The Elimination of the Male Gender

Artificial insemination is a fact of life when it comes to our most common barnyard animals, as artificial insemination allows the owner of the livestock much better control of that offspring in the sense of quality, and in the actual results meeting with desired expectations.  Of course, barnyard animals are not human beings, but in recent years, more and more human beings have been born through the steps of artificial insemination, which means, by definition, that the creation of that child was accomplished without sexual intercourse by the woman with someone of the male gender.  Additionally, it is the male sperm itself that determines whether a given child will be either male or female, to which through advanced scientific techniques the skill in sperm sorting so as to separate the "X" (female) chromosomes from the "Y" (male) chromosomes can be accomplished with impressively high success rates; as well as through other scientific tools the overall control of the gender desired by the recipient can readily be accomplished.  This means that in the order of things, instead of a very slight bias for male births in the human species, mankind now has within its means the ability to increase or to decrease those sex ratios enormously.

Since, in fact, for the most part this is a world that is dominated In power and wealth by men, one might come to the reasonable conclusion, that recent male births will have increased significantly, which it has, in countries such as China, that have been ruled by the mandate of a one child policy, to which many parents have been absolutely determined that that one child, must be male, for the basic reason that a male child will better afford those parents a more reasonable chance of being provided material aid than a female child.  This does not mean, however, that this bias for male births will always be the preference, as one could easily make the argument, that in countries to which the economic opportunities for females are nearly equal to those of males, that the pre-selection of a female would be a far better choice, since females are more inclined to be less violent, less criminally oriented, better educated, and better social creatures than males.

Additionally, in today's word, in order for a child to be birthed, one need only to have a viable sperm donation from a man, and no other direct contribution.  A woman, on the other hand, has the natural incubator for a child, her womb, and while it may be true, that in some future time, that artificial wombs might be viable for human births, it is hard to picture that as being the normal or preferred method of birthing throughout the entire world, for various reasons, amongst these being cost, moral and religious grounds, governmental or institutional control, and so on.  On the other hand, artificial insemination of a female is viable, effective, portable, and scalable worldwide.

In short, this means, that mankind has reached an intriguing tipping point, and there is not a little doubt, that the ratio of males to female births will change from its historic norms, and while most pundits might believe that the ratio will clearly be one of more males to females, one might easily argue, that in a world to which it is often said that there are not enough resources to go around, to which men have often been quick to take up the sword to take and to conquer, that a more feminine spin might make for a more benevolent and caring world.

Should Non-Profit Colleges Pay Property Taxes?

For fiscal year 2013, Harvard University had an operating revenue amount of a staggering $4.2 billion dollars to which, to the best of my knowledge, they paid no property taxes for their campus located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, because they are a non-profit Higher Educational Institution.  Yet, it goes without saying that the property that Harvard rests upon is worth millions upon millions of dollars, so while Harvard gets a free ride, the surrounding areas of Cambridge, have to pay more than their fair share of property taxes for the privilege of living or doing business in the greater Cambridge area.  It would be one thing, if Harvard or other non-profit Colleges did not avail themselves of any of the benefits provided by the paying of property taxes, but instead we can state for a certainty that Harvard does indeed utilize the typical municipal services that other businesses and property owners have to pay money for with their property taxes.

The foregoing does not mean that Harvard or other non-profit colleges are the "bad guys", it is merely meant to point out that property taxes as currently structured are inherently unfair to those that are compelled to pay them and the structure of who should or shouldn't and how much they should or shouldn't pay in property taxes should definitely be reviewed.  It is one thing to say that certain non-profits should not pay anything in property taxes because of the nature of the services that they provide to the community, or perhaps due to the small size of the institution, or perhaps their small endowment, or perhaps their lack of money because money is not their purpose; as opposed to institutions, such as Harvard, that have massive endowments, massive amounts of capital, and massive budgets, that easily could conceivably pay some amount of monies in property taxes.

Another point to be made when it comes to property taxes is that there isn't any real good reason, why any non-profit college, should get an endless pass in not paying property taxes, forever.  Further to this point, while not exactly ideal, there isn't any good reason why non-profits shouldn't, at a minimum, pay some sort of property tax, even if such a tax is at a lower rate than the surrounding homes and businesses pay at.  At least, having done so, that college, can state, that they too are contributing to the infrastructure that benefits them and helps to bring more fairness to all, across the board.

While it is a truism, that nobody really wants to pay taxes, there is also an assumption, when it comes to paying taxes, that all are paying their fair share.  This simply is not the case in regards to non-profit colleges and their lack of paying property taxes, as if they should be treated perpetually as a special non-paying property tax class within the community.   While in a general sense, most non-profit colleges are seen to be a "good neighbor", they can be even a better neighbor by contributing their fair share to the community in property taxes, as the community as a whole, deserves that consideration.

Religious Holy War

We are again living in an age of religious Holy wars, as contrasted to wars from the previous century that while definitely differentiating between the forces of "us" vs. the forces of "them", weren't fought for the sake of the satiation of their respective god, but typically for the aggrandizement of one nation in conjunction with the forceful oppression of another nation and its people. Most of the time within any war, there is almost always a call to demonize the opposition in order to fire up your troops. When this is combined with the color of religion, so as to act as some sort of moral justification for your declaration of war, the boundaries of decency are often crossed.  Often too, through the apparent sanction of your religion, this "holy war" will become a sort of divine retribution against infidels, or apostates, or "blue-eyed devils", or savages.  If you then add the supposed awards that will be bestowed upon your "freedom fighters", that if not in this world, but in the world to come, will soon be theirs, you have the makings of fanaticism.  Further to this point, if your call to arms, is based around the protection of your people and its beliefs, along with the communal sounding call being rung against those that you are led to believe are on the cusp of wresting those very things away from you and your family, you very well might felt obligated to stop at nothing and to contemplate doing just about anything to protect your own and to avenge your people.

While one nation fighting against another nation may become satiated and satisfied at some point, or even to willingly go to the negotiation table to come to terms, those that believe that their calling is both divine and pre-ordained are not likely to stop short of annihilation or physical death.  This means that those that claim to speak for God or for a prophet of God in such a manner, that their ultimate objective is that you either must surrender to their particular faith and its attendant ideology, or if not, be put to the sword is both fundamentally flawed but also, by definition, in ethical error.

There is no legitimate religion, nor any interpretation of a legitimate religion, that has as its core premise, that you must believe in its tenets to such an extent that your free will and your free choice must be suppressed to a manner that makes you an automaton or a mindless puppet.  A man, is not made to be trained as an animal or to yield his mind to others for nefarious purposes, because the purpose of a man is made to serve God and his fellow mankind as an equally created being, and not to destroy mankind or to corrupt the love of an immutable God.

Christ as well as other great prophets has made it clear, that their kingdom is not of this world.  Man fights for what?  So that one man can rule or take from another man, and all for what?  So that one man has more possessions than another?  So that one man can command that all others believe some certain dogma, willingly or not, but in the end this gets you what?  All of this killing, all of this strife, all of this misery and hatred, will not bring you peace, not in this world, and certainly not in the next.  Satan offered Christ dominion over all earthly kingdoms, yet He did not take it, He could not, because Christ knew that earth is a proving ground and nothing more. 

There is never a need or a good reason for a religious Holy war on this earth and there never will be.  Our Creator is sovereign of all and is never in danger whatsoever; His only wish is that we listen to that still small voice inside of us that tells us that we are all sons and daughters, created by the same Hand of God.

Religion and the Presidency

There are way too many pundits that try to impress upon the general public today, that in America, there is a wall of separation between State and religion, but this has never been the status of America, and would, in fact, be a bastardization of what America represents, what the Declaration of Independence represents, what the Constitution represents, and what historically the various Presidents of the United States have represented in both words as well as in actions.  America is not a secular State, it never has been, and, in fact, a careful reading of the First Amendment makes it quite clear, that the government was by law not allowed to establish a religion and thereby to force a compulsory religion upon the people, for the protection of the people, so that the people, themselves, were allowed the right to freely exercise their religious beliefs as they best saw fit.

The Presidency represents the Executive branch of our government and is often seen as the symbol of America to not only its own people but to the world itself.  This means that the words and beliefs of our President is of significant relevance especially to its citizens, so that a proper viewpoint of our Presidency must take into account the President's religious views and his beliefs as a de facto representation of the people themselves.  When we look back at the Presidents of the United States, we find that every President, without exception, has professed his belief in the beneficence and providence of our God.  President Washington stated in his First Inaugural Address, "…that the propitious smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained."  President Lincoln stated in his last public address of April 11, 1865, "The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond, and the surrender of the principal insurgent army, give hope of a righteous and speedy peace whose joyous expression cannot be restrained. In the midst of this, however, He, from Whom all blessings flow, must not be forgotten."  President Eisenhower upon accepting the Republican nomination in 1956 said: "Every tomorrow has two handles. We can take hold of it with the handle of anxiety or the handle of faith."

Each President of the United States has had a choice, to turn their back upon religion, and to impress upon the people themselves, that religion and religious belief have no part in America, yet none have done so.  I submit that they have not done so for many reasons, such as that they have all recognized that America has been a nation blessed by God Himself, that a nation that denies its God, will destroy the very edifice which enables America to be great, and that a people that has no God, has no moral compass whatsoever.

The cries that we hear so often from the secular media and its apologists are the cry that America needs no God because we are all gods unto ourselves; that a nation without god means a nation of total freedom and of no oppression, when in fact, it would be a nation of no freedom and total oppression.  The wise Founding Fathers and the Presidents of the United States recognized that in our belief in God, that we have wisely chosen the sole belief and surest foundation that will enable us to be set upon that hill and to become that beacon of light that not only will bring the light to our people, but will shine brightly throughout the entire world; whereas the denial or forsaking of our Creator, will bring abject misery, utter desolation, and total darkness to mankind

Islamic Sharia Law

Every nation, if it is to be considered not to be a rogue nation, is a nation filled with laws.  However, these laws must not be arbitrary or capricious in nature; they must be instead of a reasonable nature, equally applied to all and consistent with natural law as well as the reasoned revelation of God's law.  The invoking of God when it comes to law, is something that brings unease to certain peoples along with people and countries having different interpretations of what God's law is in the first place, but know this that God in His essence is always a force for the common good and no respecter of persons.  It is of vital importance to understand too, that law must have its foundation in a principle that is unchanging, immutable, and correct, for that law to be of truth.  This means that those that believe that mankind is the measure of all things, will never be able to bring true justice and law into the courts of life, because mankind devoid of any divine light, is unable to correctly and thoroughly comprehend just law because he reasons from error to error. 

Islamic Sharia law at its core uses both the Quran and the Sunnah to render legal judgments in accordance with the interpretations by Islamic judges of these writings, for familial as well as criminal proceedings.  The legality of Sharia Law varies from country to country, to which in some countries it is not considered law at all, to those countries that have a blended system or special circumstances that allow Sharia law, as well as to nations that Sharia law is indeed the law of the land.  As might be expected, many opinions and articles have been written about Sharia law, its dangers, its misinterpretation, its intolerance and so forth, of which there is much controversy and debate.

The thing is, though, that many nations have many laws that are considered to be offensive or inhumane or just plain wrong; on the other hand there are also many nations that have good laws and a valid rule of law that protects its citizens, and provides justice for all.  If the point of the criticism of Sharia law is to point out the inconsistencies and unfairness within the law, that has its merit; if on the other hand, the point is simply to demonize Islam, and Islamic Sharia law, in and of itself, without a thorough vetting of Sharia law, that is an unworthy attack upon another culture and belief.

There are many people that believe that where Islam goes, Sharia law soon follows right behind it, and they fear Sharia law and its effects, without taking the time to comprehend it. Further to this point, too many people believe that somehow Sharia law will crowd out constitutional law, and will become either the law of the land, or to somehow create dual laws within that land.  All of this speaks to one very large point, which is the necessity to understand what law is in the first place and how it works within your country, and subsequently to know that good law comes both from the consent of the governed as well as in accordance with eternal law which never will change.

Is the Holy Spirit - Feminine?

The Holy Trinity consists of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  Right away, when taking a look at the Trinity, one can't help but notice that there is no feminine call-out whatsoever, while, no doubt, the history of the world, is usually seen via a male-centric standpoint, or as simply using words whose typically connotation is either male or defaults to words that are associated with the masculine gender, this does not mean, on the surface, that the feminine connotation or female gender has been marginalized, but it is definitely disconcerting.  The very first thing to do, therefore, is to take a careful look at the Trinity and to try to determine what was first meant by the Holy Spirit, as Genesis 1:27 tells us: "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;  male and female he created them."

From the foregoing, it is fair to say that the Trinity has far more meaning and makes much more sense when the Holy Spirit is seen as representing the Divine Mother, as then within the immutable Godhead you now have the Father and the Mother with the God-child, which we see demonstrated here in the nuclear family on earth, as well as being represented in the higher dimension by our Creator.  This means that if we take our Bible and begin to translate into our minds that the Holy Spirit is the Divine Mother, a new and deeper interpretation of its passages can now enter into our heart.

While it is true that historically the Bible when translated into English, typically treats the Holy Spirit as either a male pronoun or interprets it as a noun without any specific gender designation, this doesn't necessarily mean that it is literally or symbolically correct and may be more in keeping within the conventions of those that translated ancient scripture from Hebrew or Greek in the first place.  The fact of the matter is that for some select scholars, the Holy Spirit has been translated as being in the feminine pronoun and they based that on their interpretations of ancient scripture which has taken into account the language and the time period of which the writings were originally made.

Rather though, than having a great debate about the Holy Spirit and its most appropriate connotation, it is of far greater merit and usage, to understand that the Holy Spirit is there ultimately for our benefit.  I do believe that if more people were to see the Holy Spirit as being more akin to the Divine Mother, that more people would therefore have a better appreciation of the Holy Trinity as a whole, and would find this to be quite comforting. 

Each one of us here on earth, has a mother, or we would not be here; therefore, it would not be any stretch of the imagination, to conceive that each one of us also has a Divine Mother, that cares for us, nurtures us, consoles us, and envelopes us, much like a Divine Spirit.

Fish Farming

About 71 percent of the planet is water and not land.  Additionally, although there is United Nations sanctioned Law of the Sea, to a large scale, and once away fromclearly demarcated coastal waters, the ocean is seen more as being held in common by all peoples, and subsequently suffers from the "tragedy of the commons", which simply means that when we all are perceived to have equal rights to something, that certain people and industries will have a strong tendency to take more, especially those that are bigger or have more sophisticated techniques and equipment, because their attitude can simply be broken down into one of "better that I get it, rather than someone else" , because ultimately the whole exercise is seen as a zero-sum game.  This means that in certain parts of our vast ocean that fishing stocks have become depleted, or have become negatively impacted for various reasons, to the long-term detriment of the fishing industry, the aqua-environment, and the balance of these in general.

Through the years, mankind has become master of his own food supply, to which, the days of hunting down food as a necessity or a way of life, has been replaced as merely something to do as sport.  For instance, today, if you want cattle or poultry products, you aren't going to go to the trouble of targeting those animals in the wild, instead you are going to raise them up under a typically very specific, master plan, which in the course of events, includes: growth hormones, supplements, antibiotics, cages, fences, tagging, artificial lighting, and overall efficiency which didn't exist even a couple of generations ago.  From a consumer standpoint, we are the beneficiaries of beef and poultry products that are mass produced because they cost us a lot less money in the pocketbook as well as being easier to procure because of these efficiencies.

Havinghad such great success in production of food products based on land-based animals, mankind has taken the next step to master the sea-based fish world as well, so that the harvesting principles previously created for animals are now being used to handle salmon, tilapia, shrimp, trout, cod, and other species of fish.   This means that, once again, the consumer is the beneficiary of this efficiency, and this is the basic reason why you are able to find easily within your grocery stores or restaurants a plentiful selection of fish and shrimp at very reasonable pricing.  Fish farming or aqua-farming is not meant to replace the fishing of lakes and oceans by commercial or indigenous people but as a necessary supplement to it, so that the oceans and lakes can begin to recover from having been over-fished for so long.

 While there has been justified criticism about fish farming in the sense that fish spawned from many of these farms are much more likely to have a higher concentration of antibiotics and pesticides as well as being typically of a lower nutritional value as a comparable wild-caught fish, this isn't unusual given the circumstances of spawning fish in such a manner as to maximize their growth and yield with all this to be accomplished within a given time frame.  This means, that the FDA must be about its "P's and Q's" in helping to assure that the American public consumes fish that is both safe and within the appropriate guidelines for its consumption.

America: A Constitutional Democracy?

History appears to be one of those subjects that often gets the short shrift and seems like a waste of time to many people, as too many of those that live in the present, fool themselves into believing that either "this time things are really different" or that the past has no real relevancy in regards to our current age.  Additionally, when it comes to the structure and the running of our government, in general, a lot of people don't really care too much, figuring that there is nothing that they can actually do to effect change, as well as recognizing that their one vote won't ever amount to much.  The thing is, despite the apathy of so many, as well as the devious desires of others, the purpose of our revolt in 1776 was clearly stated in our Declaration of Independence.  Later, when our successful and bloody revolution was victorious, our thirteen separate States united behind a Constitution to govern its people, as a Republic.  Our Constitution, clearly states in Article IV, Section 4, that: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government."  Not only that, but our Founding Fathers, were enlightened and educated men, that knew the differences and the dangers of a Democracy as compared to a Republican form of government.  Yet today, it is common to hear from media as well as pundits that we as Americans live in a Democratic nation.

While it is one thing to give all adults that have reached the age of eighteen, suffrage voting, that, in of itself, does not make for a Democracy in this country, it is at best, the allowing of all citizens an equal vote within their Constitutional Republic.  At no time, should the equal access to the ballot box, mean anything more than an equal opportunity for people to vote for issues that are within the domain of its Constitution in the first place.

 The fundamental flaw within a Democracy is the fact that when it is that the majority always rules, this places the majority in such a position as to oppress and to exploit the minority as well as to impress its viewpoints, unless the rule of law is so strong and secure as to somehow stand against the majority, or unless the Constitution is obeyed as the law of the land, or unless the judiciary as an independent branch of the government is able to strike down as "unlawful" the proposed rules by the majority.   The main error that people make in believing that a Democracy is the fairest way to govern people, is ceding control of their unalienable rights granted to them by their Creator to governmental agencies and in essence, to mob rule. 

Our Constitution was not created for factions, was not created for political parties, and was not created for privileged elite, but instead was created for the people and by the people, as a limited government, so as to secure to the people the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Our Constitution does not guarantee to anyone, prosperity, health, employment, or wealth, nor was it ever intended to do so.  Those that believe that the majority should rule will find in the end, no pot of gold, no freedom, and instead will have forged the chains of steel that will ultimately imprison them.

Wireless Emergency Alerts

While watching television all of us have been exposed from time-to-time to a test of the "Emergency Broadcast System" and the blah, blah, blah that comes behind it, which preempts whatever program, live or pre-recorded that you were watching, but this type of warning has been augmented to sync to our modern times with our "Wireless Emergency Alerts" which come straight to our cell phones, with messages alerting us of possibly imminent weather emergencies.  On the surface, this appears to be a great public service and to a certain degree it is, because the weather alert is both timely sent and of pertinence, but like many things, there is a much darker side.

For instance, according to the nws.noaa.gov/com website the: "WEA use radio technology to broadcast the alert from cell towers to mobile devices in the area of the threat."  This means that no matter what your phone area code is, whoever has a cell phone in that area that is capable of receiving such a message will receive it; although most phones do have an option buried deep inside of allowing the user to opt-out of this type of public service announcement.  However, there is something distinct implied behind this type of power and authority that although the government has the power and the authorization to co-opt cell towers in order to provide this type of emergency alert, who is to say that in situations of public unrest, that the government might not see fir to commandeered cell phone towers, internet service providers and the like to either control or to disrupt communications by mobile and other devices.

The bottom line is a government that is big enough, powerful enough, and invasive enough to provide you with all sorts of information under the guise that it is there to protect you, is the exact same governmental power that can be abused in such a way as to take your civil liberties and freedom away from you.    It would be no stretch of the imagination, to foresee a time when through the guise of an "emergency" that our government would implement its capability to herd certain designated segments of its population away from their homes, which are secured to the individual through our Fourth Amendment rights, to a designated area within a particular community, which would thereby place our citizenry into a very vulnerable position, rife with the possibilities of exploitation or worse.

As a matter of course, our government understands the value of having a fearful population, because a population that lives in a constant fear, is always easily susceptible to complying with rules and regulations that are in theory based around their safety, but in actuality effectively shackles their freedoms and liberties, as a trade-off for what they believe to be, security, but is instead built around an illusion of it.

While I have the utmost admiration for those people and government facilities that wisely and prudently provide us with true emergency aid, not everyone that speaks of having our best interests in mind, is, in fact, the earthly representation of the good shepherd.

The Majority Rules

At the most basic level, having a democracy means that the majority rules, or even at times when it comes to voting, that the plurality rules.  For instance, if only two people are running for office or if there is a proposition on the ballot to which it is either voting for or against, in both of these cases, the majority will be greater than 50%.  However, in those cases to which there are more than two politicians running for office, such as you will often get with political contests, and  to which one of the so-called "third parties" has a candidate with either a high name recognition or appeal, the candidate sometimes winning in those contests will not actually have the majority of votes (i.e. over 50%), but instead just a plurality of the votes, such as 48%, but since this percentage is greater than each of his individual opponents, and because of that plurality, that candidate will be declared the winner.  Under those particular circumstances, you could make the argument, that the majority has actually been thwarted since in aggregate more than 50% of the people have voted against the winning candidate, and that therefore the people might be better served, under a subsequent "run-off" election, with the top two finishers, so that the ultimate result will be that the elected winner will have at the end of the day the majority of actual votes cast.

Many people believe that it is fair, that the person or proposition that garners the most votes is declared victorious, but this too assumes that the people that cast the votes all have equal access to the ballot in the first place.  For instance, in America, the age at which you can first vote is eighteen, however, if you fail to register to vote, or fail to register to vote by the designated cut-off date to vote, you will not be eligible to vote, even though you may at the time the voting takes place, desire to do so.  Further to this point, if you are impoverished, or imprisoned, or a convicted felon, or crippled in some way, you may not legally be entitled to vote, or you may not have the wherewithal to get to the voting polls to vote.  Additionally, there are certain races, creeds, communities, income and age groups that are more inclined to vote in the first place, so that there is never an actually true representation of voters or the population at large at the polling booth.

Still, for the most part, most people believe that having the majority rule is fair and proper, but there is a very thin line between the majority ruling and mob rule because without constitutional principles, and without a rule of law which comes from natural law, the majority will in certain circumstances see fit to run roughshod over the minority.  This means that in any government which adheres to the principle that the majority rules, this should be tempered by the fact that the majority rules only within the constraints of constitutional government which is setup to protect and to secure the unalienable rights of individuals.

Another point to make, is at the time of Christ, we read, "… Pilate said unto them, whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? …. The governor answered and said unto them, whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas."   Incredibly, the people were given the opportunity to have Jesus the Christ released or Barabbas; as was the given custom by the Roman governor for the Jews at Passover, yet, given this opportunity, the people, whether goaded or not, whether corrupted or not, whether a true representation of the people or not, voted against Christ. 

For those that believe strongly that the majority should rule, that the majority is always right, simply because it is the majority, remember well, how the majority voted when it came to the Christ.

The East Coast, the Appalachians, and Population Density

At the time of America's revolution, there were a total of thirteen colonies, of which all of them were located on the east coast.  When we fast forward to the present time, we find that when we look at the population density of the States of our Union, the top seven States by population density are all founding colony States, with the eighth ranking State being Florida.  In fact, the lowest rated State of our original founding colonies is ranked #21 in population density (South Carolina).  As of 2010, the population of the States that have some portion of their border on the Eastern seaboard was over 112 million, whereas the population of all the States that have some portion of their border on the Western seaboard was not quite 48 million. 

These facts and statistics point to a couple of significant points such as at the inception of America, the Appalachian mountain range which originates in the southern part of Canada before ultimately terminating in central Alabama was a natural border that separated the colonists from other foreign empires such as France, as well as being separated from the Ohio and Mississippi valleys.  It also means that originally to go west in America, meant to travel beyond the Appalachian mountain range to the regions lying just west of there, that was at the time, considered to be the frontier of America and the beginnings of its expansion.   Another point to be made is although America is a country to which many people have traveled or moved from one destination to another, it is also a country that many people once coming here have subsequently established long and stable roots within a certain community and consequently that is why the States with the highest population density are and will continue to be those that were our original colonies.

There is, of course, another very important point to make about the United States of America, which makes it dynamically different than Europe, for instance, whereas Europe has many countries of different sizes and principalities, all on the same continent; North America,  on the other hand, is essentially a continent that consists of just three big countries which are Canada, the USA, and Mexico.  This means, in essence, that although we take it for granted that America runs from sea to shining sea, it could very easily have been a country surrounded by other nationalities and principalities, which, in fact, it once was.

We often wonder why it is that so much power and money seems to reside in certain locations such as the northeastern section of America.  The answer to that question is fundamentally found in the fact that money, power, education, and opportunity abound there because the roots of those institutions are of long standing and of long lasting value, that passes from one generation to the next, to which some of those peoples can trace their heritage all the way back to the founding of this great nation and are proud to be part of the bedrock which represents America at its best.

The American Aristocracy

America was founded by those coming to America in order to be able to freely express their religious views without the fear of oppression or interference by State authorities.  The origins of America do not contain any aristocratic titles for the people coming here nor did it have to deal with the long embedded hierarchy of a State-sponsored established church.  For the most part, this country was founded by men and women yearning to be free from the yoke ofboth religious intolerance as well as the escaping from the unnecessary interference of a State treating its subjects as its servants made for their pleasure as well as to help them to continue to augment their power.

Our Declaration of Independence in 1776, made it quite clear that our call for freedom, was a call based on the premise that all men are created equal, with certain unalienable rights, and that to secure those rights governments are instituted amongst men, under the consent of the governed.   Further to this point since tyranny had no place in America, the allegiance of its citizens were made to each other, for their safety and for their happiness.

Although America, today, still does not have noble titles as you so often see in countries that are located within Europe, the functioning of America clearly shows that there is an unfair and biased division within America that separates the privileged elite, typically of inherited power and wealth, from the body politic, in general.  For instance, when looking at the highest power in our land, the Presidency, we have several dynastic factions, which include the Kennedys, the Clintons, and the Bushes.  John F. Kennedy, was elected to the Presidency in 1960, later was assassinated, to which his brother Robert had an excellent chance of becoming nominated/elected in 1968 before he too was assassinated, and then later his brother Ted Kennedy, ran for the Democratic nomination in 1980, and ended up serving in the US Senate for the fourth-longest period of time of any Senator ever.  The Kennedy family is numerous, wealthy, and with an excellent name recognition, so no doubt, some Kennedy will once again come to the fore, to run for the Presidency in the future.  Bill Clinton was a two-term President, to which, his wife, Hillary Clinton, became a US Senator in 2000, was re-elected, later ran for the Presidency in 2008, later yet was appointed by Obama as our Secretary of State, and is the odds-on favorite to win the Democratic nomination for the Presidency in 2016.  George H.W. Bush was a one-term President, his son George W. Bush, became a two-term President and his brother Jeb Bush, is a two-term Governor of Florida, and is set to run for the Presidency in 2016.

Then there are those that created their wealth in America and have been able to pass on this wealth, power, and prestige from generation to generation, to which we have familiar names, such as the Astor family, the Du Pont family, the Roosevelt family, the Rockefellers, and the Forbes, to mention just a few of the most prominent families.  These dynasties have an undue influence upon America as a whole, to which their concern is far from being just ordinary citizens within America, but instead to be part and parcel of the privileged elite, having access to power and the benefits that most Americans would quiver in envy to even approach. 

America, most definitely has an aristocracy, considered in many ways to be untouchable, they live differently from you and I, they think and behave differently, they are treated differently, and their presence in America makes a big difference to the stability, fairness, liberty, and justice of America.  The American experience is different for having this aristocracy, an aristocracy that effectively is above the law, because it is a law unto itself.

The Abortion of Obama

President Obama has made his position on abortion quite clear and consistent over the years, believing strongly in a woman's right to protect their health and to have reproductive freedom, stating that: "… I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right…" Obama has also stated in regards to his daughters that:  “I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby.”  Clearly, Obama's words and beliefs when it comes to a woman's right to choose are unequivocal and clear, additionally there are also in conformance with current federal law.

I wonder though about the birth of President Obama, himself, to which he was born in Hawaii in 1961.  At that time abortion was not legal in Hawaii, even though later Hawaii would be the first State in the Union to legalize abortion, but that would not occur until 1970.  Further to this point, his mother, an intelligent woman, became pregnant with Barack Obama, before she was even eighteen, and was at the time of Barack's conception, unmarried, involved with a man that was an intelligent exchange student, six years her senior, born in a different country, from a different religion, and already a married father with two children, of which there was a legitimate question as to whether Barack's father was indeed, even divorced.

Giving this aforementioned information, and imagining that the court decision and the consequences of Roe v. Wade had been made not in 1973, but in 1960, and that there was a Planned Parenthood facility or something similar in Honolulu, to which Senator Obama stated in 2007, "Thanks to all of you at Planned Parenthood for all the work that you are doing for women…", of which Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of reproductive health services in America, one must wonder using the logic and Obama's own words and viewpoint, what advice Planned Parenthood would have given Ms. Dunham at the time of her pregnancy should she had come into their facility for counseling.

Isn't this in short, President Obama, arguing for his own abortion, because could it not be easily construed that Ms. Dunham's pregnancy was indeed a youthful mistake,  an unfortunate indiscretion, and that a baby being born from that mistake would be a form of unfair punishment against Ms. Dunham?  This would appear to be the only reasonable and logical conclusion that one could draw when taking into account Obama's position in regards to abortion and a woman's right to choose.

The fact of the matter is we do not know how a given aborted child would have turned out, because in actuality that child's life has been terminated before the child has ever been born.  Perhaps a woman's right to choose should trump all, perhaps that right should be mitigated; it's a complicated subject, with moral and human consequences of immense importance; of no less importance than the White House, itself.

Smart-phones and Rip Van Winkle

The most sophisticated cell phones today are considered to be smart-phones which allows these phones to do far more than simply communicate via telephone or by text, but act more like a micro-computer with literally thousands and thousands of applications available for smart-phones, to which most smart-phones as a matter of course are configured with a fairly impressive camera, talk-to-text, mobile hotspot, Wi-Fi connectivity, hi-resolution screen, GPS, and expandable memory to name a few of their most important capabilities.  Of course, all this power contained within a handheld phone means that the customer has to come up with the money to pay for it, additionally to keep up with the "Joneses" to re-pay for it every two years or less, and unlike virtually all other hi-technology products that have been getting both more sophisticated as well as cheaper in "real" terms, smart-phones have been getting more sophisticated but without much price elasticity.

Imagine though, that Rip Van Winkle was to wake up after a very extended slumber and come across one of today's smart-phone to which a very patient and tech savvy person was able to walk Rip Van Winkle through all of its many and myriad capabilities.  There wouldn't be any doubt that Rip Van Winkle would be suitably impressed and wowed by all this power, convenience, and multitude of features contained within the smart-phone.  However, in Rip's re-acquaintance to the world at large he might come across some things that would intrigue him. 

For instance, when he walked into your living room and saw your smart-TV, with its impressive hi-resolution, its powerful surround sound system, its 3D capabilities, and the sheer quantity of media entertainment available on your 60" screen, he might look a little askance at your smart-phone and wonder why anyone would want to watch TV on that little phone w. substandard sound when he could partake in all that your TV offered.

Then later as you took a trip to the outdoors and took our your expensive DSLR camera, Rip would be stunned at its resolution, the power and perception of its telephoto lens, the slow motion capabilities of its movie mode, its awesome ability to focus up-close on a budding flower, or to capture a "flying squirrel" in mid-air, all would absolutely find Rip at a loss for words.

Still later, deep within the woods, your smart-phone would no longer have service as the lack of proximity to a cell tower would serve to put it out of service, but your satellite-based GPS device would continue to work, and would ease Rip's concerns about your capability of finding your way back out of the woods and back into civilization.

In fact, the more time that Rip spent with you the more that he couldn't help but notice that although your smart-phone seemed to do most everything that you wished to accomplish, most admirably, that these other stand-alone deviceson the other hand were even better, perhaps considerably better.  Rip not necessarily being the brightest person on the planet, and quite frankly just beginning to get up to speed, wondered though, perhaps a device that tries to be all things to all people, or to do all things that can be done, could be simplified, but he feared voicing that opinion as he didn't wish to be mistaken for a fool.

Noah's Ark Represents the New Eden

The Bible is filled with metaphors, aphorisms, parables, and other great symbols that aren't necessarily absorbed into our minds upon the first reading of it.  In the beginning was the Word, but within this beginning, mankind disobeyed to his own destruction God's instruction not to partake of the tree of knowledge. Having partaken of this forbidden fruit, mankind brought upon itself the awesome knowledge of whom he really was on this material plane, but without the attendant wisdom mandated to render correct and good judgments.  Man's eyes were now open to recognize that he was yet indeed a child of the great God, but somehow too, he was entrapped within a physical body which had physical sensations that were at odds to his spiritual nature and served to sever the direct ties to God himself.  Placed within this position, mankind soon found out that being a mini-god with the ability and the knowledge to take actions and to make decisions on this planet, made him somewhat of a master of himself and this world.    However, once encased within this world, mankind was destined to suffer the laws of physicality, of pleasure but also of pain, of joy but also of sadness, of life but also of physical death, and through it all he lost sight of whom he really was, and came to often to believe that this world was all that ever was.

However, Noah was a righteous man, blameless in the sight of God, unlike the vast majority of human beings which had become corrupt and degenerative, to which it was their evil and selfish actions that inevitably led to the destruction of their lands on earth, because a people that will not look for salvation from He who knows the number of the very hairs on your head, is a people that even God cannot save from its own demise.  The flood did come not because of God's divine punishment upon a wicked people, but to demonstrate that those that turn their back on their Lord, in fact, believe that they themselves are gods of a certain sort, that they know best, and that they can do anything without consequences, are in error, because man's conscious separation from its Creator, is a law that can only end in darkness.

Those that entered upon Noah's Ark were the true believers of God, tested and true to His word.  Noah's Ark would not have been necessary had mankind remained faithful and true to their Lord, but in absence of this, a baptismal cleansing of earth was mandated.  Noah and his descendants represent the great hope of mankind, the opportunity to be cognizant of who we really are, and thereby to live to that knowledge, ultimately becoming one once again with our Lord.

There was never going to be just one Eden, because when mankind ate of the forbidden fruit, so that he could have free will and thereby to challenge God's authority, a never-ending cycle commenced, to which no matter how long the process takes, in the end, it cannot be other than what it always was going to be, that is to say, the wayward child will return to the fold, because in the darkness of ignorance, there is no light.

Listening to Your Call

Joel Osteen, the pastor of Lakewood Church, has a weekly program that is broadcast over several different television stations all over America.  Most people that watch this program, watch the thirty minute version which is quite good and upbeat, however, on the station Daystar, the program instead of being just thirty minutes is one hour in length, with the first half-hour of the Joel Osteen broadcast being devoted to the music/worship team of devotional music, to which I believe most of the compositions are original constructions done by the artists on behalf of Lakewood Church.  While watching this program over the years you get use to hearing the same songs, seeing the same faces, as well as seeing the same musicians, although there may be guest artists from time-to-time.  While watching though, over a period of time I began to get fascinated by seeing just a glimpse of a tall African-American man, of impressive girth, that would only be on my television screen for literally just a fraction of a second, usually seen in the background, but over a considerable period of time, I discerned that he was now getting perhaps a couple of seconds of screen time which enabled me to note that he usually was in-between two female singers and typically wore a vested brown sweater.  During the time of my watching him, he has never become that break-out personality at Lakewood Church, but I don't feel that is his purpose, after all, he probably feels spiritual satisfaction in being on stage in front of thousands of people at the service, as well as being broadcast all over the nation, to which I believe that he feels his highest service is simply responding to the call of God and being of service to our Lord in whatever capacity that our Creator best sees fit.

While many of us perhaps have fantasized about being some great superstar, the fact of the matter is, superstars aren't really even necessary in life.  What life demands from each of us, is our devotion to a cause or to a concern that means something to us, as well as providing benefit to others that surround us.  The real heroes of our age are the people that provide kindness in their actions and their deeds to those that are both down on their luck as well as being down on their selves; that also provide service and aid to those that are hurting, as well as providing a sympathetic ear and touch, to those that are feeling hurt and unloved. 

While all of us can admire those that have accomplished great deeds and accomplishments, each of us has a calling that is specific for us.  For most people, that calling is as simple as just doing good to those that we come in contact with, to make the world a brighter and better place for having us participate in it, to refresh those that are thirsty, to feed those that are hungry, and to clothe those that are unclothed.  No life has been lived in vain, if it has brought a smile, a ray of sunshine, goodness, or a blessing to others in our day-to-day activities. 

It is wise to understand and to recognize that each day is an opportunity to be the best person that you can be, and each step forward that we take in our kindness, consideration, and devotion to others, is a stepping-stone to God, himself.

Empathy

You probably have heard the saying that "a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, and a liberal is a conservative who has been arrested," and there is a lot of truth in that wisdom.  In point of fact, most people day by day, have enough to do or think about, that they aren't truly concerned about other people in general. In particular most people aren't overly concerned about other people's feelings, or what is really going on in their lives because they have plenty enough in their own life to worry or to contemplate about.  While one can call this pure selfishness on their part, it isn't necessarily selfishness, it can just be a vague lack of concern for things that don't trouble or concern that person's particular bailiwick.

However, the point to be made, is that we live in a society of people, to which, we should be concerned about our fellow brothers and sisters, not only because no man is an island unto himself, but because it is our humanitarian duty to love each other as good neighbors.  The first step towards developing empathy with others is to actually listen and to pay attention to other people.  Far too many of us, as a matter of course, don't listen all that well to others or provide that focused attention which is so vital to meaningful communication, because we are in actuality not overly concerned with another person's viewpoint, but more concerned that they don't waste too much of our time, or try to impose themselves upon us, or simply that they don't take too long to make their point.

It is difficult to be empathetic, for a lot of reasons, to which one of the most important ones is that if you have not actually lived in another person's shoes, it is hard to fathom exactly what they are saying or where they are coming from.  For instance, even in cases to which people have literally lived in another person's shoes, such as "Black Like Me", to which a white man successfully re-imaged himself as a black man; that experience while authentic on certain levels such as the fact that the "mask" was successful in fooling both black as well as white that John Howard Griffin was indeed a black man, could not at the same time fully encapsulate what it was to be a black man in the south in 1959, because Griffin was not educated as a black man, wasn’t raised as a black man, and didn't live as a black man, because, he wasn't actually black.  Still, the experience, set in the racial tensions of its time, was enlightening, to say the least, and most definitely was an experience that led to a profound understanding of racial perceptions in America from a "black" perspective.

If you haven't been very short in height, or extremely overweight, or gay in a hostile community, or of the wrong religion, or of the wrong race, or from the wrong type of family, or have the wrong clothes, or grown up surrounded by negative role models, it is virtually impossible to really empathize successfully with these types of people.  However, the first step in all of these situations, is not to be judgmental, not to jump to conclusions, but instead to take the time and to have the consideration to let that person have their say, so that through your interactions with each other, you can look behind the veneer, to feel and to relate to the essence of that person and to find common ground.

Being emphatic is not easy, it never will be, but a basic understanding that all people have a deep and abiding interest to be both loved and validated as a human being is the first step towards better days.

Blacks and Higher Education

A proper education is important for everybody, to wit, that America has an obligation to see that each and every member of our society has the opportunity to be provided as a matter of course, education that will allow their citizenry at the most essential level to at least read, write, and to do arithmetic; while also teaching them their responsibilities and duties to their country, as well as to their family, with an attendant moral code that differentiates between right actions and wrong.

Within any nation, or family structure, there are things that are considered to be taboo, or forbidden, to which some of these things are off-grounds because they are harmful to you as an individual, or that you are considered to be too young to appropriately deal with; but then again there are other forbidden items or thinking which is really a way for the State or for your family to maintain control over you.  Forexample, an educated populace is a dangerous populace, mainly because they are much harder to fool.  It is far easier to mold and to control people that are tied down to silly superstitions and pointless traditions, than those that have been not only taught at a young age to think for themselves, but also are able to communicate and do accomplish work by virtue of the fact that they have been educated and know how to use their minds.

In antebellum days, there were laws in Southern States which precluded slaves from being able to read and to write because doing so would be to give a "…. tendency to excite dissatisfaction in their minds and to produce insurrection and rebellion…"  There were distinct penalties for failure to adhere to these laws both for the slave as well as for the white man for having the temerity to educate a slave, so that, slaves were punished by whipping, whereas white men were punished by monetary fines.

Fortunately, we have come a long way from those antebellum days and in America, all are by law, suppose to be equally treated in our public educational system.  However, the long and short of it is that some children in America receive a much better and superior primary educational experience than others, so that in point of fact, there are clear and distinct differences in the opportunities presented to different classes and races within America when it comes to education.  Those differences are of long standing and of systemic origins, so that the overcoming of these disadvantages for certain segments of our population will not be overturned anytime soon, but that does not mean a giving up or a quitting, because the importance and value of a higher education in America has never been more critical than it is today.

There was a time, not so long ago, that a man willing to work hard, but lacking education beyond high school, could find himself a job that paid a fair wage that would enable him to own a decent car, to own a decent house, and to have a family and thereby to be a part of the American dream.  Unfortunately, those halcyon days are long gone, while there are still desirable "blue collar" jobs in America, there aren’t close to being what they use to be, instead, good paying manufacturing jobs, have been replaced with machines and robotics or non-union labor or out-sourced overseas, and we are left with low-paying service jobs which will never able those in that industry to earn a true living wage.

The one thing that we can say with a certainty, documented again and again, in study after study, is the higher and the further that you go in your collegiate educational pursuits, the better your pay will be.  This means that more education provides you with not only more knowledge and knowhow, which makes for invaluable life skills, but also will invariably provide you with more pay.

The successful pursuit of education, though, is something that necessitates developing discipline, attention, focus, maturity, and desire in order to see it all the way through.     While education has its merits for all Americans, none more so, than for those who were unfairly denied educational opportunities as well as their freedom, those many years ago.

The Shortcut of the Lottery

Most States in the Union have lotteries, with the comeback of modern day lotteries in America beginning with New Hampshire, in 1964, so that today forty-four of our fifty States are now offering some form of a lottery within their State borders.  Lotteries are big business within each State, that is to say, they are actively advertised and marketed, they are actively reported in media outlets, they are sold via a commission percentage by retailers, and the general availability and the convenience of purchasing lottery tickets is very convenient for their patrons.  In fact, in our digital and electronic age, some States allow the purchase of lottery tickets online, or electronically, with the purchase or lottery tickets being allowed with either cash, debit card, or in some cases, even credit cards.  Because States sanction lottery sales within their borders, they make it part of their mission statement to sell the "dual benefits" of playing the lottery, which is that you, the player, might become fabulously rich, and if not, you are doing a "good" deed by providing funds for educational or other government programs.  This means, unlike alcohol or tobacco sales, which are never actively promoted by government agencies and, in fact, often have stringent government regulations attached to the sale and usage of said product, that the State is an active promoter of lottery tickets to their residents.

The fact of the matter is, that the State has a fiduciary duty to their denizens to  do right by them, and not on the other hand to purposely or to inadvertently exploit them, or to deceive them, or to exacerbate situations to the advantage of the State, but that is, in fact, what lotteries actually end up doing.  The State loves to sing the praises of all the benefits that the lottery ticket revenue brings to educational programs, and other general funds, as if the selling of lottery tickets has created this additional revenue out of thin air, but in actuality, lotteries are nothing more than a wickedly bad "shell game" in which those that are the poorest, the most uneducated, and the most gullible are lured into spending moneyunder the guise that the State knows best, when in truth they are being conned into wasting monies that they can ill-afford to waste, on "pipedreams" that will in reality simply vacuum money from their pockets into the State's coffers for re-distribution.

As bad as that is, the other tragic part of lotteries is that both the State as well as those that play the lottery has wasted their time and their money on an activity that has no good purpose behind it.  The State sells the lie that the lottery is an easy and democratic way to raise funds instead of increasing taxes forthrightly or paring back their budget to align themselves better with fiscal reality; whereas the players of the lottery are encouraged to waste both their time as well as their money on an activity that is the antithesis of the puritan ethic, of hard work, dedication, and faithfulness; instead they are encouraged to give in to the temptation of the shortcut to wealth and glory, while obtaining neither.

The streets of misery are paved with those that believe that just one more roll of the dice, just one more turn of the card, just one more spin of the wheel, or just one more Powerball will change everything.  It won't.

The Recall of Gray Davis, Governor of California

While Governors of our respective fifty states can be removed from office via resignation, death, impeachment, or through a recall, the most uncommon of all of these is the recall election process.  Only two Governors in the history of America have been recalled, with Gray Davis the only one to have been recalled in recent times.  The fact that Governor Davis was recalled is an absolutely amazing tale, as he was essentially removed from office less than one year after being re-elected by popular vote in the State of California.  Additionally, California is the most important State within our Union, to wit, if it was a separate country its GDP would be the eight largest in the world, greater than Russia or Italy, and not far behind countries such as Brazil or the United Kingdom, so an actual recall of a standing Governor, who had not been indicted for "high crimes and misdemeanors" is pretty much unfathomable. While there are myriad reasons that contributed to Davis' downfall, the most significant are as follows:

1.       The Energy Crisis, specifically in regards to Enron and its manipulation of energy prices

2.       The low voter turnout for Davis re-election of 2002 with just 36% of registered voters actually voting, whereas in order for a successful recall petition drive to be certified only 12% of registered voters need vote in the affirmative

3.       Because of California term limits, Gray Davis, was not able to run as a candidate in the recall election to defend his position.

The story of how the recall petition was successful and the people and money behind it will not be recounted here, but suffice to say that the signatures needed to effect the recall was accomplished in the time mandated by law and subsequently the ballot for the new Governor of California was submitted as of October, 2003.  The ballot was divided into two parts, to which the first part was the question as to whether the voter supported the actual recall or not, and if that vote was in the negative, Governor Davis would remain Governor; however, if that vote was in the positive, than the candidate with the largest plurality would become Governor of California, which ultimately became Arnold Schwarzenegger.

While the population often will feel frustration with their elected officials for various reasons, it is absolutely amazing, that after a gubernatorial election in 2002, that was won by Governor Davis, that he would be removed via a recall effort in 2003.  The improbability of that event seems so staggering, the fact that it occurred, would presuppose that the threshold for recall efforts within California, must be far too low.  This is indeed implied by the regularity of recall efforts as reported by npr.org which states that: "…insufficient signatures caused the failure of the three recalls launched against California Gov. Ronald Reagan between 1967 and 1972. The man who held the office before and after him, Gov. Jerry Brown, had eight recall petitions against him fail for the same reason."  Even though, those previous recall efforts failed, the fact that they were even attempted is prima facie proof that the losers of elections recognize that there is a backdoor way to overcome democratic rule in the State of California.

The bottom line for Gray Davis and his recall, is that the rolling blackouts that occurred within California, along with the manipulation of California's energy market to drive up prices to the consumers of electricity within California, left a very bad taste in the mouths of Californians, to wit Governor Davis paid the ultimate price for his failure to properly rectify the situation.  There is a fine line between civilization and chaos, and life without reliable means to energy and at pricing within historic norms, will create both opportunity for those lusting for it, as well as wrath directed against the designated scapegoat.