Monday, January 13, 2014

There Is No Such Thing As "Non-Judgemental". There Is Only A New List Of Discriminators

Chicago Black Youth Trapped In Violence: "Violence Won't End Until We Can Make Money Off Of Peace"

MSNBC - Melissa Harris-Perry Anti-Gun Violence Series


Most people, upon viewing these remarks will consider this young male as being unrealistic.

His view is correct.  His construct is wrong.

The ECOSYSTEM of Chicago has failed to produce the conditions through which young Black people like him can be more fully engaged in the productive operations of the community - in their pursuit to retain a desired STANDARD OF LIVING.

We hear positive reactions to "The Pope" as he notes the damage of capitalistic lust.   This notion is applied to wealth people.

Yet if we consider how the Catholic church has a legacy of compelling believers to submit themselves to "God" through the church, becoming nuns, priests and fathers - that ran the church institution and associated Catholic school - the proper answer to this young man's perspective is to ask the ADULTS in the community:  "What would you have the young people in your community to submit to, adopting a disposition of 'Denial of Self' so that more of the 'Social Justice Rights' that you ascribe to the larger community are now delivered as a more local dispensation?"

Tuesday, January 07, 2014

I Disagree With Evander Holyfield's Line Of Argument That Says "Homosexuality Is Not 'Normal' "

In my assessment - Former boxing Heavyweight champ - Evander Holyfield has just "Stepped In It" with his statements that "Homosexuality is not 'Normal' ".

Just as "they" (ubiquitous "they") can BRING THEIR OWN BIBLE VERSE to argue against many of the things that Holyfield believes in as "normal" - so is the case with his inspection of the "normality" of homosexuality.

In the next few weeks we will likely hear sundry details of Mr Holyfield's:
  • Serial Marriages
  • Adultry
  • Fornication
 He set up this attack on his person  because of the paucity of his argument.


MY ARGUMENT

I am against a government attempting to regulate the personal and social behavior of free individuals - as long as they don't harm anyone else in their course of living.

HOWEVER - as a SOCIETY (and for those of us 'People Of Faith') we are asked to "Help Our Fellow Man".

Those (who I believe) are seeking to USE this mandate to make POLITICAL gains, by shifting this which is an INDIVIDUAL calling from our spiritual, religious and "character" composition to "Help Our Fellow Man' - seek to stand at the "ribbon cutting" ritual - thanks to the use of other people's money - to claim that THEY have a special closeness with "God" as evidenced by their public policy.

When we inspect a bit further - the misalignment is exposed.
We can all agree that "broken familial relationships" are a key source of much of the dysfunction that we see in our society as children are imprinted with messages that run awry of what is statistically proven to be the key construct for success at allowing them to reach closer to their full potential.

I DO NOT get caught up into the trap that "Marriage is for 'baby making", only to suffer the "Well Why Do You Allow Elderly Straight Couples Who Won't Have Children To Marry Then?"

The bottom line is that we are talking about THEORIES OF SOCIETAL GOVERNANCE.

I REFUSE to allow a radical upstart set of theories to use their TRANSACTIONAL, Ideological Imperialism - to create a "New Societal Normal" - only to follow through with the "Establishment Power Repudiation" scheme - in which the resulting problems that REMAIN offer them yet another round of a "Struggle Motion" that will promise "a fix" - if they are giving more power and time to "correct them".

Ironically - those who argue most vociferously against the "exclusivity" that elite ranks of the society enjoy ( a special interest with power) are themselves guilty of trying to arrange POWER for their own bit of cultural imperialism as they operate like a 'distributor cap', seeking to cut a deal with a serial collection of special interest groups (transactional advocacy) - without assuming the responsibility of the establishment - WHO MUST STAND ACCOUNTABLE FOR "THE WHOLE".

In the pile of "unfinished business" - as the rotor on the 'distributor cap' rotates to the next special interest - the same vulnerable people whose COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS have been taken over yet destroyed in their capability to develop the people who are most in need of order and the synergy of two adults, coupled together to support the effort of maintaining a house and a family - as THIS is "The Norm".  The "normality" of homosexuality is an IRRELEVANT discussion.

What we have is a SOCIETAL CHOICE at hand.

NO the world is not going to blow up with "hellfire" if "Same Sex Marriage" is made legal.  At the same time you will NOT have the balance of 6 year old children observe "same sex behavior" among adults and believe this to be anything but an exception.

Societal tolerance - yes.

The PRIORITIZATION OF THE NEED for STRONG FAMILIES, headed by one man and one woman, as a STRATEGIC foundation for a strong future - anything else IS ABNORMAL.

I will support YOUR STRUGGLE - when YOU finish BUILDING UP MY PEOPLE - as you had promised when you collected their valuables.


Friday, January 03, 2014

I Have No Confidence That The "Christian Biblical Creation Museum" Representative Can Properly Expose The Flaws In Bill Nye's Arguments For Evolution



AJC: Bill Nye to visit Creation Museum for debate

I have listened to atheist scientist Bill Nye argue for the theory of evolution several times.
I can imagine that the right-wing "Biblical Creationists" will go head-first, attempting to prove that the Earth was created in the 7 day interval that one receives with a literal read of the bible.  

Bill Nye will the lock them into the "Earth Is 6,000 Years Old" argument and them pick them apart from there.

The problem is that those who take Bill Nye's position "Anti-Creationism", "Pro-Evolution" mostly get to "KEEP THEIR DEBATE OPPONENT ON TRIAL", using science to refute their faith-based claim BUT never having to defend their position on evolution, at the hands of a person who is equally committed to science and logic.

The key flaws in Nye's argument will likely not be captured by the biblical creationist:

  1. Nye argues that life formed from basic components (amino acids) that made more complex organisms over time
  2. He then notes the concept of "half-life", as fissile materials decay, losing electrons and changing from one element to another
FLAWS:

  • Most people don't note the slight of hand of accepting scientific fact of decay of uranium, for example, but then conflating that into change in LIVING ORGANISMS.  
  • If a pile of chemicals were left alone for billions of years - Bill Nye CAN PRODUCE NO EVIDENCE that LIFE could ever be produced from such inert materials, REGARDLESS of the addition of heat, pressure or light
It would be a better argument for Bill Nye to be made to defend his theories.