Nancy,
Much of what you are saying have a majority following by the world
population, but you are simplifying the issues. This in the name of a God
that only have a relatively small following. Fortunately, the majority of
the Gods or teachings without a God, do adhere to and preach your
principles. Jesus had in reality very little impact on the world.
The problem is that we as humans have "developed" and taken over many of
the Gods traditional powers. When the beliefs in Gods developed, the human
race were subject to natural selection in a far larger scale and it was
absolutely necessary to promote child labor. This especially if the
religious leaders wanted to grew their following. If you look at deliberate
safe abortion, it is a phenomena that is very very small even today. If you
look at natural unsafe abortion due to malnutrition or other environmental
factors and infant death due to the same factors, the numbers are several
magnitudes larger. If you want children that grow up as healthy members in
the world community, getting rid of legal abortion it is very inefficient
and you will save many more children by a very small donation to any food
aid organization.
I was amazed when I read the UN statistics and found that two thirds of the
children in the world have irreparable brain damages 9 month after their
birth, due to malnutrition. Only one third of those are results from
starvation or lack of proper food for the mother, the other two thirds are
results of voluntary malnutrition of the mother, due to cultural or
religious beliefs and habits. So God is not that benevolent, whoever he/she
is?
So I am not sure that the minority of the world that can have the luxury of
seeking possessions, get the child issues so wrong. In fact the statistics
tell us the opposite. Children is a possession that they can afford and
nourish in a proper way. You forgot my children. The problem is often that
it is often difficult to agree with the possession view of it, does not
have the right moral sound, but I have to realize that it works quite good.
Hakan
At 10:26 AM 8/2/2005, you wrote:
Good stewardship, responsibility, and justifications of why we can't be
stewards, and be responsible seem to go together. Nobody wants to be
responsible, and we hide so well behind our justifications. After
all..it's a woman's body, it's my car that needs fuel, it's my building
that needs the forest, it's my job that takes the clean air, we are all
king babies, it's me, my needs, my wants, me, me, me.
Lets take the good old drunk, who chooses to drink and ends up in a
head on collision killing. He is ultimately responsible for his actions,
drunk or sober. Just as we all are responsible for our actions. The
alcoholic wants instant gratification and finds alcohol his tool. His
choice is not one of drinking or not drinking, because that choice has
been removed from his book. He has crossed the line and once crossed,
the choice is removed. The alcoholic's choice is whether or not to stay sober.
For a man and woman to consent in having a relationship, even the
quickie instant gratification relationship. It takes two for consensual
sex, the line has been crossed. That couple has consented to give their
bodies. In that action, whether it be one for instant gratification or a
lifetime of marriage, They are responsibility of their actions. If that
act, produces a child, the consenting couple is 100% responsible to that
life. Like the alcoholic who has consented to the drink, their are
consequences to their action, and their choice has been limited because
they made a decision for consensual sex. They chose to give their
bodies. If a child results from their act; any reasoning or
justification killing that life, any life, is not their choice. That
choice, like the alcoholic deciding to drink, has been removed from the
list of what we can do. Now, there is responsibility to the life that was
created. The ultimate responsibility is to life. And Yes, they can
choose to justify their need for instant gratification behind many
different doors, one of which is abortion. And then their is the victims
of a rape( I say victims, because if a child results, it too is a
victim.) But two wrongs don't ever make a right.
Instant gratification, around the world has gotten our entire community
into as my mother use to say one mell of a hess. Stewardship!! yes, we
need stewardship from teaching our children that abstinence of sex,
abstinence of any abuse of our bodies and environment is what is called for.
God has a good solution for sex, it's called abstinence and marriage.
Respect for what God has given, beginning with our bodies is the first
start. The mentality of "right to life" begins with Stewardship. We
have to instruct our children to be first stewards over their body, to
honor and respect it, and teaching them then to be stewards over their
environment will be much easier. In your own words: "Oh wait. It's human
selfishness, "superiority" and indifference to the rest of the world's
creations that has brought us to today's fossil fuel dilemma." Today's
dilemma began with generations being taught that their needs come first,
I want what I want when I want it, and it's okay to justify behavior by
avoiding responsibility, from the simple act of sex, to the worlds
problems. We all want to sit in the victim's chair and point our
fingers. Well, when you point your finger at someone or something, there
are always 3 pointing back to you.
So where do we start to clean it up? Do we begin behaving responsible
and begin teaching tools which will help the next generation? Or do we
just attach the problem with a protest for saving a snail's life, or
fossil fuel issues, to avoid the bigger picture? Nobody wants to tackle
the bigger picture, that begins at conception. It's so much easier to
justify our behavior, to pass the buck, to blame, and point fingers. For
me, the choice begins with respecting life, all life. For you see, I am
no different than the murderer sitting on death row, or the drunk
choosing to stay sober.
From the choice Adam had, which he chose to point his finger and blame
Eve, to the present discussion, Let's all grow up and begin teaching
responsibility. But Baby, it don't begin when your driving a car. That
is my point.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Appal Energy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <Biofuel@sustainablelists.org>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 11:13 PM
Subject: Jesus was a liberal..., and look what it got him... was Re:
[Biofuel]The New Blue States/Country
You twist the argument Nancy, and intentionally barb it with a
misconstruction of what others actually believe. I wonder what a reader
is expected to construe from such an act?
In the first place, there are enormous "herds" of people who believe in
the right to life for all life. (In case you missed it, that is "ALL"
life and all species, not just decision by "short straw.")
What it sounds like to me is that you are somehow willing to relegate all
of your god's creations to a consecutive order of importance, or
unimportance, depending upon which end of the ladder you're starting from.
I wonder what he or she would think about the indifferent
anhilation/extinction of one, multiple and eventually thousands of
species by another, much less the eventual extermination of one specie's
own self as a result of the choice to exhibit no forethought for others
or anything beyond itself? Hmmmmm..... What rubric might you be praying
under were your Jesus to have conducted his affairs in the same manner?
The First Southern Baptist Church of Me?" (Perhaps the Jesus part is a
bit presumptive. But then again, that camp often leaves a large, debris
strewn swath in its wake, much as did you.)
(If Jesus only had an Evinrude and a few sticks of dynamite..........,
maybe he would have had no need for miracles?)
But as to a creator, or god, or whatever your preference might be, might
his or her thoughts be that everything has its place and humans think
wrongly that it's their "right" to pick and choose which species to
relegate into oblivion? Or is it more probable that his or her creations
weren't quite so perfect as originally thought and the intervention of
humans is entirely necessary in order to straighten out all those initial
mistakes?
The latter is all rather doubtful. More like humans have a god complex
and tend to try and reinforce their "superiority" ("dominion") at every
opportune and inopportune moment possible, in every venue, whether
"requisite" or not. Funny that "dominion" thing. All rather like kicking
a dead horse to prove one is still in "control," when all it proves is
just how little in control one really is. The horse may not kick back,
but neither will it pull the wagon any further..............
A lot to be said for good stewardship........
Secondly? I don't think there is or needs to be a secondly. Everyone
would really like to live in a world where every child is wanted. Where
the social and economic pressures don't exist that give women, men and
even children cause to terminate pregnancies early. Everyone would like
to have a peaceful existence where there are no demands placed upon them
other than to enjoy the sheer beauty of being alive - no kissing up or
being subservient to warlords, multi-nationals, politicians of particular
design or the obnoxious manager at the local five and dime, Mal-Wart or
Bob Evans.
In case you missed that chapter in your biblical studies, there was a
time when that was the norm. They called it Eden (at least by one
biblical account) And then humans fouled the water, shat in their own bed
and bespoiled all the good that they had, thinking that there was
something more out there that they needed to know or somehow they could
improve on what was already as good as it could ever be.
That should sound familiar, as we continue to do the same thing to this
very day. One definition of insanity is "doing the same thing, over and
over again, with expectation of achieving a different result." That
doesn't speak well of us as a "superior" species.
Frankly Nancy? One would tend to believe that you need to find your
answers in broader places rather than being content in painting other
humans with the singularly narrow brush from your black and white bucket,
especially those whom you not only don't know, but who's circumstances
you are apparently oblivious to in some part.
Maybe when you can empathize with tens of millions of men, women and
children who have precious little control over their own fate and are
issued death sentences by presidential proxy - whether that be
withholding family planning funds that provide condoms or initiating
international and national policies of embargos, wars, protectionism,
corporatism, cronyism and elitism that strip away lives at every stage of
what should be a wonderful living process - maybe then you'll not be so
quick to assign attributes that don't exist to others and start seeing
"right to life" as more than just a singular issue.
.................................
And now back to our regularly scheduled biofuels programming.
Oh wait. It's human selfishness, "superiority" and indifference to the
rest of the world's creations that has brought us to today's fossil fuel
dilemma.
So I guess there's no need to change the channel at all........
Todd Swearingen
.....................................................
"Against abortion? Get a vasectomy."
...........
Nancy Canning wrote:
I agree with you Gustl. Yet, I am amazed and the quanity of people who
will uphold and fight for some snails life, being of great importance
and right to live, yet believe it is okay to kill babies. That the Child
is of no value and has no right to life.
----- Original Message ----- From: "des" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <Biofuel@sustainablelists.org>
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Biofuel] The New Blue States/Country
Thank you! That was the first message in this thread I found worth
saving for future reference. Too much out there, (government, business
and religion) has propagated the illusion of separation, competition
and isolation... We could easily forget that we do all come from the
same Source, sad to say though, that when mankind tries to give that
Source a name, religion develops, and separation of our unity follows.
doug swanson
Gustl Steiner-Zehender wrote:
Hallo Whomever,
Sunday, 31 July, 2005, 18:03:48, you wrote:
Wwrc> In poor taste. Maybe even mean spirited. God must Love you
better than Wwrc> us RED NECKS. Oh, that's right, you don't believe
"In GOD We Trust".
"In poor taste. Maybe even mean spirited."? I assume that you have
NEVER listened to Rush Limbaugh or his ilk then? Jerry Falwell? Pat
Robertson?
"In GOD We Trust"? The qualifier "Somewhat" does not appear there
between "We" and "Trust". Those trusting in God are those rejecting
the ways of the world and following the ways of the Lord. That would
be those in peace churches and not involving themselves in national
politics and perhaps not even state politics. I assume you mean "In
the bible we trust" instead, with the caveat of your own particular
interpretations of that and including the old testament which has,
according to virtually all biblical scholars of the Christian bent
been fulfilled and the jots and tittles have been changed.
It is very interesting watching the contortions of the theologians
trying to make the black words in the bible match up to the red words
when they flatly contradict them in so many cases. If they trusted in
God they would have the ability to get to their knowledge without the
aid of such an inadequate medium as the written word. It is not so
interesting watching them pulling verses or partial verses out of
context and trying to warp them to their own particular beliefs. They
would rather define truth to match their own limited understanding
rather than take the trouble to bring their understanding in line with
truth. Makes one ill.
I generally attempt to be more kind in my observations but I really
get weary watching people serving two masters while claiming to be
serving only one. That which is good, right and true speaks for
itself and the rest requires justification. There are a lot of
"Christians" who are going to be justifying their heads off and a lot
who don't call themselves Christian who won't need to do so. Law vs
Spirit. There are a lot of folks out there who may have read but have
either forgotten or do not understand MT 25:12, LK 13:25, LK 13:27 and
JN 5:42. Perhaps they just think claiming to believe something is
tautologous with demonstrating the fruits of the belief. Fruits?
GAL 5:22. You won't find a lot of those fruits in politics whether
left, right or center.
Before I forget: MT 7:3-5
There is a great difference between reading the words and knowing what
they mean, understanding them. Living them is even more difficult. I
have failed somewhat in this unkind mail but am prepared to live
and/or die with the consequences of my actions and without excuses or
justification. I hope all those upholding life with one hand and
activily participating in or concurring with the dealing out of death
with the other are just as ready. Blue or red or whatever shade.
Happy Happy,
Gustl
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/