Photographer Compares Microstock Sites To Pollution And Drug Dealing

[wgerrard]

Dear Bill,

Well, Hamilton was a great admirer of Locke, who was also long dead, ad who is another with a good claim to being one of the frst to advocate the formal separation of churh and state. I seem to recall Hamilton's quoting both Locke and Williams with approval -- he certainly quoted the former -- so it is disingenuous to pretend that separation of church and state as having nothing at all to do with Williams.

After all, separation of church and state is not a uniquely American idea, and it has been interpreted in different ways at different times. Laicité in France is so marked that a church wedding, on its own, is not a valid civil marriage.

Cheers,

R.

Point taken, Roger. I know that and should have acknowledged it. Almost everyone of that generation of political leaders was very familiar with Locke, and, undoubtedly, Williams.

But, the gist of the assertion I was responding to seemed to be that the American revolution, and the Constitution, were inspired by some sort of fundamentalist Christian world view, and that a 200-year-old conspiracy has suppressed awareness of that fact. This is a view espoused by many on the religious right and one that is taught from many pulpits and in many private religious schools. ("Private" schools is a euphemism for privately funded Christian schools that have increased in number tremendously since the 1970's. They were given their initial impetus by people who chose to start private schools rather that send their children to integrated public schools.)

 

[gb hill]

Separation of church & state didn't come from our founding fathers it came from a Baptist preacher named Roger Williams. The State dictated the Church of England rule that people made to attend worship services & live by the 10 commandments (legalism) Roger Williams fought against the State rule stating that as Christ has made us free we are free indeed. Williams as well as other great preachers such as CH Spurgeon understood the teachings of the bible that the law was given to show man of his sinfulness & that Christ came that we would be free. this is Grace. Thats the true reason of your separation of church & state, not the crap being shoved down our throats now.

Preposterous nonsense. Roger Williams had nothing to do with the Constitution, being long dead. The religious views of the people at the Constitutional Convention varied, but to argue they were motivated by a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible is absolutely incorrect. You can believe what you wish, but the belief you have asserted here is not in accord with reality.



Embarrassing preposterous nonsense. Evidence that racism is as alive today as it was in ante bellum times.

Well since you have the answers then why don't you fix it! As far as seporation of C&S in the Constitution it was another Baptist Preacher named John Leland who pleaded for a seporation of church & state. but Roger Williams was the first!

 

[splitimageview]

The government is not taking over private enterprise.

Hmmm....explain to me how this isn't happening, considering the government bailouts of AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, Chrysler, General Motors, GMAC and Chrysler Financial.

Explain how, if this isn't happening, an unelected 'Salary Czar' can decide how much executives at these firms make?

The government is not attempting to control health care.

[laughter]

The government is not attempting to "spread the wealth around". Assertions to the contrary are simple lies or delusions.

Lies, delusions, and more lies! This seems to be a common response.

The health care legislation proposes needed reforms of health care and, as it stands now, proposes a public option that would be available to a tiny fraction of the public.

Where in the House bill, and where in the Senate bill, is this 'tiny fraction' explained?

Little of this reform would be needed if we had not suffered the consequences of decades of government by conservatives who put profit before health.

Well, if this 'reform' is needed because of evil profits, why not just get rid of the profits! Yes, let's junk capitalism. Smells like a duck...quacks even...

 

[wgerrard]

Well since you have the answers then why don't you fix it! As far as seporation of C&S in the Constitution it was another Baptist Preacher named John Leland who pleaded for a seporation of church & state. but Roger Williams was the first!

Where did I say I have answers? And, fix what? Racism? Racism is an integral part of human existence, like greed envy and all the rest. Most people understand that engaging in acts motivated by racism, greed, envy, etc., are moral offenses. The law exists to deal with the remainder.

 

[Roger Hicks]

That statement is defacto liberalism. 🙂 Sorry, there is a definition of socialism, Roger, and it's not simply however any one person wants to define it. 🙂

Yes, well, I'm a liberal, which in English is a nice thing to say about someone. See post 159.

Also, if you're so insistent about its being defined, buy a dictionary. I quote the OED:

1 A theory or policy of social organization which aims at or advocates the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc...

2 A state of society in which things are held or used in common.

If you really believe that this is Obama's goal, well, as I say, few will share your beliefs, unless they are on the far right or libertarian fringe.

Cheers,

R.

 

[user237428934]

And I thougt film vs. digital brings up weird discussions.
Some time ago someone (was it Roger?) suggested not to talk about politics here in this forum because it could damage the - otherwise good - reputation of a member. Sounds like a good idea.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Point taken, Roger. I know that and should have acknowledged it. Almost everyone of that generation of political leaders was very familiar with Locke, and, undoubtedly, Williams.

But, the gist of the assertion I was responding to seemed to be that the American revolution, and the Constitution, were inspired by some sort of fundamentalist Christian world view, and that a 200-year-old conspiracy has suppressed awareness of that fact. This is a view espoused by many on the religious right and one that is taught from many pulpits and in many private religious schools. ("Private" schools is a euphemism for privately funded Christian schools that have increased in number tremendously since the 1970's. They were given their initial impetus by people who chose to start private schools rather that send their children to integrated public schools.)

Dear Bill,

Deary, deary me.

I had not realized that the loony Christian right was quite that loony. Though I suppose I should have.

Cheers,

R.

 

[splitimageview]

If you really believe that this is Obama's goal, well, as I say, few will share your beliefs, unless they are on the far right or libertarian fringe.

Luckily, I don't form my beliefs based on how many others believe. Unlike politicians. 😉

Those on the left of course, as you admit, will not call him socialist; rather they do their best to avoid using the term.

 

[wgerrard]

Hmmm....explain to me how...

You've consumed too much Kool-Aid. There's little sense in arguing with you because you simply allow your beliefs to obscure your view of reality. Belief must always give way to reality.

The bailouts were necessary because conservative greed and stupidity had taken the nation's economy to the brink of collapse. Republicans and the conservative mindset are responsible for the recession. Full stop. And yet, now they want to argue that the government should have simply allowed those institutions to fail, wreaking havoc on the lives of hundreds of millions. Just further evidence of the callous disregard of conservatives for both the truth and their fellow humans.

The public option in the bill that passed the House is very restrictive, open to only several million people. And, no, I do not have a copy of the page. Not that you'd believe it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

And I thougt film vs. digital brings up weird discussions.
Some time ago someone (was it Roger?) suggested not to talk about politics here in this forum because it could damage the - otherwise good - reputation of a member. Sounds like a good idea.

Dear Tom,

No, not I. I am all in favour of discussing politics, and religion. Far too many people take both for granted, and take great care to move only in circles where they can be sure of agreement. The enormous advantage of this forum is that you can't usually tell what someone's politics may be, merely from their choice of camera. This means that the dangerously blinkered may be exposed to others' arguments and beliefs, rational or irrational, and may therefore examine their own beliefs wth a little more thought.

Or of course they may not...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Luckily, I don't form my beliefs based on how many others believe. Unlike politicians. 😉

Or, indeed, the compilers of dictionaries. In other words, you want to make up and use your own definitions. Why not admit it?

Cheers,

R.

 

[splitimageview]

You've consumed too much Kool-Aid. There's little sense in arguing with you because you simply allow your beliefs to obscure your view of reality. Belief must always give way to reality.

The bailouts were necessary because conservative greed and stupidity had taken the nation's economy to the brink of collapse. Republicans and the conservative mindset are responsible for the recession. Full stop. And yet, now they want to argue that the government should have simply allowed those institutions to fail, wreaking havoc on the lives of hundreds of millions. Just further evidence of the callous disregard of conservatives for both the truth and their fellow humans.

The public option in the bill that passed the House is very restrictive, open to only several million people. And, no, I do not have a copy of the page. Not that you'd believe it.

Oh, I see. Capitalism imploded upon itself, due to greed. Without any help from pure as snow politicians, and bureaucrats. Including those bureaucrats that cooked the Fannie/Freddie books, padding their own pockets with huge bonuses, while their government-backed (dare I say socialist) corporations guaranteed worthless paper. No, those people had nothing to do with it. Even though they were brought under civil penalities (why not criminal?)

Neither did the senators who oversaw Fannie and Freddie, and neither did those politicians that got sweet kickbacks from mortgage companies. No, none of those people are culpable in the least way.

None of this matters, let's just blame Wall Street!

 

[splitimageview]

Or, indeed, the compilers of dictionaries. In other words, you want to make up and use your own definitions. Why not admit it? .

If you look at my earlier post, you will see that I reject the idea of making up my own definition, even though you offered it freely.

Tashi Dalek, Roger 🙂

 

[wgerrard]

Dear Bill,

Deary, deary me.

I had not realized that the loony Christian right was quite that loony. Though I suppose I should have.

Cheers,

R.

The problem, Roger, is that these notions have spread to so many parts of our society, and are being buttressed daily by talk radio and cable pundits, that people can lead seemingly normal lives entirely within a cocoon of such beliefs.

 

[wgerrard]

Oh, I see. Capitalism imploded upon itself, due to greed.

Yes, essentially. For example, during the Bush administration, the financial industry issued derivatives -- bets on bets on bets -- worth more than $900 trillion. The GDP of the entire planet is only a bit over $60 trillion.

The rest of your statement reflects a belief, not an understanding of reality.

 

[Paul T.]

I do not want a bureaucrat deciding if I'm worthy of specific medical care, and when. ...

What the system needs is more competition, not less. If the government controls it, quality will go down, and costs will go up. ....

That's a theory. Sad how the facts don't support it. Wonderful as the USA is, the performance of the American health care system is pitiful!

Terrible health outcomes - whisper, worse in some key indicators, for
instance child mortality, than Cuba!

Note I'm not advocating any particular system - on many indicators the system in France, where Roger lives, as did my in-laws, is superior to that of the UK. But if you're going to extol the existing US health system be honest, and at least say, "I [and the private health bureaucrats] am ok, and the population can go to hell!"

 

[splitimageview]

With regards to child mortality, if you want to believe the data of a communist country that controls everything including the publication of statistics, feel free. The US tries to save many low weight newborns that simply have no chance of survival in third world countries, so they aren't even counted as live births.

I think I'd rather be born here than pretty much anywhere else. 🙂

 

[gb hill]

Ignorant Democrats still blame it all on Bush & the religous right while their own party is emploding from within. So Bill how does it feel that our President will announce Tues. night that he is sending up to 34 thousand troops to Afghanistan? I noticed you have totally ignored that one. BTW I'm NOT a republican as you probably think, I'm independent, voted for Ron Paul, the only one on the campaign trail stating that we needed to get out of Iran & Afghanistan because not only is it costly, but it's against the Constitution. You live here in N.C. I sent Kay Hagan an email last night for sending out a letter stating she needed to raise $266,000 by the end of Nov. to fight against the teaparty patriots as well as extreem right wingers! She is a shill! Guess what!, I went to the march in DC and the lady that sat beside me is a Democrat who is sick of the mess in Washington & blames BOTH parties. Thats what the tea party is about, Americans sick of the system. You need to get off your party high horse & see the truth!

 

[Monky Boy]

Help me choose a color for my new bicycle.

Do you like red?

 

[Monky Boy]

Or perhaps blue?