I read this article and had to note how well the author analyzed the subject at hand.  I had a moment discussion with an individual at church on Sunday.  This individual works on political campaigns and was in one himself and spoke at the service.  One subject mentioned was freedom.  I told him afterwards that to me, there has to be responsibility.  The two are linked, and once one reduces responsibility, freedom is lost as well.  Freedom without responsibility is license.

I have seen the article and discussed at work a trial which has begun.  The charge is manslaughter.  I think, along the lines Rush used with killing a baby, she just participated in medical care in the wrong state.  After all, there is no issue with assisted suicide in Oregon.  One may protest that there was no physical issue, but note the comments about pain.  There was a real issue there, and it was demonstrated by the actions of the individual.  Let’s look just a little deeper at this.

What is the value of an individual?  If you are a person who hasn’t breathed yet, you have less than value.  The government will subsidize your death and removal.  If you are a newborn, and your teenage mother kills you in a toilet, there is a 2 year sentence for that death.  The numbers change and flux from that point until the end.  Sometimes according to the age, sometimes according to the person’s actions, sometimes according o the associations the person has.  There is no consistency with the actions.  Look a bit historically and there was Hitler.  He decided the Jews were the pox of earth and needed to be removed.  How was that done?  I know you immediately think of the logistics of the trains, ovens, and death camps.  Stalin made Hitler look like a boy scout with his murder of tens of millions.  How was that done? Think back a little and realize that these individuals had to be labeled something, or designated something to philosophically allow those actions to continue.

The Origin Of Species was an interesting book.  Darwin took time examining various species through a trip and posited the notion that one changed into another through a long period of time.  I will note that through my observations and training, he was partially correct, so let me address this at the onset.  Evolution is the adaptation of a species to a changing environment.  Without such change, very few species would exist on this ever changing planet.  That’s all there is.  It’s simple and effective.  Those with better adaptation can have offspring and continue.  Those with characteristics which could not adapt, die.  What did the evolution of species say about people?  It permitted the movement of value from the church to the classroom.  Prior to Darwin, a person was considered in the image of God, blessed by His Creator, and acknowledged by the One who formed him in his mother’s womb.  Compare that to the designation after Darwin – a well developed ape.  Philosophically speaking, this was the background of removing the Jews.  They were no longer people formed in the image of God.  They were just well developed apes which could be herded and slaughtered like cattle.

Once one is removed from the spiritual, arguments vary according to how one’s value is applied.  In a philosophy class, the basis for laws was the population and what was best for interaction.  Note that there was no relative value, just ascribed value by one’s station in the society.  I guess arguments could go on ad infinitum, because once one removes God’s designation, the result is less than ideal.

Now we enter the trial.  At issue is someone who encouraged another to remove themselves from the population.  At the base, behind the trial, is the show of the philosophy.  What is a person’s value?  Is a person designated by God as one of value, or just a well advanced ape who can be treated like cattle according to the whim of the current culture?

Philosophically speaking is described with names and locations.  It’s so sad to have to agree with what is presented.  The names and descriptions tell quite well the destruction of this society some of which I have observed through my life-time.  It seems to me that there needs to be another approach – return to the original constitution and culture.  That piece seems to be missing, however.

You used to have to know the weezle words and double intandras that were used to hide true intentions.  Apparently, that’s not needed any more.

That term tends to evoke the idea of those things which make up all others.  Technically, it is possible to split an element into the components of electron, neutron, and proton, but at that point, the element is lost.  Elements have particular qualities and are known by their behavior interacting with similar and different other elements.  Watching the behavior of an unknown element is the way to identify it.  Tests can be done on an unknown substance and according to how it behaves in certain circumstances, the identity is determined.  The same can be said for islam.  Their behavior is not an aberration, it is an essential quality.  Since the muslim is a known and celebrated lyer, (they even have a word for that behavior-taqiyya)  it’s best to look at the behavior.  Identity will be known.  That is why I call them totalitarian tribal – a political ideology.

And this is the language the Hezbollah understand.”

Now we are faced with a pickle – do we follow sensibilities and continue to receive attacks, or learn a new language and achieve a sense of peace.  I say a sense of peace as these trained individuals have been problems from the formation of this country.  Look up the “shores of Tripoli” and note our relation to muslims has a long history.  Their behavior has not changed.  Our sensibilities have.

I have long espoused the concept that islam is just a totalitarian tribal ideology.  I found another blogger with a similar viewpoint.

Islam Is Not a Religion, It Is a Design for Controlling Society

If you note the verses listed at the front of the article, it’s quite apparent that the present muslim attacks are simply acting according to their training.  Driving a truck through a crowd, or beheading a foreigner, or stoning a woman who was raped are simply acts extruded from the philosophy of islam – the true expression, and not a fringe lunatic or madman.  Imagine the clarity of purpose this country would have if the media treated coverage of islam the same as they treat guns.  If that’s too much for you, how about treating islam the way the media treats Republicans?  I know it’s too much to ask, but I would even take a true reporting of the acts and philosophy of islam.  If a true reporting was presented, there would be a much different attitude.  That’s why they don’t provide one.  Philosophically, islam is so close to communism, the left is extremely comfortable with them and covers them the same way as Democrats. There’s another concept that is not presented.

As an aside, I would say a prayer for your local cops.  They are wearing a target, not just from the muslims and black panthers, but also thugs who want to act under the cover of those murderous groups.  We as a country need to have a rule of law.  The cops are on the cutting edge of that interaction.  Remove them and the picture gets ugly very quickly.

Next Page »