"All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against. Those who have believers as their masters must not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but must serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles. " ~ 1 Timothy 6:1-2
Careful, there 53%er , you just might be an Uncle Tom develop Stockholm Syndrome.
For a more human perspective on the occupy movement, I suggest PeNolan
I know I have been gone for a long time.
You know how it is, you just get busy and time gets away from you? No? Well, it does.
That, and my son moved out of town with his mother. Trust me, a melancholy mac isn't the best read. I have ran the full spectrum of emotions over that one. I've pretty much settled on his "mother is not a nice person" . I won't get into a name calling or blame contest....because that would make me an asshole too ;-)
Needing a smile, I found this:
If this doesn't warm your heart, not much will :-)
I tend to not delve into partisan politics here, on this blog. The reason being, I see most politicians as pretty much the same.
However, every now and then, I see something so funny, I just have to share it.
The following video is one such item:
Honestly, you can't make up shit like this !
How about the way the superintendent passes the buck? I wonder how much he gets paid to act stupid.
Recently, The Guardian published an interview with Stephen Hawking ( Here ) where he expounds on life, death, and the beginning of the universe, among other things.
In response to Mr Hawking's views , The Washington Post published this from Nicholas Wright:
________________________ It’s depressing to see Stephen Hawking, one of the most brilliant minds in his field, trying to speak as an expert on things he sadly seems to know rather less about than many averagely intelligent Christians. Of course there are people who think of ‘heaven’ as a kind of pie-in-the-sky dream of an afterlife to make the thought of dying less awful. No doubt that’s a problem as old as the human race. But in the Bible ‘heaven’ isn’t ‘the place where people go when they die.’ In the Bible heaven is God’s space while earth (or, if you like, ‘the cosmos’ or ‘creation’) is our space. And the Bible makes it clear that the two overlap and interlock. For the ancient Jews, the place where this happened was the temple; for the Christians, the place where this happened was Jesus himself, and then, astonishingly, the persons of Christians because they, too, were ‘temples’ of God’s own spirit. Hawking is working with a very low-grade and sub-biblical view of ‘going to heaven.’ Of course, if faced with the fully Christian two-stage view of what happens after death -- first, a time ‘with Christ’ in ‘heaven’ or ‘paradise,’and then, when God renews the whole creation, bodily resurrection -- he would no doubt dismiss that as incredible. But I wonder if he has ever even stopped to look properly, with his high-octane intellect, at the evidence for Jesus and the resurrection? I doubt it -- most people in England haven’t. Until he has, his opinion about all this is worth about the same as mine on nuclear physics, i.e. not much. As for the creation being self-caused: I wonder if he realises that he is simply repeating a version of ancient Epicureanism? i.e. the gods are out of the picture, a long way away, so the world/human life/etc has to get on under its own steam. This is hardly a ‘conclusion’ from his study of the evidence; it’s simply a well known worldview shared by most post-Enlightenment westerners. It is the worldview which enables secular democracy to consider itself an absolute, despite its numerous and rather obvious failings right now. The depressing thing is that Hawking doesn’t seem to realize this and so hasn’t even stopped to think that there might be quite sophisticated critiques of Epicureanism, ancient and modern, which he should work through. Not least the Christian one, which again focusses on Jesus. Of course, the old set-up of the ‘science and religion’ debate was itself deeply influenced by this same worldview, and needs realigning. In fact, the ancient Christians would have been shocked to see their worldview labelled as a ‘religion.’ It was a philosophy, a politics, a culture, a vocation... the category of ‘religion’ is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Excuse me Rev Wright, I think Mr Hawking is emminently qualified to speak on the origins of the Universe. Perhaps he can't speak to your religion. But, he cancertainly use reason and science to show it's implausable. Just because his findings don't point your way, does not mean he can't speak expertly on a subject.
Evidence for the resurrection? Are you kidding? What evidence have we? Ancient writings done a generation (or more) removed can scarcely be counted as evidence. Or am I wrong? I wonder if Rev Wright has examined this evidence objectively as well.
As to Wrights claims of Hawking's "Epicurean" stance (ie. God is not really in the picture anyway): I can't argue that. Can anyone show me how God is in the modern picture? We haven't heard much from him since he knocked up that virgin. What has he done these last 2,000 years?
Then, Rev Wright closes with the old "Christianity isn't a religion and Jesus didn't establish it as such" argument.
I'm sorry, Rev Wright. But in John 16:6 when Jesus says, " “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.", he is doing just that. He is establishing a religion, not a philosophy, not a really cool way to behave, but a religion !
But, I understand. That eletronic voice thingie kinda creeps me out too ;-)
Some will tell you it's all the Conservative's fault. Some will tell you it's all the Liberal's fault.
The Christian will tell you it's the Muslim. The Muslim will tell you it's the Jew. The Jew will tell you it's the antisemite.....
I'm here to tell you, it's all their faults. And ours, too!
Why don't we demand a stoppage to the seemingly endless conflicts? Why do we trust any politician when they claim they will end "this war".
I know, many will say I am being naive, that we must stop these thugs.
Again, I ask, "Why?" Why must the US involve itself in the business of a sovereign nation? Would we appreciate it if they did it to us?
Tell me this shit isn't about oil?
Maybe one of you smart folks can explain this to me :(
If you know me, chances are you know I don't follow any religion. You may know that I sometimes rail against Christianity. You may also know, I have similar feelings for most religions.
What you may not know is, I have no desire to end your religion. I will never knock on your door at 7:00am Saturday morning to tell you, " God does not exist. You are not going to Hell if you don't change."
I do not wish you harm because you pray to a god of your understanding. Regardless of whether it's Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Santeria, Sikhism, Hinduism, Paganism, or whatever, you are very close to my feelings on religion. That is, you disbelieve all of them, save yours. I just don't believe yours either.
I have no belief in 4,200 religions, the theist has no belief in 4,199 religions.
See, We are the same :-)
The lady pictured above is Olivia Munn. She is quite an attrative woman. Recently, she has come under
controversy due to a magazine cover for Maxim Magazine.
Dan Gainor, Vice President of Business And Culture at The Media Research Center claims, "It’s disgusting. Maxim has moved their magazine from tawdry to full-on pornography.”
If by "pornagraphy", Mr Gainor means the photo is arousing, it is. However, I am also aroused by the top photo of Olivia. Is that porn as well?
I simply do not see anything to be concerned about here. It seems much less disturbing than offering someone, anyone, $100 to punch a sitting congressman, right Mr Gainor?
I dunno, what do you guys think?
Is this magazine cover over the top? Should Miss Munn be hel liable 'cause she's so darned sexy?
January 17, 1992.
I am not sure why that particular day was any different than the hundreds before it. I had sworn to do it many times before. I didn't.
Maybe I grew up mentally as well as physically that day. Perhaps my brain was catching up to my 220 pound body? Maybe riding that motorcycle in all those cold Ohio winters made me think I should get my act together, establish myself as a viable member of society, and just grow the fuck up already.
Of course, I wanted to know where, and with whom, I would wake up on any given morning too ;-)
January 16 1992: I got drunk for the last time. Sorry, Jack Daniels, I do not miss you any longer.
19 years today, I have been sober. Who wants to celebrate with a good drink ?
Now, my other addictions are not quite so easy to give up. I miss you, darlin :-)