Only One Dual Purpose NFL Stadium

There was a time when it was fairly common for NFL franchises to share the stadium that they played in with a MLB team, the greatest number of NFL teams to do that according to footballgeography.comwas: ”In 1971, 17 of the NFL’s 26 teams shared a stadium with a MLB team.” That was then, and this is now, so that the only NFL franchise that currently shares a stadium with a MLB team is in Oakland, and that is it.  While there are perhaps another 10 NFL franchises that share their stadium with a collegiate football team, the rest of the NFL franchises are standalone stadiums, to which the NFL season consists for most home teams typically of two preseason games and an additional eight regular season games, with no further games guaranteed unless that NFL team makes the playoffs.  The fact that millions upon millions is spent on the construction and the maintenance of these stadiums, it would seem that logically that there should be an incumbent duty upon the envisioning and construction of these stadiums to consider the overall utility of the project at its inception.

To make matters worse, and probably the most significant reason, why so many coliseums are built with the purpose of only glorifying the NFL, is the fact that it is estimated by Mark Fabiani, special counsel to the San Diego Chargers that: “The average subsidy in the NFL is about 65 percent of the costs of a stadium is paid for by the public.” It is a truism that one spends other person’s money differently that one spends their own money, after all, if one can fleece the public and get a large group of people, that is to say the taxpayers of a certain community, to foot the bill for the so-called “greater good” of creating a stadium solely meant to be used for NFL games, it will be done.

While there are many good and valid reasons why it is senseless to build expensive state-of-the-art stadiums which sit basically unused for virtually every day of the year, it is a real tragedy that in many major cities the NFL could avail themselves of sharing their stadium with a MLB team, which would make the overall building proposition logically more cost-effective and fairer to the taxpayer who is left stuck subsidizing some of the richest men in the entire world.  The fact of the matter is that the technology and experience today needed to create a successful multi-purpose stadium is far greater than back in 1971, yet we have gone in the exact opposite direction and the stadiums built in the present day are the most expensive behemoths on record.

It’s bad enough that out in the real world, that there is mega division between the truly rich and powerful in comparison to the common American, what makes it even worse, is to take America’s most popular sport and instead of offering the taxpayer fair entertainment to soothe his psyche after another week of drudgery mix with frustration, we instead, empty his pockets out, figuring him for a sucker, because, well, he is.

Judge the saved by their fruits

The world is full of professed believers in the religion of their faith, but a significant portion of those self-professed believers do not come close to measuring up to their faith.  In point of fact, it is difficult to believe in a risen Savior when those that claimed to be born again, or to have been saved, or reformed, or redeemed by His blood, appear to be the same as they ever were; perhaps with the exception of such modest changes as the blessing of their food before they eat it, or a portion of their money being given to charity, or a general more pleasant countenance.  While we can always be grateful for any change that is made that improves the character of one’s fellow being -- true believers are rather in short supply.

I am not here speaking of fanaticism when it comes to religious faith as being the apogee of it, because fanaticism can be the very worse aspect of any religious faith, for unreasoning faith can easily degenerate into demagoguery, oppression, narrow-mindedness, and bigotry.  The religious faith that I am referring to, is the type of faith that truly changes the character of your being in its actions, in its goals, and in its thoughts, or for those that were already on the good path, it strengthens and encourages them in their convictions and allows them to become a better vessel for God’s handiwork on earth.

The great avatars of this world incarnate again and again to serve as the prime exemplars of what man can become if he but turns away from his wickedness and selfish decisions.  The change that so many people cry for, starts within us, because God is not our puppeteer, He has instead given us free will, and with that will we can either take steps forward onto the straight and narrow path: “ Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matthew 7:14) or suffer the results of our willful meanderings.

Each person should ask themselves, this one fundamental question, who is that I respect the most out of all the people that I have met in person, and the answer that you will find upon contemplation, will often be the person that walks the path of conviction in his actions, and in his ways, in his achievements, and in his advice.  You cannot possibly be a man of real religious faith if it does not make you a better man for having done so.  This faithful man will give drink to the thirsty, will feed the hungry, assist the stranger as well as the sick, and minister upon all of them, without hope or desire of receiving compensation or necessarily gratitude from them in having done so.

The mark of a man of real religious faith is someone that respects and loves his Lord, as well as proving this tenet by treating his neighbor as his own, because he recognizes as few do, that the One beget many, but all of those many, all of them, must one day return to being just the One.

Government Spying Agencies

According to businessinsider.com the: "… U.S. intelligence community is vast, composed of 17 distinct organizations each operating under its own shroud of secrecy".  Additionally, businessinsider.com estimates that the classified budgets of these intelligence agencies may be as of a 2012 estimate: "… pegs the cost at about $75 billion…" which is an astonishing monetary figure.  While, in theory, these various spying agencies are accountable to someone or somebody or some government oversight committee, and in theory, operate strictly in accordance with United States Constitutional law, the truth lies far outside these boundaries.  While we can take some solace in great organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, whistleblowers, certain citizens, certain blogs, and various media outlets, as well as the Freedom of Information Act, for the most part the general public, the citizenry of this United States, is basically left in the dark in regards to domestic spying which is either unwittingly or deliberately performed against them.

Because of technology, there has never been a better time to be a spy, and the government thereby has very little interest in walking away from all its capabilities of learning just about everything of actionable value against any citizen or groups of citizens as it pretty much desires.  If would be one thing, if the government had the best interests of its citizens in mind, when it performs its domestic spying, but in actuality, primarily, the government tries to place itself into a position to which they can argue, somewhat successfully, that all this data, all this intrusion, is necessitated by their concern for the welfare of the country as well as its citizens.  Francis Bacon said long ago that: "knowledge is power," and this government absolutely knows that this is true.

When the government essentially knows everything about you in the sense of where, why, and how, then they own you, lock, stock, and smoking barrel.  When you play a game of cards and you cannot read or see your opponent's cards yet they can read and see yours, preferably without you knowing it, you cannot hope to win.  That is the situation that our citizens are in, in which, they are effectively having their Fourth Amendment rights to be secure violated in that we read: "… in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…"   Today's government relishes the fact that their extensive intrusion electronic devices in conjunction with their massive databases allows them to search, to correlate, to analyze, to track, and to document just about everything that has an electronic footprint for their own purposes.

The legitimate government of this country is meant to be for the people and by the people, but this has been subverted over time to simply mean, that the government knows best and woe unto he that should question this wisdom.  There was a time, when J. Edgar Hoover, was perhaps the most feared man in the USA, because of his position as the director of the FBI, a post which he held through Democratic as well as Republican administrations, for nearly fifty years.  Hoover was legitimately feared because he had information, lots of it, so we can only imagine what Hoover would give to be alive today with all this advanced technology at his disposal, but unfortunately for us Director Hoover is dead, yet the legacy of Hoover lives on today in the specter of all our government spying agencies, which are far more menacing, far more diabolical, far more destructive, and far, far, far, beyond the pale.

Do not be Ashamed to be Christian

Some people, wear their Christianity as a badge of honor, some do not, and some profess their faith only amongst those of a similar faith, whereas some do not, and further some when giving the opportunity to testify for their faith simply remain silent, whereas some do not.  While it is true that many of us are not gifted in our ability to proselytize or to testify about our faith, it is a form of hypocrisy to change our habits and our being in order to conform to certain social orders or to not rock the boat, or other assorted reasons of convenience.  Christianity is not meant to be convenient, Christianity is not meant to be hidden, Christianity is not meant to be testified to only when you are in some place of safety, and Christianity is not something to be turned on and off like a light switch.  You are either a Christian, a real Christian, or you are not, and those that feel shame when given the opportunity to speak truthfully of their love for our Savior, have done immeasurable harm to themselves as well as to those that weren't able to feel the warmth of their witness.

Unfortunately, too many of us live lives of conformity, to which we want to be polite, to not stand apart, to not be a bother, so consequently we adjust our habits and mindset to match perceived social customs of the day.  That type of wrongheadedness does not produce a man of real worth, because only a person that is alive in the spirit can go against the flow, whereas those that are dead have no choice but to go with the flow.  While there is nothing wrong with being humble in your faith, or shy in your countenance, a true Christian should always have the resolution that when something abuts up against their faith that they will not abandoned it out of mere convenience or cowardice. 

The essence of being a Christian is that you do recognize that you are beholden to a Higher Power.   We read in Mark 8:38: "Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed…"  A Christian cannot have it both ways, either you are Christian and your faith is a true foundation to build upon, or you are shifting sand, lukewarm, and an abomination because of your hypocrisy to the faith.  True Christianity is not a "get a free pass to Heaven" card; it is instead an eternal commitment to Christ in spirit, words, and in action. 

As a Christian, you are given the responsibility to be accountable for your actions and deeds, both implicit and explicit.  While there are some so-called Christians that turned their back on Christ, when really put to the test, there are many others who abandon Christ through thousands upon thousands of little, minute missteps, always intending to do the right thing at some unspecified future date, but never getting around to it, all because of convenience, or possibly because you are caught up in this world, or really because you believe that you are a Christian, but not one of those kind of Christians, where you have to be a servant to anyone, because, for example, washing an impoverished person's feet is something that is disgusting, even shameful.

“The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.” -- Voltaire

According to Wikipedia.org: "In the 29th annual List of global billionaires, a record 1,826 billionaires were named with an aggregated net worth of $7.05 trillion…"  Whereas according to globalissues.org: "Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day."  The fact of the matter is, wealth cannot be created out of thin air, while it can in many countries and families be passed rather easily from one generation to another, and/or be taken from other people or organizations through outright State-sponsored theft; wealth does not create itself, it is created by some sort of labor, and most probably financial legerdemain.

Those that have become extremely rich by creating something of value like to fool themselves by contending or believing that we live in a world that consists of "an economic invisible hand" that somehow produces a fair equilibrium in regards to products and pricing, to which they, these particular skillful game players, are able to profit fairly from.  While it might be comforting to believe that each person is given a truly equal opportunity to be successful, in actuality a significant amount of people born into this world, have virtually no hope of ever rising from the abject poverty that they are born into.

In one way or another, the rich depend upon the abundant supply of the poor so that they can utilize them and to exploit them, which allows them to become rich in the first place, or to maintain their wealth, if they already have it.  There are very few people in this world that are entirely self-sufficient, that is to say, each of us needs food, shelter, clothing, electricity, plumbing, and well, the internet, of which none of these things just appear out of nowhere, as if by magic.  Because a lot of what we utilize can simply be purchased, a disconnect is created between the real cost of these goods in sweat labor, in comparison to what they simply cost us in ready money.  This means that the creature comforts that we often take for granted, often consist of millions upon millions of poor people behind the scenes, unknowable to us, and/or their resources that have been either exploited or simply just taken.

The reason why the moneyed elite do not have a vested interest in the elimination of poor people and/or people that is dependent upon their largess, is because their wealth would dissipate quickly.  The access to cheap labor and also cheap or undervalued resources are absolutely critical in keeping the superrich--super-wealthy.    This wealth also allows these privileged people to essentially rule their domain as they best see fit, and to become untouchable, and sometimes even championed.

The wealth of a country such as America, in so many instances, is based upon the outright exploitation and the taking of labor as well as resource wealth from countries around the world, often having regimes that are easily placated or soothed so as to allow this plucking to take place.  The rich understand the value of living to the adage that you can shear a sheep many times but you can only slaughter it once.  The poor of this world are those sheep, often ill-educated, ill-fed, ill-sheltered, but typically given just enough to live another day, and given too just enough hope to believe that meaningful change might actually come,  never suspecting that their end has already been pre-determined from the beginning.

Where was Jesus from the ages of 13 through 30?

We read in Luke 2 that: "… when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem… And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers…. And he said unto them, how is it that ye sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?"  So, we find that at age 12, Jesus was well aware of his earthly mission and of his purpose and understood exactly who his Father was, yet we are led to believe by many Biblical authorities that Jesus from the ages of 13 through 30, spent his time and his activities as a carpenter with his earthly father.  While it is certainly possible that Jesus did so, with the exception of some scriptural passages that imply that the population knew him as a carpenter's son and as a Nazarene, this general belief by the public could just as well have come from the fact that as a child, Jesus grew up in Nazarene and that his earthly father was a carpenter.

When it comes to the missing years of Jesus life, one must ask yourself the basic question, as to how do people become great lawyers, or great doctors, or great composers, and the only logical answer is that they become so by hours and hours and years of learning, listening, applying, and much dedicated practice and work.  It isn't possible to become a great master of anything without sitting at the feet of those that have accomplished these things themselves, and testing your knowledge and your skills against those that have the insight to help guide you and to correct you.  For those that accept Jesus as the Christ, as the Son of the living God, how is it even conceivable to believe that the Christ would waste away his time as a mere carpenter for eighteen long years?  I suppose the answer could be that God works in mysterious ways or to show the humility of the Christ, but neither of these is satisfactory, whatsoever.

In point of fact, to become the Christ, to become the savior, is not only an act of obedience and surrender to God, but also necessitates the mastering of this particular skill-set to the highest possible degree so as to later conduct his Father's business without error or fault.  This type of divine expertise must be nurtured and developed over a considerable period of time, as they that believe that one is simply born into greatness are hopelessly misguided, as greatness is something achieved only through perseverance, consistency, application, and guidance.

While we may not know physically where Jesus was from the ages of 13 through 30, we do know for a certainty that during those years, he was activity pursuing his Father's business so as to master his trade and to become both the son of Man as well as being the son of God.  One would do well to acknowledge that the earthly plane is not the same as the heavenly plane, and that the earthly brain is not the same as the omnipotent and omniscience God of the universe, the God of all creation, the Alpha and the Omega.  In actuality, to be the Christ, necessitates the disciplining of the physical body, as well as the emptying from the mind of one's ego, with the replacement of this with divine wisdom.   This is the only way that Jesus the Christ could become God manifest.

The Police Back the Status Quo

It has been said that government is force, and for those that doubt this, just look at the power that any given police department has within its community in its ability to confront, interrogate, disrupt, and arrest just about anyone that it so desires, understanding that in virtually all circumstances that these specific police force actions and policies will be back by the powers-to-be.  The police force does the things that it does within a community not so much because it is a power unto itself, but more akin to that there is an implied understanding as to what actions that the police may take that are desired or considered desirable by the status quo.  This means that while we can rail against injustices performed by police officers within our community, ultimately little or nothing will change, unless those that control those forces, sometimes little known, make it a policy to do so.

While we might like to think that our police force is really here to "protect and to serve" its community, the reality of the situation is, that the police force answers mainly to those that have the money, power, and authority over them, and these influential people may well have a diametrically different viewpoint of what they wish their police force to accomplish within a given community.  While it may be true that a notorious case can become a nationwide cause célèbre, as well as it can be true that certain media outlets can focus attention on particular outrageous police actions, for the most part, to effect real long-lasting change within your community in regards to police force actions and its attendant mindset, there must be a change of perspective from those that have the ultimate power over the situation.

This means that if you are not part of the status quo, that if you are not part of the city council, or the city manager, or the county executive, or the city commission, or the mayor, and assuming that any of these positions are the effective manager(s) of the police force, your power as an individual citizen to effect change is virtually negligible.  For instance, the one thing that any competent police force is good about doing is following structure, rules, bureaucratic paperwork, and order; which means that the appropriate civil authority which is the administrator to the police force has the power to mold such a force in such a way so as to have the police behave in a way that it is acceptable to community standards.

While it is convenient to lay all of the blame of excessive police brutality, violence, discrimination, unequal application of the law, at the feet of the police officers themselves, in actuality, you would be far better to lay the blame to where it should be, upon the shoulders of the status quo that actively encourage and abet this behavior by police officers within their community.  The fact of the matter is, federal law trumps state or city or county law, and all the civil rights that citizens essentially need are contained within the 14th amendment to our Constitution, which states that all persons are entitled to equal protection of the law as well as the due process of law. 

If, in fact, the application of law is discriminatory within your community, recognize that the real enemy is often not the police, for these are best seen as messengers of your community law; the actual enemy instead is those that mastermind the police force, becoming a law above Constitutional law.

The Opium Hypocrisy

The usage of the opium poppy for pain tolerance and its general euphoric effects has probably been around since the consciousness of mankind was first formed.  Even though, the opium poppy is still cultivated and used today legally through pharmaceutical companies that produce opiate drugs such as oxycodone or vicodin or hydrocodone or codeine as well as methadone or morphine or similar, the opium poppy and its derivatives are for the most part demonized by the United States Federal government as a Schedule II narcotic which is regulated by the government.  This means in a nutshell that the usage of opiates is managed and controlled by the US Government in conjunction with medical authorities so that any abuse of the above products is subject to penalties, civil fines, and/or criminal prosecution. As for heroin this is considered to be a schedule I narcotic and is illegal in any of its forms in the United States with significant penalties associated with its illicit usage.   

The hypocrisy of the United States can be essentially demonstrated by the fact that the opium poppy is fine to be utilized as an appropriate medicine if it has been prescribed to you by a medical authority, but if on the other hand, you should try to utilize the opium poppy yourself, without prescription, you are in essence, a criminal, even if there may be mitigating circumstances for your usage of opium.  The basic reason why this is hypocrisy is the sheer quantity of Americans that are prescribed opiates in the first place, as reported by abcnews.com in 2011: "The United States makes up only 4.6 percent of the world's population, but consumes 80 percent of its opioids."  What this really tells us, is that opioid prescriptions in America are undoubtedly overprescribed, abused, and are readily available to certain segments of the population for specious reasons, and ultimately profit for the pharmaceutical companies.  While it is certainly true that opioid prescriptions are necessary and of immense value to patients as a whole, the corollary is also true that deceitful patients do take advantage of their ability to receive access to the opioids whereas others on the outside are essentially heavily penalized for their apparent inability to "game" the system and thereby suffer the consequences of that failure.

It appears that when it comes to the opium poppy in the United States, that governmental authorities recognize the importance and strength that opioids provide to the population for pain control, pain relief, and general blissfulness, so consequently legal opioids are both heavily marketed as well as distributed in America through approved governmental sanctioned regulations.  Additionally, pharmaceutical companies recognize the great profit that they can make from the selling of these drugs, to which IMS Health estimated that:”In 2011, U.S. sales of prescription painkillers amounted to $9 billion."  All of this essentially means that while on the one hand, the United States spends a considerable amount of money attempting to eradicate, interdict, and to destroy the opium poppy in countries all around the world, on the other hand, it maintains its own opium poppy distribution chain in order to synthesize the chemicals necessary to create derivatives from the poppy that ultimately produces the painkilling prescription pills that its denizens consume at record levels. 

So it would appear that as long as our government, its agencies, and its multi-national pharmaceutical companies make their coin, and unauthorized countries and individuals do not, that we have paid proper homage to "the business of America is business."

Residential Streets

Different communities have different rules when it comes down to residential streets, all dependent on so many factors that there is a lack of uniformity.  That, however, doesn't mean that there shouldn’t be an ideal standard for residential streets now and into the future.  When it comes to residential streets, there are several factors that come into play, things such as the speed of the vehicles along with safety of the pedestrians, parking on the street or not, and sidewalks, to mention some of the largest issues.  Another very important factor, is the fact that land costs money, so from a development standpoint, if one can develop residential streets that are, for instance, 32 feet across, rather than 36 feet across, the developer of the residential community will be able to be more efficient in the usage of that land, and in all likelihood, be able to pass along to its consumers the cost savings, thereof, so that the width of streets most definitely has a cost factor involved.

When it comes to residential streets, at a minimum those streets must be able to allow traffic to flow in both directions, as one-way streets in residential sections is simply too restrictive and undesirable.  Additionally, there must be a discussion as to on-the-street parking, to wit, allowing cars to park on either side of the street is most desirable, since it favors neither side, and also depending on the location of the residence, it may be necessary to mandate parking permits in the neighbor so as to cut down on unsolicited visitors from using residential streets as their preferred free parking location, for work, for school, or whatever, as well as encouraging the residents themselves to park their vehicles in either their garage and/or driveway so as to leave the street essentially free to true residential visitors, only.

Additionally, with very few exceptions, there should be sidewalks within a neighborhood, because without sidewalks, those walking, running, walking their dogs or whatever, will be walking out into the street, and/or possibly trespassing on a neighbor's lawn.  In order to use space efficiently, though, only one side of the street needs to have a sidewalk, as one sidewalk should be sufficient to accommodate pedestrians.  Also, to cut down on the speed of vehicles for the protection of pedestrians, some neighborhoods like to use speed humps, which ideally should never be used on flat surfaces but only in cases in which the road is sloping downwards in order to slow down the vehicle as necessary. 

An ideal residential street would be one with one sidewalk, parking on both sides of the street, and wide enough that two cars can easily pass each other on the street when there are no vehicles parked on the street, but, however, when there is a car parked on the street, one car must yield the right of way to the other.  Today, with the cost of land so high, there isn't a need or justification for two sidewalks, nor for a street to be so wide so as to easily accommodate traffic flow in either direction, even with cars parked on either side of the street.  The fact of the matter is a narrower street will for the most part allow residents to be about their business without any noticeable downside, yet still providing all the desirable things that a good residential street should have, all with the understanding, that for the vast majority of the time, there won't be any undue inconvenience.  

Mandatory Retirement Age

In an era to which more and more people are working for government agencies, it is important to recognize that in some of those government jobs, mandatory retirement is a fact of life.  Not only will good and experienced individuals lose their employment, solely based on their numerical age, but the overall age for mandatory retirement, in an epoch to which people are living longer and longer quality lives, is ridiculously low.  For instance, state and federal police, firefighters, air traffic controllers, and airline pilots are all subject to mandatory retirement between the ages of 55-60, even though the continued life expectancy at that age is approximately another twenty-five additional years.

While it is true that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not permit mandatory retirement of workers in the private field, except under very specific conditions, that does not mean that in function as well as in action, that these workers too aren't subject to discrimination and/or pressure to retire at an age earlier than they so desire.  The problem that older workers have when they are laid off, replaced, or encouraged into early retirement, is twofold; one is that they will normally continue to live for a considerable period of time and if they do not have the savings, and/or affordable healthcare, and/or enough social security or pension benefits, they will not have the necessary income to sustain their lifestyle; also the additional issue with older workers is despite all the laws on the books about the illegality of discrimination against elder workers, the fact of the matter is, most older workers after losing employment, will not be able to find a suitable or replacement job at or near their previous employment salary, despite their years of experience, reliability, and wealth of knowledge.

All people do not age at the same rate, nor do all people have the same maturity, work ethics, vision, health, wisdom and other attributes, so that to arbitrarily take a certain age, and to declare to that person, that they are no longer of worth to a particular company or agency is hypocrisy.  In general, there should not be a mandatory retirement age in any job or any sector, although it is reasonable to assume in some jobs that involve the maintaining of safety for others, that a periodic testing of the applicable skills of a given employee in order to sustain their current employment would be reasonable.  Additionally, just because an employee fails a test, should not terminate that employee, as there should be reasonable access available for another position within that governmental agency, that could still utilize that particular person's experience and skill but without negatively impacting the quality of the service provided by the overall government agency as a whole.

While it is true that most people want to reach a time or an age when they can walk away from their employment so as to enjoy their sunset years, most of those employees do not want to be compelled to do so before their time, especially considering that they have the experience, the knowhow, and the mindset to provide good and competent service to their agency on behalf of the people.

Guardian Angels

It doesn't matter what your religious belief or faith is, or whether you consciously have faith in a higher being or not, or where you were born, because in all circumstances for everyone, in every case, there are guardian angels that are there with us, to comfort us, to guide us, and to succor us.  This does not mean that guardian angels run our lives, our make our decisions, or rule the world, because God has gifted each one of us with free will and that therefore we are not automatons, so that our free will, our decisions, truly trumps all.  However, God, out of his great love for us, never abandons us alone to our own devices, instead he sends out to each of us guardian angels, that help to guide us and in truly exceptional cases directly come to our aid.

For many people, there is a suspension of disbelief that any unearthly power at any time could possibly influence or be a part of our lives, but that is simply because their vision is trapped within the deception that all there ever is -- is physical.  The best way to look upon our guardian angels is to equate them to a great teacher or to our loving parents.  The fact of the matter is our earthly parents cannot be with us 24/7, yet, they truly want us to be protected by them at all times, whereas our guardian angels have no distractions, and have no need for sleep or rest, so that they can monitor and aid us at any time of the day. 

Your conscious mind can drive away the voice of your guardian angels at any time, at any juncture, but often you will feel the tugging of conscience at yourself for having done so.  An even easier way to push aside your guardian angels is to enslave yourself to substance abuse, so as to drown out their voices, or to give in to temper tantrums, or to your ego, or to selfishness in such a manner as to ignore voices of reason and love.  Man, ever can walk away from light, even to his own destruction, as that is the nature of man's law.

Each of us has a purpose here on earth and our guardian angels are forever assisting us in trying to maintain and to achieve our objectives, as they wish for nothing more than to see us successful in our endeavors.  The best way to listen to your guardian angel is through calmness and the incumbent desire for their infinite wisdom, as their voices are never silent; we only have to truly open ourselves to hear their words and to act upon them.

There are too extraordinary situations where guardian angels will save you from physical damage or harm, often without you being consciously aware of it, as it actually happens, but only upon quiet reflection will their actions begin to be felt deep within your being.  A guardian angel can do nothing for he who would jump off a high cliff, with the mistaken belief that God will catch him; whereas, for someone through happenstance, should stumble by a high cliff in such a manner as to bring the possibility of great physical harm, may find themselves saved at the last moment by a branch that just happens to be in the right place at the right time.

Our guardian angels are ever with us, never judging us, and are reflections of God's unceasing and unyielding love for those that He created in His image.

Eyesight

Probably the most common handicap that people have is the need for eyeglasses so as to correct our vision so that our vision is clear.  It is estimated by the Vision Council of America, that approximately 75% of Americans need some sort of vision correction.  As you might well imagine, for those over 50 years old, that percentage increases appreciably, to somewhere around 90%.  While there are many theories put forth as to why so many of us need glasses, such as the vision stress of modern day technology, in which so often our eyes are glued to computer screens, or smart phones; as well as the nature of our work, which instead of being of the 'hunter-gatherer" type, we are alas too often stuck with jobs performed under artificial lights, and thereby the necessitating of the constant focus on objects that are near to us, as opposed to taking in the panorama of the outdoors world.  For whatever it is, the amount of people necessitating vision correction is staggering, and it is a blessing that we have so many options to help correct, maintain, or to improve our vision available to us.

While it is said that exercise is good for the physical body, we probably need to more carefully look into the proper care and maintenance of our eyes.  For instance, some optometrists recommend a simple routine of for every twenty minutes of up-close focus that you perform, that you should then take a twenty second break and focus on some distant object, so as to keep your eyes more limber in their focusing ability.  Additionally, it is important to practice consistent blinking so as to not dry out unnecessarily the moisture for your eyes and unduly strain them.

It is amazing, how much that we take our eyesight for granted, when if you think about it, the productivity and lifestyle of so many individuals would be damaged significantly without the aid and usage of corrective lenses.  The invention of aids to improve one's vision has apparently been around since at least the 13th century probably because those that suffered from poor vision recognized that they had a need to improve that vision in order to successfully function within society, and subsequently were able to discover that convex-shaped glass was able to improve one's eyesight.

In today's modern world, the lack of corrective lenses to improve your vision is extremely debilitating as so much of what is required from us on a given day, necessitates the ability to focus on objects close to us so as to manipulate them or to properly utilize them.   It is extremely fortunate that corrective lenses are available to us at such a low cost for what they provide to us in return, because an inability to focus and to see the world as it is, negates our powers of observation, and truly handicaps us.

As the truism goes, you truly don't appreciate something until you lose it, and those that use corrective lenses to correct their vision, certainly appreciate that aid, perhaps spending little time though, truly appreciating just how absolutely vital that it really is.

Dual Income Married CouplesToday vs. Two Generations Ago

According to TED: The Economics Daily, for married couples: "53 percent had earnings from both the wife and the husband in 2011, compared with 44 percent in 1967. Couples in which only the husband worked represented 19 percent of married-couple families in 2011, versus 36 percent in 1967."  This means that from a percentage basis that in 2011 there was an increase of just over 20% of married couples in which both partners were working than was previously seen in 1967. Additionally, in comparison of 1967 for married couples to 2011, the husband was the sole earner at nearly a 90% greater rate than 2011.  If we were to simply look at this information, and nothing else, our conclusion would be that because that there are more dual-income married couples today, that the material worth and/or the disposal income in constant US dollars of these couples must be better than their 1967 counterparts, but in actuality that isn't the case.

In point of fact, rather than looking at the increase of dual income married couples as being of great benefit for the couples themselves, from both a financial as well as a self-worth perspective, it is too often been, more often a perceived necessity for these couples that both adults work just to make ends meet.  What has occurred in the interim from 1967 to 2011, is several-fold, for instance, both the size as well as the price of housing has gone up considerably since the 1960s, so that the amount of money being needed to budget for a home for rental or purchase has increased markedly.  Additionally, two-income families have had to spend considerable more money on vehicles and their incumbent insurance, because usually both workers need to have their own car.  If, these couples also have children, they then need too to pay for childcare.  Also, because the income tax is graduated, the more that you make, the greater that percentage that has to be sacrificed for federal as well as state taxes; in addition to tax rates overall having gone up, this should also include the increases for both sales tax as well as property tax rates.  Furthermore, the access to easy credit, as in credit cards, is considerably higher than in 1967, signifying for a considerable portion of married couples, additional bills and interest payments that were pretty much unknown two generations ago.  Finally too, healthcare as well as college costs have soared from 1967, with often married couples, having to budget their funds to pay back their college loans that have reached staggering amounts exceeding the high five figures or more.

While there are many married couples that have no interest in returning to a time when the man was traditionally the one to be the breadwinner and the woman stayed at home, that option, in any variation, for many married couples, isn't even available any more.  Today's married couples need both incomes just to keep their heads above water, meaning that if either worker loses their job, that they are up against it; whereas years ago, with one adult held back in reserve, there was always available to that married couple, the opportunity to increase their wages seasonally, periodically, or in times of urgency.

Today's married couple's work harder than ever before, but too often their harvest is paltry.

America's Free Press

The 1st Amendment to our Constitution permits Americans to have both free speech as well as a free press.  This right is of critical importance because if the government or its agencies determines what is or is not printed, than the public is not being served with the information that they need in order to formulate valid decisions.  For instance, before our revolution, papers printing news that was damaging or critical to the government or its authorities were subject to the charge of seditious libel, which meant imprisonment or fines or both.  Samuel Adams stated in 1768 that: "There is nothing so fretting and vexatious, nothing so justly TERRIBLE to tyrants, and their tools and abettors, as a FREE PRESS."

At the time our 1st Amendment was enacted, modern devices such as the radio, television, the internet, smart phones, and the like, didn't exist, and along with the fact that the transportation and distribution of newspapers or pamphlets was for the most part, both difficult and expensive, this meant that  the news printed was typically local just within the community, and that therefore that news had to be both pertinent as well as accurate, because the readers of said paper would know the difference.  That may have been then, but that isn't necessarily true today.

Today, we proudly proclaim that our press and mass media are still free and protected by our 1st Amendment, while the distribution of news throughout America is, in fact, range bound by the two dominant political parties of America, as well as having to be in accordance for the most part with governmental and corporate desires.  While the NY Times proudly displays on its masthead:  "All the News that's fit to Print," this statement is an absolute absurdity.  The NY Times is known for its liberal bias and deliberately promotes this agenda in contradistinction to conservative viewpoints.  

In fact, whether you get your news from a major television network or newsprint or a magazine, in all and each of these areas, there will be for a certainty a deliberate bias in favor of providing and confirming the political viewpoint desired by that particular media outlet.  The business of the press at this point, is not at all to provide all the news that is fit to print, but to provide just the news that fits within the mindset of that outlet.

The information that we receive from the press today, is filtered and given to us in such a way, as to be most pleasing to the corporate ownership of the news organization, which needs to satisfy its advertisers in order to receive that much needed monetary boost from them, as well as the power brokers of its ownership, which must do its best to enhance its stock price, and ultimately sees the public that is buying into its wares, as mindless consumers, who must be and are easily manipulated.

For those that are truly desiring of a free press, unfortunately, you will not find that in any of the mass media outlets of today, who exist primarily for the purposes of selling you propaganda, but instead you must seek it through alternate sources, such as individuals that you respect, bloggers, some books, radio, and other print media, as well as a personal willful determination to both question authority and to dig beneath the surface.

Abandonment and Divorce in America

In pre-Civil war times, marriage was often seen as an institution that was subject to the invocation of Mark 10:9, to wit: "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder," and consequently divorces were not given for frivolous reasons nor were they easy to obtain by government or religious authority.  This means that marriages of earlier generations were quite often until "till death do us part," unlike today's "no-fault" divorces and the more relaxed mores of modern society.  However, while it may be an absolute certainty that divorces have increased substantially in America since those times, there were ways to effectively divorce in the 1800s which did not involve the trouble of necessitating official documents to reflect this fact. 

For instance, in the 1800s it was far more common, even the norm, to essentially live within the bounds of your local community for your entire life, so that those that traveled far enough away from their birthplace, and that might only be 100 miles or even less, could begin their life anew in a different community, and under different circumstances than their previous livelihood.  This means, that for some husbands, trapped in an unhappy marriage, or simply not wishing to remain in an undesirable situation, that the abandonment of one's wife and his attendant family responsibilities, was an option that some men took advantage of, which, in effect, accomplished the same purpose as a divorce but without any of the backlash of religious or societal condemnation.

So that when studying the statistics of divorce from generations ago and comparing them to the divorce rates of today, one must understand that there was a significantly higher degree of what was in essence the equivalent of divorce by abandonment, along with in all probability, a much higher incident of bigamy, to which one party would typically not be completely aware of undisclosed peculiar circumstances.  Consider that Andrew Jackson, our seventh President of the United States, unbeknownst to himself "married" Rachel Donelson in 1791, only to discover rather inconveniently that his wife had not been legally divorced from her husband who had separated from his wife, previously, whereupon ultimately a legal divorce was finalized under the grounds of adultery, and they were legally married in 1794.

Another important fact to remember, is that the law in regards to divorce, was much more amendable to those that had the money, connections, and the time to effect changes as they might desire back in the 1800s, as compared to most people of that day that were consume with their work and family duties, so as to not have any excess monies available to pursue a divorce, even under reasonable grounds such as adultery or desertion or similar. 

The no-fault divorce laws of today, makes it fairly straightforward to get a divorce from your spouse, if that is your desire, even if your spouse is adamantly opposed to it; whereas in earlier times, a divorce for the common man was often not easily achievable, and had its incumbent society ill-after taste, so that often times, it would be much more conducive to simply abandon your spousal duties and move on to another town so as to begin anew, which essentially served the purpose that you had aspire to have done in the first place, for better or for worse.

Why Trading is So Vital

The typical way that most people in America are compensated for work is by the payment of cash or cash equivalent.  While there are people that will claim that they never trade at all, in fact, trading is part and parcel of our everyday life, for example, we trade the money that we make to purchase goods and services.  Although most people look upon this as not being a trade, it is a very basic form of trading, where we are exchanging one thing that represents value for another thing that we need or desire.   Trading is a very vital part of American life, because the efficiencies and logistics of America, allows certain industries and locations to effectively produce goods at prices that are substantially below what some other part of the country could provide, if they were even able to provide the good or service at all.  The overall arching reason why goods are so affordable in America is the fact that "the invisible hand" of capitalism makes it so.

Nowadays, of course, the world has become a much smaller place, so that international dealing and trading is vital for any country of real worth.  For instance, a lot of the economic growth that has been achieved by Southeastern Asian countries is fundamentally because they are exporting their goods to rich countries such as America.  Americans are the beneficiaries of this trade because they receive goods at a cheaper price than they could be produced domestically and the foreign countries benefit because they are able to keep both their countrymen employed as well as the being the recipients of additional monies into their country.

In an ideal world, the best trading is done from strength to strength, that is to say, if the particular climate and technological knowhow as well as the labor forces are favorable to produce agricultural products within a particular geographic center of the world that is probably the right thing to do.  At the same time, if another area of the world has large mineral wealth, than that part of the country would best lend itself to maximizing the worth of those natural resources.  So that, if can be said, that it is typically of more economic value to specialize and to work upon the things that you are best suited for, as compared to trying to be all things to all men.

However, we don't actually live in an ideal world, and natural resources, brain resources, monetary resources, weather and geographical locations, have not all been equally provided to all countries in equal amounts.  That is why some trades are inherently unfair, such as the trading of precious metals for trinkets, and other nonsense from generations ago.  Yet, the nature of man doesn't change, so those that have knowledge and foresight typically have the upper hand over those that have neither of these, and consequently those that get the short-hand of the trading deal, suffer for it.

The way that trading should work, is that both parties should clearly benefit from the trade, that is what makes trading so vital and so good for the common welfare.   A good trader has an obligation both to be fair as well as to be honorable to the other party, anything less than that degenerates into a "hustle", which isn’t right or just.

The Importance of Regular School Attendance

It's fair to say that those who are of compulsory school age and do not attend school on a regular and consistent basis are on the path that will take them away from good employment prospects and opportunities, leaving them instead with few real good choices and a life derailed.  Each child in a country as rich as America is entitled to a good education and this education should provide to that future adult the ability to read, to write, to understand right from wrong, and to process basic mathematics, so that their education on a fundamental level permits them to be able to function at a literate baseline level in society.  It almost goes without saying, that if you don't bother to show up to school, and/or don't attend your classes in school, as well as taking the demands of school seriously, than you will not do well scholastically at school.

While there are plenty of laws and rules that demonstrate how the State is omnipotent and can make students as well as their parental authorities made to suffer for their lack of diligence to school attendance, that type of "tough love" isn't necessarily productive.  There are already way too many people that are well aware that getting onto the wrong side of governmental power is not the place that you want to be, and this does more to build up resentment as compared to corrective behavior. While there will be intransigent students and it is good to identify them early so as to possibly rectify that behavior, punishment is seldom going to be the route that will be most effective for all involved. 

As the saying goes, "a stitch in time saves nine," and with the powerful ability for governmental agencies to process and compute information, school agencies should avail themselves more often of these very tools.  That is to say, every student should be tracked to their attendance, and every absence should be duly noted and followed up within the shortest possible period of time.   So that, if a student is absent that day, parental authorities should be contacted that very same day notifying them of that absence, in conjunction with this the school system should provide absentee students with some sort of student aid mentor to help to keep them "on point" in regards to their attendance.  In addition, it's too easy for school systems to just accept any excuse as to an absence; every excuse should be scrutinized and correlated against that student.  The school system should make it vividly clear that while they understand those children that are medically sick, should be excused from school, not every student that misses school, will be found to be truly medically sick.

Over and above all things, schools should try to get to know their students, so that rather than just seeing students as one, big anonymous blob, they are instead dialed into students specific habits and proclivities.  Although schoolwork is demanding, most students, at least, initially, are willing to step up to that demand, if given the right toolset to deal with it.  The bottom line is that most students that miss school do not fill that vacuum with anything of real value, but rather fill that absence with frivolity or worse.  The schools should make it their point, to do their best to not leave anyone behind, and at a minimum provide these young charges with at least the basics to deal with the reality of a world that is far more cutthroat and foreboding.

The Anti-Smoking Joy Killing Crusade

Those that are adamant non-smokers often believe wrongly that the mere hint of tobacco smoke will kill them, or injure them in some way, and consequently this thought process gives them the moral high ground to eliminate smoking and any visages of smoking from the community at large.  The fact of the matter is that most smokers are polite; they don't deliberately blow smoke in your face, they don't deliberately go out of their way to annoy you by smoking, and most smokers are content to just be in a place where they can enjoy their cigarette break without any undue hassle, and/or to be in a place to which cigarette smoking is permitted as a matter of course.  The fact of the matter is, most smokers are respectful and simply want to enjoy their cigarette, but the unjustified crusade against them never seems to stop.

The problem with the anti-smoking crusade is that not only do these crusaders refuse to share the road with smokers; their belief is that the road of life should not contain any smokers at all.  Somehow, over time fanatical non-smokers have aggrandized to themselves the right to believe that they should make your personal decisions for you, and smoking is just one of those rights that they should decide for you.  The bottom line is people would not smoke if they did not derive some sort of pleasure or comfort or stress relief or similar from smoking, and the decision to smoke or not to smoke should be left up to the individual and not to State agencies, killjoys, or annoying do-gooders.

Life is full of all types of people, to wit, some will give you their piece of mind without any prompting whatsoever, and some will take it further and insist that they have to control your life, without ever having the common decency to understand who and what you are and not really caring about that as long as you obey them.  It is a fact, that we are individuals, and further that some individuals gravitate to certain things that might offend or bother other people, but that is their prerogative, that is their choice, and that is their lifestyle. 

Certain people complain all day about smokers and how nasty and dirty that they are, but there are endless things to complain about.  For instance, perhaps one doesn't like the smell of certain foods, or of your breath, or you have too much hair or not enough, or too much perfume, or you just smell bad, or you'rebow-legged, or your clothes don't fit right, or your accent is annoying, or your opinions are just plain wrong, and so on.  Our civilization is based on the fact that each of us has the right to be ourselves and to live the life that we want to live, and unless somehow we are breaking a meaningful law, to just be.

The anti-smoking crusaders are really just a cover for busybodies that aren't satisfied with giving unsolicited advice and warnings, but want the arm of the law, to strike smokers down, all because they believe they know best and just want smokers to shut up or to crawl into a dark hole and die.  The anti-smoking crusaders are control freaks, misguided, bigoted, prejudiced, destructive, and intolerant of the freedom of choice.

Sunday Blue Laws

Since colonial times, "blue laws" were part and parcel for a significant portion of our founding communities and towns in America.  For the most part, the purpose of these laws was to encourage the people to recognize that the Lord's Day was a special day of thanksgiving, to which, the community spokesman believed  that the Sabbath should best be spent in a worshipful attitude and demeanor, and subsequently activities that were counter to this mindset were frown upon or punished.  Today, there are still States as well as communities that do have "blue laws" on the books that are applicable to the population as a whole, irrespective of their religious persuasion or lack thereof.

While it use to be, that blue laws monitored or restricted traveling, sports activities, work, blasphemy, public displays of affection, and other assorted behaviors, nowadays, for the most part, blue laws restrict the purchase but not the consumption of alcohol, as well as the mandatory closing of certain stores on the Sabbath day, although some stores are voluntarily closed as a matter of their own policy in regards to the Sabbath.

The purpose of blue laws back when they were created and the purpose of blue laws today, are pretty much the same, which is to set aside one day of the week for worshipful prayer, church attendance, contemplation, quietude, or similar, and for that day not to be a day spent in lasciviousness or drunken activities.  That is to say, that six days of the week were set aside for mankind to accomplish and perform the activities that he so desired or were necessitated, but our Lord, asked only that we set aside one day to remember and to honor Him.

Incredibly, even the Christ was castigated for healing on the Sabbath day, but He ultimately responded with these profound words, "... The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath…"  This does not mean, that the Christ would have been against blue laws, or that He didn't appreciate the necessity and need to have periods of quiet contemplation and solitude, as Christ himself, understood that He needed to set aside specific time and places to pray.  What our Messiah was saying, in regards to the Sabbath, is that we shouldn't let the letter of the law rule over us, but only the Spirit of it, for the Sabbath or the spirit of the Sabbath was created for the benefit of mankind, and not because God mandated our blind obeisance to it.

The fact that blue laws are still in effect in some communities and even States in America, is a reminder to all, that we are not here on our own, that above us, is a loving God who wishes at all times to remind us that we are not just of the material, but that we are indeed Spirit, and made in His image.  Mankind too often speaks of his right to freedom, but seldom of his attendant obligations to his fellow man as well as to his Creator.  Blue laws should be seen as a touchstone to remind mankind that he is not here alone, and that no matter his place or particular position, God welcomes him at any hour, at any time, and appreciates when he renders sincere honor to Him.

Internet Service Provider (ISP) Spying

There are few people that would welcome someone spying on them 24/7, monitoring all their conversations, all their movements, and all their activities, as doing so would not only be a broad breach of someone's right to privacy, but also the activity of a de facto police state apparatus in action.  Yet today, it has never been easier to track someone and their proclivities, even in their own home, which certainly appears to be a direct violation of our 4th Amendment rights to be protected against "…unreasonable searches…"  Yet, in a nutshell, when we connect to the internet through our Internet Service Provider, we are, through our IP address which uniquely identifies our account with the ISP, are being tracked as to the websites that we visit and this information is kept on the ISP server logs, long after you have forgotten what websites that you visited on a given day.

There isn't any doubt that if you know the web addresses a given person visits day after day, that this information in conjunction with other "public" data about you will allow the recipient of those details to be able to construct a very accurate representation of your characteristics and your habits, and thereby to know you in a way that in the wrong hands could easily compromise or embarrass you.  Of course, your ISP will be quick to point out to you that as a condition of you using their service, you have agreed to certain Terms and Conditions, but those Terms and Conditions do not mean, that they are right, that they are legal under all circumstances, and further that the divulging of this information to government or other agencies, is some sort of nebulous benefit to our country that somehow trumps your individual constitutional rights.

Media companies have become quite annoyed at the reduction of their revenue through the illegal downloading of their copyright materials, and have taken steps to track back IP addresses that have been seen to infringe upon their property through peer-to-peer network sharing, so that they have taken upon themselves to provide this infringement information to the ISP provider, whereupon that ISP provider then sends an email "alleging a copyright violation", to the IP address on file.  This given policy seems fundamentally flawed, that is to say, if the media company knows for a certainty that a particular peer-to-peer networking connection contains their copyrighted material, they then should either seek an injunction against this activity or interdict the connection or something of a similar nature.  Instead, after the fact, they accuse the IP address holder of having copyrighted material solely based on alleged internet activity without actual verification that this is indeed true.

The bottom line, in fit and function, is that your ISP is either directly monitoring your internet activity, and/or implicitly has the power to do so, and/or implicitly gives itself the power to forward such information to government or other authorities, all as a "condition" of you, utilizing the ISP.  It would be one thing, if the ISP provided you internet connectivity free of charge, and as a condition of doing so, you voluntarily gave up your privacy rights, something akin to the usage of Facebook, but in point of fact, you are paying them good money for a service, and they are in essence, spying upon you, and, in some cases, placing you in a position, that your monitored activities will theoretically incriminate you.