set down, you live by these and your life will be better, just, moral, prosperous and fruitful.
In here, lies the problem with the Theist argument that they believe in God. Most of them don't live by the rules of a being they say is an ALL POWERFUL BEING, that is everywhere and sees everything. So then, when they don't live by such a beings rules, it's hard for me to believe that they truly know that God is real. They may want it to be so, they may believe but if I knew an all powerful being was aware of everything I did at all times and I have told this being that I will serve it or live by its edicts. Seems to me, I would be learning what those edicts are and making it a habit to live by them at all times.
It's like having a boss but you only follow some of his rules when you like them or think they are socially acceptable. What boss would put up with that?
Now for the Atheist, this is also a problem, because let's say this God, that he knows is real. Has policies, rules and a plan that you don't agree with. Should I do as he commands simply because everyone else believes in him and he is All POWERFUL. Or should I do what I know is right, even if it may only be right for me and say no? Because I do not believe in you.
Now obviously most people would do what such a powerful being commands simply out of fear. Hence the term "God-fearing people", so I imagine if God was standing right next to many Atheist they would become active participates quickly, though this activity still doesn't mean they believe in God. They just believe in staying alive, survival against a force far more stronger than they are.
My point is that believing in God is akin to believing in any Leader. And when a Leader puts forth rules of "morality, justice, law, daily life, relationships, spirituality, religion, and community". That leader has to have a vision that the person can believe in. If the person can't, then why would they believe in that Leader?
Now theist would say God has given a perfect vision. However Atheist would say, reading the first half the bible that is simply not true. Now a Christian would say that the second half is what is important now. (Yet they tend to favor some of the rules in the first half. This situation automatically cancels it's own argument.)
Now Jesus as a Leader believed different things than Yahweh did in the beginning of the Bible. Some of the laws of God do work with Jesus' teachings... many do not. One of the confusing things for Atheist is that when many Christians say God, they combine these two entities, making it hard to accept a belief in either cause they contradict each other. God said kill everyone in Jericho, every animal. Yet Jesus said non-violence no matter what, he died to prove that point.
Now I believe when God created his rule do not kill, he meant that the Chosen People were not to kill one another. God had no problem with them killing others. They weren't his people so why would he care. However, people try to tell you that God loves everyone but actions say he loves those that have a covenant with him.
Now Jesus completely contradicts that, a non-violent stance even when A Roman is whipping the skin off of you (thank you, Mel Gibson I will never forget that image, Passion of the Christ) means he loves everyone. One of his fellow Jews comes out of the crowd as he is carrying the cross and says, they would help him they would fight. What does he say, he says, NO! Holy Crap, now if that isn't believing in what you preach I don't know what is. But here is the problem again, an Atheist may say Jesus teaching are great. I can live by the idea of non-violence but I can't believe in God because he doesn't believe in non-violence, and I don't want to believe Jesus is a God or even divine.
So in that instance, an Atheist may follow the philosophy of Christ: helping the poor, non-violence, perhaps even forsaking material wealth, but that doesn't mean they believe in Christ but rather believe that his message was right.
Theist say to Atheist all the time "What if you're wrong?" Honestly, I think A Theist should be far more afraid of God being real than an Atheist. Think about it this way. Say you had a king, and he passed rules of the land. Then one day you and another person came before this king. You bow to him believing him to be your king, and worship him, and praise him every weekend, or when you can. You follow some of his rules but not all. You may even break his rules sometimes, but hey "Nobody is perfect, right?"
Now this other bloke is standing there before this king. However, he doesn't recognize him as his king. He doesn't live by the rules the king set, however many of the rules he does live by are the same. He does not worship, he does not praise and does not pretend to follow this king. If he breaks the Kings rules, it does not matter they are not his rules, however, he may have similar rules that he does live by.
Now they both are before this king. Now this king may punish the non-believer for not accepting his ways when he lives on his lands. This may or may not be just depending on the character, and actions of that individual. However, the king, will and must punish the believer. He has no choice, this person has given a vow, oath whatever it may be that he will live by the king's laws, serve him, and worship him.
Now using the Bible as an example but again this works with most authority entities in history. They don't accept the "We all aren't perfect excuse." That may work among the commoners but that king is going to punish the believer, harshly, and the king is within his right to. You chose that way of life.
In closing believing in a God, a person, or whatever is not the same as knowing it exist. Knowing someone exist does not mean you have to believe in them. One should believe in a God, person, whatever because that being has presently a vision that will do better, and make progress for the person and the community they belong to.
Some of the rules created five thousand years ago still have credence today. After all human behavior hasn't changed that much. However human understanding has changed a great deal since then, and many of the laws of any religion simply do not hold true and should be discarded.
However here is the Greatest problem with this. An Atheist would say, yes let's keep the ones that make sense and rid ourselves of the ones that our new understanding says are not valid.
A believer a true believer cannot do this. In fact, I don't think they should. You see if you believe your all powerful being has given you these rules, then only that all powerful being can change them. If people change them then they are saying by their actions they don't believe. In such a situation compromise is possible.
For a few hundred years there have been many compromises, most gradual changing what many believers believed. It seems now the argument has come to a point where many say that most of the rules of religions should be done away with, including believing in God. On the other side they want to bring back more of the rules, at least in social settings, on a grander scale in politics. Neither argument will be able to succeed.
Atheists let the people believe in their God. Theists do not force the laws of your God, the ones you accept, on others. This simple thing brings balance, that allows for that compromise. Anything else is vanity on both sides.
For example, I will use the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Not because I thought it was so special he became president... I have Boondocks reaction to that. I use him because many in the world know of him and many in the world believe in him, some both.
In the United States election over 40% of the population, that voted, did not believe in Barack Obama. They voted for McCain, they knew Obama existed but didn't believe in him. While over 50%, that voted, elected Obama because they knew he existed and many would say they Believed in him.
Knowing someone exist is easy, you are simply aware of them. However believing in someone means you have faith or understanding they will do something that will favor you or be pleasing to you or others, and that they have a plan that you accept. Many voted for Obama cause they believe he would be a great leader and bring change to many of the problems facing America. Even though they give way to much credit to the power of the Office he holds
So God... even if many Atheist knew God existed. The truth is they still wouldn't believe in him. For example, let's say God was standing next to you right now (If you're a believer technically you already think this). Now if you're a non-believer you may have questions. If God wanted you to believe in him, you would ask, just as you do any leader, what believing in him would mean for your present and your future? God (let's use the bible God, but this works for any of them) would say these are the rules I have set down, you live by these and your life will be better, just, moral, prosperous and fruitful.
In here, lies the problem with the Theist argument that they believe in God. Most of them don't live by the rules of a being they say is an ALL POWERFUL BEING, that is everywhere and sees everything. So then, when they don't live by such a beings rules, it's hard for me to believe that they truly know that God is real. They may want it to be so, they may believe but if I knew an all powerful being was aware of everything I did at all times and I have told this being that I will serve it or live by its edicts. Seems to me, I would be learning what those edicts are and making it a habit to live by them at all times.
It's like having a boss but you only follow some of his rules when you like them or think they are socially acceptable. What boss would put up with that?
Now for the Atheist, this is also a problem, because let's say this God, that he knows is real. Has policies, rules and a plan that you don't agree with. Should I do as he commands simply because everyone else believes in him and he is All POWERFUL. Or should I do what I know is right, even if it may only be right for me and say no? Because I do not believe in you.
Now obviously most people would do what such a powerful being commands simply out of fear. Hence the term "God-fearing people", so I imagine if God was standing right next to many Atheist they would become active participates quickly, though this activity still doesn't mean they believe in God. They just believe in staying alive, survival against a force far more stronger than they are.
My point is that believing in God is akin to believing in any Leader. And when a Leader puts forth rules of "morality, justice, law, daily life, relationships, spirituality, religion, and community". That leader has to have a vision that the person can believe in. If the person can't, then why would they believe in that Leader?
Now theist would say God has given a perfect vision. However Atheist would say, reading the first half the bible that is simply not true. Now a Christian would say that the second half is what is important now. (Yet they tend to favor some of the rules in the first half. This situation automatically cancels it's own argument.)
Now Jesus as a Leader believed different things than Yahweh did in the beginning of the Bible. Some of the laws of God do work with Jesus' teachings... many do not. One of the confusing things for Atheist is that when many Christians say God, they combine these two entities, making it hard to accept a belief in either cause they contradict each other. God said kill everyone in Jericho, every animal. Yet Jesus said non-violence no matter what, he died to prove that point.
Now I believe when God created his rule do not kill, he meant that the Chosen People were not to kill one another. God had no problem with them killing others. They weren't his people so why would he care. However, people try to tell you that God loves everyone but actions say he loves those that have a covenant with him.
Now Jesus completely contradicts that, a non-violent stance even when A Roman is whipping the skin off of you (thank you, Mel Gibson I will never forget that image, Passion of the Christ) means he loves everyone. One of his fellow Jews comes out of the crowd as he is carrying the cross and says, they would help him they would fight. What does he say, he says, NO! Holy Crap, now if that isn't believing in what you preach I don't know what is. But here is the problem again, an Atheist may say Jesus teaching are great. I can live by the idea of non-violence but I can't believe in God because he doesn't believe in non-violence, and I don't want to believe Jesus is a God or even divine.
So in that instance, an Atheist may follow the philosophy of Christ: helping the poor, non-violence, perhaps even forsaking material wealth, but that doesn't mean they believe in Christ but rather believe that his message was right.
Theist say to Atheist all the time "What if you're wrong?" Honestly, I think A Theist should be far more afraid of God being real than an Atheist. Think about it this way. Say you had a king, and he passed rules of the land. Then one day you and another person came before this king. You bow to him believing him to be your king, and worship him, and praise him every weekend, or when you can. You follow some of his rules but not all. You may even break his rules sometimes, but hey "Nobody is perfect, right?"
Now this other bloke is standing there before this king. However, he doesn't recognize him as his king. He doesn't live by the rules the king set, however many of the rules he does live by are the same. He does not worship, he does not praise and does not pretend to follow this king. If he breaks the Kings rules, it does not matter they are not his rules, however, he may have similar rules that he does live by.
Now they both are before this king. Now this king may punish the non-believer for not accepting his ways when he lives on his lands. This may or may not be just depending on the character, and actions of that individual. However, the king, will and must punish the believer. He has no choice, this person has given a vow, oath whatever it may be that he will live by the king's laws, serve him, and worship him.
Now using the Bible as an example but again this works with most authority entities in history. They don't accept the "We all aren't perfect excuse." That may work among the commoners but that king is going to punish the believer, harshly, and the king is within his right to. You chose that way of life.
In closing believing in a God, a person, or whatever is not the same as knowing it exist. Knowing someone exist does not mean you have to believe in them. One should believe in a God, person, whatever because that being has presently a vision that will do better, and make progress for the person and the community they belong to.
Some of the rules created five thousand years ago still have credence today. After all human behavior hasn't changed that much. However human understanding has changed a great deal since then, and many of the laws of any religion simply do not hold true and should be discarded.
However here is the Greatest problem with this. An Atheist would say, yes let's keep the ones that make sense and rid ourselves of the ones that our new understanding says are not valid.
A believer a true believer cannot do this. In fact, I don't think they should. You see if you believe your all powerful being has given you these rules, then only that all powerful being can change them. If people change them then they are saying by their actions they don't believe. In such a situation compromise is possible.
For a few hundred years there have been many compromises, most gradual changing what many believers believed. It seems now the argument has come to a point where many say that most of the rules of religions should be done away with, including believing in God. On the other side they want to bring back more of the rules, at least in social settings, on a grander scale in politics. Neither argument will be able to succeed.
Atheists let the people believe in their God. Theists do not force the laws of your God, the ones you accept, on others. This simple thing brings balance, that allows for that compromise. Anything else is vanity on both sides.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Things WRONG With AMERICA
SENATE CORRUPTION
It's obvious that the ones with money own congress, especially the senate. Simple solution, it must be made illegal for congress to take money or at least large sums from corporations. It should be made a rule that only US citizens can give money to their representatives.
Of course the problem of the rich being about to buy congress is still present with this system but at least it will be their personal money and not the money of what is usually a more lucrative corporation.
Perhaps there should be a limit to how much individuals can give as well.
Yes it is a free country but that doesn't mean that one is free to steal an election or a nation or state policy.
There has to be limits and regulation to protect the whole, You know CHECKS AND BALANCES.
It's obvious that the ones with money own congress, especially the senate. Simple solution, it must be made illegal for congress to take money or at least large sums from corporations. It should be made a rule that only US citizens can give money to their representatives.
Of course the problem of the rich being about to buy congress is still present with this system but at least it will be their personal money and not the money of what is usually a more lucrative corporation.
Perhaps there should be a limit to how much individuals can give as well.
Yes it is a free country but that doesn't mean that one is free to steal an election or a nation or state policy.
There has to be limits and regulation to protect the whole, You know CHECKS AND BALANCES.
Things WRONG With AMERICA
I've decided to write short analyzes on the practices, policies, and programs I think need to be changed, reformed or completely done with in the United States of America. However I'm not naive enough to believe a profit based society like the one in the US will completely change for the better of all it's citizens, but I do believe that many things can change for better opportunities of all it's citizens.
I won't focus much, if at all on silly social arguments, for example, to much sex in media or lack of, or too much religion. I find these arguments are used more by people that either have very little understanding, are trying to distract or are simply focused on a small tree in a very large regional forest.
I will attempt to point out a the problem, and then give a simple solution. However I will not even pretend I'm an expert. Only a guy with a bit of insight.
I won't focus much, if at all on silly social arguments, for example, to much sex in media or lack of, or too much religion. I find these arguments are used more by people that either have very little understanding, are trying to distract or are simply focused on a small tree in a very large regional forest.
I will attempt to point out a the problem, and then give a simple solution. However I will not even pretend I'm an expert. Only a guy with a bit of insight.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
RIVER WASTE - FACTORY FARMS
This documentary is about the pollution and waste created by Factory farms(Industry farms).
It's sad how much our political system is control by corporations. Wait isn't that Fascism? Of course it's sadder how many citizens believe that their is nothing wrong with many of the practices depicted in this film.
It's sad how much our political system is control by corporations. Wait isn't that Fascism? Of course it's sadder how many citizens believe that their is nothing wrong with many of the practices depicted in this film.
POLLUTION DEBT
When watching these films about food, soil, and water. One thing comes up over and over again, POLLUTION. I don't understand people, especially people that want, or have children. I would think these people would most agree about the destructive properties and plague that is pollution.
When I watch the news I see these republican types that talk about economic debt. What about POLLUTION DEBT? They seem to not think of this. In fact these same people want to deregulate laws on these corporations that create this pollution. They say things like the market will make these corporations do the right thing. THIS IS BULLSHIT. Simple reasoning, if you eat chicken, and the chemicals in it accumulate slowly in your body. HOW THE HELL ARE YOU SUPPOSE TO KNOW THIS? You would eat this chicken merrily and never know. If you are living on top of chemical waste, or it is in the air from a factory. How are you suppose to know that the chemicals are slowly accumulating inside of you? How are you suppose to test the ground, the air, the water? That is the job of the government, to PROTECT THE CITIZENSHIP.
Corporation will get away with what ever they can. They don't do what is right. They do what is profitable. The people that say, "the market will rectify things". They make it seem as if the corporations are doing things that are out right destructive. So people well see this and stop buying their products. Problem solved. The problems what they do are not outright. They do things that slowly harm. Things you may not see or have to deal with. Things you wouldn't know about unless you study it or live in the area of the problem.
The corporation is about profit. It is suppose to be the job of the citizens to demand that corporations are responsible for what they do. The consumer will not demand this, the consumer wants the convenience and the cheap products at any cost. Are you a citizen, or a consumer? You can be both as long as you are citizen first.
POLLUTION DEBT is far worse than economic debt. We are seeing the events in small areas here and there in America. From waste in the soil, in the water, in the air. Look up hydraulic fracturing or frakking, see what Dick Cheney and his crony politicians have unleashed on many places in America. How he has opened up land that was once protected land, land designated to be owned by all AMERICAN CITIZENS, to be drilled and polluted. If that wasn't bad enough he also made it so these gas companies are not beholden to many environmental laws. Yes Halliburton is one of these companies, is that really a surprise anymore. It's disgusting.
Ronald Reagan the "genius" he was. Allowed for huge deregulation of environmental laws. He set it up so many rivers, and places can be polluted by corporations. One of those rivers is the Potomac River. This is the river that gives the D.C. area it's water. He basically allowed for the river that gave him his drinking water, to be polluted, now how smart is that. If that doesn't show how short sighted this man was, nothing will convince. The funny thing is many of the environmental laws Reagan took away were put in place by President Nixon. Nixon will go down as a "crook" and Reagan is considered a "hero", this is insane to me.
When ever I hear people talk about economic debt yet seem to not care about it. Many help pollution waste to prosper by being on the side of deregulation. When I hear them say, "Our kids will be paying this economic debt". I sit in disgust thinking, what about the waste your children will deal with in the soil, in the air, in the water, The WATER.
Economic debt seems trivial in the face of the health concerns that will come from this pollution, and that is the least, minor case scenario. The worst case scenario is most of the drinking water becoming contaminated. WHAT WILL YOUR CHILDREN DRINK? But hey economic debt, yeah that is so much worse.
We are dealing with the pollution from the last hundred fifty years. But the worse of it has been since the chemical revolution in the forty and fifties. Whether you like it or not we are in a large chemical experiment. The sad thing is, the experiment isn't being done by a scientist to see how these chemicals, effect the environment, interacts, and accumulates in the environment, animals, and people. No this experiment is done by corporations. These corporations are simply hoping that they can make as much money as possible before any really negative affects come to be learned. And even if it does, it won't matter cause the law says the people would have to show a direct cause and effect from the corporations practices. So the corporations, now and then will be loving that slow accumulation, cause it's difficult to proof.
REGULATION is to protect us from pollution, and irresponsibility of corporations.
P.S. It seems to me that people say to their children that the convenience of their life now is more important than the pollution you will have to live with in the future. How selfish is this?
When I watch the news I see these republican types that talk about economic debt. What about POLLUTION DEBT? They seem to not think of this. In fact these same people want to deregulate laws on these corporations that create this pollution. They say things like the market will make these corporations do the right thing. THIS IS BULLSHIT. Simple reasoning, if you eat chicken, and the chemicals in it accumulate slowly in your body. HOW THE HELL ARE YOU SUPPOSE TO KNOW THIS? You would eat this chicken merrily and never know. If you are living on top of chemical waste, or it is in the air from a factory. How are you suppose to know that the chemicals are slowly accumulating inside of you? How are you suppose to test the ground, the air, the water? That is the job of the government, to PROTECT THE CITIZENSHIP.
Corporation will get away with what ever they can. They don't do what is right. They do what is profitable. The people that say, "the market will rectify things". They make it seem as if the corporations are doing things that are out right destructive. So people well see this and stop buying their products. Problem solved. The problems what they do are not outright. They do things that slowly harm. Things you may not see or have to deal with. Things you wouldn't know about unless you study it or live in the area of the problem.
The corporation is about profit. It is suppose to be the job of the citizens to demand that corporations are responsible for what they do. The consumer will not demand this, the consumer wants the convenience and the cheap products at any cost. Are you a citizen, or a consumer? You can be both as long as you are citizen first.
POLLUTION DEBT is far worse than economic debt. We are seeing the events in small areas here and there in America. From waste in the soil, in the water, in the air. Look up hydraulic fracturing or frakking, see what Dick Cheney and his crony politicians have unleashed on many places in America. How he has opened up land that was once protected land, land designated to be owned by all AMERICAN CITIZENS, to be drilled and polluted. If that wasn't bad enough he also made it so these gas companies are not beholden to many environmental laws. Yes Halliburton is one of these companies, is that really a surprise anymore. It's disgusting.
Ronald Reagan the "genius" he was. Allowed for huge deregulation of environmental laws. He set it up so many rivers, and places can be polluted by corporations. One of those rivers is the Potomac River. This is the river that gives the D.C. area it's water. He basically allowed for the river that gave him his drinking water, to be polluted, now how smart is that. If that doesn't show how short sighted this man was, nothing will convince. The funny thing is many of the environmental laws Reagan took away were put in place by President Nixon. Nixon will go down as a "crook" and Reagan is considered a "hero", this is insane to me.
When ever I hear people talk about economic debt yet seem to not care about it. Many help pollution waste to prosper by being on the side of deregulation. When I hear them say, "Our kids will be paying this economic debt". I sit in disgust thinking, what about the waste your children will deal with in the soil, in the air, in the water, The WATER.
Economic debt seems trivial in the face of the health concerns that will come from this pollution, and that is the least, minor case scenario. The worst case scenario is most of the drinking water becoming contaminated. WHAT WILL YOUR CHILDREN DRINK? But hey economic debt, yeah that is so much worse.
We are dealing with the pollution from the last hundred fifty years. But the worse of it has been since the chemical revolution in the forty and fifties. Whether you like it or not we are in a large chemical experiment. The sad thing is, the experiment isn't being done by a scientist to see how these chemicals, effect the environment, interacts, and accumulates in the environment, animals, and people. No this experiment is done by corporations. These corporations are simply hoping that they can make as much money as possible before any really negative affects come to be learned. And even if it does, it won't matter cause the law says the people would have to show a direct cause and effect from the corporations practices. So the corporations, now and then will be loving that slow accumulation, cause it's difficult to proof.
REGULATION is to protect us from pollution, and irresponsibility of corporations.
P.S. It seems to me that people say to their children that the convenience of their life now is more important than the pollution you will have to live with in the future. How selfish is this?
Tapped
This is a documentary about bottled water.
I use one Gatorade bottle that I fill with tap water and lemon juice. However after watching this documentary I looked at the bottom and saw PETE (name of plastic). Now I am thinking of the possible effect of the bottle leaking chemicals into the water. As I use it over and over again. Does this mean I will stop using the bottle, well not until I find me one of those reusable bottles.
Much of what is in this film I knew about already. However if you don't know about the harm that bottle water brings, not only the chemicals of the bottle but the process to create it. As well as the effect of so much plastic on the earth and in the oceans this video will make you more aware.
Also I think the bottle water bills should be in every state. The corporations should pay for the recycling of the bottles. Living in Michigan was sweet, I loved turning bottles in for the ten cents, honestly I wasn't thinking about the environment most of the time when I did.
Holy crap, who knew Nestle was so fucking evil. Then again Willy Wonka made chocolate and he seemed very "suspicious". I mean the original movie, didn't watch that Johnny Depp horror movie version.
I think the most telling part of this video is when Senator Kerry is talking to the head of the FDA. When he says that the FDA relies on the manufacturers to give them studies on what they sell and not independent reports, it was all I needed to hear. Learning that only one person regulates the bottle water industry doesn't even matter after hearing they rely on industry studies but that does make this case even sadder. No wonder people don't trust the government.
All I can say is I believe that water has to be the one, I say the ONE substance that should not be privatize EVER!
Water bottles are like prostitutes. You don't buy the bottle for the water, you buy it for the convenience to throw it away (go away in the prostitutes case).
I use one Gatorade bottle that I fill with tap water and lemon juice. However after watching this documentary I looked at the bottom and saw PETE (name of plastic). Now I am thinking of the possible effect of the bottle leaking chemicals into the water. As I use it over and over again. Does this mean I will stop using the bottle, well not until I find me one of those reusable bottles.
Much of what is in this film I knew about already. However if you don't know about the harm that bottle water brings, not only the chemicals of the bottle but the process to create it. As well as the effect of so much plastic on the earth and in the oceans this video will make you more aware.
Also I think the bottle water bills should be in every state. The corporations should pay for the recycling of the bottles. Living in Michigan was sweet, I loved turning bottles in for the ten cents, honestly I wasn't thinking about the environment most of the time when I did.
Holy crap, who knew Nestle was so fucking evil. Then again Willy Wonka made chocolate and he seemed very "suspicious". I mean the original movie, didn't watch that Johnny Depp horror movie version.
I think the most telling part of this video is when Senator Kerry is talking to the head of the FDA. When he says that the FDA relies on the manufacturers to give them studies on what they sell and not independent reports, it was all I needed to hear. Learning that only one person regulates the bottle water industry doesn't even matter after hearing they rely on industry studies but that does make this case even sadder. No wonder people don't trust the government.
All I can say is I believe that water has to be the one, I say the ONE substance that should not be privatize EVER!
Water bottles are like prostitutes. You don't buy the bottle for the water, you buy it for the convenience to throw it away (go away in the prostitutes case).
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Ronald Reagan
I plan to write a more description post about this, but for now I will say this.
RONALD REAGAN WAS AN IDIOT.
I say this because most of not all the things that Republican cite as the reason Ronald Reagan was a good president or did to make this country great. Were actually short sighted plans. Yes they did good for America in the immediate time (during his presidency) somewhat after. However for the long term, most of his policies we are dealing with the consequences of and will be for years to come.
(I'm sure someday a Republican will see this and say I need to show evidence of this and I will when I write my later post on this subject matter.)
RONALD REAGAN WAS AN IDIOT.
I say this because most of not all the things that Republican cite as the reason Ronald Reagan was a good president or did to make this country great. Were actually short sighted plans. Yes they did good for America in the immediate time (during his presidency) somewhat after. However for the long term, most of his policies we are dealing with the consequences of and will be for years to come.
(I'm sure someday a Republican will see this and say I need to show evidence of this and I will when I write my later post on this subject matter.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)