Category Archives: Culture

Culture, Economics, Education, Governance, Immigration

America on the High Wire

Leave a comment

Constitutionalists and other conservatives, along with the rest of the world, are watching the American high-wire act being performed without practice and without nets. Having had top billing in the center ring since WW-II, The U. S. has also had unique control of the world’s money supply and, in the pleasant swaddling clothes of the so-called “Federal” Reserve Bank, has enjoyed unlimited debt creation for more than a century, financing sticky, anti-Constitutional socialism, sold so softly that once-conservatives defend its pillars, now.

Along the way the innate goodness of American ideals enabled the U. S. to also liberate and rejuvenate millions of people and dozens of countries, imperfectly, but with the best of efforts. On balance, the United States has done sufficient good in the century of its financial dominance that people living under much crappier politics still risk everything to get here. Unfortunately, unlike the struggle to get to “America” during the first 130 years of our existence, immigrants come less and less often for the opportunity to perfect themselves and their families, and more and more to grasp the socialist welfare for which we have indebted several generations to come, to provide for the “less fortunate,” who, in the minds of virulent anti-American socialists, comprise the rest of the world.

Therein is the outline of one of the strands of the high wire we, through our virtually inept governments, are attempting to navigate across a chasm so dark that most of the citizenry will not look into it… or acknowledge it, believing that nothing so threatening could possibly exist nor could our Senators and Representatives have allowed it to manifest. Yet here we are, gingerly sliding one fat foot before the other, hoping to cross to a better century to come.

In that better century we won’t be in debt up to our annual eyebrows, or obligated socialistically for many multiples of our entire annual economic output. We love our Social Security, our Medicare and a thousand other benefits. We love being able to shove the irresponsible in under the umbrella of Medicaid, lest we worry ourselves sick over them. But we aren’t loving the loss of independence that ungodly debt represents, nor the loss of freedom that taxes represent – at least we shouldn’t be. You do understand these concepts, don’t you?

Taxes are a loss of freedom? It should be obvious: freedom and economic freedom are symbionts. Debt, on the other hand, threatens freedom of the nation in terms of independence – economic independence. We owe a year’s economic output to someone, many some-ones, and a lot of that we owe to people who wish to destroy us.

Independence. It’s another strand in that taut, high wire on which America balances.
Most of those who would weaken, dominate or destroy the United States, removing us from our global economic chairmanship, and from our military empire, do not have the internal dissent that freedom allows. They do not have debilitating, enervating victim-based political mine-field governance. Nor are they constricted by waves of illegal and criminal aliens and hired armies of “antifa” street thugs who use violent force to make points that duplicitous media endorse. They aren’t required, politically, to attempt to coexist with a dozen opposing cultures within their borders, schools and core cities. They aren’t burdened by thousands of laws that are never enforced, or enforced differently for citizens and non-citizens.

And, like badgers, or jackals, they probe and push and nibble at our strength, waiting… waiting for the moment we are so distracted, or weary, or confused about our existence, that we can be toppled. Such an occurrence will mark a new dark age.

The high wire is not unable to hold our weight, or our debt or our dissension. Our confusion is more worrisome, but right now, it’s holding. There is no net. We have succumbed to debauchery, as it were, with governments decriminalizing activities and products they can tax… or gain votes from. It’s tawdry. What sort of government can profit from the temporary or permanent mental incoherence of its citizens? Our individuality no longer breeds responsibility or cohesiveness, rather division and wasted potential. As a people we are becoming more clever and less intelligent. Instead of rewarding success and improvement, we are rewarding failure, deviance… and incoherence.

Immigration, once a strength, we are now rushing – indeed fighting – to make a weakness and a threat. It’s not the stuff of socialism, but it is a weapon to prevent resistance to socialism. Socialism, a virtual denial of the spirit, is threatened by freedom – not by licentiousness, for that weakens freedom – because freedom, described by God in a million religious texts and well-distilled into our Declaration and Constitution, empowers individuals, not groups or classes. The majesty of individual sovereignty, barely recognized or remembered, today, is at the foundation of the American idea. For those blinded by the allure of socialism: the ability to get something for nothing – American independence of the individual is the enemy. The high wire is not yet severed, but the blowtorches of the original lie, now emboldened as “socialism,” are trying to soften its tensile strength.

Still we proceed, one foot before the other, carefully sliding and balancing, while the burdens of debt cower us and the rending of our muscles by a million jackals weakens us. The ideas of America – not her mistakes – are so strong that we are able to find new ways to rejuvenate her body, albeit more temporarily each cycle.

Belatedly, Trump is trying to “clean up” international problems that have encroached on our peace and prosperity for decades. Politically we have botched many circumstances, treaties, agreements and relationships around the world – too many to list. Currently we worry about North Korea, Iran, Russia and China, along with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, Libya, Zimbabwe, Sudan and South Africa… oh, and Venzuela, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Mexico, Brazil, Haiti, and even Canada. Ooops, forgot Philipines, Indonesia, Somalia, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Other than that, things are pretty calm… unless we want to not overlook the entire EU and Britain in particular and the Balkans, Romania, Bulgaria, and Ukraine. And Georgia. Never mind the DNC.

The point is, it is a consummate balancing act the U. S. performs to keep its dominance through both economics and diplomacy, while shoveling huge volumes of “foreign aid” in the form of military aid, if not intervention, into over 150 countries. This doesn’t begin to quantify activities of the C. I. A. No wonder everybody loves us. All this while our enemies – every one socialist, communist or fascist (socialist) – watch for weakness, indecision, or introversion, or, for “leading from behind.”

If at some point the U. S. stumbles, fails to defend itself or, worse, fails to stand up for its majestic founding principles, the jackals will pounce to bring down – as in destroy the greatest affront to socialism and tyranny the world has ever seen: our great, lumbering hodge-podge of cultures and beliefs which had not the good sense to teach its own children the ideas of its founding and its exceptional place amongst humankind.

Our greatest balance pole has always been freedom, outlined in the Bill of Rights and elsewhere. We will do best to preserve ourselves and our countering role by cleaning our own house and by returning to our long climb toward honesty and perfection based on the sovereignty and individual responsibility of our people. We’ve drifted away from our ideals as we’ve carefully stepped far out above the abyss. Every reader knows the cleansing that must be done. There is no amount of political Febreeze that will correct for the rot it covers up.

We must regain our balance, and in fairly short order, Prudence indicates.

Culture, Education, Immigration, Representation, Responsibility, Trump

The Progress of Hate

Leave a comment

Since Mr. Trump’s campaign for the presidency commenced, the Left and those easily led by leftist propaganda have virtually exhausted the supply of calumnies that can be thrown against another person. For his part, Trump can take satisfaction at having advanced from “buffoon,” and, one of the worst, “businessman,” to “Nazi” and, topping every other, “Hitler.” And he seems to have advanced so far with no effort. Remarkable.

As interesting, and not just interesting: phenomenal, is the ability of the Left to accuse their most hated opponent of being history’s most reviled LEFTIST! Of course, as the left constantly proves, the meaning of words – and philosophies – is one of the left’s adopted tasks. The danger is that words intended to cut the deepest might become meaningless.

When Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in 1942, Communist sympathizers infesting the West, including the U. S., immediately placed Hitler on the “far Right.” That lie was so successful it has become common “knowledge” and not just repeated casually, but taught as truth by people who ought to know better. Hitler was a socialist and a fascist. “Nazi” is an abbreviation of “National Socialist.” The enmity between Hitler and Stalin was between Cain and Abel. The Soviets suddenly became “allies” of the West by virtue of sharing an enemy – they never became a brother of American constitutional republicanism.

Ultra-leftists, George Soros and others, created the “spontaneous” agitators, “Antifa.” Antifa is an abbreviation of “Anti-Facist” which blithely mirrors the lie of Nazism being a right-wing philosophy. Fascism, as under Mussolini, Hitler’s happy Axis ally, is the primary tactic OF THE LEFT, not of the right. Antifa is a creature of the Left and it’s stated justification is to oppose fascism, a tactic of, well… the Left. Mainstream news outlets repeat their supposed purpose without analysis, in large part because most of today’s news companies are leftists, too, and the lie serves them.

No nation has ever “adopted” Fascism, although Italians were acquiescent following the corrupt failures of World War One and the economic fragmentation that followed. The soup of socialism in Italy was a widely varied mix from Catholic socialists to Communists. None could resolve the economic malaise and inflation. Fascism held out the promise of straightening everything out – putting people to work, making the trains run on time, enforcing dependable utilities of all kinds, where disparate unions had made key functions erratic and thrown people out of work. Mussolini, socialist to his core, perceived himself as the strong-man who could set things aright, and his rallying point was patriotism.

Patriotism for Italy and all things Italian, provided the unifying banner. For 30 years Italians could agree on very little but that they were Italians. The Fascists became “the Right” by virtue of usurping power that Communists and other ultra-socialists had jockeyed to obtain for themselves. Being to “the right” of international communists could hardly qualify Fascism as “Right wing” as the term is used today. Fascism was the penultimate collective, shy of Communism’s collective misery and politically elite control of production. Fascism organized business and industry to do its bidding, employing the profit motive for the State’s purposes. By putting people back to work Fascism appeared benign and was at first. Before long, however, Fascism could not help but take away freedoms as the trade-off for efficient government and, initially, efficient industry. The beliefs of fascist governors that they are in some way the best people to hold the positions they hold, is inevitable, and Fascism provides no mechanism for the governed to “clean house” of the corruption that power engenders.

Today’s “anti-fascists,” in their complete misappropriation of history, place American constitutionalists in the same camp as fascists and accuse them both of being on the “right wing” when, in fact, there is no connection. The exceptionalism of the United States is a form of “Rightness” that is at the opposite end of the political spectrum from the leftist, socialist soup of which Fascism was the outgrowth. Fascism and Constitutional Republicanism are so different as to be diametric. Yet we allow, and leftist media happily reinforce, the concept of “right-wing” and fascism/Nazism to be grouped as synonymous. Thank you, American public schools and most private schools, too. Even the Pope is now infected.

The founding Fathers, or, better, founding Philosophers, of the United States, determined to not simply create a kinder tyranny, but to create a new spectrum of Freedom. To become “an American” meant to agree with the ideas of America and, by adoption, accept the “American Dream,” defined only as the Constitutional Republic where people of all kinds can live together in Freedom and personal responsibility. We have drifted very far from the IDEAS, but not so far, quite, that we cannot row back to the safety of the Constitution.

Unfortunately, the exercise of citizenship in the United States is unlike that in every other nation: it depends upon shared morality and self-discipline. As those qualities erode and scatter in the winds of sexual abandon, the U. S. follows the same path toward leftwing fascism that far less promising nations have done before us. What might that look like?

It is, most sadly, conceivable in this summer’s reactions to normal legal functions at our southern border, that widespread rioting could erupt prior to the mid-term elections. People consumed by irrational hate for Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee and alleged “incarceration” of children in Texas have shown the ability to move thousands of ignorant people – young people – into civil disobedience. Is there a line they will not cross? Could a police incident where a young black man were killed, God forbid, in an urban setting, with cell-phone video spurring Ferguson-type rioting and destruction, spill over into multiple cities? As Federal troops arrive to support local police could shooting break out?

If erstwhile conservatives are in elective power when it becomes necessary to declare martial law, God forbid, again, they’d be accused of “police-state” tactics and “Hitlerism.” The police-state charge would have some merit. But it is a very risky step to take no matter how serious the civil unrest appears. So many legal conditions are suspended under martial law – even under a state of emergency – that “justice” is essentially discarded. Even if martial law ended in a month, say, the legal clean-up would take years.

Executive department bureaucracies would be locked out for at least some period. There is no way that “government” can appear to go on as before and, unfortunately, very little economic investment can proceed without satisfying a federal law or regulation or several of each. Large-scale trade activity would be severely disrupted for days or weeks, and with it, the World economy. No one outside of the U. S. knows how to deal with a non-functional U. S. government, any more than we in the 50 states do.

There are sizable numbers of people on the Left and the Right who would welcome a federal clamp-down in certain circumstances. On the Left one could imagine acceptance of a clamp-down to “stop fascism” and to free “political” prisoners, essentially rendering the U. S. a one-party state: socialist. On the Right, one can imagine acceptance of absolute federal stoppage of the drug trade, purging of bureaucracies of socialist-minded individuals, restrictions on abortion and absolutism on immigration. Neither adheres to the Constitution.

Martial law is too extreme to employ. We will need some rational way to walk our way back from the precipice of daily hatred of everything not “progressive” / socialist /Democrat. To Trump and those millions who wanted him in the Oval Office, the thought of relinquishing the limited exposure of foul and secretive government that Trump has begun, is anathema. Another way.

Unlike most pundits and proclaimed wise observers, Prudence dictates caution in offering solutions to our current divide between retaining the United States under the constitution, and letting it dissolve for the cause(s) of socialism. Do those fighting for dissolution even recognize which side they are on?

Have we allowed, through the actions of our “representatives,” the descent into a dilemma that democratic representation cannot solve? Aye, that’s the question.

Culture, Governance, Politics 2018

Leaders, Leaders Everywhere – Part two

Leave a comment

Modern leadership can be described in part by the lack of individual, internal and personal leadership. What does that mean? Essentially, there are millions of teens and 20-somethings who have finished their childhoods, schooling, even college for many, and arrived at a point in their lives: about 30 at the oldest – when they should be taking charge of personal events. They should be building careers but they are buried in little screens of non-reality, comparing relatively meaningless consequences. Who among them could “lead” in any direction? They are, in fact, easily LED. Like modern “LED’s” they have small impacts except to give off light when switched on by a “leader” who has reached them socially, with no prior personal connection, valuation or judgment.

Political leadership is the model of “leadership” for most people, today. Each must choose a course or direction and communicate it, and his or her reasons for choosing it. The success of that leadership is election and the gaining of some level of legal power, which the new office-holder claims is truly power belonging to all who worked so hard to get out the vote, etcetera, etcetera. In most cases, inexorably, only the elected person gains very much – he or she and those who garner favors from his or her new position. The Mission, then, turns out to be quite personal and bears no serious risk for failure. Was there leadership? Not in a classical sense, although in a modern one, perhaps.

One might suggest a postulate: The more personally enriching it becomes to win an election, the less likely widespread benefit or moral strengthening of the polity will result.

An unfortunate reverse postulate also writes itself: The more personally risky or costly a political campaign is to the candidate, the greater the likelihood of positive widespread benefit should he or she win, and the greater the forces that will array against that candidate’s success.
Is it as simple or as “clean” as that? Does the same dichotomy fit other forms of leadership?

Now that government leaves nothing and no one alone, leadership – in terms of effecting change – is grievously political, which is to say, tied to gaining and holding political power. If a politician becomes wealthy in the process, all the better, but gaining elected power isn’t everything… it’s the only thing. And in our soup of communication overload, the democracies of the world are at a distinct disadvantage in matters of social and national cohesiveness. In other words, short-term power is subject to instant and widespread pressures to make changes beneficial to ever-smaller “communities,” and no one, no one, is holding the line against social corruption.

Pandering has become retail… online retail. What has become of leadership? When leaders are discussed, now, they are either somewhat dictatorial, like Putin, Khamenei, Li Keqiang, even Kim Jong Un. What about Trump? Unlike true dictators, Trump is bound by cooperation with representatives who are intensely sensitive to retail forces of social change, including removal of borders and national identity. To the degree that he can exert some power vis a’ vis other, less malleable nations, he exhibits many hallmarks of leadership, something most American politicians creatively retreat from.

Given that most of the planet is explored and most markets interconnected, leadership is lately more “thought-leadership.” That is, influencers of what others believe. These are decreasingly Christian belief-leaders and much more often sexual-abandon leaders or, a small journey away, hate-leaders. While the sexual-abandon leaders break down old standards, beliefs and word meanings (public schools raise your hands), hate leaders can in minutes, not only destroy individuals and their livelihoods, but also families and friendships, the fabric of civility. A list of actively hated people and causes is disturbing:
• Donald Trump
• Family members of Donald Trump
• Every member of Trump administration
• Anyone who voted for Trump
• Anyone expressing support for Trump
• Republicans, unless very liberal
• Conservatives
• Opponents of abortion
• Limiters of abortion
• Those opposed to public funding of abortion
• Christians if they “act Christian”
• Politicians in favor of Christian prayer
• Meat eaters
• Farmers deemed unkind to chickens
• Companies owned by Christians
• Straights
• Straights uncomfortable with homosexuals
• People who disagree with homosexual marriage
• People who say they disagree with homosexual marriage
• People who disagree with “gay” rights
• People who disagree with teaching homosexuality in schools
• People who don’t believe in transgenderism
• People who believe in boys’ and girls’ bathrooms
• People opposed to homosexual adoption
• People opposed to self-declared gender identity
• People who disagree with unregulated welfare
• People who disagree with unregulated food-stamps
• People who want illegal entrants deported or kept out
• People who support the amended Constitution, every word
• People opposed to legalized drugs
• People who want lower taxes
• People who believe in American exceptionalism
• People opposed to Socialism
• People opposed to Communism
• People skeptical of Islam
• People opposed to Sharia law
• People opposed to black racism
• People opposed to Black Lives Matter organization
• People opposed to “Antifa”
• People in favor of Israel
• Jews
• People in favor of Jews
• People skeptical of Climate Change
• People “opposed” to science
• People opposed to unions
• People opposed to public-sector unions
• ICE
• Border Patrol
• American Flag
• Declaration of Independence
• U. S. Constitution
The reader may not have heard every one of the instances of hatred listed, but some of them, certainly. Each is disturbing when the fact of its ability to affect politics, civil discourse, even civility itself, is understood. The days of disagreement are over for many on the left, it seems; their aims now include destruction of both individuals and beliefs, causes and of the nation, itself.

One of our major parties has departed from its drift leftward and begun to rush somewhat blindly toward radical socialism. Republicans, feeling confident with Trumps popularity ratings, are failing to grasp the need to LEAD the nation away from the base hatreds of liberty that “leaders” on the left are using to gain power. The ridiculousness of statements by Rep. Maxine Waters and others seems obvious to the right.

The left evidently believes that now is the culmination of their 100-year plan to undermine the experiment known as the United States of America. Their dream is that “the American Dream” of all kinds of people living together under individual freedom and individual responsibility, morality and civility toward all, shall be snuffed out.

Where are the leaders?

Culture, Governance, Politics 2018, Responsibility

Leaders, Leaders Everywhere – Part One

Leave a comment

America, or shall we say, the United States in particular, has severe leadership problems. We decry them in terms of politics as “partisanship,” but they are much broader than simply that. During our 100 years of industrialization we seemed to have a pretty good pool of leaders – business, industrial, scientific, mercantile, military, religious, philosophical and political. They weren’t deemed to be perfect by everyone, but they were relative giants in society and with their influences they appear to have set standards for others who would be leaders. A handful articulated this role, most simply lived it and comported themselves in what might be described as statesmanlike, in that they took larger views of life and growth, exploration and discovery, and responsibility, in their fields.

We have leaders among us now, of course, but… well, they’re different. And I mean no slighting of women in history, also of course, and the phenomenon of this devolution of leadership seems, unfortunately to have afflicted them, too. How to describe it? Or, how to describe a cause of it?

Let’s consider who a few of today’s “leaders” are. We know them: Trump and some in his administration; certain Democrat leaders including Mrs. Clinton; Congressional leaders, both majority and minority party; numerous “celebrities” from the entertainment industries – indeed, “celebrity” is a critical component of most “leadership,” today; ultra-wealthy business and financial leaders, like Federal Reserve governors and the Chair-man or –woman; the heads of corporations like Google, Facebook, Disney, Microsoft and a hundred more… maybe 500 more… maybe 5,000. But we hear of these business/industrial leaders usually with a descriptive term before their name: billionaire. Maybe, multi-billionaire. It’s a clue to what’s happened to leadership.

Money? Is that all that’s wrong with today’s leaders? They’re disoriented by wealth? Prudence would say, “no, not just money, but it’s a part.”

Leaders often have power. Charles Krauthammer had power as a “thought-leader” for example. Was he a celebrity? Somewhat, thanks to television, but he was a columnist and never described himself as a TV personality. No billionaire, certainly, but he had power for two reasons I can discern: 1) He was a well-read, well-educated observer of things powerful and political, who lucidly expressed his opinion with refreshing honesty, clarity and consistency, and 2) He was honest to himself and to his readers, a refreshing and rare quality from which his power derived. It has been a treat to be alive and literate during his lifetime. Most people under, say, 40, would not list him in their panoply of “leaders,” sadly.

Throughout history the most powerful, threatening, feared person has been in charge. He (occasionally she) could push people around, command their virtual, or real, slavery and surface fealty, and literally take the profits of their work. They could even “lead” them into battles but never were they “leaders” in the sense that they were going in directions that others wanted to go or felt “right” about going. That is to say, the mission driving the King – or kingpin – was not shared by those afraid to not follow him. Mission and Leadership appear to be of a set, virtually inseparable. Does this illuminate any of the apparent differences between leadership during “America’s” biggest century and now?

Intentionally or not, every leader, by default, has some kind of “mission,” possibly only because he or she has articulated what it is that has spurred his or her actions. Lo, and behold! That sudden mission is agreed-to, thanks to our being awash in communications, by a group of people who, in the majority of instances, know only a thin shell of what issues are at stake. But, they are behind “the leader” all the way. One might say that the “size” of the leadership is a function more of the extent of the communications about the issues than it is about the quality of the leader or of the importance of the issues… or of the “principles” that motivate the leader and the followers.

In earlier times, when it could take days for news to reach a significant number of readers – always readers – powerful, or strong-willed people, at least, would start their journey towards a big idea, big goal, big industry or discovery, more nearly alone. His (most often, his) “followers” numbered in the single digits or low tens. It required courage, then. There were no happenstance leaders during the big century. Right or wrong they were real, and honest to their missions. If they and the mission failed, they faced failure… sometimes failure that meant the loss of everything. Lincoln.

Morality has a way of guiding, cajoling, molding and even forcing bad actions to end and bad actors to leave the stage of public influence. In fact, morality is essential to the success of leadership. Even today, when institutions and agencies do their level best to remove themselves from moral judgment, every person who claims to lead this or that movement – even “flash” movement – first lays out some “moral” position around which the latest crowd of followers might rally. Something is wrong and thanks to this “leader’s” vision, that wrong has been exposed and with (your) help, and money, that wrong will be ended and “things” will be set right. Communications unlike anything humans have been exposed to throughout evolution, play a big role in two ways: 1) newsworthy crowds can be assembled in a moment and, 2) the “wrong” that unites them need not be agreed to by even a significant fraction of the nation’s population.
What is “right” and what is “wrong,” anyway? Leadership, historically, has generally been connected to “leaders” who exercise courage in defense of what is “right.” Clear examples were seen during the American Revolution. Not only were the patriots fighting the government they were born under, but fighting with guns and cannons and real bullets. Not all of their fellow colonists were with them, many helped to fight against them. But motivating Washington and every Continental soldier who endured with him and other officers, was the powerful belief that what they were trying to do would yield a greater “good.” They believed they were doing what was right – not just more comfortable or more profitable, but right in terms of freedom, independence and justice.

The “patriots” comprised not even half of the British colonists… not even a quarter. Their mission would have appeared futile in many instances yet they soldiered on. How? They were both blessed and cursed by the paucity of information available to them. Cursed because they did not know the nature or size or deployment of the forces arrayed against them; blessed because they, unlike their modern descendants, were not burdened by too much thinking about their circumstances or by too much planning of how to avoid failure.

That is to say, they didn’t “know enough” to stop believing in the rightness of their mission: bumblebees unaware that they could not fly. The combination allowed their belief and trust in Washington and others to not just maintain but strengthen, until they flew in the face of the greatest possible headwinds. Is that “faith?” Trust in something one cannot see? Leadership is connected to that ability of humans – to believe in something greater than one’s self.

Modern leaders are more likely to be constrained by a flood of information. Indeed, most of our current “leaders” are called so because of financial success. Nearly every move they make is “hedged” in half a dozen ways such that they, personally, cannot lose. Even if their leadership of great businesses “fails,” they have arranged for a “golden parachute” that lets them leave wealthy. Their “leader-ship” carries minimal risk… to themselves. Their “mission” is personal gain and not the gain of a people or of a nation. They may be giants, dollar-wise, but are mis-identified as leaders. More and more, “success” is a measure of mere wealth. Even top political leaders leave office with more money than they entered with, and many become multi-millionaires by selling their celebrity – or notoriety. Money.

Culture, Economics

Butcher, Baker, Candlestick Maker

Leave a comment

The Colorado baker whose case the Supreme Court finally heard, has won only a reprieve and not quite a victory. “SCOTUS” ruled on the improprieties of how the Colorado Commission on Discrimination treated baker, Jack Phillips, during its proceedings and the ruling that followed, not on the right to withhold certain aspects of his services on the basis of religious belief. The larger fight looms.

Another case may be decided this month, as well, concerning a florist who refused to create bouquets and other floral displays for a same-sex wedding.

Then there is the “Sweet Cakes by Melissa” case where the family-operated bake shop was unmercifully attacked, boycotted and broken-into after a lesbian couple was denied a custom wedding cake. Oregon chipped in with its own punishment by fining the Greshams, themselves, $135,000.

So far, the arguments have been religious in nature and they, it seems Prudent to say, will eventually fail. The anti-religious, or, at least, anti-spiritual socialist power structures in place in the U. S. and the various states, cannot accept religious belief as the basis for any public act, since it can’t be touched, tasted or seen… or taxed. Through the looking-glass, however, these same happily accept the self-declared conditions grouped under “LGBT” even though they are equally un-provable beyond the declarations of adherents. Prudence finds it difficult to discern the logical distinctions; aside from the political.

The winning arguments, and those which may be legally definable – codifiable – will have to follow this path: public accommodation can be satisfied by requiring any retailer to sell its generic products to anyone who wishes to buy them; retailers will be allowed to retain their right to deny application of their artistic skills that would customize products for purposes they find offensive.

That is, no government should be able to COMPEL anyone to exercise creativity, imagination, or hard-learned and long-practiced skills unique to that individual. For skills and abilities that are widely held in the area of trade a store represents, it is reasonable that products produced thereby may not be restricted from sale to anyone who is able to pay for them. How the new owner of a product then decorates or uses the product – cakes or otherwise – is no concern of the original fabricator… or baker.

Culture, Governance, Race

Po Boys and Indians

1 Comment

At Book Club the other night we discussed a disturbing, true story from the 1920’s about the only partly resolved multiple murders of Osage Indians and the origins of J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI.(1)  Following the final forced relocation of the Osage to what looked like useless land in northeast Oklahoma.  Beneath that land, it was soon learned, lay a gigantic pool of oil and the Osage owned all rights to it.

Subsequently whites were declared to be “Guardians” of Osage “rich redmen” ostensibly assuring that they handled the contracts and ownership of their great wealth properly.  Instead, most took financial advantage and many, probably dozens, took part in both slow and quick murders of Osage families such that control of the oil and the leases would wind up in white hands.  The FBI finally got to investigate a handful of the murders and to convict a couple of conspirators and murderers, whereupon victory was declared.  In fact murders had occurred prior to those the FBI investigated, and continued past that time.  Sordid, and disturbing; dozens of Osage Indians were murdered but, in the views even of lawmen of the time, “they were only Indians.”

Prudence has always required that Nazi Germany be soundly condemned for treating a class of citizens and neighbors as something less than human and needful of extermination.  One wonders how so many Germans could have followed Hitler, accepted the “Final Solution” or actively ignored it, even as trainloads of Jews passed by and as gas-chambers and ovens processed them nearby.  Lo and behold, hundreds of Americans coexisted with, if not participated in, systematic murder of the Osage, even whole families, for no more than financial gain.  The membrane between Judeo-Christian ethics and societal murder schemes, is very thin.

So, the whole chapter might be buried in our national memories as something that we have moved beyond and would never, in our enlightened state, today, be repeated.  A bit more reflection is in order.

Following King Phillip’s War, or the French and Indian War, American colonists clarified their perception of the new continent as theirs for the taking, lacking only a few courageous men and women to push the frontier further and further and a little further.  The sometimes peaceful “Indians” who already lived on it were deemed uncivilized or even savage, and therefore lesser beings, a perception proven over and over as “Indian” land, waters and hunting grounds were “settled” by colonists, French, Spanish and English (as well as Germans and others), and the occupants lashed out in the only ways they knew, killing and brutalizing many “whites”.  It became easy to kill those indigenous “savages” since they were lesser and God clearly had provided “America” for the colonists.

Natives couldn’t seem to handle their liquor, either.  Frontiersmen quickly learned that “Indians” could be weakened and controlled with alcohol.  The fact that “firewater” was a problem for Indians was reinforcement for the idea that they were lesser humans and their problems were due to their own flaws – get rid of them.  Some Osage had those weaknesses, at least some did, and despite their remarkable assimilation, were perceived as not quite worth a white person and flawed, as shown by their ignorance of white people’s connivance and thievery.  Thank God we have moved beyond such arrogance and prejudice. Not.

One need look only at the last 55 years(!) of federalized welfare policy and effect to see that the “Osage” of that period are simply mainly inner-city blacks, today, but also Hispanics.  Their flaws, in our liberal sympathies, are evidenced by poverty and worthy of welfare programs too numerous to count.  Instead of stealing their oil we steal their opportunities by trapping them in failed ghettos and failed schools, failed health-care and failed economics, partly because of political advantage, but partly, Prudence dictates, because of a never-admitted belief that the inner-city demographic is not as capable of success as “normal” people.  This attitude is “proven” by the statistics of gang warfare and high murder rates.

Now professional sympathizers and the employees of the welfare industry will scream that I am racist because I think that poor “folks” are guilty of being poor when it is really my racist attitude that keeps them stuck in welfare.  The opposite is true.  There is a large bloc of people who earn elections and financial power off the backs of welfare recipients… but it isn’t comprised of conservatives.  Prudence suggests that a clear-minded examination of the last 55 years of inner-city problems and failures reveals that those awful conditions could never be sustained, maintained and profited from unless it fulfilled some over-arching purpose.  And, if not an articulated purpose, at the very least, an over-arching belief!

Fifty-five years is a long time, even for an all-intrusive government with unrestricted debt-creation power, to accidentally allow millions of its citizens to live in failed circumstances while trillions of dollars in entitlements are sent to them or spent on them.

While “Indians” have a flawed relationship with alcohol, for inner-city populations it is drugs.  Fortunately, in someone’s decades-old view, drugs also provide a source of income for blacks and Hispanics and they do, after all, mostly kill one-another, gang members, somewhat bad neighbors.  Just make ‘em vote correctly and leave the suburbs alone and, in fact, the rest of us can leave them to their miserable daily existences.  It’s a de-facto policy that has worked for over 50 years!  Who’s the cynic… or the racist?

Unionized social work and current public policies are certainly not the solution.  Dominant philosophy holds that these people are unable to break out of poverty because “government” – right-wingers, primarily, won’t provide “the resources” to make it happen.  Failing schools, by the way, also unionized public services, use the same logic. Rapid growth in expenditure-per-pupil have failed to reverse declines in educational achievement; more “resources” will fix the problem.  Worse, now that pharmaceutical companies and sales companies have expanded addiction into the suburbs, the dependable drug trade that has kept blacks and others from being too restive in the inner cities is causing wider concern about drugs and the whole corrupting profit-structure may collapse leaving ghetto-dwellers in a tough spot.  Only a racist would want that to happen.

President Trump has begun a decades-overdue process of review and undoing of welfare programs that have failed continuously.  What will make that actually “stick,” if any of it may be accomplished against the welfare bureaucracy and politics, is a change in philosophy, attitudes and beliefs, starting with belief in black abilities as equal to those of any whites.  Maybe this is the last generation that treats inner-city residents like children or, worse, like “Indians.”

(1) “Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI”
by David Grann

Culture

Weathering the Worst

1 Comment

So it’s snowing today – might get two feet.  The wind is blowing from the northeast and everyone is upset that it’s less than a week since the last windy snowstorm.  Even worse, lots of us lost power last week, and that is the worst affront possible to our connected, screen-addled selves.  I mean, no TV?  What the heck?  No INTERNET?  What the    _ _ck??  Worse than all of that… if that’s possible, this terrible weather is all – our – fault!

We live in a remarkable political environment.  We’re in deep debt, welfare costs are too high, drugs are killing more people than ever, President Trump just fired Rex Tillerson and the White House seems to be in chaos, illegal entrants are being released after committing crimes so the “Feds” can’t deport them and a college education costs more than $50,000 a year, if you can believe that.  Besides, North Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons and missiles and China is building sand islands with military airstrips.  Let’s not even mention Venezuela and the Dakota Access Pipeline.  What are we supposed to do?

None of that stuff is worth a hole in the snow… well, except the snow, which is all – our – fault!  Wait until this summer, when there may be some hot days, 94 degrees, even.  Those will all be our fault, too.  This winter is the first time in the history of history that there has been more snow than municipal budgets allowed for… except for the past 40 years’ budgets or so.  Actually it’s not the first winter there has been 3 snowstorms in one month, either, but when I was a kid and everyone thought the world was cooling a little, they weren’t my… our… fault, although I had to shovel the stuff.

There isn’t a single problem, of terrorism, opiates, debt, taxes, wars, trade, education, politics, Constitutionalism or school shootings, that is as serious or as threatening as global warming.  If you had paid attention you’d have learned that all of the problems, unhappiness, dysfunction, trans-genderism, murder and genital herpes is CAUSED by global warming!  Where have you been?  Wait!  What’s that?  OMG!

Global warming is so ummmnh… so, ahhh… so 2010; I knew that.  All of those problems are caused by Climate Change… not global warming.  Meh! What’s the matter with me?  But, it’s still our fault and something we should be proud to recognize and proud to alter our lives over and pay taxes to put a STOP to.  It’s the best damned invention of the early 21st Century, for Heaven’s sake.  For the first time since the discovery of salt it’s possible to control the lives of EVERYONE on Earth, while we all sacrifice with a smile.  It’s better than religion ever was and church services are every minute of every day.

There are even sacraments.  Ten years ago a Prius was sufficient, but now it’s vegetarianism, and not just any vegetables, either.  If they’ve been touched by Monsanto or harvested by Con-Agra or Cargill or distributed by Nestle’, don’t eat them!  No siree.  You want only foods grown by real people who don’t make a lot of money or vote Republican, and who use good fresh shit to make them flourish.  If you eat meat you are taking food from the mouths of baby polar bears… or baby wolves, you ungrateful civilizer, you.  And all you people who earn a living raising animals and speaking harshly to them can just switch to carving souvenirs from windfall wood – memorials to places people once lived.

And if you can’t plug your car in and drive with no emissions, don’t come crying to us at the World Preservation at Every Cost Foundation.  We won’t have any hatred left for you: it’s all applied to the damned power plant operators who are making Climate Change worse for polar bears.  The next rally is being crowd-sourced on our freshly-charged dumb-phones, made in candle-lit factories.  You’re on your own for hatred, pal.

Man… oops, sorry, I mean two-foot.  Two-foot, I wish I believed it all – hate would be so much simpler, less distinctive.  I do believe in global climate change, though, since science shows us that it’s been going on since before history and even earlier than that.  In a way it’s somewhat reassuring that the forces that have shaped the earth are still with us.

The climate we really liked for Earth is a mix of good and bad times blended into that perfect day in, um, some state or country that has no bad storms or droughts, some time before Ronald Reagan became president.  We want to keep Earth right like that, that day… probably a 24th or 25th of April, and if it takes not driving to work or Disney World to achieve it, it’s a small price to pay.

And don’t worry about having nothing to do.  Get a pot prescription.  Text me.  We’ll do hunch.

Culture

Resolution Revolution

4 Comments

The start of a New Year may be a more significant spiritual event than any on liturgical calendars.  As a genus, Humans are compelled to count days, organize seasons and lunar cycles, divide days into candle-time, observe celestial cycles and even build gigantic stone thingy-s associated with all of those times.  Longest day, shortest day, equal days, feast days – they all become so very important.  But, the most important of all… the one day that every one of us cares about, regardless of nationality, is the day, indeed the hour, minute and SECOND that we change the number we have rather arbitrarily assigned to the year-time division: New Years.

Every one of us that is aware of the change in annual numbering is equally compelled to make promises to ourselves – sometimes publicly – as to how we will comport ourselves in better ways in the “new” year.  It’s a time for new personal and, in effect, spiritual beginnings.  We collectively, but privately, intend to be “better” people… replace bad habits with good ones, go on a diet, give more to charity, maybe go to church more often, tell our significant others, more often, that we love them.  Now, then, to whom are we speaking when we tell ourselves these promises?

Obviously we are attempting to communicate to a “self” that exists somewhere deeper? higher? than our cerebral cortex.  Short-term memory is notorious for being… well, short.  Our need at New Years is to imprint some new pattern of behavior – belief, really – on very long-term memory, and to do so quickly.

Belief is the key, and beliefs are spiritual, fundamentally.  Does all of our consciousness exist in neurons, ganglia and synapses?  Religions teach us, “No,” and even a little meditation can expose that our beliefs are held in a different level of mentality, and that maybe there is a spiritual component to the reflective human.  However it works, it is unlikely that a smoker, for example, will relinquish his or her hold on the habit until he or she believes that he or she is a non-smoker who is simply entangled with tobacco.  At that point dis-entanglement can begin; it won’t until then.

Or a druggie or a drinker, for other examples, must cement the belief in him- or her-self as a non-addict before commencing a true path toward cleansing that self of the entanglement with drugs of some kind.  The same is true of any habit or practice that the resolute resolver can identify as needing change.  The best news is that we need not wait for New Years’ morning to get started.  There are lots of cycles that we attend to that form perfectly good times to start becoming better humans.

In Eastern traditions there exists a concept called “The Cosmic Clock.”  It’s connected to other concepts related to the “Law” of “Karma:” As ye sow so shall (must) ye reap.  There are many ways of stating this idea.  “What goes around, comes around,” is one.  Even westerners understand it.  The Cosmic Clock starts the cycles of your life when you are born – that’s YOUR true “New Year.”  In line with the concept of being tested in each lifetime, aiming toward self-perfection, you and the people around you start a series of tests upon your birth.  Every year on your birthday you commence a new cycle of both testing and accomplishment, and by the end of that year you are obligated to place your accomplishments – your harvest: what you have “reaped” – on the spiritual altar of your “higher” self… the one you are trying to communicate with through New Years’ resolutions!  These cycles come in groupings of 12: 12 hours, 12 months, 12 years.

It is in your thirteenth year that your own, personal karma begins to cycle into your life.  That is the age of spiritual responsibility, as it were.  Many cultures and spiritual paths recognize this timing with celebrations – or events, at least – marking the end of the first 12 years’ milestone, like a bar-mitzvah.  In every year there will be 12 beginnings we call months; every day there are two beginnings – of 12-hour cycles; every 12 years of our lives there are major beginnings.  Sometimes the kinds of tests this life will include come to 12-hour, 12-month and 12-year “peaks,” together, so to speak, and even comfortable Westerners can detect a point at which testing is severe, a point when “everything goes wrong” at once.

“Every cloud has a silver lining,” is a platitude that then applies.  The lowest point is when there is the greatest opportunity for good, or improvement, or, we might say, Victory over that test.  Karma instructs that the tests you failed to pass the first time (in this life or a previous one) will be presented again, providing the opportunity for personal victory.  Trying to imprint a “resolution” is a response to the spiritual need to prepare yourself for tests your “higher” self knows are coming, and to remove weaknesses that will interfere with your victories.  You might refer to the post of Christmas Eve for another aspect of this: http://www.prudenceleadbetter.com/2017/12/24/the-religious-question/

So, New Years is a big party, presumably a celebration of all we accomplished in the spiritual year just ending.  But, it is also commencement of a year/cycle in preparation for which we are resolved to “be better.”  Pretty cool, thank goodness.

Culture, Economics, Governance

Is ‘drug’ the past tense?

4 Comments

We seem to not be serious about – truly intent on solving – the growing drug threat in the United States.  “We” refers to our governing and policing institutions… and to all of us, one supposes.  While there are many subsets, and many individuals, of local, state and national agencies who are deeply committed to the fight, overall, our national policies have effectively allowed the trade to grow and corrupt many levels of law enforcement and justice.  While doing so, this “business” has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, destroyed families and spawned immeasurable volumes of criminal activity that has damaged many other thousands, if not millions of people.

Today our publicized problems center on “opioids” both “natural” and pharmaceutical.  A market developed by criminal drug-dealers has proven too attractive to ignore for multi-billion-dollar corporations, corrupting them and their medically licensed facilitators, daily prescribing their FDA-approved wonder drugs at clinics, hospitals and back rooms, nationwide.  Soft-headed federal welfare and subsidized medicine programs help irresponsible patients “pay” for their prescribed addictives.  One statistic tells us that it’s long past when our national battle tactics ought to have changed dramatically:  over 60,000 dead from opiate overdoses in one year.

Unfortunately, opioids represent simply and tragically just an aspect of the modern American drug culture.  It’s a culture that begins with candies, ice cream and juice-boxes rewarding good, or at least not too embarrassing, behavior, by 18- to 84-month-old infants, continuing unabated through aspirin, Tylenol, Advil, “arthritis formula,” Cold-Eze, Thera-Flu, Nyquil, Dayquil, 5-Hour energy, cigars, cigarettes, chewing tobacco, nicotine “Vaping,” Claritin, dextromethorphan, Robitussin, Afrin, Aleve, Excedrin, Motrin, and hundreds of other variations of over-the-counter feel-better concoctions for aches and pains,  “colds” and headaches, plus the dozens of prescription pain alleviators, allergy relievers, cold-symptom removers, cough syrups, tablets and inhalers… and we didn’t even get to actual pain “killers,” a most suitable name.

Every TV program advises consumers to question their doctors as to which sort of blood-thinner is best, what kind of goop will kill fungus, how to resolve breathing problems and 44 ways to get better sleep through chemistry… or better sex.  Once all of these conditions have been restored to desirability, it is crucial to eat, swallow or drink something to improve regularity and then avoid and cure hemorrhoids.  It’s a never-ending battle to achieve perfect health – or a perfect simulation of it.

Eventually we pay attention to ads for diabetes medications… other than juice-boxes, of course.

Doctors, in 2013, wrote narcotic prescriptions at a rate 272% of the 1991 rate.  That is, 207 MILLION prescriptions!  For 300 Million people?!  Gross opiate production had increased from 3,520 kilograms (7700 pounds) in 1993 to an astronomical 70,000 kilograms (155,000 pounds!) in 2007, which MORE THAN DOUBLED just 6 years later, to 150,000 kilograms!  What the Hell has our government done to protect the nation in this period?  Why, they’ve forced a “cutback” to only 108,000 kilograms!  Whoop.

Where did all this pain come from?  How did humans ever evolve without Dr. Feelgood?

Today we give pills not only when we feel sick… because we ARE sick, we give them when we just feel, well, not right.  We give boys hormone treatments when they say they want to be girls; we give related treatments to girls who feel like boys and even perform bilateral mastectomies on teenagers who don’t want to admit to being girls.  Boys are mutilated by removal of genitals.  What has “medicine” become?  It seems similar to Nazi experimentation, except that people in favor of the mutilations – chemical and otherwise – are the ones accusing realists of being the Nazis.

Is it just profit?  Much like the alcohol business, fortunes are not made in painkillers and other stuff from people who nurse a bottle of Scotch for 3 months.  Big money comes from people who consume a couple of bottles/packages/ounces a week or more – Scotch or Advil, Oxycontin or Aleve, marijuana or Lunesta.  Amidst all this we try to draw lines that cannot be crossed – like Bingo at the Parish Hall but no permitting of casinos, no, no, no.

We hate cocaine, for example, and we really hate crack cocaine, so no legalization for that stuff, no, no, no.  And heroin!  Oh… my… God, heroin?  No, no, no – a thousand times NO!  BUT(!)… if some powerful pharmaceutical manufacturer – powerful because of political contributions and constant lobbying – wants to distribute a few hundred Million capsules of SYNTHETIC heroin, then the mind/nerve altering effects can be described in wonderfully pharmaceutical terms and the distribution system liberally supplied – FDA approved, Medicaid-financed.

In an earlier career I worked with a Vietnam vet, a Marine, who had received shrapnel in one arm.  It was badly scarred and made possible the receipt of a check every month for his “disability.”  Every 3 months or so he had to go to Boston, to the V.A. hospital, and get tested for the level of feeling that was returning to his arm… or not.  Meanwhile he practiced not reacting to pins in the flesh of that arm.  Then, when he’d get tested, he could look stone-faced and continue his claim that he had no feeling in the arm, and the checks would continue.

Humans are very capable of lying to the point of severe discomfort, to get what they want.  Do we think proto-addicts wouldn’t lie to keep receiving pain-killers?  Even if all they were doing was selling each month’s supply?  Is the medical establishment that performs hundreds of thousands of abortions each year, unable to withhold excessive quantities of opioids?

They certainly can’t refrain from prescribing.  Two-thirds of patient visits result in a prescription… meaning upwards of THREE BILLION prescriptions for 300 Million people!  That’s 10 each.  We’ve all experienced the kindly scrip-recommendation from even the most caring physician (or nurse-practitioner).  It’s no surprise; most medico’s receive constant “education” from the pharmaceutical complex and there exists an inherent desire by them to provide advice that patients will experience benefits from, and that often means a drug of some sort.

Unfortunately, there are about ONE MILLION adverse drug reactions every year, yielding some 100,000 DEATHS – the fourth largest cause of death in the U. S.  We might consider that fentanyl-laced heroin or synthetic opiods also produce “adverse drug reactions.”  The differences can be distilled to two: the INTENT of the seller/provider, and the legal status of all concerned.  Both are interested in two things: making the customer feel better… and repeat business.

It’s all part of a national, societal culture of control of biology for human comfort.  Whatever we don’t like about nature… there is a drug – a chemical – to “fix” it.  “Addiction” is pejorative only because of the lesser qualities of the illegal providers.

Today states are racing to legalize marijuana, all 122 current strains of it because it will provide (choose a favorite): tax revenue for underfunded state budgets; ability to control quality and safety; stiff competition to illegal drug dealers, hopefully to stop illegal drug trade; funding for drug-treatment programs; reduced dependency on “bad” drugs; votes for those most supportive of legalization.  Another, really important provision is eliminating Timmy’s criminal record for possession and, one other: freeing up the justice system to concentrate on serious crimes.  After all, if “they” are going to get the stuff anyway, we might as well go along with it and raise some revenue to boot.  Who are we to interfere?

There are no adults… we’re a nation of juveniles.  And the drug “culture” is us, this most pampered generation.  If you weren’t sure of where you stood on socialized medicine, be mindful that such a system will cement the drug culture even more firmly in place.  Whoop.

Culture

The Religious Question

3 Comments

Everyone seems to question religious doctrine these days… “everyone” meaning a large majority of Christians in Europe and the United States and Canada.  We think we have become “too smart” to believe that stuff.  That smartness is like an infection, similar to socialism, where our science, technology and ubiquitous governors (bureaucrats) are creating a much nicer world than “God” supposedly ever did.  The internet, gaming and pornography are meeting most of our needs; WalMart, Kohls and fast-food restaurants handle the rest.

And the rigors of marriage are so last Millennium – let the bureaucrats raise the kids.  I, mean, with pre-kindergarten, pre-school, K–12 and perpetual college, who really needs parents anymore?  The love-making part is OK, but even that’s becoming a big hassle; and courtship… forget it.  Hooking up and living together is fun but look at all the divorces.  No, that model doesn’t really work for us anymore.  If that’s the religious model, then let’s pass.  And it’s so expensive!  How much more pleasant driving around is.  Besides, my low-emissions hybrid helps to save the planet.

Oddly enough, Muslims are more serious about religion today than almost ever.  And the most serious expression of their most-serious religion is the destruction of Christianity – and of Christians, themselves, of course.  It’s as if we were in a race with terrorists to prove the unimportance of Christianity, except we’re not winning.  Muslims still want to kill us or convert us.  Jews are just as bad as Christians, in their book, so they are more than happy to kill them, too.  Jews are certainly willing to give up religious seriousness, along with Christians, so why do the Muslims care so much?  It’s a worthy question.

As Muslim terrorism has accelerated over the past 50 years there has been a parallel, mostly anti-Christian movement gaining steam in “the West:” atheism.   And this isn’t some “live and let live” form of God-less non-religion.  No.  It has become virulent… same infection, different strain.  Atheist don’t expend a lot of effort opposing Judaism, Buddhism or Hinduism – mostly they target Christianity.  Christmas makes atheists apoplectic, similar to its effect on Muslims.  Why on Earth do self-proclaimed non-believers – we’re talking scarlet-lettered “A” atheists, here, not agnostics or, presumably, not ignorant fools, but serious opponents of Christianity and its slightest mention… why the Hell do they care?

The broad network of atheists concentrate on the awful record of human organizations that operate in the name of doctrines other humans wrote stories about, derived dogma from, and implemented with motivations of personal and institutional power, as well as motivations of financial security.  There are thousands of years of policies and incidents – crimes, in fact – that belie the ostensible teachings of EVERY religious tradition.  Just collating and describing every human error will always yield plenty of material.  Indeed, an entire movement could be, has been, created out of the effort.  But that story is not complete, is it?

Nowhere in the vast network of atheist websites and their aggregation of terrible acts, is there a long list of extraordinary acts of charity by other humans deeply motivated by the overarching story of Christian sacrifice.

If your intention is to catalogue human failings, you will forever be busy.  You may also become blinded to phenomenal beauty, sacrifice, love and greatness.  However, rendering judgments about the existence of “God” based solely upon the much-edited and selected stories in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, or upon the evolving catechisms of churches, will always be somewhat erroneous.

There are but two places to stand in the debate about the truth of God’s existence: He exists or He doesn’t.  The rest of arguments on either side are inevitably biased for each advocate’s personal advantage, comfort, satisfaction or smug superiority.  Barring personal experience with God, Himself, all of our words are opinion, more or less informed.  Hearsay, we might conclude.  And, in Prudence’ view, too fraught with mysteries that may be balanced only with faith.  This in no way denigrates faith.  Faith is the best glue religion provides to cause populations to share codes of morals and conduct.

Prudence tells us that God would not launch our long climb into perfection with a list of mysteries.  It doesn’t make sense that He would hold us to standards we cannot understand – there must be a logical structure to God’s Law, logic that humans can grasp and apply to our social organization.  Further, it seems reasonable to assume, following God’s Law must be good for people and for Life, itself, and, still further, and logically, for God, himself who never, by definition, acts outside of his own “Law,” since He is that Law.

So, for those of us who stand on the side of God’s reality, admittedly thanks to a measure of faith, there must be a value to God for the creation and existence of humans with the free will to choose between His law and earthly evil.  That is, there must be a BENEFIT to God to go to the trouble of creating humans.

Hinduism provides some insight to the logic of God’s existence, through the laws of Karma.  There is a near-universal understanding of what Christianity states as: “As ye sow, so shall ye reap,” which is to say: “…so MUST ye reap.”  Karma is more complex than that, of course, because of its connection to re-embodiment of the soul.  Western Christianity does its best to suppress the possibility of being truly “born again,” but even the Bible includes references to it.  In one view, the New Testament provides the opportunity to return, through karma, to resume self-perfection, arriving after being “judged and found wanting,” agreeing to accept the rigors of a life that will provide the opportunities to “balance” what is “wanting” – karma.  Only by cleaning up all of our negative acts in whatever lifetime, can we achieve acceptance into “heaven,” if that is our goal.  Whether we call it Nirvana or Heaven, or some other, mankind generally believes in rewards in an afterlife for good living in this life.  Is there a logic to this?

There is if God also benefits.  What if – just consider – that God’s Law that tells mankind to “go forth and multiply,” applies equally to Him.  He is the Law, by definition, so of course it does.  In other words, individual perfection is logical if God is ENHANCED by humans’ choices to adhere to His Law and not succumb to the comforts of evil.  In other, other words, God becomes happier when his “children” do right.

Oh, that’s impossible, you might say.  God is all there is.  But, then, who are we to limit Him… if we are standing on His side, after all?  After all, you get to keep only what you give away!  In those other words, it is only the ACTION of charity – or of following the Law – that stays with your soul.  The other side of that is that an evil action must be balanced in order for your soul to progress into “Heaven.”  It’s very logical.

And, it’s not a mystery.  There is a value and purpose to being “good” and not “evil.”  Part of the value is that society and civilization, itself, holds together through the application of shared morals.  Society functioning, strengthening families and children, educating them and protecting them, is a value.  Only in strong societies do people have the opportunities to worship and, one hopes, to learn greater aspects of the Law.  No mystery there.

Atheists perform an important function.  They continuously expose our flaws, particularly  human failures in the guise of religion.  And well they should.  They may be blind to some things, but they’re searchlight-clear on crucial others.  If they can recognize, as Karma describes, that life is a series of tests and that earth is the testing place, then they might accept that belief in God is a test and that disbelief is also a test.  It really doesn’t serve anyone to attempt to determine whether others are passing or “failing” a test, only whether we, ourselves are passing.  If belief in God generates hatred and death, it is reasonable to think that a test is being failed.  Likewise, if disbelief generates hatred or worse, that is also evidence of a failure to pass.

Every event, whether we deem it good or bad, is an opportunity to choose good or evil.  One can stand in judgment of God if he or she wishes, and say that this or that earthquake, flood or disease is an indictment of God, but what is the value of that except to sow hatred?  If God were to place us all in nurseries so that we would be perpetually comfy and fed, free of disease – free of choices, in effect, what value would humans have?  There would be no growth, no strength, no ability to make ourselves more perfect.

If there were no standards to meet or tests to pass, life would be useless; there’d be no horizon, no mountains to climb, no wonder to fulfill by finding out.  No, you non-believers, that there are tests is not proof there is no God but, rather, that there is.

It is our response to the test that we can take with us, not our comfort.  Still, you should keep on holding up your mirror, reflecting back at us our flaws and errors in God’s name.  The original question, though, remains.  Why do opposing religions, best exemplified by Muslims in opposition to every other belief structure including atheism, become so hateful toward others?  What do they care?  I think the only care great enough is that their chosen enemies may be right.