|
|
Post by UttuqXul on Jul 2, 2018 19:25:12 GMT -6
It's hard to avoid missing the purport and intent of the principle of non-harmfulness towards other living creatures, celebrating The Fourth Of July as Independence Day. This principle is called Ahimsa in the eastern religious philosophy; is cited as the first principle of yoga/religion. I believe I'm correct, that our celebration of The Fourth of July actually annoys or irritates the british, especially, a little bit! I'd certainly like to instill an appreciation of Fortune issues surrounding the british; U.K. birth; of that country- I doubt if there is any more Fortune-beloved country anyplace! By Fortune I mean the Fourth member of the godhead we're acquainted with, also called Providence. There's no people who have a greater average level of delightfulness, I'll add...
You might not fully understand that severing our tie with them in such an extremely violent, bloody manner hurt America, on a long-term scale even; Fortune was displeased. Personal interests could be abetted, most probably, by abstinence from really "thrusting in your sickle" in such celebration- reaping atavistic American pride with all your might, so to speak. One could possibly attract an added frown or curse from Fortune.
Most certainly, Providence willed that there should be a new country, for certain wise reasons- a much better policy towards Independence could have been followed... It's true that a rather wicked King was causing a very good deal of oppression and aggravation- today the Constitutional Monarchy which has developed has generally been working a little better than our own government. (Our government is starting to pick up, remarkably, is my current impression).
I will suggest a move, perhaps enigmatic, of celebrating Independence on December 24, every year- I won't say if this actually is based on the best, chief Probability for resolution of the matter; something or a course which actually wasn't followed, in Reality....
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob W. Case on Jul 4, 2018 2:17:28 GMT -6
In response to your comments about the 4th of July....
The Fourth of July from a British Standpoint:
The very idea of how British people feel about our celebrating independence from Britain is very interesting and thought provoking. Yet never in my lifetime have I ever heard, seen, or even read about a British citizen, or politician express any form of anger, disappointment, or loathing at the idea or our publicly celebrating our independence from the British monarchy. What is interesting though, is that when British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (in her first year as Prime Minister) visited the White House for the first time, we got a public glimpse of how a British public official viewed our founding fathers. The comments were made on December 17th, 1979.
A Couple of Quick Highlights:
“I know, Mr. President, that as you pointed out at the beginning of your speech, the relationship between America and Britain started off with one or two errors of judgment on our side. [Laughter] Looking around me at the beauty here and at the wonderful nation you've created, I'm really rather glad that my predecessors weren't successful in all things they tried to carry out.”
“The United States is our friend, our ally, and our time-honored partner in peace and war. The history and the destiny of our countries have been and always will be inextricably intertwined. Our friendship goes back a very long way. We are, after all, among the very few countries in the world whose constitutions and national identities have remained intact over two centuries. I hope you won't mind, Mr. President, my recalling that George Washington was a British subject until well after his 40th birthday. [Laughter] I've been told, to my surprise, that he does not have a place in the British Dictionary of National Biography. I suppose the editors must have regarded him as a late developer. [Laughter]”
And we all know (especially those of us who remember the 1980's) that Margaret Thatcher was a fierce supporter of America, and great friend and political partner to President Reagan. But going back to addressing your comments; most English people that I’ve encountered love both countries and enjoy dual citizenship. And that is something to factor in as well. America and Britain have been friends and allies for so long that our relationship is more like that of close relatives who love each other more than anything. If bitterness exists somewhere, it is largely confined, and isolated to some ideological wacky group. Where bitterness did exist was in the late 1700’s and early 1800’s, and that was within the monarchy.
The Necessity of Blood:
The American colonies under British rule were forced, by order of the King, to bear the heavy economic impositions that he placed on them while he stripped them of their rights, their say, their protection, safeguards, and so forth. And it weighed incredibly heavy on them, even to the extent that, as Patrick Henry asked in 1775, “Why stand we here idle? What is it that
gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
The fact that these British subjects defied and overcame the might of the British Empire, the most powerful empire of the world in that day was astounding and impressive. America’s success at independence would launch a whole new era that would form a new government that was separate from that of one where a King rules its subjects. It also proved that with blood, leverage and power could be shifted as a battle of the wills would prove itself to be a battle of the status quo vs. the hope of something better for themselves and for future generations.
Providence:
I do not believe that fortune is the fourth member of the godhead called Providence. Fortune is simply chance, luck, and fate. Their supposed “workings” are very random, spontaneous, and lack any formulaic order. One would also have to argue that if God is just, and if chance is a work of God, then why do people who deserve justice don’t get it, and people who don’t deserve it do get it? God is sovereign over the affairs of men, and he permits and ushers in new epochs. I talk about the dynamic of God’s sovereignty at length in my Bible studies, but to put it in a nutshell, I believe that God has used the formation of America to extend what is known as the age of grace, fulfilled profound prophesies through America, provided the nation of Israel with a friend and ally on the world’s stage, and has used America in growing His Kingdom through its efforts in evangelizing.
|
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Jul 13, 2018 6:53:06 GMT -6
I always like to ask which god(s) someone is referring to. There are many different gods people worship. I'm a weak atheist when it comes to some nebulous supernatural beings that might exist. I'm a strong atheist when it comes to christianity. Too much wrong with it for it not to be just all myths and superstitions. It's contradictory and muddled and wrong in too many places. For that reason I know there is nothing like a christian god. So, which god(s) might you be talking about?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob W. Case on Jul 17, 2018 17:10:39 GMT -6
What largely accounts for this mindset is a “religious” spirit that focuses on rituals, superstitions, mentalities, and dogmas, and diverts attention away from the plain truth of things. Thinking that they are in favor with God, people who follow these things are largely not aware of what is going on, and people who do not follow it get a very strange impression of “religious” people and religion in general. This is understandable.
The Plain truth of God:
When I went through the Bible (a word that we call to describe the various books involved) on my own, I got a completely different impression of things. The Bible is in fact a real history book whose books document times and events where we are introduced to this triune God who makes his presence known, holds a strong moral code, makes a series of promises and claims, selected a people to be separated from the surrounding cultures and civilizations around them, intervened on their behalf when necessary, and raises awareness on the condition of their heart.
Through moral failings, corruption, and deviations from his statutes, man descended further and further into chaos and depravity in the very same ways they continue to do today. And so, God sent a series of prophecies that hundreds of years later point to the identification of Jesus Christ, who verified that He was the one God was referring to in the prophecies. After his crucifixion by the Romans, and resurrection from the dead, there was a growing grassroots movement that began with his message, but grew more powerful after his resurrection, as witnesses to the risen Jesus and his disciples were emboldened and empowered where they were once controlled by fear and ignorance. The movement would grow, and even (in the course of a few centuries) influence high ranking officials within the Roman empire.
But since those events, and due to the rise of western civilization which rose up after the fall of Rome, influenced by Christianity, the facts remained the facts in a matter of fact way. And so, even after the fact, people like the founding fathers who realized this learned from the histories recorded in the Bible (like the ancient Israelites and its Kings, those who followed God and those who deviated away from Him), as well as the civilizations that the Bible refers to (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome) and built a model for self government. They also put safeguards in place to protect people from the moral failings, corruption, and deviations from God’s moral code by those who were responsible for governing over them.
But either way, whether you were a King or a peasant, the truth of God became undeniable because people were so open to his influence, and built many experiences from trusting Him and His influence that He became (and still becomes) relied on and depended on for wisdom, guidance, intervention, healing, and various other things that this world, nor people in it can be relied on to carry on their own strength alone. And so that’s something to consider, because beliefs in nebulous gods carried by various leaders do not produce the same outcomes or benefits that God is connected to at all.
Just late last week, I was at a gathering where this pastor who opened a church in India, provided a whole list of interesting breakthroughs that would never have been possible were it not for God’s hand in the matter.
Everything from providing knowledge where there was ignorance and saving lives because of it, to rising above and beyond a designated caste system in which people of the lowly caste (believed to have been determined by the “gods”) were broken free from the system because they became a Christian.
So to put it in a nutshell, there is very tangible and substantiated results that come from relying and depending on God, especially through Jesus Christ. And while it has helped in the formation of American government, it is also been felt very strongly through the personal experiences of people and through the changes in people’s hearts, minds, and lives. And there is always something provided that references the reality of an event or a truth. And that is radically different than just following a religious mindset, superstition, dogma, and/or ritual.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aaronb on Feb 24, 2019 5:42:12 GMT -6
Real nice god we have. Like a holocaust victim once said. What kind of god allows 6 million people to be murdered. You hear horror stories everyday on the news. Real nice god.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob W. Case on Feb 24, 2019 21:48:07 GMT -6
Real nice god we have. Like a holocaust victim once said. What kind of god allows 6 million people to be murdered. You hear horror stories everyday on the news. Real nice god.
Isaiah 53:6a
We all like sheep have gone astray, each one has turned to his own way;
Let me repeat that last part once again. "EACH ONE HAS TURNED TO HIS OWN WAY."
This world is dark and evil, and God's words and precepts are DESIGNED to instill order, structure, stability, and peace. So if you head in one direction, you are moving away from the other direction. Germany was once classified as a Christian nation. But once it started taking God out of society's most important institutions, and embraced charismatic politicians like Adolph Hitler (who could stir up the masses in Germany), they put their faith in Him and abandoned God. From there, he transformed law, revitalized the German economy, brought about nationalized health care, controlled the media (and thus controlled the message), and then some, and thus became an unstoppable force in pursuing the agenda he sought to bring about.
That said, there will always be a time where evil will be successful, but when God is truly sought and people connect to Him, He steps in and stops the otherwise unstoppable.
To connect this with America's independence, the most powerful empire in the 18th century was the British empire. And the people of the American colonies (who were spiritually sensitive) were outraged at the immoral way they were treated and interests disregarded by the monarchy. And they rebelled. And the most powerful empire at the time lost. Now how is that? Look to George Washington who had the answer.
"…by the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability of expectations, for I had four bullets through my coat and two horses shot under me, yet escaped unhurt, although death was leveling my companions on every side of me!”
|
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Oct 20, 2019 11:16:42 GMT -6
Not sure why so many religious cons support this guy when it's clear he's evil. And I've never called anyone evil except for Hitler.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob W. Case on Oct 21, 2019 17:24:04 GMT -6
Not sure why so many religious cons support this guy when it's clear he's evil. And I've never called anyone evil except for Hitler. |
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Oct 21, 2019 21:29:18 GMT -6
Not sure why so many religious cons support this guy when it's clear he's evil. And I've never called anyone evil except for Hitler. Elaborate?? Not sure if you think that's some sort of a challenge but please believe there is nothing i type that I cannot fully express, articulate and fully elaborate on. Nothing. In this case it's clear, certainly should be, that this person has no morals, no scruples and will do whatever it takes to get whatever current transaction he wants to accomplish at the moment. There's ample evidence of that that I can provide but I doubt that would be necessary, I'm sure you would agree. I don't really believe in "evil" per se. Certainly and most definitely not in any sort of biblical sense of "evil" as I'm a fully committed agnostic regarding mystical magical otherworldly beings and a firmly supremely confident atheist when it comes to Christianity. The Bible has simply gotten too much nuts wrong for me to be anything otherwise intellectually. So I don't throw the word "evil" around much at all. Good or bad usually suffices. But this guy goes behond mere amorality and I believe is evil in his policies of separating little babies from their mothers AND the policy of wanting to kick sick immigrants here on emergency waivers out of the country. That is just simply pure evil plain and simple. Without going into him paying off porn stars or hookers and lying about it. I kinda admire him his daliances and respect someone that didn't lie about them. Or his pandering to religious conservatives when he clearly isn't religious in the least. It's baffling how they would support someone so clearly lacking in what they view as "morals". Not even going into his racist "birtherism" or other instances of racisms. What he's doing regarding immigrants and especially little babies is inhuman, and inhumane and simply evil.
Was that enough elaboration?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob W. Case on Oct 23, 2019 12:10:17 GMT -6
In this case it's clear, certainly should be, that this person has no morals, no scruples and will do whatever it takes to get whatever current transaction he wants to accomplish at the moment. There's ample evidence of that that I can provide but I doubt that would be necessary, I'm sure you would agree. I don't really believe in "evil" per se. Certainly and most definitely not in any sort of biblical sense of "evil" as I'm a fully committed agnostic regarding mystical magical otherworldly beings and a firmly supremely confident atheist when it comes to Christianity. The Bible has simply gotten too much nuts wrong for me to be anything otherwise intellectually. So I don't throw the word "evil" around much at all. Good or bad usually suffices. But this guy goes behond mere amorality and I believe is evil in his policies of separating little babies from their mothers AND the policy of wanting to kick sick immigrants here on emergency waivers out of the country. That is just simply pure evil plain and simple. Without going into him paying off porn stars or hookers and lying about it. I kinda admire him his daliances and respect someone that didn't lie about them. Or his pandering to religious conservatives when he clearly isn't religious in the least. It's baffling how they would support someone so clearly lacking in what they view as "morals". Not even going into his racist "birtherism" or other instances of racisms. What he's doing regarding immigrants and especially little babies is inhuman, and inhumane and simply evil.
As for the other stuff you mentioned, again, the Democrat party had no problem with that. It is the party that regularly promotes, encourages, and celebrates vices. And you didn't have a problem with that... until the party you follow told you to have a problem with that. I have a problem with that, and had a problem with that when he ran. I had my doubts. But I thought that he was the best choice out of the two candidates despite that, and he was already making enemies with and agitating the entities in corporate America, in government, and with people that I wholeheartedly despise. Then he won. Now, I am impressed by what I see in terms of results. And there is such a thing as changing. You guys on the left are quick to promote or indulge in such behaviors such as these (or like when Hillary threatened people who would speak out against Bill's numerous sexual advancements--so you didn't vote for Hillary?), but when it comes to someone who leaves the fold, you are quick to accuse and mercilessly throw stones. |
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Oct 23, 2019 14:54:47 GMT -6
You're associating Trump with border enforcement policy that existed way before he was president. That is something that the fake news media has been instrumental in perpetuating, but putting his face to it as if HE is the one doing it. Not the case here. Also, I read an article yesterday about how leprosy is now spreading in Los Angeles, a haven and sanctuary city for illegal aliens. Again, not evil, practical and responsible. Those advocating for illegal immigration are doing so for the purpose of exploiting them, no more no less. That's evil. If they become citizens then by law companies at least have to provide them with a minimum wage, and with it going up to $15 in some areas, they don't want to pay them that.
As for the other stuff you mentioned, again, the Democrat party had no problem with that. It is the party that regularly promotes, encourages, and celebrates vices. And you didn't have a problem with that... until the party you follow told you to have a problem with that. I have a problem with that, and had a problem with that when he ran. I had my doubts. But I thought that he was the best choice out of the two candidates despite that, and he was already making enemies with and agitating the entities in corporate America, in government, and with people that I wholeheartedly despise. Then he won. Now, I am impressed by what I see in terms of results. And there is such a thing as changing. You guys on the left are quick to promote or indulge in such behaviors such as these (or like when Hillary threatened people who would speak out against Bill's numerous sexual advancements--so you didn't vote for Hillary?), but when it comes to someone who leaves the fold, you are quick to accuse and mercilessly throw stones. There was no border enforcement policy in place that separated mothers from their little children. That is plainly evil and it's something this abomination has instituted.
The thought of deporting people here on a medical waiver is even worse. That is pure evil. THAT has been an ongoing exemption for decades now and this abomination has contemplated ending it and sending those here on that waiver away to most likely die because their country of origin lacks the means and methods to adequately treat them. Again, evil. And again I rarely use that word but in this case it applies.
|
|
|
|
Post by doug1943 on Oct 27, 2019 5:56:37 GMT -6
I think many people on the Right support Trump for the same reason many people on the Left supported Stalin in the 1930s: the person being supported may have grievous faults, but the alternative seems far far worse.
In the 1930s, the alternative was Hitler and Nazism, and the Communists, both within and outside the USSR, seemed by far the most determined and effective fighters against the Nazis. So many people on the Left suppressed their doubts.
Same with Trump.
But there this loose parallel ends: the Nazis were destroyed, and the Soviets played the major role in doing that, so you could make out a case that the liberals who apologized for the Moscow Trials (both the New Republic and The Nation did that -- the two flagship publications of American liberalism ) were pragmatically justified ... you won't be able to make the same case for Trump. He may slow the rot -- while doing lots of other damage, as in foreign policy -- but he won't be able to stop it.
Demographics -- ethnic and age -- favor the long-term triumph of the Left (pushing naive soft liberals ahead of them as cover and enablers). It will not be long, historically speaking, before the US is run by people who oppose free speech, and despise the US itself. It will become a blend of downtown San Francisco, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.
People who believe in civilization and its values -- not just conservatives, by the way -- had better start giving serious consideration to making their escape. This doesn't mean immigrating, but beginning to think about peaceful separation.
There is precedent: "When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them ...."
|
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Oct 27, 2019 7:09:26 GMT -6
I think many people on the Right support Trump for the same reason many people on the Left supported Stalin in the 1930s: the person being supported may have grievous faults, but the alternative seems far far worse. In the 1930s, the alternative was Hitler and Nazism, and the Communists, both within and outside the USSR, seemed by far the most determined and effective fighters against the Nazis. So many people on the Left suppressed their doubts. Same with Trump. But there this loose parallel ends: the Nazis were destroyed, and the Soviets played the major role in doing that, so you could make out a case that the liberals who apologized for the Moscow Trials (both the New Republic and The Nation did that -- the two flagship publications of American liberalism ) were pragmatically justified ... you won't be able to make the same case for Trump. He may slow the rot -- while doing lots of other damage, as in foreign policy -- but he won't be able to stop it. Demographics -- ethnic and age -- favor the long-term triumph of the Left (pushing naive soft liberals ahead of them as cover and enablers). It will not be long, historically speaking, before the US is run by people who oppose free speech, and despise the US itself. It will become a blend of downtown San Francisco, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. People who believe in civilization and its values -- not just conservatives, by the way -- had better start giving serious consideration to making their escape. This doesn't mean immigrating, but beginning to think about peaceful separation. There is precedent: "When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them ...." Not very heartening you comparing this traitor to one of the world's dictatorial historical monsters of the 20th century. Quite ominous actually. But it falls apart in other ways also in that there were no Hitler alternatives in 2016. You sound like one of those people who have sprouted T-shirts that say "rather Russian than Democrat". That says something about you.
Stalin never contemplated selling out Russia to his foreign adversaries is another way the analogy falls apart. At this point the evidence is crushing that that is what this traitor is willing to do with Putin. There were many with better conservative bonafides than Traitor, better religious bonafides, more experience, knowledge....everything. The reasons cons selected Traitor were overlapping - just a couple being his celebirty (which is a sad state of affairs in this country), and the instincts that he would tear down and break nuts. He has done that in spades so far as far as his extreme lawlessness, cluelessness and bumbling stumbling idiocy and amazing outright stupidity. He has done irreparable harm to us internationally and is breaking our country apart constitutionally. And Allah only knows the shennanigans he's done that we don't see. What we see is but the tip.
You hit the nail on the head though with your forecast of eventual overrun of the white male conservative in America. His days are numbered and this traitor is a last gasp for those who clearly are willing to burn the country down before they suffer anymore of the frightening, frustrating and confusing changes they see all around them. Capped off by the election of our first black president that seems to have snapped their sanity and was the last straw leading up to this time of shame for cons. These times will be recorded in history as The Great Shame, the time America lost its everloving mind flirting with destruction. Better Russian than Democrat indeed. It's a classic case of "If I can't have you nobody can" regarding cons and America. And that's a crying shame.
|
|
|
|
Post by doug1943 on Jan 5, 2020 3:20:55 GMT -6
I was agnostic about Trump and Russia, and still am just a little bit. But basically I don't believe it.
What to do about Russia is another question -- I happen to agree with Stephen Cohen, the husband of
the editor of the very liberal/left Nation magazine on this one.... a micro-example of the same alarm
about American foreign policy that has brought together a Koch and a Soros, who have jointly founded
(and funded) a think tank that will try to argue for a non-interventionist foreign policy.
It's a shame that you have a stereotype about conservatives -- not that there isn't some truth in it. You
might be interested to know that many of the conservatives with whom I'm acquainted are admirers of
Tulsi Gabbard. I myself am probably closer to being a JFK 1960s Democrat than anything else -- but sadly
the Democratic Party is changing rapidly. (I didn't quite realize how rapidly until I found an old friend (believe
this if you will) who is an open member of the Communist Party --- and a Precinct Chair of the Democratic
Party. And in Texas of all places.
The problem is, the Left has been hard at work since I was in it in the 1960s -- it dominates the "cultural apparatus"
now, and is successfully turning out a generation of "post-Americans". Since patriotism is the only real social glue
holding together this racially-fractured society, when it is gone, we will see some very unpleasant
developments, probably set off by some exogenous shock, like a great depression or military humiliation at the
hands of a rising China.
So ... something for thoughtful people on the left to ponder over: why not just get rid of us? We're nearly half the country,
and will be substantial minority for decades to come. And we're the majority in some states. And the peculiarities of the American
Constitution, and events, can even give us national power, as it has now, from time to time. We can make a lot of
trouble -- legally -- on your way to the Progressive Utopia. (We're going to raise hell when you start smashing the statues
of racist slave owners, for instance, especially in states where we are a majority, like South Dakota. Let's not have a Charlelottesville
around Mt Rushmore!)
So ... let's talk about a peaceful separation, an amicable divorce. I know there are many practical and technical difficulties but ... it
can be done. It IS being done all over the world, as the number of sovereign states grow. Quebec, Scotland and Catalonia are next
on the list. I predict that India will see serious separatist movements, now that Hindu nationalism is running amuck there.
With most of us gone, your side can move on to building socialism -- doing it right this time! -- and implementing justice for
trans-species-ists (trying to anticipate new developments here) or whatever.
First, of course, we must shake off the chains of empire. After this Iran business is over, we can get back to work doing that. Many many
people on the Right, after they have cooled down, will return to the view that has been growing among our side for the last decade or so: it's
time to stop being the world's policeman, and bring our boys home. If they need combat experience, they can get that in the South Side of Chicago.
Let's face it: they just don't want a Lesbian Outreach Center in Kandahar, so let's let the Taliban come back, take care of any Afghan feminists and gays
etc in their own unique way, and concentrate on nation-building back home. I think we can agree on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by bostondave on Jan 15, 2020 19:42:17 GMT -6
Yes, you'd rather live under Putin than live under a Democrat. What in the hell has happened to cons? Their love of country is showing to be only skin deep. The love you have professed for our country all my life and what America has been has turned to a fear, hatred and loathing of what it is becoming to such an extent that you've turned veritable traitors to America. We're all Americans. All my life you cons were the hyper flag waving American love-it-our-leave-it super patriots. You hate that America is changing, you fear it, and so will turn to unbelievable and hitherto inconceivable lengths to fight it. Even to turning traitorous. How's that feel? I'll admit I'm having an incredibly hard time wrapping my mind around this. I'm rather long in the tooth and all my life there appeared to be one constant of cons. Love of country. Clearly you don't love your country anymore. At least not as much as you hate and fear it now. Rather Russian than Democrat. If you had told me this just a couple years ago I'd have called you crazy. But here it is. We're living it right now.
|
|
