For God so Loved ...

For God so loved the world that … he drowned the entire population except for one worthy family and several lucky animals. If that’s what a benevolent God does to his friends, I’d hate to see what he might do to those he doesn’t befriend!

Fast forward a few millennium and you have the (in)famous New Testament quote about “God so loved the world” made popular by persistent American football fans occupying end zone seats!

But, even the new version of God’s love is absurd to all except those raised to believe it since occupying a crib.

I mean, Vietnam War prisoner John McCain likely suffered worse in terms of agony and duration of pain. Granted, I’m not saying it was a pleasant experience for Christ, but give me a break.

Countless people before and after Christ have fared far worse in pain and suffering than him, including many who died at the hand of Christ’s followers during the Dark Ages.

And, all those poor souls didn’t possess the knowledge that they would only be dead for three days after all their pain and suffering.

So don’t count me among those jumping to congratulate the Christian God for any meaningful sacrifice. 

Maybe leaving Christ dead forever like the rest of us would have been a true sacrifice to allow the rest of us to live forever. Making it contingent on us accepting the sacrifice and being grateful for it seems like a fair deal.

Any, why not? After all, who said Christ had to come back alive to make it a true sacrifice? What does resurrecting the sacrificial lamb accomplish?

But, you say, there cannot be only two members of a Trinity. This is true enough. But, who exactly invented the notion of Trinity? It was Yahoo himself! Whatever he decreed would have been believed in any case, so why confuse the math?

LGBT Rights as a Political Pawn Piece

I still don't understand why the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) came out so early for Hillary Rodham Clinton, except to think they really like the initials in her name!

Anyway, HRC (the organization) is part of the power-establishment in my analysis. For example, if you look at their magazine, it has lots of sponsors associated with banks, military contractors and the like - the usual money-interest suspects. The kind HRC (the candidate) likes to give speeches to for money.

HRC (the organization) knows who pulls the strings and they don't want to rock the boat given the tenuous nature of human rights, in general and LGBT rights in particular.

In any case ...

You can always count on the backwards people of this country to react to progress. And, I suspect things are going to get worse before they get better until the WASP population diminishes enough in size and power; and right-wing politicians stop kowtowing to them.

But right-wing politicians are not going to kill the golden goose prematurely. They'll milk the reactionary mob for as long as possible. And they'll buttress it by rigging the system with gerrymandered districts and making it more difficult for forward-thinking people to vote. But, even that will eventually succumb to demographic realities.

One's Allegiance to Country; not Symbols (e.g. Flags)

The Chinese use the flag as a litmus test for allegiance to the State. And hence, they outlaw its "desecration." I have no such allegiance to the State and so decry using a Flag to define said allegiance. The U.S. Flag, as a symbol and history is beautiful and worthy of understanding and appreciation. But, my allegiance is not to a Flag or any other symbol; but instead to the Principles upon which it was Founded - including the right to dissent even to the extreme case of burning a country's Flag.

Being Civilized ... Politically Speaking

My family is right wing politically; combined with religious fundamentalism. It's always been a toxic brew but we managed to get along before Facebook, where people say stuff they wouldn't say to your face. We also worked hard to follow the advice of our parents: "Never talk religion, politics or money in polite company."

Well, our offspring did not follow that advice and Facebook and other online venues have thrown that completely out the window. I've parted many a ways with high school friends and some family members because of deep political differences, made worse by unnecessary toxic and hurtful language.

People need to think before they speak/write/post.

For example, when you are accusing a president of being treasonous, besides the fact that you should provide evidence, you need to think about what you are implying to your friends and family members who support that president - that they are knowingly and willingly supporting a president that should be impeached. You're impugning their integrity as well, even if implicitly.

It is fair to talk about unlawful actions if it is based on evidence and is discussed rationally and reasonably. However, posting or regurgitating something inflammatory you read somewhere on the internet or heard through the grapevine; just because you don't like someone is not helpful.

Culpability in Undermining the Working Class in America

There have been some recent books attempting to place blame on Democrats for destroying the Middle Class.

But I believe the analysis of many of such attempts miss the mark. Relatively speaking (versus other political party choices), the Democratic party has been more pro-worker, blue- and white-collar.

Of course, I’m talking about economics here and not a discussion of “values” and how that has been used to distract many working voters from the economic savagery they were being subjected to, starting with Reagan’s assault on unions.

Reagan’s presidency was the beginning of when a sufficient number of blue collar workers chose to prioritize nationalism, militarization and “family values” over their own economic interests. And, it has been down-hill ever since.

It is true that Clinton’s embrace of the “moderate” Democratic Leadership Council agenda moved the Democratic Party more towards an embrace of the Republican worship of the free market and the havoc that wreaks when left unchecked.

This, in turn, led to disastrous policies that make both parties culpable for gutting the rust belt, worker rights and good-paying jobs. As our elected leaders paid lip service to the future of better-paying professional jobs, they failed to help factory workers and the like transition to the “new economy.”

But, choices have consequences. And as the book, “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” points out, the working class itself made choices. And, those choices were not inconsequential. If people put as much stock in the substance of what politicians delivered as a whole instead of being soothed by their cheap words, single-issues or party affiliation, we’d all be a lot better off.