Archive for the culture Category

Faith Based Fraud in US Government

Posted in Agnostic, Atheist, belief, biblical "values", Christianity, culture, Government, politics, random, religion, Social, thoughts on November 1, 2016 by chouck017894

Special interest handouts by political office holders in the United States have become big-time  “faith” privileges over the last few decades, increasing dramatically after the Religious Right gained control of the Grand Old Party in 1996.  The fast changing legal status for churches and faith system institutions have not been shy in underhandedly trying to “liberate” religious organizations by granting them more lenient rules than is permitted to their secular counterparts.

Such deliberate disregard for the democratic principles by religious extremists holding congressional positions, such a separation of church and state, is hardly due to any spiritual morals.  This dangerous and frightening chipping away at long standing principles of democracy has occurred under pressure from extremist religious groups that have muscled their way into the political arena.  The deviously devoted never make it comprehensible as to why an “omniscient/omnipotent” God should or would have to rely upon the use of deceitful persons to achieve “his” intentions.  But the raucous, self-serving religious extremists have effectively infiltrated our Congress, the US Supreme Court , and federal and state courts, all of which have too often casually conceded to the demands that “faith” groups (Christian only) should be protected from any government impositions!  (Related blogs: Rise of Holy Agitators, September 1, 2016; Spiritual Vanity, The Sin of Fundamentalism, October 1, 2016)

This has been pushed upon the nations’s widely diverse citizenry by devious religious fanatics who paint themselves with false eminence that reflects neither the principles of true democracy nor any higher spiritual values.  These predatory religious wolves have accomplished this betrayal of democratic principles by camouflaging themselves with traditional sheep’s clothing.  Thus disguised they have methodically selected, one by one, various supporting regulations of democratic comportment by inserting into those regulations their faith system’s claims of exclusivity with the Creator.  This has purposefully disfigured and betrayed the numerous longstanding laws of equality and spiritual freedom that the “fathers” of the nation intended.  As a consequence so many democratic principles have been mauled to such an extent that the “faith” pretenders may often thumb their noses at requirements leveled upon everyone else.  As an example, their “public” buildings and organizational programs may be only slightly related to their faith system.  That bears the foul odor of theocratic ideology.

Under these contrived special-interest allowances, unethically obtained, even the day care centers that have religious affiliations were once actually exempted from licensing requirements in a number of states.  In Texas, for example, the religious day-care facilities and drug-treatment programs were once exempt from state licensing.  However, protected by their privileged status by the “faithful” serving in state government positions the abuse and disregard for patients in those facilities proved to be greater than in nonreligious facilities.  Another example: The health care system operated by the Seventh Day Adventists was actually allowed to bar nurses from joining unions.  And many states permit tax-free churches build or expand their facilities in ways that clearly violate zoning ordinances with which everyone else must comply.  Religious-front operations have routinely discriminated in choice of employees, or have expressed their piety in heartless neglect of employee misfortune.  In these faith system front operations even persons that may suddenly be stricken with some physical malady have been unceremoniously dumped, which would never be tolerated in non-religious organizations.  How these self-serving practices follow the teachings attributed to Jesus, such as “love one another“, or “do unto others as you would have done unto you” is never explained by them.  

Special privileges which have been extended by faith aggressive politicians into government to certain (Christians only) faith system organizations is not fair or just or moral in a nation that has been built upon dedication to the freedom of choice and the pursuit of happiness.  And practicing bigotry and narrow mindedness as some religiously obsessed do is neither righteous nor spiritual in a Creation which is rampant with lavish diversity of life and variety of expression.  A true democratic society can function only within conditions of equality and respect for each individual within the nation.  Attempting to inject one particular man-concocted faith system into the politics of a nation which has been dedicated to freedom and liberty for its diverse people can only accomplish catastrophe for all.  Enlightenment will never be attained in an indulgence in spiritual avarice.

Advertisements

Spiritual Vanity, the Sin of Fundamentalism

Posted in Atheist, belief, culture, faith, Fundamentalism, humanity, random, religion, theology, thoughts on October 1, 2016 by chouck017894

It must be a terrible burden for fundamentalists of any faith system to confront all the diversity and variety and multiplicity in this life—a lavishness which typifies the radiance that is Creation.  The “conservative” outlook of hard-nosed fundamentalists obliges them to advise the Creator that “he” made a vulgar blunder by having indulged in such a prolific assortment of potentials.

One characteristic of a religious fundamentalist is that they seem to always wax with hatred toward a hell of a lot of life’s manifestations.  However, it is that astonishing diversity, variety and multiplicity that assures the awesome radiance that we refer to as Creation.  Another characteristic of the “fundies” is their unending attempts to impose their manufactured belief system upon anyone they can.  This vanity of spirit is indulged in despite the fact that genuine spiritual enlightenment always proves itself as authentic by an enfolding sense of inner serenity and compassion that is experienced.  Such an inner warmth is rendered impossible when cultivated hatreds for all the intentional differences that sustain Creation are encouraged.  And yet, like any other man-contrived faith system, the fundies claim that it is only through their hard-line approach alone that anyone can attain the Creator’s favoritism.

Reason and knowledge are seriously constrained when any faith system representative labors to advance  preconceptions of any sort to hover over seekers interactions with others.  In tightly structured faith systems, for example, seekers are routinely indoctrinated and continuously conditioned with claims that it is only through their particular man-made faith system that anyone can ever attain the favoritism of the Creative Principle which they like to personify as “God.”  But, curiously, the universe and nature do not happen to reflect that narrowly restrictive disposition toward the diversity and multiplicity of life which the Creative Principle formulated, made manifest and steadfastly maintains.

The creative and unifying force which is commonly personified as “God” is too often imagined in scriptural texts to be mainly concerned with the dilemma of only one certain representation of human species in one small region on planet Earth.  Ignored in such “holy” tales is the fact that those characters just happened to be from the author’s locale and also happened to be subscribed to his faith system.  That narrow understanding of life and spiritual significance in relation to the rest of the world population has resulted only in a setup for persistent and unnecessary conflicts.

Such old locally focused writings which are honored as “revealed word” leave us with fundamental questions.  Such as: When a person feels they must indulge in devilish scheming to impose their faith upon others can that really be assessed as one’s “higher calling?”   Why would an omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful) Creator find this to be the only way of making “his” intentions known among men?   In a universe that has been created with such lavish diversity and multiplicity, we are left to wonder over the Where, When or Why did the Creator of that diversity and multiplicity suddenly judge himself/herself/itself to have been too liberal and/or too excessive?  And if that hypothetical self reevaluation was the case, what caused him/her/it to decide upon picking and choosing favorites out of that multiplicity and give only to those “chosen ones ones” or “saved one” the all-clear for them to indulge in what amounts to spiritual brutality?  Would it not have been easier and wiser for him/her/it to have simply have resorted to the alleged original method of Creation and simply just say, “Let there be no more variety and diversity in Creation?”  Certainly that would have erased all the virulent spiritual egotism which all man-made faith systems demonstrate.

Regimentation and/or strictly controlled adherence to man-invented rites, rituals, ceremonies, taboos, cultivated hatreds and contriving to exert authority over others is not the means into genuine spiritual enlightenment. That means, bluntly, that no man-contrived faith system can sincerely promise or officially grant a stamped passport into what they may fantasize to be a heavily regimented and snooty Heaven.  All that the  “fundies” of any faith system can conceivably offer seekers is only a lottery ticket for an all-expense paid future flight into what is actually another dimension of creative energy.  (Energy does not cease; it simply transforms.)  Few faith system seekers, it seems, ever notice the tiny print at the bottom of their frail proffered ticket stub where it is grudgingly admitted that the voyage and destination are the same for each and every matter-life form, and that no purchase or contribution is necessary to gain that award.

 

 

 

Hints on Sin Dodging

Posted in belief, Bible, culture, faith, random, religion, scriptures with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 1, 2015 by chouck017894

Sin, the alleged estrangement from God due to transgressing God’s “known will,” is the age-old whip of faith system chieftains. The notion that some god could be directly or inadvertently offended and thus bring about disastrous consequences seemed plausible in the hostile conditions of primal forests or in the depths of gloomy caves. That trait, born of fear of the unknown, is apparently cast into the DNA of animate life as a self-preserving attribute. That natural preservation trait, unfortunately, can be mined like a vein of gold by crafty schemers.

By chapter three of Genesis, after the compressed account of Creation is dispensed with, the plot jumps rapidly into the introduction of sin with Eve nibbling fruit from the do-not-touch Tree of Knowledge. For this alleged sinful incident not only was Eve, Adam and the serpent given a death sentence, but all life forms were condemned to experience God’s continuous indulgence in vengeance! Sin was then established as a vicious circle in Genesis 4:7 with God allegedly saying to Adam and Eve’s son Cain, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” Cain, not understanding this concept of sin–perhaps because mom, Eve, had already tainted all life with “original sin,–by the very next verse (8) Cain kills his brother Abel. Now that is divine speed-plotting. But God’s earlier condemning judgment upon sin is then shown with Cain to be impulsively amendable by God’s reluctant setting a protective mark upon Cain’s head. Thus did “sin” become incorporated as the meal ticket for the CEOs of any western faith system.

The great pivotal moment in sacred “history,” according to 8th century BCE priest-interpreted accounts, hinges upon the Lord’s alleged call for Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac as a burnt offering to receive special blessings. In Jewish recognition of this momentous happening of Abraham’s unquestioning obedience is celebrated with Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Abraham’s devotion is held as representative of their faith system’s especial characteristic–even though in that distant timeframe Judaism was not yet an organized faith. Not fully answered; was Isaac to be a sin offering? It is never clearly said why God would have asked for such an unmotivated act. Some have suggested that it was simply a test, but if God is omniscient (all-knowing), what could he be uncertain about? As the story is depicted, neither God nor Abraham inspire any spiritual admiration. And why would Isaac be such a spineless wimp? For some, however, Isaac is held to be the first Jewish martyr (and again, ignore that Judaism was not then an organized faith system). Functionally there can be only one purpose for this tale: since God, the personification of the Life Principle, would never condone such child abuse, the story purpose in the priest-written tale is aimed to encourage submission and obedience of all seekers to the priest-manufactured faith system.

In the later priest-written book of Leviticus (18:6-7) this priestly lust for ugly showmanship is highlighted in the supposed shifting of personal sin–allegedly with God’s okay–from the guilty party to some hapless victim. The alleged God-approved instructions read: “And he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the door of the tent of meeting. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other for Azazel.” We should note that the word “tent” was an occult reference in pre-history Creation lessons for primordial energy involvement out of which Creation is made manifest. To retain their authority the self-important priests indulged themselves in the slaughter of one goat upon the Temple altar and sent the other hapless goat into the wilds to be torn apart by predators. Or, depending on their location, the other goat was hurled by priests from a cliff to be cruelly dashed upon the jagged rocks below. The alleged reason for hurling the goat from a cliff: Azazel was said to be imprisoned beneath the mount.

Nowhere is it ever explained in Hebrew or Jewish myths why the Lord–a self-admitted jealous god–would ever sanction such a custom of equal offerings, for by presenting identical offerings it is openly admitted that Azazel was indeed considered the equal to God. Consider also that the name Azazel is said to mean “God strengthens,” so the implication seems to be that one aspect of the creative Source, active as the Life Principle, cannot be honored without the other. What this tale inadvertently reveals is that the Source-power cannot create and bring anything into existence except through a process of positive/negative energy exchange and interaction.

Even in this twenty-first century of space flights and instantaneous communications around the planet there are still Orthodox Jews who practice the bloody ritual of slaughtering hapless life (such as chickens) in an appeal to God for personal forgiveness of sin. In Los Angeles, California, for example, there are Orthodox Jews who seek to sidestep responsibility and save themselves from sin by victimizing defenseless animal life.

The Roman “fathers” and “saints” of Christianity (such as Paul, Jerome, Augustine, etc.) enthusiastically took up the sin ensnaring tactic which carries with it the submit and obey features of the faith by relating how Jesus was sacrificed for the sins of the world. On that occasion, however, God did not see any reason to substitute a ram or goat for the spectacle. The reason for such spiritual indifference? It is the claim that God so loved the world that he should allow it to sidestep responsibility for its sins by letting his “only begotten son” be sacrificed. It seems a bizarre way to teach that everyone must stand responsible for their own acts if they are ever to evolve.

Why should this surrender and torture of God’s “beloved” and “only begotten” son inspire the world with any spiritual love and trust? Such a concept hinges upon pre-Christian societies in which no rite was seen to hold more august power with the people than the sacrifice of the king or the king’s son for the redemption of the king’s people. That superstition was impressed upon Roman awareness around 60 BCE when the Roman general Pompey captured Jerusalem, which was then weakened due to a power struggle between the two sons of King Aristobulus. Pompey installed one son, Hyreau, as high priest and took the other brother, Antigonus (along with his sons) to Rome as displays of triumph. Eventually, however, it was Antigonus who became priest-king, and in his short reign before being taken by Marc Antony in 37 BCE, he had slain his own two sons–presumably as sacrifice for the welfare of his people.

As noted, exploiting scapegoats, as promoted in Leviticus, was often subtly upheld in Hebrew Scriptures. Unfortunately, the only thing that such alleged godly allowance of using a substitute for the guilty sets up as standard practice is for the faithful to alway seek out ways to sidestep responsibility for themselves. However, passing the blame to another provides only the illusion that such “sacrifices” will free one to fly to Heaven on a comfortable mattress of lies. As for everyone else they supposedly go to Hell.

Evaluating Corporate Style Monotheistic Faiths

Posted in belief, culture, faith, history, random, religion, Social with tags , , , , , , , on February 13, 2015 by chouck017894

Any man-fashioned faith system is basically designed as a power structure: it was not resolutely assembled for the benefit of mass spiritual enlightenment but is designed to broaden the faith system’s authority. Like any commercial endeavor the service that is offered is gauged by customer demand, and commercial demand is stirred up by advertising. In the faith business the product is a manufactured illusion; the merchandise offered is emotional assurance that a higher power looks after them—but that power only functions if subscribers submit, obey and partake of all the rites, rituals and ceremonies that the self-appointed authorities have set in place for business practice. Consequently those formalized procedures are cleverly fashioned to appeal to the ego of the seekers, not crafted to empower everyone’s personal connection (called “spirit”) to Creation’s Source.

Principles of righteous conduct are comparatively self-evident to any balanced mind: seek understanding, control avarice, value individuality, honor love, demonstrate compassion, respect all life, recognize that all things are interrelated, etc. For the most part the three corporate styled monotheistic faith systems of today’s western cultures choose to market the principles of caring conduct by claiming to possess favoritism of a compassionate god. The general work ethic of these sister faith systems, however, is to force their formalized concept of a God-Creator upon everyone else, which results only in constant conflicts. Thus for each of these monotheistic systems, their calls to devotion happen to exploit identical unrighteous principles: submit, obey, and resist tolerance. Notably lacking in the basic practices of these formalized faiths is any real respect for life’s intended diversity. To achieve this lack of sympathy the strategy that is traditionally used is to obstruct knowledge, curtail science, stifle natural desires, belittle intimate pleasures–in short, reduce yourself to a robotic religionist. All this is standardized by their priest-written books which are claimed to be “revealed” commandments.

What is the architectural foundation for this? It is the concept of monotheism, a doctrine that there is only one Creator-God, male of course. It is a principle which permits erecting a business machine upon the assertion that the all-embracing, all-inclusive power which created and sustains everything has censored himself to play favorites with segments of the human species that he created. This is a tactic which is then buttressed by utilizing man’s fear of death which further allows the charlatans to peddle their faith system’s insurance policy which offers a glorious afterlife in a cloud-lined country club atmosphere–but only if you follow the rules.

The three self-serving monotheistic faith systems of western cultures could never survive as a controlling power if the peace and brotherly love to which they give much lip service was really practiced by them. Instead the self-appointed representatives of heaven stimulate the egos of seekers with notions of exclusiveness. Peace and brotherly love happen to make for a limited meal ticket if such tolerance was actually allowed to be demonstrated by followers, for that would allow seekers to truly embark upon achieving personal alignment with universal power. Such freedom of spirit would deprive the self-proclaimed ambassadors of God and the public image as having been heavenly approved for godly service. Each of these three corporate styled faith systems claim to teach love, tolerance and peace, but curiously after over two millennia of these sugary claims the world has not yet witnessed any proof of such divine conduct on their part. Instead, all three by-the-book religions have to resort to whitewashing and disguising their bloody histories of violence, prejudice, deceits, contrive theatrical ceremonies, and similar excesses of shameless spiritual pretentiousness. With these pretensions each of these faith systems have shamelessly taught seekers to hate without cause.

When some faith system then attains political clout it inevitably slides into the sensuous “sins” of brutal power management which they legitimation by quoting cherry picked verses from their own priest-crafted, self-serving “holy books.” For example, does not the Torah attest that God urged the Israelites, his “chosen ones”, to slaughter the inhabitants of Canaan to attain the “Promised Land”? Indeed, the holocaust that is glorified throughout the book of Joshua is not exactly spiritually uplifting: in chapter 12 alone there is listed the killing of thirty-one kings. And for the promoters of Gospel, was not Europe brought into God’s favor by use of torture and fiery destruction during the Inquisition by self-proclaimed representatives of the Prince of Peace? And does not the Quran avow that Allah (the merciful) sent hordes of angels to slay opponents of Mohammad’s possession of Mecca? Such is the deceptive propaganda preached by all by-the-book faith systems. The uncompromising justification for any acts of brutal domination is always in the name of an alleged prejudiced holy spirit. Nowhere in such “faiths” is the truth ever acknowledged that each and every thing is manifested through and from one Source, and that each and all things are therefore interrelated and equal before that creative Source. There is, of course, no ego manipulation in teaching that truth, and thus little material or political profit is possible in promoting such truth of impartiality before the Creator.

It has been noted elsewhere in these postings that regional conditions in which these faith systems originated shaped the spiritual teachings which were worked into the political governance of tribal stability. Thus today, to the Jews and Muslims, God is still promoted as something like a bellicose tribal leader; and those “others” who are not of these implied favored people of the Creative Principle supposedly decrees “cut them off.” For example, Psalms 118:10 (among many interpretations) “…all nations surround me; in the name of the Lord I will surely cut them off…” In Christian faith, which was conceived and nourished in the militant Roman Empire, God is viewed more as a commander-in-chief, with priests, bishops and preachers placed in charge like generals over the lower ranks.

How glaringly different the by-the-book dogmatism practiced in the western cultures’ faith systems today when compared to the way the belittled Pagans approached spiritual understanding. Pagan understanding was that spiritual things are highly personal and meant to be experienced by each person individually. The reason why Pagans did not actively solicit others to join any particular sect was the belief that the impulse for spiritual enlightenment must originate within the person himself. It was not viewed as a commercial subject. The Pagans knew that the first place of one’s spiritual preparation had to be within one’s own heart. Spiritual preparation, they understood, was not something acquired through exterior pressures. To the Pagan, regardless of which small sect he or she might be drawn to, it was always accepted that those in any superior position were like elder brethren who, just as the postulate, were sharing in a similar search for divine understanding.

Also noted in these posting is the fact that those belittled Pagan cultures had much more spiritual freedom–and tolerance for each others spiritual connection–than the world has been privileged to since the programming imposed by the by-the-book monotheistic faith systems which have turned spiritual yearning into a product for sale.

Abuse of Democracy Within US Congress

Posted in culture, Government, history, life, logic, politics, random, Social, thoughts with tags , , , , , on February 4, 2015 by chouck017894

Remembering that religious right factions took over the US Republican Party in 1996, and that Republican dogmatists now (2015) control both houses of Congress, perhaps we should review their method of “progress.” The nation had thrust upon it in 2000–through dubious means which happened to be decided by five Republican-Catholic leaning Justices of the Supreme Court–confirming presidency upon a self-admitted born again believer who then quickly lied the nation into a needless and costly war, and who relished torturing captives taken in that drummed up war. After his devious eight year term in office was over the Republicans in Congress spent the next six years deliberately obstructing the bulk of law making which could have advanced the bulk of US citizens. Indeed, the 2014 Congress turned in the worst record of representation of the citizens in the nation’s history. With over half of Congress also being long-stocked by millionaires, perhaps we should look into past member’s track records.

There are 535 members of the United States Congress, members who are responsible for establishing the nation’s laws which are supposed to guarantee equal justice for all citizens, and which should also apply equally to the citizens’ representatives. There have always been freeloaders among the “membership,” and experts at double talk, addicts of pretentiousness, and those who do business under the table and/or behind closed doors. There have been untold episodes of conflicts of interest, endless self-promotions through a feeding trough called “ear marks,” childish tantrums of spite called “filibusters,” and even outright indifference for the nation’s Constitution. All of this can be and has been indulged in while taking a healthy salary (paid by taxpayers), self-granted government paid medical coverage, generous expense accounts, and even a self-granted pension plan (paid from tax payers’ wallets) after they exit their stint of “service”—even if only after one term. Speak of entitlements!

In other words, politics, like religion, attracts people with huge ego problems and who are divinely untroubled with any heavy personal scruples. Perhaps we should not be surprised, therefore, at these disquieting statistics of Congressional members (a sample is from 2011).

* Three members were incarcerated for assault
* Seven members were arrested for fraud
* Eight were arrested for shoplifting
* Fourteen were arrested on drug-related charges
* Twenty-one were defendants in lawsuits
* Seventy-one could not get a credit card because of bad credit
* Eighty-four had been arrested for drunk driving
* One hundred and seventeen were involved, either directly or indirectly, in bankrupting at least two businesses
* It is unclear how many were/are adulterers and/or brothel clients
* Too many in office continue to pretend that they have superior religious guidance for their material double dealings

The Founding Fathers of the United States well-knew that human nature is easily tempted. For this reason they sought to devise safeguards so every citizen of the new nation might have a better chance in the pursuit of happiness and freedom of spirit. Governing power, therefore, was not to rest in one person’s hands as in kingdoms, dictatorships or theocracies. Therefore three branches of government were specified to act as the hallowed trinity of democracy; the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. For the most part, that system has well-served a broader spectrum of people for the bulk of the nation’s 239 year history.

As religious faction have pushed more and more into the inner circles of government since 1996 (when religionists took over the Republican Party), emphasis has shifted from loyalty to a golden democracy into a furious pursuit of democratic gold for power seekers. In the process neither genuine democracy nor spiritual integrity have been enhanced. The founders of the US were altruistic, and they believed that serving in any of the three branches of government was to be taken on as an honor, not as a self-serving career move.

But from at least the late 1990s the thrust of those who have wormed their way into government positions from the Right have vigorously chopped at the very roots of democracy. And the carnival which this brand of politicians have made of politics is shown in the fact that they proved incapable of any real solutions to national problems. Instead they kept public attention muddied with faith system obsessions such as a woman’s right to choose, people’s’ lifestyles, and even who they should love. When their grab for power and materiality has been successful they shackled democratic principles in attempts to do such things as take away workers’ rights, deny senior the protection which the seniors had paid into for years, have sought to downgrade education standards, actually gave personhood rights to corporations, stolen from the poor and siphoned it to the rich, reduced environmental standards, and just sat on their hands and did nothing about gun shows where anyone could and can buy quantities of guns without any background checks.

The point of this mini review is that there is a desperate need for Congressional Reform, and that has been summed up in the proposed 28th Amendment to the US Constitution which covers the following eight considerations:

1) Term limits for Congress members consisting of twelve years only should be established, which would, however, include one of three possible options; A) two six-year Senate terms; B) six two-year House terms; C) one six-year Senate term and three two-year House terms.

2) There should be neither Tenure nor Pension provisions to Congress members for having held the honor of their office. Every Congressman receives a salary, usually with an expense account; and they continue to get paid for that past honor even after leaving office, which certainly dishonors the concept of true democracy. Indeed, a member of Congress can retire with the same yearly pay after only one term! Is that self-granted entitlement available anywhere else in the workplace?

3) Equally dishonoring of true democratic principles is the special favor Congress members bestowed upon themselves which frees “members” from participating in Social Security which is relied upon by the very people the “members” are supposed to serve. Democratic principles as conceived by the Founding Fathers require that Congress participates with the American people; that means that properly all funds which have been amassed for Congressional retirement payouts (from taxes) should always have been placed in the Social Security system just as it is for the private citizens whom they serve. That Congressional graft scheme must be corrected.

4) If Congress members want a retirement plan they may and should do as the rest of the American citizens are obliged to do and purchase that security cushion on their own. That self-granted Congressional retirement plan is but another graft scheme.

5) What average citizen has the ability to give themselves a pay raise? Why does Congress have the undemocratic clout to vote themselves a pay raise? Rightfully, Congressional pay should rise only by the lower of CPI–or by three percent. That’s what they impose on the elderly–but they have reneged even on that raise for those depending on Social Security.

6) Person elected as representatives of the people do not represent the people when they grant themselves special privileges. Another case in point, Congress enjoys a special health care system, and have excluded themselves from the Healthcare Reform which everyday citizens have to rely on. Properly the Congressional “members” should participate in the very same health care system as all other American citizens. Elected representatives are neither moral nor true to the democratic principles upon which the nation was founded by implying that they are a privileged class; they are servants of the people.

7) The legislative branch of government determines the laws of the land: that office does not mean that those in-office are above the law. Congressional members must comply equally by each and every law which Congress has imposed upon the American people. (As one little example which members slipped into law, did you know that Congressional members are exempt from being prosecuted for sexual harassment?)

8) All of these listed points considered here make it clear that the proper thing to do for true democratic governing is to void all past and present self-serving contracts of Congressmen for Congressmen, and this should be made effective immediately. The above mentioned seven points of undemocratic indulgences were self-contracted by Congress “members”–certainly their self-granted entitlements are not for the betterment of private citizens. It is crucial that American citizens stand up and confront their elected “officials” about these self-granted privileges the lawmakers enacted for themselves. These self-serving entitlements are in direct opposition to the laws they have imposed upon the rest of the nation’s citizens.

The Creator’s Demand For Diversity

Posted in belief, biological traits, culture, environment, faith, history, humanity, life, lifestyle, nature, random, science, sex, Social, thoughts with tags , , , , on February 1, 2015 by chouck017894

Man is such an egotistical creature that he believes that he can ignore Nature’s subtle warnings. Perhaps that is because our revered ego-driven, man written “holy books” happen to assure us that the human species was given dominion over all life forms on this little planet. Unfortunately, those ego-driven priest authors happened to also believe that this little planet, which they perceived to be flat, was the center of the universe. Well, that’s not exactly an in-depth assessment, and human ego is pretty much a whore.

This admittedly crude appraisal of human egotism and arrogance (and its intimate attendant, greed) was spurred by a mid-2014 report concerning the dilemma of some ordinary fish. Seems that man’s self-interest had seeped into various streams and rivers (in the Susquehanna, Delaware and Ohio river basins of the US), which resulted in turning some fish species into what was delicately termed “intersex” fish. Gasp! Some of those damned male fish were found to actually be carrying eggs! Well, let’s not start pounding the pulpits just yet. Something very basic is shown here, something which illustrates that everything which exists in Creation is composed of interchangeable polar elements and thus nothing is ever exclusively representative of one energy pole or its opposite.

As for the dilemma of the river fish population referred to, their altered sexual identity reflects the natural interchangeable aspects within the energy pool of all life. The home waters of the fish happen to have been blessed with hormones, but hormone-mimicking chemicals compounded by man’s arrogance and greed contributed to the identity crisis of the fish. The waste waters that man dumped into the streams carried estrogenic chemicals used in agriculture and released in animal wastes, and the internal organs of the fish which regulate the release of hormones were being redirected.

Those ancient and much revered priest myth-makers apparently were never informed by God about hormones or chromosomes or DNA, nor was it revealed to them how the chemistry of the brain actually determines a person’s physical-mental-sexual makeup. Unfortunately even today, two to three thousand years after “revealed word” was set down as sacredly unchallengeable, the blindly faithful ascribe to principles drafted by those crafty men and completely ignore what modern science research has revealed. For example, research shows that the effects of sex chromosomes and chemical sex hormones do not have an undeviating manner of lining up in strict accordance to one narrow and specific anatomical structure as hateful religious prejudices love to pretend.

Furthermore, anatomist research shows that there are naturally considerable variations in the human brain–its shape, thalamus, structure of the cerebrum, etc.–which are extremely variable and are as individual as fingerprints. This means that mental and/or sensory properties connected with brain structure may freely align within vastly different ranges, and thus no two persons will ever be exactly the same–including identical twins. So, as far as religious approval of racial or sexual expression goes, one feature was never intended to define all. To the horror of religious extremists, that almighty Creation power which is diverse and variable in shaping life forms (dare we say democratic), and which is personified as “God,” did not use a cookie cutter technique to fashion every person’s racial, physical or category in life. Instead of trying to understand that variety and diversity are the underpinnings of all Creation, they choose instead to spew endless reams of hatred from their pulpits. Stated in biblical terms, their egotism and ignorance “runneth over.”

Religious fanatics should awaken to the fact that there is an intentional alterable holy code used in the production of all life–the code of the hormonal-chromosomal-chemical “design” which decrees great necessity for diversity and variety in human physical, mental and emotional expression. This seems to be problematic only for those who choose to work themselves into melodramatic clamoring over anyone who is perceived to be too different from themselves due to their taught ego-gratifying beliefs. Certainly the endless assortments of life forms which may be observed around us shows clearly that the Creative Principle (God) holds absolutely no grudge or spite over “his” handiwork which is diverse and varied.

within these God-allowable differences there is purposely left open the allowance–the tolerance–for all expressions of life and love. The far-reaching hormone and chromosome chemicals control the total development of the body, brain and intelligence. And these continue to do so in a wide range of ways throughout the duration of each person’s lifetime. Therefore, for political and/or religious factions to pretend that some humanlike Creator expects only one narrow expression of life or love to be striven for by every individual is not true spiritual understanding, and it is not moral instruction. In fact, such an unyielding stance against life’s intended diversity and variety with Creation amounts to outright sacrilege.

Perhaps, considering the thousands of different man-invented faith systems (over 4000 have been documented), it would do well to remember what research science has also revealed through intense study. The brain contributes only two percent of a person’s body weight, but it needs and uses twenty percent of the body’s energy. But as religious fanatics and political extremists consistently prove, very little brain is needed for a body to function and bring distress upon everyone around them.

Disguised Background of Moses Epoch

Posted in belief, Bible, culture, faith, Hebrew scripture, history, prehistory, random, religion, scriptures, theology with tags , , , , , , , on January 17, 2015 by chouck017894

The timeframe upon which the Moses epoch was loosely structured was most probably c. 1576-1490 BCE. This was a particularly rough period for planet Earth and turmoil had continued for centuries following the earlier frightening event when a rogue planet-sized comet had lunged out of the skies from the general direction of planet Jupiter. Electromagnetic imbalance in the solar system resulted in interplanetary disturbances, and cultures worldwide were dramatically affected. In the following timeframe 1490-1480 BCE, for example, the royal city of Ugarit went down in flames, and in this same timeframe the cities of Troy, Knossos and the walled cities in the Indus Valley were also destroyed. Using the 1480 BCE date as anchor-point (which lasted to at least around 1200 BCE) not only the Hebrews (who were cast by priest authors as Israelites) but people everywhere suffered through worldwide calamities.

If this was the broad timeframe in which Moses allegedly heard God speak to him personally from a burning bush, he would have been around eighty years old (if he had been born c. 1576 BCE–one of the numerous dates that are debated). The approximate earlier date 1486 BCE is also often associated with the Exodus and the Moses tale. Still another date often theorized as the Moses saga is the 1480 BCE timeframe, which happened to be when Thutmose III came of age and officially became pharaoh of Egypt; until then his mother Queen Hatshepsut, wife of Thutmose II, had overseen her son’s duties in his name. (Note the mose part of the names.)

The plagues which Hebrew Scriptures (Exodus) claim was God’s way of affirming his favoritism for the Israelites and his divine prejudice against the Egyptians is largely priestly liberty with actual planetary circumstances. The plagues in the setting used for the Moses epoch were not peculiar to that narrowly focused region of the world. Worldwide upheavals in this period also plunged the Phoenician trading empire into decline due to the fall of so many trading partners. Indeed, much of this was recorded by Chaldeans, Hebrews, Greeks, Minoan Cretans, Egyptians, East Indians, Chinese, and even the South American Mayans. In the priestly accounts (as in Jeremiah 7:20) God is quoted as saying, “Look! My anger and my rage are being poured forth upon this place, upon mankind and upon domestic animals, and upon the tree of the field and upon the fruitage of the ground; and it must burn, and it will not be extinguished.” This is how holy hatred is glorified.

The unstable planetary conditions which lasted for generations were drawn upon by later priest authors for their own advantage. As portrayed by the priests, God is claimed to have spoken to Moses from a thick cloud upon Mount Sinai saying, “I am the Lord your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage (some translations incorrectly interpret this as out of the “house of slavery”). About this time, according to scriptures, God promised the Israelites that if they obeyed his “laws” (as interpreted by the priests, of course) they would prosper from what amounted to his conditional love. Thus were the Exodus 19:4-6 verses reinforced in which God supposedly said, “…you shall be to me a nation of priests and a holy nation.” The tone of this claim of selectivity rather tarnishes its credibility as spiritual truth.

The date most commonly given for the death of Moses is 1456 BCE. In the book of Deuteronomy 32:49 and 34:1, written long after the depicted wandering events (probably written by the High Priest Hilikiah in Jerusalem in seventh century BCE) Moses is averred to have died atop Mount Pisgah after viewing the Promise Land. This mount is identified with Mount Nebo, a mountain in Moab near the north end of the Dead Sea (and where later Jeremiah supposedly hid the Ark of the Covenant). This Mount was from ancient times held to be dedicated to the Sumerian-Assyrian-Babylonian god Nebo, the son of Marduk chief god of ancient Babylon, who bore the title of “Ilu-tashmit,” meaning god of revelations, and he was regarded as a soothsayer or prophet. From this the Hebrew word for prophet became nabi or nebi.

Many features of the Moses saga clearly indicate that the priest-written “history” actually concerns the process of energy involvement and development into matter form (Creation activity), not of some selected human leader who escorted “bound” Hebrews to a new location. Just as with the parting of water in Genesis, the waters are parted for Moses and the Israelites (elementary particles) to move into diverse and defined life archetypes. Indeed this is what is alluded in Exodus 33:20-23 where Moses, symbol of the Life Principle, is told by God, “Thou canst not see my face…” “…thou shalt see my back parts”—a clear reference to the primal condition from which life is made manifest. The fabled character of Moses can never see God’s front parts–the evolutionary results–because he symbolizes the energy action of the Life Principle up to where pre-physical energies begin to congeal and transform into material-matter form. And this is why Moses must “die” when that objective is within sight. It is therefore a certainty that “…no man knoweth of his sepulcher unto this day.” (Deuteronomy 34:6–written c. 8th century BCE)

Among the divine mysteries of this tale none is more puzzling than the manner in which the Lord is alleged to have fed the starving Israelites in the “wilderness.” According to the priest-written account over six hundred thousand Israelites were miraculously fed with manna. The Israelites were depicted as on the verge of annihilation and a somewhat indifferent Creator sent them only a microscopic form of nourishment. As claimed in the text, “And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as hoarfrost on the ground. And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is Manna; for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given us to eat.” (Exodus 16:14-15) HUH? Is it wise to believe that over six hundred thousand starving persons were given “bread” as small as hoarfrost as sustenance? This story feature clearly attests that the chronicle of Exodus is not history but is allegory of the Creation process, and the “hoarfrost” refers to elementary particles being infused with subatomic elements. Everything which is made manifest as matter-form is nourished by subatomic particles.

Perhaps the most honored part of the Moses saga is of God making Moses the bearer of the Ten Commandments to the stranded Israelites. Strangely, these Commandments passed through several transformations of their own, and became guidelines for moral/ethical conduct only after 700 BCE–and which were again rewritten in 400 BCE. The earliest intention in the “Commandments” which Moses would have received and relayed from the personified Source of Creation certainly could not have been in regard to moral and ethical behavior in the “wilderness” (prototypal conditions). Moses, traditionally revered as the “Law Giver”, is depicted as having descended from an ecstatic rendezvous with the Lord on Mount Sinai. The law-giver is commonly pictured as standing erect with the “laws” which he carried etched upon two stones . This image indicates allegorically that the “laws” did not originally concern moral conduct among physical beings but concerned the principles of genetics. All that could have been decreed there in those primal circumstances (“wilderness”) would concern genetic purity–the “law” of Creation which established that like is to beget like. This is Creation’s powerful “law” which carries weight far beyond the principle of genetic reproduction; it applies equally to each individual’s thought patterns which determine each person’s lifestyle and how they interact with others. Lost in this self-serving scriptural storytelling style is that this “law” of like must beget like also brings reprisal after its own kind. Thus this “law” of reproductive energy indeed supports divine advice to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.