OT - Obamacare

[Julie]

+ 1

[ChicagoGranny]

"Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try, no hell below us, above us only sky..."

Stalin’s extremely brutal 30-year rule as absolute ruler of the Soviet Union featured so many atrocities, including purges, expulsions, forced displacements, imprisonment in labor camps, manufactured famines, torture and good old-fashioned acts of mass murder and massacres (not to mention World War II) that the complete toll of bloodshed will likely never be known.

An amoral psychopath and paranoid with a gangster’s mentality, Stalin eliminated anyone and everyone who was a threat to his power – including (and especially) former allies. He had absolutely no regard for the sanctity of human life.

1 million imprisoned or exiled between 1927 to 1929; 9 to 11 million peasants forced off their lands and another 2 to 3 million peasants arrested or exiled in the mass collectivization program; 6 to 7 million killed by an artificial famine in 1932-1934; 1 million exiled from Moscow and Leningrad in 1935; 1 million executed during the ''Great Terror'' of 1937-1938; 4 to 6 million dispatched to forced labor camps; 10 to 12 million people forcibly relocated during World War II; and at least 1 million arrested for various “political crimes” from 1946 to 1953.

Although not everyone who was swept up in the aforementioned events died from unnatural causes, Medvedev’s 20 million non-combatant deaths estimate is likely a conservative guess.

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

Most other estimates from reputed scholars and historians tend to range from between 20 and 60 million.

Imagine that.

[ChicagoGranny]

"Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try, no hell below us, above us only sky..."

In fairness to John Lennon, I must say John yearned for Jesus Christ.

During his lifetime, he became one of the most controversial figures in popular culture, effecting not just how people listen to music, but how many view religion and faith. But a recently discovered interview with the late Beatles frontman John Lennon indicates the singer’s real views about Jesus and Christianity. The interview, which was unearthed two weeks ago, took place in 1969 for a segment on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation show before getting lost in studio obscuirty for nearly 40 years.

Lennon’s views on Christianity first came into focus when he made his infamous 1966 proclamation that the Beatles were “bigger than Jesus.” The statement drew scorn and boycotts like nothing rock ‘n roll had seen before. Christians decried Lennon and his band, blasting the audacity of such an irreverent statement. But, according to the interview, irreverence wasn’t the singer’s intention. And, as it turns out, he was actually really interested in Jesus.

"It's just an expression meaning the Beatles seem to me to have more influence over youth than Christ," he said in the interview. "Now I wasn't saying that was a good idea, 'cos I'm one of Christ's biggest fans. And if I can turn the focus on the Beatles on to Christ's message, then that's what we're here to do."

He went on to express how he felt many Christians seemed to be very “uptight” and even hypocritical for not allowing him to marry Yoko Ono in church because he had been divorced. He said that his original distaste for church first came at a young age, when he was kicked out for giggling. But, in the interview, Lennon said that his feelings only extended to the organized church, not Jesus Himself.

"If the Beatles get on the side of Christ, which they always were, and let people know that, then maybe the churches won't be full, but there'll be a lot of Christians dancing in the dance halls. Whatever they celebrate, God and Christ, I don't think it matters as long as they're aware of Him and His message," his voice says on the unearthed recording.

And though this is the first time many Beatles fans have heard this particular conversation, Lennon’s interest in Christ was no secret in the early ‘70s. In his book, The Gospel According to the Beatles, writer Steve Turner said that there was a period in his life when the world’s most famous songwriter deeply wanted to know who Jesus was. According to the book, in an effort to escape the chaos of public life, Lennon would often retreat to television and became a regular viewer of the era’s most influential evangelists including Billy Graham, Oral Roberts and even Pat Robertson.

In 1972, Lennon even took part in a written correspondence with Roberts, in which he apologized and further explained his statement about being “bigger” than God. The Beatles frontman, who had experimented with a variety of drugs and spiritual ideas wrote this to Roberts:

“The point is this, I want happiness. I don't want to keep on with drugs. Paul told me once, 'You made fun of me for taking drugs, but you will regret it in the end.' Explain to me what Christianity can do for me. Is it phoney? Can He love me? I want out of hell."

Oral Roberts sent him a long response, giving him a copy of his book Miracle of Seed Faith and a detailed explanation of God’s love for him.

Five years later, in 1977, Lennon became deeply moved by NBC’s broadcast of the movie Jesus of Nazareth and told his friends that he had become a born-again Christian. A week after seeing the film, Lennon returned to church on Easter Sunday with his wife Yoko and son Sean in tow.

It was during this time that Lennon even penned several Christian songs (“Talking with Jesus” and “Amen”), and according to Turner’s book, even called The 700 Club prayer line.

The change in his life disturbed his wife Yoko Ono, who pulled her husband away from his new religion, and eventually, after months of isolation in Tokyo, Lennon found his life going in a dark direction, and ended up abandoning his faith and retreating into New Age practice and further searching. Before he was murdered in 1980, Lennon embraced a universalistic belief of religion and no longer seemed interested in his born-again lifestyle.

Although the new interview doesn’t change what we know about John Lennon at the end of his life, it does shed some light on what help developed his view of Christianity in the first place. It wasn’t confusion about theology or the nature of God. It wasn’t the pull of a conflicting lifestyle. According to Lennon, it was Christians who made him not want to be a part of the church.

http://www.cbn.com/entertainment/Books/ ... ennon.aspx

[ChicagoGranny]

I have yet to ever hear Beck and have heard Limbaugh maybe 3 times. I don't follow any of those guys on the radio. Some of us actually use our own minds to make decisions, not spew the agenda that the corrupt news medias of this country are trying to brainwash everyone into believing. There is more than enough information on the net, to look at both sides with an open mind and come to your own conclusions. But, most people are biased in their opinions, and cannot look at information with an open mind. Both Republicans and Democrats have had good and bad ideas over the years (mostly bad for both sides). Just go back to the early 1900's and read through the history of our country and the Presidents we have had through the years, and make up your own mind about which party has the best intent for this country. Of course, if your of the opinion that socialism is a good thing, then you will fall on the Democratic side, and if you want less government and freedom you will side toward the Republicans. Though I don't really side with either one, to me they are both working against the Magna Carta, Our Bill of Rights and our Constitution. Even the US Supreme Court is showing their contempt of the US Constitution, when they start talking about basing their decision on European laws , they are not following the laws of our Constitution.

The Magna Carta

The Founding Fathers found the Magna Carta an inspiring source. In 1215, a group of English nobles, demanded certain rights and forced the King to sign the Magna Carta or the Great Charter. 500 hundred years later the American colonists were to use this example to demand their rights from the British King.

These rights included: The right of jury trial, protection of private property, limits on taxation, and some religious freedoms. These rights became a part of our Bill Of Rights and apply to all.

John Locke

No other individual influenced the author of the Declaration of Independence more than Unitarian John Locke (1632-1704). He was a British philosopher who rejected the idea that Kings had a divine right to rule. Instead, Locke argued that people are the source of power, not kings.

Locke argued that people are born with certain "natural" or "inalienable" rights. These include the right to "life, liberty and property." Government did not give people these rights; rather they are born with them and as such, no government can take them away.

According to Locke, people formed governments to protect their rights, which he called a "social contract." People agreed to obey the government and in return, government had the responsibility to protect peoples' natural rights.

Locke also argued that if the government failed to protect our natural rights, then the people had the right to replace the government. Thomas Jefferson, in writing the Declaration of Independence, drew heavily from the writings of John Locke.

Above: extracts from: CLASS NOTES- AMERICAN HISTORY by Levi Anthony January 30, 2004 and Wikipedia.

The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.
The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People's rights vs Citizens' rights)

In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution's first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.


In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people.

The people did "ordain and establish this Constitution," not for themselves, but "for the United States of America." In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the "Great Experiment in self government." The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People. The experiment is to answer the question, "Can self-governing people coexist and prevail over government agencies that have no authority over the People?"

The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States (See 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitution). NOTE: U.S. citizenship did not exist until July 28, 1868.

Actually, the United States is a mixture of the two systems of government (Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law). The People enjoy their God-given natural rights in the Republic. In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights).

There was a great political division between two major philosophers, Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes was on the side of government. He believed that sovereignty was vested in the state. Locke was on the side of the People. He believed that the fountain of sovereignty was the People of the state. Statists prefer Hobbes. Populists choose Locke. In California, the Government Code sides with Locke. Sections 11120 and 54950 both say, "The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." The preambles of the U.S. and California Constitutions also affirm the choice of Locke by the People.

Above: extracts from: http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm

For more understanding of the difference between Democracy and Republic, that most try to claim is one and the same with minor differences read: http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/Ameri ... emrep.html

After reading all of this, it is easy to see how our government has turned this country from a "Republic", into a democracy and is headed toward a dictatorship. Obama has stepped up the pace since he took office, thinking he doesn't have to have approval from the House and Senate to do as he wants. He believes he is above the law and can side step the Constitution.

The only thing I will quibble with is the definition of "minority".

I am a strong proponent of "minority rights". However, in my definition, "minority" applies exclusively to the individual.

Any minority greater than one is a group and groups have no rights in my view. But each individual, regardless of any "groups" they belong to, is endowed with full human rights.

[Cutnstuf]

Granny, the point is obviously lost on you.

[ems]

"Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try, no hell below us, above us only sky..."

The change in his life disturbed his wife Yoko Ono, who pulled her husband away from his new religion, and eventually, after months of isolation in Tokyo, Lennon found his life going in a dark direction, and ended up abandoning his faith and retreating into New Age practice and further searching. Before he was murdered in 1980, Lennon embraced a universalistic belief of religion and no longer seemed interested in his born-again lifestyle.

Although the new interview doesn’t change what we know about John Lennon at the end of his life, it does shed some light on what help developed his view of Christianity in the first place. It wasn’t confusion about theology or the nature of God. It wasn’t the pull of a conflicting lifestyle. According to Lennon, it was Christians who made him not want to be a part of the church.

http://www.cbn.com/entertainment/Books/ ... ennon.aspx

If one was a fan of the Beatles back in the day, and I sure was, you would know that John and Yoko began attending New Age lectures in their continuing search for religion and God. I remember hearing John on a talk show or maybe it was the news, and I can almost quote one particular thing he said. It went something like this... the world is my country; to do good in my life is my religion. The man had certainly evolved.

[Stormynights]

I find it easier to believe in God than to believe in evolution. I like nature shows. They mostly talk about evolution but I see the hand of God. I am not a Bible thumper but I do believe in God.

[ChicagoGranny]

I find it easier to believe in God than to believe in evolution.

Of course the ideas are not mutually exclusive. Christians should be scientific people because to practice science for the Christian is to study God's handiwork and learn about His creativity and thereby His nature.

In the 19th century Darwin used the scientific method in developing his theory of evolution.

In the 7th century BC Daniel (of the lion's den) conducted a scientific experiment complete with a hypothesis, a control group, a treatment group, and a conclusion.

The emergence of a true scientific method was provided by the Judeo-Christian perspective. “The principles underlying the scientific method (testability, verification/falsification) arise from the Judeo-Christian Scriptures. The experimental method was clearly nurtured by Christian doctrine."

Wikipedia continues with a brief history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method#History) of the Christian development of the scientific method.

Pagan, heathens and atheists contributed very little to the development of the scientific method.

Today many atheists who think science support their beliefs about "no God" have poor understandings of science.

[Cutnstuf]

You folks have the right to believe anything you like. That doesn't necessarily make it right. But I can't understand why so many of you deny what is obvious such as climate change and the actual age of the world. I'll take hard facts over "faith" any day. I suppose it's just fine though if you prefer to spend the rest of your lives with your heads firmly planted in a hole in the ground. Again your business and your choice. I do though invite you to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

[Julie]

Doncha love being lumped in with pagans and heathens? Why not Wiccans, Zoroastrians and Voodoo practitioners while they're at it?

[Goofproof]

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper

I do think that to run for president of the U.S., you should have your head shaved! While religion isn't a issue, it would make it easier to see the 666's., and maybe check terrorist lists for sure.

[Goofproof]

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." The modern concept of a wholly secular government is sometimes credited to the writings of English philosopher John Locke, but the phrase "separation of church and state" in this context is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper

I do think that to run for president of the U.S., you should have your head shaved! While religion isn't a issue, it would make it easier to see the 666's., and maybe check terrorist lists for sure.

[Wulfman...]

You folks have the right to believe anything you like. That doesn't necessarily make it right. But I can't understand why so many of you deny what is obvious such as climate change and the actual age of the world. I'll take hard facts over "faith" any day. I suppose it's just fine though if you prefer to spend the rest of your lives with your heads firmly planted in a hole in the ground. Again your business and your choice. I do though invite you to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

So, what is your belief about "climate change"?

I "believe" that there has been "climate change" through the billions and billions (somewhere between 4 and 16) of the age of this earth.......and it's NOT human caused. I don't KNOW if there is a "GOD" (which is dog spelled backward), but I'm open to the possibility and I'm trying to live my life as if there may be (trying to treat others as I would wish to be treated) and frequently talk to him/her and ask for forgiveness. An argument can be made that there is evidence that there MAY be a "higher power". I'm of the opinion that evolution and creationism may possibly go hand in hand. I believe that there are more scientists now that believe in a higher power than there used to be. This life MAY be all there is for us......but if there IS something beyond this, I'm hopeful for that, too. I'm even open to the possibility that we get "recycled", but I'm not sure that I really want to come back and go through this again.

Is there a Heaven or Hell? I dunno, but I believe that if there is, there will be lots of people going to both.

I'm not sure what all that makes me........maybe "normal"......???


Den

.

[49er]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_at ... technology

I am not even sure what post I am responding to except there seems to be an inference that atheists are evil and have nothing to do with science. I am sure CG will tell me I am totally missing the point. Whatever.

Boy, this thread has really gotten OT from original topic. So I will guess we have 18 more pages of this which I just admittedly contributed to.

49er

[49er]

Finally, to end on a humerous note, I broke my winning streak of not opening this thread for three straight days. That is a record for me I know some of you are probably wishing it had continued.

49er

I wish I had your level of self-control, 49er.

Thanks!

As you can see from my latest post, that person with self-control is history.

49er