So many people seem to be so concerned that someone is out to fleece them, that someone might get something they don't deserve, and that someone is poor -- not because of circumstances beyond their control, but on purpose, just so they can get hand-outs. Where did this silly pervasive attitude come from?
Why is it "drug abuse"? Rather, various substances are used by various people for various reasons -- as has been since man has interacted with the physical world.
Congressman Paul is not advocating hate; he is (as in every instance I am aware of) thinking in terms consistent with his libertarian tradition. Part of this tradition (which he often iterates) is not imposing his own beliefs on others. This incredible integrity is what endears Dr. Paul to those who don't denigrate him, but actually listen to him.
The problem is that words are politically separated from their meanings; and we are left (or right?) to muddle along without true definition. Liberals (old style) were the ones who understood the importance of individual rights, of the dignity of human self-determination. Conservatives are meant to be those who say: "Wait! Slow down! Pay attention to possible unintended consequences. Don't eat your seed corn. Build to last." Today we just have a bunch of angry yelling and obfuscation.
this is a time for reflection, for giving to oneself the gift of true acceptance, of meditation on light, on fire, on energy -- forget about trying to appease or give, give, give to show your value. Take!
I have come to a conclusion (possibly more to follow) that the way to make money in politics irrelevant is to ignore all ads -- make the effort to discover our own information.
Life begins before conception. The egg and sperm are alive. The question is more about when consciousness begins. Some say we are reincarnated with old consciousness. So perhaps consciousness, individual life, begins at the beginning of time. The problem for abortion is not about what is life, what is conscious, what is human or what is murder. The problem is about what are rights and what are the responsibilities of society to the rights of citizens.
The Government was never meant to be a caretaker. It is meant to be a social structure upon which common issues can be addressed, an organizing structure for common projects, an edifice to represent us to other societies, and, yes, mostly devolves to serving those with power. If we expect our government to serve us, we need to own the power that caring for ourselves demands.
Supply and demand are the daemons of capitalism. Socialism is more about distribution of resources.
There is nothing wrong with socialism, or for that matter capitalism -- it's all in how it's done, and for whose benefit.
even for political junkies there is a lot more to each of us than politics, parties, or partisan philosophies.
the problem is not in believing; it is in needing others to believe as you
There are a great many gods -- as the god of The Bible fully knows. I suspect they may be beings from another dimensional universe; but that's just my suspicion.
The current "capitalist" model of requiring some degree of monetary wealth formation in order to survive, with the norm of doing some job or selling some skill or resource, in several ways limits the creativity, individualization of solutions, and useful distribution of tools (including knowledge) and goods. However, people are not the grounded angels that some may propose in arguing for say classic communism or altruistically based economic systems. Perhaps with evolving technologies and understandings of how we work models could be constructed based on other kinds of rewards than ability to control resources or bare survival.
My political philosophy is basically libertarian, old style liberal, wherein the overarching principle is individual liberty, self-determination. My reservations about the obvious conclusions of capitalism are concerns about the individual getting lost in the drive to profit. My reservations about socialism are about the general lack of social responsibility evidenced in our culture, which makes such a project impractical. In theory these theories could be revised to work out their kinks and inconsistencies with human realities. Perhaps we could look at economic theory from the perspective of the psycho-social world as we are coming to better understand it. Perhaps we could devise a workable system that actually fits within our greater goals -- which I hope would be better living conditions for all.
There is also much in us that is attracted to while fearing and reviling the "other". I don't think we can rationally hope to create a social structure based on loving kindness (and what exactly is love?) Yet, we do not have to agree to a structure based on hatred, greed, or hostile competition. If enlightened self-interest, in the sense of a basic underlying principle well understood that what is good for all is good for each, that we have more of a well-lived life when our surroundings are pleasurably pleasant and creatively shared, were to be sufficiently encouraged, modeled and memed, perhaps ...
When you look up and outward into the starlight echoing brilliance in cold, dark space the wonder is not in the distance You are not missing from your space from which your universe emanates.