What is the highest value when it comes to a culture?
I just read on 'First Things" that there was a distinction made between the values of equality and liberty. Where Europe prioritizes equality, the United States values liberty. Which value should be prioritized?
If one prioritizes equality, then, how is there anyway to 'police" that value? Wouldn't government be a form of inequality, as those in power posiition would determine who was or wasn't discriminating and on what basis (law/rule) that would be determined. Society cannot function apart from government, therefore, equality cannot be prioritized.
If liberty is prioritized, then, would there be equality, because those in government would be implementing laws that would gurantee freedom under law. As long as an individual respected law, then there would be liberty to pursue their own ends. Therefore, good government must prioritize liberty, so that justice can be upheld. There is not justice without liberty.
There has been much talk about Obama being a socialist. I don't know whether he is really commtted to the ideology of socialism, so much as against discrimination and inequality. If you listen to the pastor whose ministry he listened to for over 20 years, then one begins to understand that he wants to make sure that those who have been discriminated against will get their just due. He is for globalization on a wide scale, so that America, as an imperialistic nation, will not implement their culture on another. He is against faith based institutions because he believes in universal education, as well as universal healthcare. He wants government to implement OT law, so that individual liberty is limited to moral responsibilty. This is just short of Shairia law.
I hope that those who care enough about the benefits of living in a free society will take seriously what is at stake in this election and not "toy" with the idea of a Utopian "promise for tomorrow"!
Friday, October 31, 2008
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
A Lawsuit States That Obama Was Born in Kenya, Disqualifiying Him for President
Many of us are tired of the demonization in this presidential race. But, this was news that is not something that should be disregarded, as it concerns our Constitution. In light of other things said about change and bringing about a different type of governing, this is an important item of news...
It was reported in the Washington Times that a Pennsylvania lawyer and Democratic activist has filed a lawsuit against Obama, on September 15th and after the 30 day request of admissions either by objection or response, there has been no acknowledgment. Therefore, it is being released as an admittance that the lawsuit is true and requesting that Obama step down from seeking the presidency.
The lawsuit states that Obama was born in Kenya. A meeting was held to discuss who might replace the candidate if he is disqualified for president. Wouldn't that be interesting especially in light of A.C.O.R.N.
It was reported in the Washington Times that a Pennsylvania lawyer and Democratic activist has filed a lawsuit against Obama, on September 15th and after the 30 day request of admissions either by objection or response, there has been no acknowledgment. Therefore, it is being released as an admittance that the lawsuit is true and requesting that Obama step down from seeking the presidency.
The lawsuit states that Obama was born in Kenya. A meeting was held to discuss who might replace the candidate if he is disqualified for president. Wouldn't that be interesting especially in light of A.C.O.R.N.
Missing Finale, a Known Friend and Some Things She Taught Me
I wrote on Sunday about my dog's last day with us and explained what she meant to all of us. She has died of pneumonia. Her last day brought questions to my mind and her absence of two days has underlined some important truths.
Finale was a mutt. She was half Chow and half Golden Retriever, so she was not a "canned" breed of a dog. Finale was known as more than just a dog. She was a beloved pet. I went to the Humane Shelter (both of them) to just remind myself that there were other dogs to be adopted. But, what it revealed was how unique Finale was. She was our dog, which meant she was not "just a dog". We had a relationship to her.
When I went to the Humane Shelter, I saw many different kinds of dogs, and could see that all of them had certain qualities in common. They were, after all, dogs. Now, I am not discounting the fact that these "facts" are also applicable to Finale, as a dog. But, there was much more to her than just her "dogginess".
Her absence these past two days has brought to mind how we "knew" her. I still smell her, can imagine her running toward me when I call. She would come up to be petted and if you didn't oblige, she would nuzzle her nose into your leg, chest or hand. She had a unique way of jumping and was clumsy. But, her idiosyncrisies only endeared her to us. And I miss her terribly.
In thinking of her last day with us, I thought about euthanasia. I watched her struggle and would've done anything to relieve her of her misery, but it was the week-end. And to be honest, I still was hoping for some change for the better.
Knowing Finale as a dog, is not knowing Finale. The same is the case for people. People are more than the material bodies they inhabit and the common characteristics of "humanity". But, their material bodies and the common characteristics are also part and parcel of their existence and "revelation". We cannot reduce man to his parts without doing damage to understanding man and diminishing man to an object to be "conformed" to "right order" or "proper functioning" (discipliship is understood in some segments as a conforming in this way). Man, as an object, is not loved, appreciated, or embraced, but controlled, manipulated and experimented upon for "god", or the "common good". This is not knowing a man as a unique creation, but, controlling man through education (propaganda).
Thinking about Finale's struggle to survive also made me think about what it would be like if she had been a person, who I had loved. What if I was watching my husband or child die like this? Wouldn't I feel the same way, even more so? It was obvious to others that Finale would not survive, but I kept hoping. Is this what happens to others when they face the death of a loved one? I really began to think that it would be best in certain situations to allow life to exit, instead of heroically trying to 'fix" it. There is a time to die. And sometimes embracing death is healing in itself for the person and the family involved.
Finale was a mutt. She was half Chow and half Golden Retriever, so she was not a "canned" breed of a dog. Finale was known as more than just a dog. She was a beloved pet. I went to the Humane Shelter (both of them) to just remind myself that there were other dogs to be adopted. But, what it revealed was how unique Finale was. She was our dog, which meant she was not "just a dog". We had a relationship to her.
When I went to the Humane Shelter, I saw many different kinds of dogs, and could see that all of them had certain qualities in common. They were, after all, dogs. Now, I am not discounting the fact that these "facts" are also applicable to Finale, as a dog. But, there was much more to her than just her "dogginess".
Her absence these past two days has brought to mind how we "knew" her. I still smell her, can imagine her running toward me when I call. She would come up to be petted and if you didn't oblige, she would nuzzle her nose into your leg, chest or hand. She had a unique way of jumping and was clumsy. But, her idiosyncrisies only endeared her to us. And I miss her terribly.
In thinking of her last day with us, I thought about euthanasia. I watched her struggle and would've done anything to relieve her of her misery, but it was the week-end. And to be honest, I still was hoping for some change for the better.
Knowing Finale as a dog, is not knowing Finale. The same is the case for people. People are more than the material bodies they inhabit and the common characteristics of "humanity". But, their material bodies and the common characteristics are also part and parcel of their existence and "revelation". We cannot reduce man to his parts without doing damage to understanding man and diminishing man to an object to be "conformed" to "right order" or "proper functioning" (discipliship is understood in some segments as a conforming in this way). Man, as an object, is not loved, appreciated, or embraced, but controlled, manipulated and experimented upon for "god", or the "common good". This is not knowing a man as a unique creation, but, controlling man through education (propaganda).
Thinking about Finale's struggle to survive also made me think about what it would be like if she had been a person, who I had loved. What if I was watching my husband or child die like this? Wouldn't I feel the same way, even more so? It was obvious to others that Finale would not survive, but I kept hoping. Is this what happens to others when they face the death of a loved one? I really began to think that it would be best in certain situations to allow life to exit, instead of heroically trying to 'fix" it. There is a time to die. And sometimes embracing death is healing in itself for the person and the family involved.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Human Formation, Conformity and Discrimination
A lot of discussion has gone on in the recent past about the biblical text. What is this text and how did it come to be an authority? The text was written to form a tradition around history. The historical Jesus' impact on his culture began with a small group, spread to become a movement that came to define a religious tradition. The Church was born upon the heels of Jewish tradition and its text was interpreted as a unique revelation (but uniqueness is understood in any tradition, initially.).Tradition is the concretelization of experience that represents a universal "ideal" and are brought about by social, religious and political reformers (some would understand them as revolutionaries.).
Tradition is defined by its beliefs and many have suffered persecution under its power. "Conditioning traditions" of ostracism, exclusion, and heresy hunting have permeated the Church's history, but, unfortunately has not been viewed as discrimination. Belief is a powerful identity factor in humanity's search for meaning. Conformity is identified as spiritual formation in a tradition. But, conformity to a tradition is not uniqueness, but identification with a certain means of understanding existence.
Evolutionary biology/neuroscience has "revealed" that man is nothing more than animal in his responses, unless he is "trained" to conform. Brain science has born out that the neural connections must be disciplined, so that humans might behave in a proper way for maintaining society's order and structure. Man is no longer viewed as primarily a rational animal, but an animal of instinct. Moral training must form the individual into conformity, so that society's flourishing will be furthered and man will attain his "teleos".
I find that there is nothing wrong with training children, but is not the epitome of man's rational development. There is something wrong with conformity, when the "form" is so narrow that the individual child cannot attain to his/her uniqueness. Conformity is what Jesus stood against in discrimination of others who did not fit with the Jewish standard, which was a religious tradition.
In the Christian traditon, how is discrimination seen? And how would Jesus' example exemplify another standard than the "christian one"?
I find that "biblical christians" those, who live by the text are always dismissing some things while emphasizing others. Is this really what religion should be about? Or should religion be about unifying and expanding human existence beyond traditional understandings, where man is seen as human within a humane context and not one driven by a religious ideology? But, then religion is about defintions and standards, which are gauged by groupism, or textual understandings. And discrimination is always about how the other doesn't fit. Traditions call the outsiders "sinners", "infidels", and "dogs". Religion, then becomes a narrowing of boundaries and limitation to man's flourishing.
Tradition is defined by its beliefs and many have suffered persecution under its power. "Conditioning traditions" of ostracism, exclusion, and heresy hunting have permeated the Church's history, but, unfortunately has not been viewed as discrimination. Belief is a powerful identity factor in humanity's search for meaning. Conformity is identified as spiritual formation in a tradition. But, conformity to a tradition is not uniqueness, but identification with a certain means of understanding existence.
Evolutionary biology/neuroscience has "revealed" that man is nothing more than animal in his responses, unless he is "trained" to conform. Brain science has born out that the neural connections must be disciplined, so that humans might behave in a proper way for maintaining society's order and structure. Man is no longer viewed as primarily a rational animal, but an animal of instinct. Moral training must form the individual into conformity, so that society's flourishing will be furthered and man will attain his "teleos".
I find that there is nothing wrong with training children, but is not the epitome of man's rational development. There is something wrong with conformity, when the "form" is so narrow that the individual child cannot attain to his/her uniqueness. Conformity is what Jesus stood against in discrimination of others who did not fit with the Jewish standard, which was a religious tradition.
In the Christian traditon, how is discrimination seen? And how would Jesus' example exemplify another standard than the "christian one"?
I find that "biblical christians" those, who live by the text are always dismissing some things while emphasizing others. Is this really what religion should be about? Or should religion be about unifying and expanding human existence beyond traditional understandings, where man is seen as human within a humane context and not one driven by a religious ideology? But, then religion is about defintions and standards, which are gauged by groupism, or textual understandings. And discrimination is always about how the other doesn't fit. Traditions call the outsiders "sinners", "infidels", and "dogs". Religion, then becomes a narrowing of boundaries and limitation to man's flourishing.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Race, Discrimination, and Endorsement
Colin Powell's endorsement of Barack Obama has been labelled by some as a race issue.
I don't know whether anyone really understands discrimination unless they have experienced it. But, reverse discrimination is what Colin Powell is being accused of. Is an endorsement valid just because they happen to be of a certain group, race, ideology, etc.? is this just and right?
Groupism is unjust in so many ways. Groupism is prejuidicial because groups are defined by certain attributes, ideology, etc. Groups are a way for humans to maintain an identity, but the identity is based on prejuidice. Although I recognize and aknowledge the lack of opportunity that many of certain groups have had, priviledging groups has a downside in meeting quotas, when there are not enough qualified candidates to fulfill a certain position. Is this just, even though it is meant to give equal opportunity? Reverse discrimination is also unfair.
The discriminated form a solidarity to gain a power base and then politic for their group's representation, which is good in our free society. But, equal respresentation of the majority's side also needs acknowledgement. This is only maintaining a balance of power and is just and right.
The fact that Obama is able to run and get his party's nomination is proof that our society is overcoming its bias. Hillary Clinton ran against Obama and was a formable foe. She has broken the wall separating the sexes in powerful leadership roles. I think our country has come a long way from 25 years ago. Granted there will always be segments of the population that remain prejuidiced, but, as more and more minorities gain powerful positions, it will become harder and harder to ignore the facts of equality.
I am hoping that Colin's endorsement is not one that is racially motivated. That would illustrate an ultimate prejuidice.
I don't know whether anyone really understands discrimination unless they have experienced it. But, reverse discrimination is what Colin Powell is being accused of. Is an endorsement valid just because they happen to be of a certain group, race, ideology, etc.? is this just and right?
Groupism is unjust in so many ways. Groupism is prejuidicial because groups are defined by certain attributes, ideology, etc. Groups are a way for humans to maintain an identity, but the identity is based on prejuidice. Although I recognize and aknowledge the lack of opportunity that many of certain groups have had, priviledging groups has a downside in meeting quotas, when there are not enough qualified candidates to fulfill a certain position. Is this just, even though it is meant to give equal opportunity? Reverse discrimination is also unfair.
The discriminated form a solidarity to gain a power base and then politic for their group's representation, which is good in our free society. But, equal respresentation of the majority's side also needs acknowledgement. This is only maintaining a balance of power and is just and right.
The fact that Obama is able to run and get his party's nomination is proof that our society is overcoming its bias. Hillary Clinton ran against Obama and was a formable foe. She has broken the wall separating the sexes in powerful leadership roles. I think our country has come a long way from 25 years ago. Granted there will always be segments of the population that remain prejuidiced, but, as more and more minorities gain powerful positions, it will become harder and harder to ignore the facts of equality.
I am hoping that Colin's endorsement is not one that is racially motivated. That would illustrate an ultimate prejuidice.
Love to Finale
My heart goes out to my dog this evening. She came down with pneumonia. It was diagnosed two weeks ago and the vet said initially she sure looked and acted healthy for a dog so sick. (He had listened to her heart.). But, tonight she is finding it difficult to breathe. She has been on four differnent antibiotics. I'd taken her in every day last week to get shots, but she has still not responded. She is little more than a walking skeleton today. But, it is so hard to know when to let go, as she is only 3 years old. But, tonight, I am willing to let her go, because I don't want to see her struggle to breathe.
I have loved all my dogs, as they have been my best friends. Dogs love you no matter what. They are loyal and faithful friends. Finale was an exceptional example and it was hard to leave her behind last year while we were in D.C. She followed me everywhere and loved showing and getting affection, which I certainly obliged. She was a happy dog. She used to jump with all four in the air, as she didn't know how big she was (she was a mix of Chow/Golden Retriever). And even though I had wanted a white dog, Finale has won my heart with her temparment. She is gentle and sweet like the Retriever and fiercely loyal and determined, like the Chow. Wim had named her Finale, as he thought it would be our last dog. But, now we aren't so sure.
Finale was loved by our whole family, but the individuals in our family had different ways of expressing it. Our son, Nate, had agreed initially to keep her here at the house while we were away last year, but it became problematic, as he was in school and working all day. Finale was used to having attention, so when I came home to visit last October she would hardly come to me on her own, as she had grown unaccustomed to human contact. It broke my heart.
Our other son, Daniel decided to keep her at the house where he lives. The family there have two outdoor dogs and two indoor dogs. She likes both the inside and outside. As the family lives in the country, she enjoyed her freedom and roamed their acrage. Both the boys had had interaction with her over our absence.
Our daughter, Rebekah, and her two dogs came with her family most every week-end before our leaving for D.C. and her two dogs grew fond of Finale. Our granchildren would love to pull her ears, pet her head and she would just let them be children with little response. Hannah would come in and the first thing she would often say was "Tallie, where are you Tallie"....
Today, Daniel and his girlfriend came for lunch and he was heartbroken upon seeing her and how she'd lost so much weight in a week. He had checked up on her through the week and asked me to call him if something changed with Finale.
Our son, Nate, came late in the day and looked at Finale and said, "Mom, she's dying, I hope you're not putting any more money into her. She needs to be put to sleep" ( His major is, you guessed it, business!)...(I told him that I knew who not to depend on when I got older :) )...
Rebekah is too busy with her children to be too concerned (and they are more important).
Our children have had unique responses to Finale's sudden demise. She is our dog and she was loved very much.
We will all miss her!
I have loved all my dogs, as they have been my best friends. Dogs love you no matter what. They are loyal and faithful friends. Finale was an exceptional example and it was hard to leave her behind last year while we were in D.C. She followed me everywhere and loved showing and getting affection, which I certainly obliged. She was a happy dog. She used to jump with all four in the air, as she didn't know how big she was (she was a mix of Chow/Golden Retriever). And even though I had wanted a white dog, Finale has won my heart with her temparment. She is gentle and sweet like the Retriever and fiercely loyal and determined, like the Chow. Wim had named her Finale, as he thought it would be our last dog. But, now we aren't so sure.
Finale was loved by our whole family, but the individuals in our family had different ways of expressing it. Our son, Nate, had agreed initially to keep her here at the house while we were away last year, but it became problematic, as he was in school and working all day. Finale was used to having attention, so when I came home to visit last October she would hardly come to me on her own, as she had grown unaccustomed to human contact. It broke my heart.
Our other son, Daniel decided to keep her at the house where he lives. The family there have two outdoor dogs and two indoor dogs. She likes both the inside and outside. As the family lives in the country, she enjoyed her freedom and roamed their acrage. Both the boys had had interaction with her over our absence.
Our daughter, Rebekah, and her two dogs came with her family most every week-end before our leaving for D.C. and her two dogs grew fond of Finale. Our granchildren would love to pull her ears, pet her head and she would just let them be children with little response. Hannah would come in and the first thing she would often say was "Tallie, where are you Tallie"....
Today, Daniel and his girlfriend came for lunch and he was heartbroken upon seeing her and how she'd lost so much weight in a week. He had checked up on her through the week and asked me to call him if something changed with Finale.
Our son, Nate, came late in the day and looked at Finale and said, "Mom, she's dying, I hope you're not putting any more money into her. She needs to be put to sleep" ( His major is, you guessed it, business!)...(I told him that I knew who not to depend on when I got older :) )...
Rebekah is too busy with her children to be too concerned (and they are more important).
Our children have had unique responses to Finale's sudden demise. She is our dog and she was loved very much.
We will all miss her!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
