RE: [ZION] Trial by Media
>-Original Message- >From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 11:42 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [ZION] Trial by Media > > >RB Scott wrote: > >> >>You mean, sort of like the OJ trial? >> >>Ron >> >> > >Which trial? > >Tom The criminal trial // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
[ZION] SLTrib
SUNDAY March 07, 2004 Gay marriage threatens the fundamental unit of society -- the family By Paul T. Mero Utah should support a federal constitutional amendment to recognize legal marriage as only between a man and a woman. But it should do so for the right reasons, understanding why it is needed, what it really means for the long term and just who will benefit. This is a very curious debate. Homosexual marriage is often portrayed as an assault against the family or as a struggle for human rights. In reality, it is more a testimony against failing families and broken homes. Clearly, a federal marriage amendment would prevent states from recognizing homosexual marriages. But it would not save our broken homes. Surely it would serve to remind us that a real mom and dad, together, still produce the best future for their children and our nation. But it would not do one thing to make a family better, let alone succeed. This point seems to be lost on many "pro-family" advocates. A federal marriage amendment is no panacea. Troubled families still would produce a truckload of personal and social dysfunction for their children, including oftentimes the same homosexuality that comes back to haunt so many of these parents. Laws do not make people good; they will not make promiscuous homosexuals more faithful, and they will not make bad parents into good ones. It helps to understand that, in legal terms, the family is prior to the state. The family created the state, not vice-versa. This is the perverse irony of the gay argument favoring marriage it requires the state to create it, unlike the natural family. We ask the state to sanction certain forms of marriage, not because the creation of the natural family depends on it, but because, as a matter of public policy, society seeks to maximize its futurity. State-sanctioned marriage is really, and only, about two things -- child-bearing and child-rearing -- two things, by the way, homosexuals do not do very well. All of this goes a long way to inform us about what adversarial forces really threaten the family. The family is the seed-bed of civilization. Discourage or destroy its natural functions and our future is in jeopardy. Take away its procreative powers, take away its nurturing elements, take away its autonomous functions, take away its pluralistic representation, and we will have threatened the family. The real threat of homosexual marriage is that it is the antithesis of authentic family. It pretends to give life and cannot. It pretends to nurture and does not. It pretends to seek autonomy but is ever dependent. It pretends to pluralism but only finds diversity. In other words, it pretends to civilization. It only plays house, and only then as the state allows it to. This is its threat; it does not form naturally. It is dependent upon the state for its organization. And that is the antithesis of freedom. A federal marriage amendment says nothing about homosexual relationships. They will continue unabated and as usual. A federal marriage amendment is primarily an expression in favor of enduring freedom. It is further recognition, and now it seems a necessary reminder, that the family is the fundamental unit of society. This is the real value of a federal marriage amendment. Serious pro-family advocates would do well to heed this lesson. Fighting to protect the family is more than a religious exercise, though it is that. We fight for the family because pluralistic, autonomous families create freedom. The family is the only natural institution that can honestly come by the title "enemy of tyranny." - Paul T. Mero is president of the Sutherland Institute, a Utah-based conservative think tank. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] Trial by Media
-Original Message- From: RB Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 4:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [ZION] Trial by Media >-Original Message- >From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 11:42 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [ZION] Trial by Media > > >RB Scott wrote: > >> >>You mean, sort of like the OJ trial? >> >>Ron >> >> > >Which trial? > >Tom The criminal trial Can't compare that with Martha's trial. Most of us saw almost every minute of it, sometimes several times. True we had endless "spin" commentaries trying to sort it out for us, but we saw the evidence. I also believe that the jury practiced "jury nullification". In effect, they knew full well that OJ was guilty, but they chose to nullify the prosecution for other reasons. Either they accepted the "race card" as a trump to the actual evidence, or they nullified because they believed the LAPD was unworthy of the conviction. Probably a combination of those two reasons. How do you compare the OJ trial with Martha's trial? It seems to me that Martha had no defense and therefore put up no defense. She relied on her reputation and a parade of celebrity supporters sitting behind her in the courtroom to influence the jury. The jury didn't buy it. It is also my understanding that had she admitted doing what she obviously did - dumping shares on an inside tip - she could have taken the high road by admitting her hasty ill advised action and been fined and gone on with her life. Instead she falsified her records, lied to the investigators, and asked others to lie for her, the latter being the most despicable of things. Of course, I have to state my prejudice here. I feel like her whole "branding" thing is big lie. She comes off as this great expert that knows everything and about everything and that can manipulate anything into anything. She came to believe her own fabrication and it rose up and bit her - in the end - so to speak. Tom // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] Trial by Media
Tom: I think you may have misunderstood. John suggests that people from afar feel sorry for Martha because they are being led by the media. I asked if it was similar to the way the "media" led folks in the OJ trial. I'm not quarreling with the verdict -- Martha lied under oath. Like you, I believe she should have fessed-up early to the insider trading thing -- neither a particularly huge thing when compared to the "cover-up" charges. That said, she's hardly a big fish. She's a celebrity fish, something the prosectors can hang their hats on. The big fish still are free. I do not judge her professional success as harshly as you. I think it's amusing that a poor girl from Joisy could shape herself into a Super WASP. Sort of a latter-day Eliza Doolittle without her Henry Higgins. It's a wonderful poke in the ribs. RBS >-Original Message- >From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 10:36 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: [ZION] Trial by Media > > > > >-Original Message- >From: RB Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 4:46 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: [ZION] Trial by Media > > > >>-Original Message- >>From: Tom Matkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 11:42 PM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: [ZION] Trial by Media >> >> >>RB Scott wrote: >> >>> >>>You mean, sort of like the OJ trial? >>> >>>Ron >>> >>> >> >>Which trial? >> >>Tom > >The criminal trial > >Can't compare that with Martha's trial. Most of us saw >almost every >minute of it, sometimes several times. True we had >endless "spin" >commentaries trying to sort it out for us, but we saw >the evidence. I >also believe that the jury practiced "jury >nullification". In effect, >they knew full well that OJ was guilty, but they chose >to nullify the >prosecution for other reasons. Either they accepted the >"race card" as a >trump to the actual evidence, or they nullified because >they believed >the LAPD was unworthy of the conviction. Probably a >combination of those >two reasons. How do you compare the OJ trial with >Martha's trial? It >seems to me that Martha had no defense and therefore >put up no defense. >She relied on her reputation and a parade of celebrity >supporters >sitting behind her in the courtroom to influence the >jury. The jury >didn't buy it. It is also my understanding that had >she admitted doing >what she obviously did - dumping shares on an inside >tip - she could >have taken the high road by admitting her hasty ill >advised action and >been fined and gone on with her life. Instead she falsified her >records, lied to the investigators, and asked others to >lie for her, the >latter being the most despicable of things. Of course, >I have to state >my prejudice here. I feel like her whole "branding" >thing is big lie. >She comes off as this great expert that knows >everything and about >everything and that can manipulate anything into >anything. She came to >believe her own fabrication and it rose up and bit her >- in the end - so >to speak. > >Tom > > >// >/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// >/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// > >/ --- > > > > // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
[ZION] Am I wasting my time?
Hello, I've noticed that you all don't seem too interested in the things that I'm writing. Could you please tell me why that is? Is it that you disagree? Is it that you don't care? Is it that you're too busy to read my posts? I'm putting a lot of time into this, and I really could use the help (feedback). P.S. the answer to the riddle was "nothing." -- Jonathan Scott // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] An Answer to the World - Chapter 3
Jonathan, I'm not sure I follow your first attempt at deconstruction. I am interested in the linkage you're making between the war and the "counterculture". Although there seem to be some significant connections, I'm pretty certain that the slide toward this studied irresponsibility popularized as "freedom" started prior to the Vietnam war. I suppose there have always been people like this. In the decade following WWII, I think they were called "beatniks". These folks had a hold on San Francisco long before Vietnam started. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] An Answer to the World - Chapter 3
Jonathan, I'm not sure I follow your first attempt at deconstruction. I am interested in the linkage you're making between the war and the "counterculture". Although there seem to be some significant connections, I'm pretty certain that the slide toward this studied irresponsibility popularized as "freedom" started prior to the Vietnam war. I suppose there have always been people like this. In the decade following WWII, I think they were called "beatniks". These folks had a hold on San Francisco long before Vietnam started. I was just thinking that it didn't really get a good strong hold though until Vietnam...basically the kids were faced with the choice to "serve and die" or "revolt and live." And forced with a choice like that a lot of kids, very understandably, chose to revolt. It was the only way to keep your integrity and your life intact. -- Jonathan Scott // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] Am I wasting my time?
Jonathan, I have not seen your comments about feminism yet. I suggest that this is something you might like to examine. I did not see mention of divorce as a social issue at all. In my thinking this is one of the primary indicators of the attack on families. Before 1960, divorce was uncommon. Today it affects nearly everyone, to our detriment. Did the hippie counterculture create this problem? I think not. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Am I wasting my time?
Jonathan Scott wrote: Hello, I've noticed that you all don't seem too interested in the things that I'm writing. Could you please tell me why that is? Is it that you disagree? Is it that you don't care? Is it that you're too busy to read my posts? I'm putting a lot of time into this, and I really could use the help (feedback). P.S. the answer to the riddle was "nothing." == Grampa Bill comments: As to the riddle I had no idea therefore had no answer, therefore had no reply. As to your other postings, I suspect most are tired after the recent battles which ended in an old hand unsubbing, Even those who weren't actively engaged are just plain tired. If you notice, total posts are down to about ten percent of what they were a week ago. Give us some time. It'll perk up. Love Y'all, Grampa Bill in Savannah There are 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't. // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
[ZION] An Answer to the World - Chapter 5 (Feminism)
Feedback Please - - - - - - - - - - 5. Feminism, Women in the Workplace, and the Poverty It Created "A liberated woman is one who has sex before marriage and a job after." - Gloria Steinheim The Princeton Language Institute. 21st Century Dictionary of Quotations. New York, Bantam Doubleday Dell, 1993 Married Women Entering the Workplace Reduced the "Spending Power" of All Salaries Year194019502003 --- Men that Worked 39,496,563 40,174,705 77,714,187 Women that Worked 12,654,256 15,559,454 66,341,379 Number of Workers 52,150,819 55,734,159 144,055,566 Total Population130,962,661 149,895,183 291,500,000 # people per income 2.512.692.02 Avg. Salary $1,299 $2,992 $34,280 --- "Spending Power" Adjusted for 1940 - - - $2,791 $42,595 "Spending Power" Adjusted for 1950 $1,392 - - - $45,650 "Spending Power" Adjusted for 2003 $1,045 $2,246 - - - --- If there were the same ratio of workers to non-workers in the US today as there was back in 1950, the "spending power" of the average annual salary in the US would increase by over $10,000 a year. Due to the change in ratio of workers to non-workers in the US since 1950, the average value of salaries has decreased substantially. Married Women Entering the Workplace Widened the Disparity in Salaries "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer." - Proverb Women in 1960 made roughly 59% of what men made. Today they make roughly 79%. This sounds better but still bad. But, only when one does not realize that all women work today...even the married ones. SINGLE FATHER HOUSEHOLD - Then (1960) - Family Single Parent - Father = 100% salarySingle Father = 100% salary Mother = No salary - Disparity = 0% SINGLE MOTHER HOUSEHOLD - Then (1960) - Family Single Parent - Man = 100% salary Single Mother = 59% salary Woman = No salary - Disparity = 41% SINGLE FATHER HOUSEHOLD - Now (2004) - Family Single Parent - Father = 100% salarySingle Father = 100% salary Mother = 79% salary - Disparity = 44% SINGLE MOTHER HOUSEHOLD - Now (2004) - Family Single Parent - Man = 100% salary Single Mother = 79% salary Woman = 79% salary - Disparity = 56% It was once bad for women to make only 59% of what men make. It is even worse now when single mothers make only 41% of the average two income household. Putting this in terms of dollars (Assuming a $20,000 salary for the men in each instance). Income Type 19602003 Family Income $20,000 (100%) $35,800 (100%) Single Father $20,000 (100%) $20,000 (56%) Single Mother $11,800 (59%) $15,800 (44%) Sources http://www.fiftiesweb.com/pop/info-family.htm http://www.prb.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PRB/PRB_Home.htm http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/stats/histcensus/ http://kclibrary.nhmccd.edu/decade40.html http://www.wtv-zone.com/moe/moesboomerabilia/page35.html The Princeton Language Institute. 21st Century Dictionary of Quotations. New York, Bantam Doubleday Dell, 1993 -- Jonathan Scott -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
RE: [ZION] Am I wasting my time?
Jonathan, I have not seen your comments about feminism yet. I suggest that this is something you might like to examine. I did not see mention of divorce as a social issue at all. In my thinking this is one of the primary indicators of the attack on families. Before 1960, divorce was uncommon. Today it affects nearly everyone, to our detriment. Did the hippie counterculture create this problem? I think not. - Jim Cocabe I'm getting to it. I've actually never written about it before, so it'll take me some time. It will be in the paper though. The argument will focus on the "If it feels good, do it" slogan of the time period. Basically, with the increased influence of Nihilism, people automatically began thinking more about themselves and focusing less on responsibilities. Higher focus on sex...and less focus on taking care of the consequences of it. Increased divorce just seems kind of unavoidable in that kind of atmosphere. I'm thinking I'll be quoting some of the song "It's Too Late" by Carole King. I'm a big fan of hers, but the song seems to just kind of show how effortless people give up sometimes. I'll probably contrast it with a song from Oleta Adams, "Easier to Say Goodbye" from her album "Evolution." - It's Too Late Carole King Stayed in bed all morning just to pass the time There's something wrong here There can be no denying One of us is changing Or maybe we've just stopped trying And it's too late baby Now it's too late Though we really did try to make it Something inside has died And I can't hide And I just can't fake it Wo no no no... It used to be so easy living here with you You were light and breezy And I knew just what to do Now you look so unhappy And I feel like a fool And it's too late baby Now it's too late Though we really did try to make it Something inside has died And I can't hide And I just can't fake it Wo no no no... There'll be good times again for me and you But we just can't stay together Don't you feel it too Still I'm glad for what we had And how I once loved you And it's too late baby But it's too late Though we really did try to make it Something inside has died And I can't hide And I just can't fake it Wo no no no no no... It's too late, baby, it's too late Now darling, it's too late - Oleta Adams - Easier to say goodbye We need a love revival, somewhere for us to begin to take apart the wounded hearts and love them back together again. Solemn promises are too quickly spoken. That tie that binds the hearts is easily broken. It hurts to leave and yet it hurts to live a lie. It's easier to say goodbye. The family chain has oddly gained a missing link Cheating pairs don't seem to care what the children think They pledge fidelity but they're too weak to try It's easier to say goodbye I just want to make it better it's easier to say goodbye. I just want to mend a heart, it's easier to say goodbye. Men and women lack the courage of commitment. All their energies and passions are misspent. Will we ever understand the reason why it's easier to say goodbye. I just want to make it better (I wanna try to make it better, gotta try to stay together, we've gotta find the reasons why) it's easier to say goodbye. We need a love revival, somewhere for us to begin to take apart the wounded hearts and love them back together again. I just want to make it better (I wanna try to make it better, gotta try to stay together, we've gotta find the reasons why) it's easier to say goodbye. -- Jonathan Scott // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
[ZION] LA Times has banned the use of the term "Pro-Life" in its paper
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=4&u=/nm/20040305/od_nm/media_opera_dc -- Jonathan Scott // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
[ZION] Stewart is guilty
While in St Louis, then in Joplin, Missouri this weekend, that's all we saw in the headlines: "STEWART IS GUILTY" "STEWART FOUND GUILTY" "STEWART: GUILTY" I told Cherie it was a shame, because I always liked him ever since seeing *It's a Wonderful Life* *jeep! ---Chet "If ya thinks ya is right, ya deserfs credit - even if ya is wrong." --Gus Segar via Popeye // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
