iPandora

The only right which each and every human being has is the right to struggle.

To try is the only thing we can claim as ours.

To have or possess? That is only ours if we succeed in our struggle, and it may be taken away without notice or consent or fault.

To deserve? Not ours. Aesops Cricket ‘worked’ playing his violin and claiming the world owed him a living, and yet nothing was owed him. And yet consider the ants. I would count myself among Aesops faithful and hardworking ants much more readily than among his lax and laxadaisical crickets. However, what if, after all that work storing food all summer long, a storm came and wiped out the ants supply? Do they deserve the supply? How can they? Who do they petition for a redress? Before whom would they lay their grievance?

It’s futile and pointless to live in a state of deservation.

The only right there is is to struggle, to try.

Anybody who claims otherwise is lying and manipulating. And if you believe you deserve, you’re the unhappier one for it.

What makes us so special?

Rather than embarking on a long dialogue, as is my norm, I want to instead throw some things out on the table for you to think about.

First . . . do we really readthe Bible, or do we just preview it through our Americanized mindset? In American culture, my actions are treated as my own, and the consequences are solely mine. However, read the Bible. Truly read it. The story of Achan clearly demonstrates that not only is a person responsible for their crime, but their wife, children, and grandchildren are to suffer for the sin and their possessions are to be destroy. Do I condone this? No, with fulfilment of the law, God brought grace. But guess what? God hasn’t changed, we are still responsible for the sins of those we are connected to (accountability) are our sins still effect those we are around (responsibility), to a much larger extent than our American minds want to accept.

Second . . . what makes us so special (American Christians)? We walk around acting like being an American Christian is a benefit to God. Somehow, we have a general mindset (not when we think about it, but when we just normally act) that God is in debt to us since we are American Christians and he owes us providence and goodwill. I got news . . . I am of no more value to God than a Chinese Christian who is of no more value to God than a Chinese heathen. We act like God owes it to us to keep our country “safe” and prosperous, but God owes us no such thing.

Third . . . are we (American Christians) the ones who decided who is a Christian nation and who gets God’s blessings? Somehow, we feel like we have a direct line to God and can dictate to Him who he should bless (us) and how the world should be run (through our prosperity). However, here is a though . . . maybe God is using, and blessing the Chinese. Here is an even harder thought, maybe God is using the Chinese to reshape the world for the next stage of human development. That is a hard pill to take, but guess what . . . we (as Christians) should rejoice in that because it is the next good  step in God’s good plan.

In closing, maybe we should get over ourselves, read what God really says (not what fits our mindset), and take joy in world event (and prepare for joyous persecution) because God has ordained it for his glory.

My naturally sunny and normally indomitably positive attitude on life in general has been taking a beating lately, what with the grasping, lying, ugliness found in the Democrat leadership in Washington and the seemingly ceasless assaults on fact and science and truth and reason found there and nearly everywhere else.

But then there come things that make everything bright again.

We are in a period of strengthening, testing, trimming, and growing.

The dirt and filth in Washington is in need of some serious Simple Green, and when it comes time again, we’ll start that very necessary process again.

And this was the encouragement:

Thanks to Chicago Bungalow.

So, I really hate to point out the obvious . . . but how many rings does this circus we call the “White House” have?

Today, our president let us know that the economy isn’t as bad as we thought. . .  after telling us a few weeks ago that it was going to be worse than we thought . . . after telling us that he would fix the economy (remember, in the election? Oh, forgive me, he said he would spread the wealth, not fix the economy.)

And now guess what . . . not only have 4 of Obama’s nominees been charged with tax evasion (has anyone looked into Obama’s taxes?), but one of his aides is now under investigation by the FBI. I guess this just goes under the “transparency” clause. They want us to know that they are just like us . . . they don’t pay their taxes (just like us right?) but still love to spend other people’s money (just like us right?).

For those who haven’t heard on Twitter or Facebook or from the Horse’s Mouth.

Grace and I are expecting a boy this summer.

Here is one of the first pictures of our son.

It’s all across the newswires:

The Great Messiah Steps Into Our Small, Mostly Vicarious, Lives And Allows Federal Funding Of Stem Cell Research!

Well, tie me to a pole until the Jackanapes come home and lick my toes until I die imagining Caravaggio! I’d've never thought such a thing could occur.

At least the ABC story got things half right when they filed this story under Health AND Politics.

Two bits and then my opinion:

1. The local Fox affiliate this morning noted that opponents to stem cell research are opposed on moral grounds. No word yet on if the reporter bothered researching any further than the local abortion mill’s press release.
2. There are actually 2 primary classifications of stem cells: embryonic and adult. The embryonic stem cells cause tumors and uncontrollable growths and the adult stem cells actually cure people.

My opinion is an old article I wrote as far back as November of 2007:

• Adult stem cells suffer no chance of rejection from their host. Adult stem cells are collected from the person they will be used on, meaning the organs grown from them carry the exact biological and genetic “fingerprint” of the rest of the body, there is zero chance of rejection of these treatments.
• Adult stem cells are given voluntarily as part of treatment. There is no moral or ethical morass involved in the collection of the these cells.
• Adult stem cells can differentiate under controlled conditions. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which differentiate wildly and which we are currently unable to control, adult stem cells pluripotency can be controlled in application with greater reliability.

So we have an issue where the successful treatment and therefore all the private money has gone in one direction, but a few stubborn souls insist on using disinformation and outright lies to promote a morally reprehensible treatment system which would have been likely looked upon with distaste by most of the Nazi death doctors in hopes of getting us to pay for a treatment process with no current success and little promise.

“If human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.” ~James A. Thomson

Read all about it…

It’s an issue of science as much as morals. If you will ignore the morals, you cannot, at least, ignore the science.

If you must ignore both, your life is far smaller for it.

By the way, what business is it of the government to pay yours and my money for this? Don’t we already do that supporting the massively bloated health care industry?

I made a mistake last night. I was taking a young kid out to the movies and there were no good movies out . . . at least, not that late. So we decided on “Watchmen.” Big mistake.

Simply, there is no redeemable plot. The story line is slow, rambling, and barely organized. There are moral conflicts, but the are address and resolved in totally gray manners.

On top of that, there are good action sequences, but that is all that drives the movie and those have way too much gore (bones visibly breaking and coming out of the skin, a person biting another’s cheek and you can see the patch of skin in the person’s mouth, and the list goes on). Then on top of that, the movie is also unwatchable because it’s “real” rating should be an X. Dr. Manhattan wear nothing through most of the movie . . . so basically his penis is one every scene. And the movie is based in a “slum” town so there are prostitutes in almost every scene. And there are graphic, extended and unneeded sex scenes that don’t hide much.

Though everyone might not agree with me on this, there is also the vilification of Nixon. Although Nixon doesn’t carry a good reputation, he is becoming regarded as one of the best presidents on the last century because he set the footprints that started the economic growth. Not to mention that every President has most likely been involved in covert, questionable actions.

So, basically, don’t waste your money. However, I do want to expound on what really ticks me probably the most. The immoral resolution to a moral conflict.

The climax of Watchmen depends on that man will inherently spiral into fear and rage due to its inherently evil nature. Because of this, man is currently in a state of fear (the cold war), and the world is in a state of decline as people implode on themselves. Because man has put themselves in this situation, there is not significant loss if a single person dies, or even a group of people dies. In fact, through out the film, the slaying of innocents, or demonstrators is glorifies, or at least shown in abundance.

The creates an interesting phenomenon in the audience as they are told to accept this as a reasonable action given the situation, but internally, the audience knows it is wrong.

The supposed answer to the fear perpetrating everyone is the need for a great uniting calamity. The proposed calamity is the loss of a huge amount of human life (so a single life isn’t valuable, but a collective number of lives is? I am sorry, if you assign zero value to a single human life, then no matter how many zeros, or human lives you put together, the value is still only zero). However, the crux of the deli ma comes when it is not the hero’s lives that are to be sacrifices (a concession that the loss of a hero’s life is no more significant than the loss of any other life), instead the hero’s “choose” who will die or the greater good.

So, I am forced to ask the unanswerable question. Is the involuntary, or unnecessary death of one person (or a group of people), worth the preservation of billions of others. If you have no soul, or there is not a God (as the movie supposes), or there is not moral code except what humans have arbitrarily made, sure, why not end life of one more animal?

However, that is not the reality. As everyone knows deep inside, our moral code is not human made and is not arbitrary. Rather it is based on a conscience that is God created and God maintained. In that case, any single human life is worth more than every other human life in every single situation. This premise is what actually drives the pain and emotions behind self sacrifice. Although the sacrificing individual is giving everything for the common good, the individual as a person is still worth more than everyone else, just as a single person the “hero” is saving is worth more than everyone else (including the one sacrificing).

The essence of this value is really best found in that basic question, “Is it ok to kill a large amount of people to save the rest?” This can be debated philosophically all day, so let me make the question more specific and relevant. Let us assume that there is not cure for HIV, is it ok to kill those who have HIV to preserve everyone else and end the HIV? If you did answer yes, let me ask you, do you have HIV? Doesn’t that change the issue.

In here lies the biggest problem with the movie, the hero’s are sacrificing millions or people to save billions. However, the value of the millions is reduced because, what will happen when another catastrophe arises? Kill another couple million? However, while innocents are dying for their neighbors, those who are responsible for the decision remain unaffected and above it all. This is not sacrifice. This is demented reasoning that spits in the face of a creator who didn’t choose other to sacrifice, but sacrificed HIMSELF for us. This mindset spits in the face of a God who is more valuable than everyone but gave up that value for each one of us.

The film reaks of immoral answers to moral questions. The films reaks of disrespect to a God or creater. The films reaks of the disrespect of a single human life, and consequently, many human lives.

This is the problem with the film . . . this is why this film is junk and should not be watched.

(Hitchens and Dawkins) have to borrow from a theistic worldview in order to argue against it. They have to sit in God’s lap to slap his face.

Frank Turek: Sleeping with your girlfriend

So . . . I am now officially embarrassed. After my daily musings over drudgereport.com, I can say that something is wrong in the White House. Just as a matter of perspective, the drudgereport is officially a non-biased news collection website that posts the most pertinent and useful recent news. The website has always been considered to have a conservative bent but is suspected of having been more supportive of President Obama during the last election cycle. However, the website is a good barometer of the times. A person can get a good perspective of our society by viewing the website over a couple days time.

And let me tell you . . . these last couple days have been embarrassing. Who did we put in the White House? A juvenile. A newbie. Or, as the English writer James Delingpole says in his article entitled “Was ‘Lady Macbeth’ behind Barack Obama’s snub of Gordon Brown?” from the telegraph, President Obama might be a “hormonal teenager.”

Honestly, this guys takes everything personally, cannot stand other opinions, and has little sense of decency and no sense of respect.

First, taking everything personally. When Jim Cramer, a very liberal economist, criticizes the Obama administration, the White House press secretary makes a dismissive comment about Jim Cramer specifically. I am sorry, but I remember lots of medica criticism of the Bush administration, but very few (if any) direct barbs at specific citics.

Cannot stand other opinions. Ok this is really a given. However, doesn’t it really strike you that, when the President should be leading the people through a hard time, he has the time to specifically get involved in attacking an individual who holds another opinion. When the world is falling apart, Mr Obama is involved in plans to label Mr Limbaugh at the face of the Republican party (how about you let the Republicans do that) and then attacking him as such. Hm . . . forget real issues like, the middle east, China’s hold on our fiscal notes, genocide in Africa, oh and stuff like, the economy, being bipartisan, reforming social security. You know .  .  . important things that might actually mean something in 10-15 years.

And finally, little sense of decency and no sense of respect. So, Gordon Brown, Britain’s PM (I think), comes over to the U.S. to try to reinforce a “special relationship” that the two nations have. The PM brings over a pen made from the wood of of a former anti slave ship. A very rare and special gift to an up and coming world leader (or maybe not if he has his way and there is nothing left for him to lead in a couple years). So, what does Mr. Obama do for the head of the British legal system? He send a box set of 25 classic American films on DVD to a man who is generally thought to have no high regard for films. Smart. Not only that, but Mr. Obama returns a gift of a bust of Winston Churchill to the U.K.

My goodness, down right royal snubs to the people who stayed with us through Operation Iraqui Freedom (which EVERYONE knows was a failure. Right?). I am sorry, but any five DVD’s of anything are just pieces of plastic waiting to attract dust. And then to return the Winston Churchill bust? A tribute to one of Great Britains (and the worlds) greatest leaders? I am just getting too upset . . . Anyways . . . here, and here are some articles on the exchange between President Obama and Gordon Brown. And this guy wants to unite the world . . . great start.

If I ran the world I would tell people:

I’m the government, and the government cannot fix all your problems. The good things I can do are limited to:

• Protecting the entire nation and it’s immediate interests of safety and commerce through foreign war.

• Protecting each individual equally and without preference through the rule of law.

That’s it. That’s all.
Anything else I, the government, tries, I fail at.
I am not efficient or practical.
I am not flexible or creative.
I stifle.
I limit.
I take.
I hurt you.
Limit me. It’s in your best interest.