BIAS IN DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING
It is clear that there is much bias in the administration of the death penalty in America.1.
Poor minorities make up a large percentage of the death penalty cases. It is rare that a rich person will be sentenced to death.
Blacks are disproportionately represented on death row. This historical bias was demonstrated in 1965 by Donald Partington, a Virginia lawyer. He documented that between 1908 and 1963 2,798 men had been convicted for rape or attempted rape in Virginia. All of the 54 executed were black. The bias continues into the present.
Gender bias is also evident. Although women commit 11.6% of the murders, only 1.4% of death row inmates are women. This may be related to the severity and circumstances of the crime.
Where a person commits a murder affects their chances of being put to death. Extreme disparity is seen in execution data listed in Statistical Abstracts between 1977 and 2005. During this time period, 871 executions are listed as occuring in the United States. Six states were responsible for executing 72% of the total number. Southern states predominate in death penalty sentencing.
While:
- 23 states carried out no executions, and
- 7 states carried out no more than 1-3 executions,
- Texas carried out 313 executions,
- Virginia carried out 89,
- Oklahoma carried out 69,
- Florida carried out 57,
- Missouri carried out 61,and
- Georgia carried out 34.
ERROR IN DEATH PENALTY SENTENCING
The finality of the death penalty raises concern about errors in sentencing.
This concern became severe following exonerations based on DNA evidence of more than 200 prisoners, including prisoners on death row.
Jurisdictions across the country are enacting policy reforms to protect against wrongful convictions. Inmates in all but eight states are now given access to DNA evidence that may not have been available at the time of trial.
In a 2005 study, Professor Samuel R. Gross found that between 1989 and 2003, 340 prisoners, 95% convicted of murder and rape, had been exonerated. DNA evidence was used to exonerate 144 of these inmates.
False witness identificaton was involved in half of the murder convictions and 88% of the rape convictions.
Peter J. Neufeld, a co-director of the New York City-based Innocence Project said that the legislation resulting from DNA exonerations is "probably the single greatest criminal justice reform in the last 40 years." 2.
Troy Anthony Davis has become synonymous with error in the death penalty system. Davis was sentenced to die in 1991 after being convicted of killing a policeman, despite lack of physical evidence. Since the trial seven of the nine witnesses came forward to say that they were coerced by police into identifying Davis as the gunman.
Amnesty International, death penalty abolition groups and thousands of concerned individuals, including President Jimmy Carter, Pope Benedict XVI, and Bishop Tutu, have challenged the perceived injustice.
Davis was granted a stay on his scheduled execution while the U.S. Supreme Court considered his petition. The court declined to hear the case. Another execution date was set that was stayed by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, Georgia.
Davis continues to wait and still faces execution. 3.
THE DEATH PENALTY IS COSTLY IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE
Concerns about the death penalty go beyond moral and emotional injustices. The death penalty is an expensive cost to the taxpayer compared to a sentence of life without parole.
The Dallas Morning News, in 1992, reported that "a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years." 4.
Other states report similar extreme costs for the death penalty system. In 2007, California reported that it costs an additional $90,000 a year per inmate to confine an inmate on death row as opposed to those sentenced to life without parole. With California's death row population of 670, that accounted for $63.3 million annually. 5.
Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center,testified that death penalty cases require more time to prepare, more pre-trial motions filed, more experts hired, twice as many attorneys for the defense, more quizzing in jury selection, two trials conducted (for guilt and sentencing), and a series of appeals that come after conviction.6.
In 2000, the U.S. prison population reached 2 million prisoners, up from 1 million in 1995. The U.S. Justice Department reported that 461 of every 100,000 Americans were serving a prison sentence of at least one year.
C. M."Marty" Lensign, warden at Louisiana's Elayn Hunt Correctional Center, noted that cost effective alternatives were not sought because the incarceration business had a financial interest in perpetuating itself. He said, "We've used prison beds to stimulate the economy...In other words, it's an industry." 7.
RETHINKING THE DEATH PENALTY
Considering the bias, error and cost involved in administering the death penalty, there are many questions to be pondered.
The death penalty is viewed by some as a deterrent to future crime, but this is not generally supported by data. Conclusions from many studies show that the opposite is true. States that carry out higher numbers of executions actually have higher murder rates.
Supporters argue that "therapeutic vengeance" brings peace of mind and closure to victims or relatives of the crime. Others contend that laws and objectivity, not emotion, should control the process of justice. 8.
Texas is responsible for over 30% of the executions in the U.S.
A former district attorney of Bexar County, Texas, Sam Millsap, recognizes the fallibility of the death penalty system, saying that an honest assessment of the problems is overdue.
Millsap concludes,"When it comes to human life, a system that gets it right most of the time should not exist at all." 9.
REFERENCES:
1. Henslin, James M.2007. Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach. Boston:Allyn and Bacon:175-177.
2. New York Times. October 1, 2007. "DNA exonerations lead to key policy changes throughout the US". DPIC.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/federal-executions-19270-2993.2/11/2009.
3. Lajoie, Ron. Winter, 2007. "Troy Davis' Day in Court". Amnesty International:6.
AIUSA. Winter 2008. "Letter from Death Row." Amnesty International:7.
4. Texas Death Penalty Education and Resource Center. Feb. 13, 2009. "Costs".
http://texasdeathpenalty.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=39<em=62.
5. DPIC. February 13,2009. "Financial Facts About the Death Penalty".
http://wwwdeathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty.
6. Ibid.
7. Katz, Jesse. Feb. 19,2000. "U.S. prison population reaches 2 million mark." San Antonio Express News:16A.
8. Parrillo, Vincent N. 1999. Contemporary Social Problems. Boston:Allyn Bacon:133-134.
Sullivan, Thomas J. 2000. Introduction to Social Problems. Boston:Allyn Bacon:324
9. Millsap, Sam. Dec. 13, 2008. "Death penalty system fatally flawed." San Antonio Express News:8B.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Freedom of Choice Divides the Nation
When Roe v. Wade was enacted in 1973 the U.S. engaged in a massive social experiment that the country was not ready for. Abortion became one of the most explosive, bitter and divisive conflicts on the American landscape.
The terminology used to discuss the issue has been crucial. Initially the terms pro-abortion and anti-abortion were used by the media to discuss the positions of the opposing sides. However, each side sought to use more positive images to package their viewpoints. Those supporting abortion rights favored the term pro-choice in support of a woman's right to control her body. Those opposed to abortion favored the term pro-life in support of the rights of the unborn child. 1.
The positions are emotional extremes with little room for compromise. The nation became torn and continues to be divided. In a 2003 Gallup survey, 47 percent of adults claimed to be pro-choice, while 46 percent claimed pro-life. 2.
SOCIAL PRESSURES TO ABORT
Since the legalization of abortion in the United States the pressures not to abort have been replaced by a multitude of social pressures encouraging abortion.
Industrialized countries now favor lower fertility. A woman may be discouraged from bearing a child by family or friends. Increasing data document that in many cases the choice to abort was not made by the woman but was forced upon her.
The Elliott Institute catalogs and examines the after effects of abortion, focusing on stress experienced by women. They report, "Pressures to abort can come from husbands, parents, doctors, partners, counselors or close friends and family. They may threaten or blackmail a woman into abortion...Coercion can escalate into violence." 3.
An abortion security guard testified that women "were routinely threatened and abused by the boyfriends or husbands who took them to the clinics to make sure they underwent their scheduled abortions. 4.
Research by Rue et. al. studied the relationship between induced aborton and traumatic stress. In a study of 548 women (331 Russian and 217 American) they noted that 64% of women who aborted felt pressured by others; 54% were unsure of their decisions; 67% received no counseling beforehand; 87% received inadequate counseling; 79% were not told about alternatives; 31% had health complication afterwards; and 65% of the American woman suffered multiple symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorders with 14% meeting all of the diagnostic criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. 5.
THE POLITICAL PROCESS UNFOLDS
Because abortion is intimately related to the value and meaning of human life and family, the disputes became acrimonious. A struggle ensured for political control over circumstances under which an abortion could be obtained. States became active in seeking to manage and control the circumstances surrounding abortion.
States Limit Abortion Practices
In January of 2009, the pro-choice Alan Guttmacher Institute summarized the laws that had been passed by states "limiting whether, when and under what circumstances a woman may obtain an abortion". 6.
*38 states require an abortion to be performed by a licensed physician.
*36 states prohibit abortion after a specified point in pregnancy, most often fetal viability, except to protect a woman's life or health.
* 14 states prohibit 'partial-birth' abortion.
* 32 states and the District of Columbia prohibit the use of state funds for abortion.
* 4 states restrict coverage of abortion in private insurance plans.
* 46 states allow individual health care providers to refuse to participate in abortion.
* 43 states allow institutions to refuse to perform abortions.
* 17 states mandate that women be counseled in regard to the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (6 states), the ability of the fetus to feel pain (8 states), mental health consequences (7 states) or the availability of ultrasound (6 states)
* 24 states require that a woman wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between counseling and procedure.
* 34 states require parental involvement in a minor's decision to abort. 22 states require one or both parents to consent, while 10 require that one or both be notified.
Federal Protection for the Unborn/Born Alive Child
* The Born Alive Infant Protection Act, enacted into law in 2002, states that any baby born alive is legally a person and entitled to medical care. Failure to provide it is a crime.
* The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, enacted into law in 2003, prohibits a late-term abortion called partial-birth abortion.
* The Unborn Victims of Violence Act ,enacted into law in 2004, was the first recognition of federal legal rights for an embryo or fetus as a person separate from the woman. This Act made it a separate federal crime to harm a fetus during and assault on the mother.
THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT (FOCA)
This Bill was introduced in April of 2007 but failed to be reported to a committee.
The Freedom of Choice Act "declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health. It prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices..."
The Freedom of Choice Act was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Barbara Boxer and co-sponsored by 19 co-sponsors, including then Senator Barack Obama.
On July 17, 2007, Senator Obama spoke to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. He said, "The first thing I'd do as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." 7.
In discussing the Freedom of Choice Act, Brad Mattes, executive director of Life Issues Institute, said, FOCA "is a dangerous bill that President Barack Obama has promised to sign...FOCA... would kick to the curb every protective law that has been passed by Congress, state legislatures, or local communities." 8.
MORAL AND LEGAL AMBIGUITY
When does life begin and who should decide? Legal and moral ramifications lie at the core of decisions about abortion. Women, especially young women, are left in a state of ambiguous concern as to the value of the life of their developing child.
Although abortion became legal in the United States in 1973, Time magazine reported in January of 2003 that "53% of women between ages of 18 through 39 say they consider abortion an act of murder." Results of a TIME/CNN poll reported that 60% of 1,010 adult Americans agreed that it is "too easy for women today to get an abortion." 9.
The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research affiliate, reported that since 1973 the total abortions in the U.S.through 2007 exceeded 49 million, 550 thousand.10.
The Freedom of Choice Act would create extreme and divisive moral confusion in our country.
A "NO" vote to FOCA is the wisest choice.
REFERENCES:1.
Craig, Barbara Hinkson and David M. O'Brien. 1993. Abortion and American Politics. Chatham House:Chatham, New Jersey.
2. Pisano, Marina. "Roe v. Wade at 30". San Antonio Express News. Jan. 20, 2003:1A.
3. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing: The unChoice.com. 2/3/2009.
4. McQuarrie, Brian. "Guard, clinic at odds at abortion hearing." Boston Globe, April16, 1999.
5. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing:The UnChoice.com.
Rue, V.M., P.K. Coleman, J.J. Rue, and D. C. Reardon. "Induced abortion and traumatic stress: a preliminary comparison of American and Russian Women." Medical Science Monitor. Sept. 23, 2004. Oc:10(10):SR5-16. E-pub.
6. Guttmacher Institute. "State Policies in Brief:An Overview of Abortion Laws".
www.guttmacher.org. January 1, 2009.
7. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Jan. 30, 2009. "Freedom of Choice Act."
http://wn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Choice_Act.
8.Butts, Charlie. Jan. 28, 2009. "The fight against FOCA begins."
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Printer.aspx?id-399060.
9. Tumulty, Karen and Viveca Novak. January 27, 2003. "Under the Radar-Thirty years after Roe v. Wade." Time. Vol. 161. No. 3:38-41.
10. National Right to Life. http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/facts/abortionstats.html.
2/2/2009.
The terminology used to discuss the issue has been crucial. Initially the terms pro-abortion and anti-abortion were used by the media to discuss the positions of the opposing sides. However, each side sought to use more positive images to package their viewpoints. Those supporting abortion rights favored the term pro-choice in support of a woman's right to control her body. Those opposed to abortion favored the term pro-life in support of the rights of the unborn child. 1.
The positions are emotional extremes with little room for compromise. The nation became torn and continues to be divided. In a 2003 Gallup survey, 47 percent of adults claimed to be pro-choice, while 46 percent claimed pro-life. 2.
SOCIAL PRESSURES TO ABORT
Since the legalization of abortion in the United States the pressures not to abort have been replaced by a multitude of social pressures encouraging abortion.
Industrialized countries now favor lower fertility. A woman may be discouraged from bearing a child by family or friends. Increasing data document that in many cases the choice to abort was not made by the woman but was forced upon her.
The Elliott Institute catalogs and examines the after effects of abortion, focusing on stress experienced by women. They report, "Pressures to abort can come from husbands, parents, doctors, partners, counselors or close friends and family. They may threaten or blackmail a woman into abortion...Coercion can escalate into violence." 3.
An abortion security guard testified that women "were routinely threatened and abused by the boyfriends or husbands who took them to the clinics to make sure they underwent their scheduled abortions. 4.
Research by Rue et. al. studied the relationship between induced aborton and traumatic stress. In a study of 548 women (331 Russian and 217 American) they noted that 64% of women who aborted felt pressured by others; 54% were unsure of their decisions; 67% received no counseling beforehand; 87% received inadequate counseling; 79% were not told about alternatives; 31% had health complication afterwards; and 65% of the American woman suffered multiple symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorders with 14% meeting all of the diagnostic criteria for post traumatic stress disorder. 5.
THE POLITICAL PROCESS UNFOLDS
Because abortion is intimately related to the value and meaning of human life and family, the disputes became acrimonious. A struggle ensured for political control over circumstances under which an abortion could be obtained. States became active in seeking to manage and control the circumstances surrounding abortion.
States Limit Abortion Practices
In January of 2009, the pro-choice Alan Guttmacher Institute summarized the laws that had been passed by states "limiting whether, when and under what circumstances a woman may obtain an abortion". 6.
*38 states require an abortion to be performed by a licensed physician.
*36 states prohibit abortion after a specified point in pregnancy, most often fetal viability, except to protect a woman's life or health.
* 14 states prohibit 'partial-birth' abortion.
* 32 states and the District of Columbia prohibit the use of state funds for abortion.
* 4 states restrict coverage of abortion in private insurance plans.
* 46 states allow individual health care providers to refuse to participate in abortion.
* 43 states allow institutions to refuse to perform abortions.
* 17 states mandate that women be counseled in regard to the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (6 states), the ability of the fetus to feel pain (8 states), mental health consequences (7 states) or the availability of ultrasound (6 states)
* 24 states require that a woman wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between counseling and procedure.
* 34 states require parental involvement in a minor's decision to abort. 22 states require one or both parents to consent, while 10 require that one or both be notified.
Federal Protection for the Unborn/Born Alive Child
* The Born Alive Infant Protection Act, enacted into law in 2002, states that any baby born alive is legally a person and entitled to medical care. Failure to provide it is a crime.
* The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, enacted into law in 2003, prohibits a late-term abortion called partial-birth abortion.
* The Unborn Victims of Violence Act ,enacted into law in 2004, was the first recognition of federal legal rights for an embryo or fetus as a person separate from the woman. This Act made it a separate federal crime to harm a fetus during and assault on the mother.
THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT (FOCA)
This Bill was introduced in April of 2007 but failed to be reported to a committee.
The Freedom of Choice Act "declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health. It prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices..."
The Freedom of Choice Act was sponsored in the Senate by Senator Barbara Boxer and co-sponsored by 19 co-sponsors, including then Senator Barack Obama.
On July 17, 2007, Senator Obama spoke to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. He said, "The first thing I'd do as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act." 7.
In discussing the Freedom of Choice Act, Brad Mattes, executive director of Life Issues Institute, said, FOCA "is a dangerous bill that President Barack Obama has promised to sign...FOCA... would kick to the curb every protective law that has been passed by Congress, state legislatures, or local communities." 8.
MORAL AND LEGAL AMBIGUITY
When does life begin and who should decide? Legal and moral ramifications lie at the core of decisions about abortion. Women, especially young women, are left in a state of ambiguous concern as to the value of the life of their developing child.
Although abortion became legal in the United States in 1973, Time magazine reported in January of 2003 that "53% of women between ages of 18 through 39 say they consider abortion an act of murder." Results of a TIME/CNN poll reported that 60% of 1,010 adult Americans agreed that it is "too easy for women today to get an abortion." 9.
The Alan Guttmacher Institute, Planned Parenthood's research affiliate, reported that since 1973 the total abortions in the U.S.through 2007 exceeded 49 million, 550 thousand.10.
The Freedom of Choice Act would create extreme and divisive moral confusion in our country.
A "NO" vote to FOCA is the wisest choice.
REFERENCES:1.
Craig, Barbara Hinkson and David M. O'Brien. 1993. Abortion and American Politics. Chatham House:Chatham, New Jersey.
2. Pisano, Marina. "Roe v. Wade at 30". San Antonio Express News. Jan. 20, 2003:1A.
3. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing: The unChoice.com. 2/3/2009.
4. McQuarrie, Brian. "Guard, clinic at odds at abortion hearing." Boston Globe, April16, 1999.
5. Elliott Institute. After Abortion.org. Facts Sheets & Healing:The UnChoice.com.
Rue, V.M., P.K. Coleman, J.J. Rue, and D. C. Reardon. "Induced abortion and traumatic stress: a preliminary comparison of American and Russian Women." Medical Science Monitor. Sept. 23, 2004. Oc:10(10):SR5-16. E-pub.
6. Guttmacher Institute. "State Policies in Brief:An Overview of Abortion Laws".
www.guttmacher.org. January 1, 2009.
7. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Jan. 30, 2009. "Freedom of Choice Act."
http://wn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Choice_Act.
8.Butts, Charlie. Jan. 28, 2009. "The fight against FOCA begins."
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Printer.aspx?id-399060.
9. Tumulty, Karen and Viveca Novak. January 27, 2003. "Under the Radar-Thirty years after Roe v. Wade." Time. Vol. 161. No. 3:38-41.
10. National Right to Life. http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/facts/abortionstats.html.
2/2/2009.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Strength To Love
Today, Martin Luther King Day of 2009, is a momentous occasion as we look forward to tomorrow when Barack Obama, the first African American president, will take the oath of office as the 44th president of the United States. Obama will be using the same Bible used by the 16th president, Abraham Lincoln, at his inauguration in 1861.
The American promise of equality and freedom rings true as people of all races gather on the Washington Mall from all over the country and the world to prepare for the inauguration of President Obama.
The gathering is reminiscent of and a consequence of the orderly demonstration of 250,000 people who gathered on the Washington Mall over 45 years ago on August 28th of 1963 for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. It was here that the historic, I Have a Dream speech, was delivered by Dr. King as he stood in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
His speech, replayed in full over CNN news today, spoke of the future struggle for justice. He warned that the struggle would be hard and many would be imprisoned for their efforts. However, Dr. King said, "We must not be guilty of wrongful deeds, not drink from the cup of bitterness and hatred"...but rather move in the "high plain of dignity and discipline...meeting physical force with soul force.".
DIGNIFIED AND NON-VIOLENT
Dr King, other black ministers and leaders of the civil rights movement were insistent that the demonstrations for freedom would be controlled, orderly, dignified and non-violent. People who could not accept this condition were asked to leave. The strength, discipline and determination of these demonstrators spoke to the hearts of many Americans as they watched with horror on television the attacking dogs, water hosings and imprisonment of the demonstrators.
This powerful strength to love, in spite of past and present violence against them, was a convincing factor that led to the passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965.
The determination and ability of black leadership to speak truth to love laid the foundation of a a just society for all people.
As a Baptist minister at the Ebenezer Baptist church in Atlanta, Dr. King held firm to the teachings of Jesus. In 1963, he published a book of his sermons entitled Strength to Love.
The remaining portion of this entry will honor Dr. King's wisdom by presenting excerpts from one of his sermons entitled "Loving Your Enemies".
LOVING YOUR ENEMIES
from: Strength to Love. by Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. pgs. 49-57.
Probably no admonition of Jesus has been more difficult to follow than the command to "love your enemies". Some have sincerely felt that its actual practice is not possible...Others, like the philosopher Nietzsche, contend that Jesus' exhortation to love one's enemies is testimony to the fact that the Christian ethic is designed for the weak and cowardly, and not for the strong and courageous. Jesus, they say was an impractical idealist...
Jesus is not an impractical idealist: he is the practical realist.
I am certain that Jesus understood the difficulty inherent in the act of loving one's enemy. He never joined the ranks of those who talked glibly about the moral life...
HOW DO WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
First, we must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive... Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. It means, rather, that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning.
Second, we must recognise that the evil deed of the enemy-neighbor, the thing that hurts, never quite expresses all that he is. An element of goodness may be found even in our worst enemy...
Third, we must not seek to defeat or humiliate the enemy but to win his friendship and understanding...
Every word and deed must contribute to an understanding with the enemy and release those vast reservoirs of goodwill which have been blocked by impenetrable walls of hatred...
LOVE IS AGAPE
Love is something much deeper than emotional bosh... An overflowing love which seeks nothing in return, Agape, is the love of God operating in the human heart. At this level, we love not because we like them... we love the person who does an evil deed, although we hate the deed that he does.
How can we be affectionate toward a person whose avowed aim is to crush our very being and place innumerable stumbling blocks in our path?...
When Jesus bids us to love our enemies he is speaking of Agape - understanding and creative, redemptive goodwill for all.
WHY SHOULD WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
The first reason is fairly obvious. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars...
Another reason why we must love our enemies is that hate scars the soul and distorts the personality... Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes that personality and eats away its vital unity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
...Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend. By its very nature, hate destroys and tears down; by its very nature, love creates and builds up.
Love transforms with redemptive power.
The American promise of equality and freedom rings true as people of all races gather on the Washington Mall from all over the country and the world to prepare for the inauguration of President Obama.
The gathering is reminiscent of and a consequence of the orderly demonstration of 250,000 people who gathered on the Washington Mall over 45 years ago on August 28th of 1963 for the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. It was here that the historic, I Have a Dream speech, was delivered by Dr. King as he stood in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
His speech, replayed in full over CNN news today, spoke of the future struggle for justice. He warned that the struggle would be hard and many would be imprisoned for their efforts. However, Dr. King said, "We must not be guilty of wrongful deeds, not drink from the cup of bitterness and hatred"...but rather move in the "high plain of dignity and discipline...meeting physical force with soul force.".
DIGNIFIED AND NON-VIOLENT
Dr King, other black ministers and leaders of the civil rights movement were insistent that the demonstrations for freedom would be controlled, orderly, dignified and non-violent. People who could not accept this condition were asked to leave. The strength, discipline and determination of these demonstrators spoke to the hearts of many Americans as they watched with horror on television the attacking dogs, water hosings and imprisonment of the demonstrators.
This powerful strength to love, in spite of past and present violence against them, was a convincing factor that led to the passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and the voting rights act of 1965.
The determination and ability of black leadership to speak truth to love laid the foundation of a a just society for all people.
As a Baptist minister at the Ebenezer Baptist church in Atlanta, Dr. King held firm to the teachings of Jesus. In 1963, he published a book of his sermons entitled Strength to Love.
The remaining portion of this entry will honor Dr. King's wisdom by presenting excerpts from one of his sermons entitled "Loving Your Enemies".
LOVING YOUR ENEMIES
from: Strength to Love. by Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. pgs. 49-57.
Probably no admonition of Jesus has been more difficult to follow than the command to "love your enemies". Some have sincerely felt that its actual practice is not possible...Others, like the philosopher Nietzsche, contend that Jesus' exhortation to love one's enemies is testimony to the fact that the Christian ethic is designed for the weak and cowardly, and not for the strong and courageous. Jesus, they say was an impractical idealist...
Jesus is not an impractical idealist: he is the practical realist.
I am certain that Jesus understood the difficulty inherent in the act of loving one's enemy. He never joined the ranks of those who talked glibly about the moral life...
HOW DO WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
First, we must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive... Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. It means, rather, that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning.
Second, we must recognise that the evil deed of the enemy-neighbor, the thing that hurts, never quite expresses all that he is. An element of goodness may be found even in our worst enemy...
Third, we must not seek to defeat or humiliate the enemy but to win his friendship and understanding...
Every word and deed must contribute to an understanding with the enemy and release those vast reservoirs of goodwill which have been blocked by impenetrable walls of hatred...
LOVE IS AGAPE
Love is something much deeper than emotional bosh... An overflowing love which seeks nothing in return, Agape, is the love of God operating in the human heart. At this level, we love not because we like them... we love the person who does an evil deed, although we hate the deed that he does.
How can we be affectionate toward a person whose avowed aim is to crush our very being and place innumerable stumbling blocks in our path?...
When Jesus bids us to love our enemies he is speaking of Agape - understanding and creative, redemptive goodwill for all.
WHY SHOULD WE LOVE OUR ENEMIES?
The first reason is fairly obvious. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars...
Another reason why we must love our enemies is that hate scars the soul and distorts the personality... Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes that personality and eats away its vital unity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
...Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend. By its very nature, hate destroys and tears down; by its very nature, love creates and builds up.
Love transforms with redemptive power.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Vast Conclusions from Half Vast Data
Recently a group of scientists, science teachers, and interested Texans went before the Texas State Board of Education and "pleaded with the 15 member board not to confuse public school children with a watered-down teaching of evolution by requiring teachers to teach its weaknesses or limitations".
This month the State Board of Education will take a preliminary vote on "new science curriculum standards that will dictate new science textbooks for the state's 4.5 million students".
Steven Schafersman, president of 'Texas Citizens for Science' told the board, "Scientists want to get rid of this weaknesses wording...Scientific theories don't have weaknesses."
Paul Kramer, a Texas engineer, countered this argument. He presented names of 700 scientists from around the world who doubt the claims for random mutation and natural selection. Kramer said that restricting debate is out of place in a free society. He said, "It smacks of oppression and tyranny and reminds us of another darker time in Germany where brown shirted, black-booted thought police burned books and crushed any free debate."
Educators around the United States watch closely to see the direction Texas moves because their decisions on controversial issues influence the content of books. 1.
SCIENTIST PRIESTS?
In the late 1960's Spencer Klaw examined the organization of the scientific community and scientific research in the United States. He concluded that "Science has become a form of established religion and scientists its priests and ministers." 2.
This conclusion was prophecied in the early 1800's when Auguste Comte, a French social thinker who was greatly concerned by growing social problems, contended that social relationships and society operate by laws that could be discovered through the application of scientific principles. He believed that 'scientist priests' could use the methods employed by the natural sciences to discover the natural laws of social relationships. These discovered laws would be used to develop a planned socialist society for the benefit of mankind that would replace the religious view of society based on the revelation of God's will. 3.
WAYS OF KNOWING
The world we live in is largely an unknown entity. We give meaning and understanding to the world around us through subjective experience, traditional authority, mystical understanding, and reasoned logic.
Increasingly, however, these personal ways of knowing are being supplanted by science, a systematic method that bases knowledge on observation of information that can be verified with our senses,
In the 1700's, the Age of Enlightenment ushered in an era of progress through science with an emphasis on human reason and scientific discovery. Only that which could be observed and verified scientifically was considered meaningful. Supernaturalism was viewed as outdated by the intellectuals of the time.
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
The scientific method is one mode of obtaining understanding about the world around us. Science is a way of generating and testing the truth of statements.
The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systmatically collected.
The scientific method consists of two processes: theorizing and research based on observable (empirical) information.
THE RESEARCH PROCESS 4.
* The process begins by defining the problem to be examined.
* Literature is reviewed which describes previous studies that have been done on the problem.
* A theory, which is a framework suggesting how two or more variable factors are related to each other, is developed.
* Through a process of logical deduction, an hypothesis is developed that predicts how one variable will affect or change another. An hypothesis is an If-Then statement. If (this) occurs then (that) will occur.
* A research method is developed to determine what data are to be collected and how they will be sampled and analyzed.
* The observations of the data are collected.
* The sample measurements are summarized.
* Generalizations are drawn from the conclusions as to whether the hypothesis was confirmed.
* The theory is confirmed or revised, depending on the results of the research.
QUESTIONS TO ASK OF RESEARCH
The value of research depends on accurate measurement of variables, a well drawn sample, and objective analysis of data.
Before the results of a scientific study are accepted as valuable, questions should be considered.
* What definitions were used to define the variables that were measured?
* How were the variables measured?
* Why was the research carried out?
* What were the motivations of the researchers?
* Who sponsored the research?
* What were the qualifications of the researchers?
* How large was the sample of observations and how was the sample drawn?
* Where was the sample drawn?
* When was the study done?
* Were all of the results considered in the conclusions?
CONCERNS WITH ADVOCACY RESEARCH
When a researcher studies a problem with an 'ideological imperative', politically acceptable findings may become more important than the quality of the research.
Research studies are often used to raise public consciousness toward acceptance for
a political agenda or to develop scientific legitimacy for social programs.
The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.
SCIENTISM
Science, unfortunately, can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. Merriam Webster defines scientism as "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)". 5.
Pbs.org. discusses scientism in this way. "Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality... Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. 6.
AGAINST METHOD
Paul Feyerabend, professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, in his book, Against Method, contends that progress in science has not been made by following the scientific method. He notes that the gathering of facts are biased and distorted by theories and that the observation of facts are distorted by selective perception and prejudice.
Feyerabend observes that the scientific process is full of sordid personal controversy that comes closer to mob psychology than methodology.
He concludes that theories in science prevail not because they convince their opponents, but because they overpower them.
He believes that the search for truth must encompass a pluralistic methodology, including that of art, philosophy, religion and politics, because only a method that encourages variety is humanitarian. 7.
SEPARATION OF STATE AND SCIENCE
Feyerabend states, "As the accepting and rejecting of ideologies should be left to the individual, it follows that the separation of state and church must be supplemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. Such a separation may be our only chance to achieve a humanity we are capable of, but have never fully realized". (pg. 295).
REFERENCES
1. Scharrer, Gary. "Scientists Speak up for Evolution". San Antonio Express News. November 20, 2008:B1.
2. Klaw, Spencer. The New Brahmins, Scientific Life in America. NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1968:12.
3. Macionis, John J. Sociology: The Basics. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. 1997: Chapters 1 and 4.
4. Wallace, Walter. The Logic of Science in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine Press:1971.
5. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam Webster, Inc. Springfield, Mass. 1988:1051.
6. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/scism-body.html. 1/11/2009.
7. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk, Great Britain: The Thetford Press Ltd. 1975.
This month the State Board of Education will take a preliminary vote on "new science curriculum standards that will dictate new science textbooks for the state's 4.5 million students".
Steven Schafersman, president of 'Texas Citizens for Science' told the board, "Scientists want to get rid of this weaknesses wording...Scientific theories don't have weaknesses."
Paul Kramer, a Texas engineer, countered this argument. He presented names of 700 scientists from around the world who doubt the claims for random mutation and natural selection. Kramer said that restricting debate is out of place in a free society. He said, "It smacks of oppression and tyranny and reminds us of another darker time in Germany where brown shirted, black-booted thought police burned books and crushed any free debate."
Educators around the United States watch closely to see the direction Texas moves because their decisions on controversial issues influence the content of books. 1.
SCIENTIST PRIESTS?
In the late 1960's Spencer Klaw examined the organization of the scientific community and scientific research in the United States. He concluded that "Science has become a form of established religion and scientists its priests and ministers." 2.
This conclusion was prophecied in the early 1800's when Auguste Comte, a French social thinker who was greatly concerned by growing social problems, contended that social relationships and society operate by laws that could be discovered through the application of scientific principles. He believed that 'scientist priests' could use the methods employed by the natural sciences to discover the natural laws of social relationships. These discovered laws would be used to develop a planned socialist society for the benefit of mankind that would replace the religious view of society based on the revelation of God's will. 3.
WAYS OF KNOWING
The world we live in is largely an unknown entity. We give meaning and understanding to the world around us through subjective experience, traditional authority, mystical understanding, and reasoned logic.
Increasingly, however, these personal ways of knowing are being supplanted by science, a systematic method that bases knowledge on observation of information that can be verified with our senses,
In the 1700's, the Age of Enlightenment ushered in an era of progress through science with an emphasis on human reason and scientific discovery. Only that which could be observed and verified scientifically was considered meaningful. Supernaturalism was viewed as outdated by the intellectuals of the time.
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
The scientific method is one mode of obtaining understanding about the world around us. Science is a way of generating and testing the truth of statements.
The process of scientific investigation attempts to overcome personal bias and preference by a reliance on an objective analysis of facts systmatically collected.
The scientific method consists of two processes: theorizing and research based on observable (empirical) information.
THE RESEARCH PROCESS 4.
* The process begins by defining the problem to be examined.
* Literature is reviewed which describes previous studies that have been done on the problem.
* A theory, which is a framework suggesting how two or more variable factors are related to each other, is developed.
* Through a process of logical deduction, an hypothesis is developed that predicts how one variable will affect or change another. An hypothesis is an If-Then statement. If (this) occurs then (that) will occur.
* A research method is developed to determine what data are to be collected and how they will be sampled and analyzed.
* The observations of the data are collected.
* The sample measurements are summarized.
* Generalizations are drawn from the conclusions as to whether the hypothesis was confirmed.
* The theory is confirmed or revised, depending on the results of the research.
QUESTIONS TO ASK OF RESEARCH
The value of research depends on accurate measurement of variables, a well drawn sample, and objective analysis of data.
Before the results of a scientific study are accepted as valuable, questions should be considered.
* What definitions were used to define the variables that were measured?
* How were the variables measured?
* Why was the research carried out?
* What were the motivations of the researchers?
* Who sponsored the research?
* What were the qualifications of the researchers?
* How large was the sample of observations and how was the sample drawn?
* Where was the sample drawn?
* When was the study done?
* Were all of the results considered in the conclusions?
CONCERNS WITH ADVOCACY RESEARCH
When a researcher studies a problem with an 'ideological imperative', politically acceptable findings may become more important than the quality of the research.
Research studies are often used to raise public consciousness toward acceptance for
a political agenda or to develop scientific legitimacy for social programs.
The temptation may be to distort the results by using only a portion of the data that supports the agenda or to widely over generalize the results to imply 'all' when only 'some' is appropriate.
SCIENTISM
Science, unfortunately, can be and sometimes is misused for political agendas. Merriam Webster defines scientism as "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)". 5.
Pbs.org. discusses scientism in this way. "Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality... Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. 6.
AGAINST METHOD
Paul Feyerabend, professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, in his book, Against Method, contends that progress in science has not been made by following the scientific method. He notes that the gathering of facts are biased and distorted by theories and that the observation of facts are distorted by selective perception and prejudice.
Feyerabend observes that the scientific process is full of sordid personal controversy that comes closer to mob psychology than methodology.
He concludes that theories in science prevail not because they convince their opponents, but because they overpower them.
He believes that the search for truth must encompass a pluralistic methodology, including that of art, philosophy, religion and politics, because only a method that encourages variety is humanitarian. 7.
SEPARATION OF STATE AND SCIENCE
Feyerabend states, "As the accepting and rejecting of ideologies should be left to the individual, it follows that the separation of state and church must be supplemented by the separation of state and science, that most recent, most aggressive, and most dogmatic religious institution. Such a separation may be our only chance to achieve a humanity we are capable of, but have never fully realized". (pg. 295).
REFERENCES
1. Scharrer, Gary. "Scientists Speak up for Evolution". San Antonio Express News. November 20, 2008:B1.
2. Klaw, Spencer. The New Brahmins, Scientific Life in America. NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc. 1968:12.
3. Macionis, John J. Sociology: The Basics. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall. 1997: Chapters 1 and 4.
4. Wallace, Walter. The Logic of Science in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine Press:1971.
5. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Merriam Webster, Inc. Springfield, Mass. 1988:1051.
6. http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/scism-body.html. 1/11/2009.
7. Feyerabend, Paul. Against Method. Thetford, Norfolk, Great Britain: The Thetford Press Ltd. 1975.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Imagine No Religion. Impossible!
The weeks before Christmas are a beautiful and magical time in our homes and communities. The rich and mellow carols of peace and goodwill echo in the streets, in the churches and over the media. Sharing, caring and giving are spread throughout the land.
However, in driving home the other day here in San Antonio, Texas I saw a large elaborate billboard that said, "Imagine No Religion". The billboard, promoted by the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) out of Madison, WI, is being placed in cities across the country. The FFRF, an association of atheists and agnostics, was formed in 1978 to promote freethought and to keep state and church separate. 1.
It is impossible to 'imagine no religion'. All persons and groups develop meaning systems that guide their decisions and behaviors which they then pursue with religious fervor.
In 1933, The Humanist Manifesto, contending that spiritual reality, worship, and prayer were false hopes, outlined the blueprint of faith for what they outlined as religious humanism based on science. 2.
In 1966, Anton Szandor LaVey contended that "The Church of Satan will be the pivotal point for an acknowledged belief system of the 21st Century". 3.
These religious faith systems, without any challenge or criticism, have become deeply involved with the state.
Nazism, Stalinism and Maoism were certainly organized as religions.
IMAGINE NO GOD!
THE POWER OF GOD PROTECTS FROM THE POWER OF THE STATE
When FFRF asks us to 'Imagine no religion' they are in reality asking us to imagine that there is no God, no higher power, no spiritual reality, or moral authority to which we are accountable, no reality or rightness that exists beyond human ability to manipulate or manage.
The attempt to remove the concept of God from our society raises deep and legitimate fears related to individual integrity, freedom and survival.
Faith in spiritual reality and authority is the sole liberating force which can supply freedom and integrity to individuals. Rights endowed by the state can be retracted by the state. Rights endowed by a Creator are beyond manipulation.
POWER TO CONTROL
Power is the ability to compel the will and action of another through influence, physical force, or intimidation. To gain total control rulers must control the authority structure, the distribution of rewards and punishments, and the surveillance mechanisms of society.
Dictators who seek to gain total control must eliminate alternatives which are beyond their ability to manipulate.
Social moral authority
In a discussion of the sources of moral authority in a sociology class, I mentioned The Ten Commandments as basic to Judeo/Christian moral understanding. A Muslim student in class raised his hand to correct me, saying "The Ten Commandments are basic to Judeo/Christian/Islamic moral understanding".
In our society, The Ten Commandments, The Sermon on the Mount, and the Declaration of Independence have been accepted as directives, truths, and inalienable rights endowed by the Creator.
Religious humanism, as outlined in The Humanist Manifesto, declares that modern science makes unacceptable inalienable human values.
The removal of The Ten Commandments from the foundation of our court system seeks to remove from our society faith in a transcendent authority and higher source of moral rightness beyond the state.
The radio commentator Dennis Prager said, "I regard the demise of Christianity in America (as a) nightmare - and I say that as a believing, religious Jew... The battle is no longer Jew versus Christianity, but Jew and Christian versus secular nihilism." 4.
Social Control
Social power requires control over the rewards that motivate people to strive and the punishments that deter. The rewards most available to managerial distribution are money, status and prestige.
Transcendent religions, however, maintain that the most desirous rewards relate to spiritual integrity rather than the transient rewards of personal gain.
Persecution for righteousness sake is the refining fire of the soul and 'great is your reward in heaven'. Attempts at coercion, harassment and intimidation lose their power to destroy, oppress and compel.
Social Surveillance
Control requires surveillance. In a nation that trusts in the all-seeing eye of a just God, control is maintained by bringing individuals into awareness of the expected and appropriate spiritual and social behaviors. People are then expected to control their own behaviors in light of this knowledge. With the elimination of the concept of God new types of surveillance must be used to ensure compliance with appropriate social norms.
STEPS TOWARD TOTAL POWER
Total power is not power for the 'good of the people' but rather power to determine what the people shall perceive as their good. It is the power to define or rather redefine right and wrong.
Transcendent religions which remove this authority from would be dictators must be destroyed by them.
A series of steps is used to de-program a society from the concept of spiritual authority, reward, and surveillance.
The first step is toleration. The word is used not as respect for religious seeking and diversity, but rather is used to imply endurance.
The second step is ridicule in the form of sarcasm, cartoons, and mocking caricature.
The third step is oppression. This includes deliberate obstruction through such avenues as economic sanctions and exclusion from the roles of social status, prestige and responsibility.
The fourth step is persecution and consists of physical harassment and removal and destruction through brainwashing or death
The most necessary step, however, is control over the shaping process of the children. Total control must be gained over the process whereby people learn to assign legitimate authority, reward, and surveillance.
VULNERABLE TO OPPRESSION
With the removal of the concept of spiritual reality and rightness, individuals are left ultimately vulnerable to being controlled (and crushed) by the capricious distribution of rewards and punishment.
The courage to dissent, the courage to live authentically, the courage to stand alone for what you believe to be right can only be born of the assurance that the ultimate rewards of personal integrity will surpass the immediate punishment.
The society that is unable to grant inalienable value, liberty and integrity to individuals cannot be good for the people.
REFERENCES:
1. Freedom From Religion Foundation. 12/18/2008. http://www.ffrf.org.
2. Humanist Manifesto I. The New Humanist. Vol. VI. No.3 (May/June) 1933.
http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html.
3. Bugbee,Shane and Amy Bugbee. "The Doctor is in...MF Magazine.No.3.1997.
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/MFInterview.html.
4. Laconte, Joe."The battle to define America turns violent". Christianity Today. Vol. 37. No. 12 (Oct 25) 1993:76.
However, in driving home the other day here in San Antonio, Texas I saw a large elaborate billboard that said, "Imagine No Religion". The billboard, promoted by the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) out of Madison, WI, is being placed in cities across the country. The FFRF, an association of atheists and agnostics, was formed in 1978 to promote freethought and to keep state and church separate. 1.
It is impossible to 'imagine no religion'. All persons and groups develop meaning systems that guide their decisions and behaviors which they then pursue with religious fervor.
In 1933, The Humanist Manifesto, contending that spiritual reality, worship, and prayer were false hopes, outlined the blueprint of faith for what they outlined as religious humanism based on science. 2.
In 1966, Anton Szandor LaVey contended that "The Church of Satan will be the pivotal point for an acknowledged belief system of the 21st Century". 3.
These religious faith systems, without any challenge or criticism, have become deeply involved with the state.
Nazism, Stalinism and Maoism were certainly organized as religions.
IMAGINE NO GOD!
THE POWER OF GOD PROTECTS FROM THE POWER OF THE STATE
When FFRF asks us to 'Imagine no religion' they are in reality asking us to imagine that there is no God, no higher power, no spiritual reality, or moral authority to which we are accountable, no reality or rightness that exists beyond human ability to manipulate or manage.
The attempt to remove the concept of God from our society raises deep and legitimate fears related to individual integrity, freedom and survival.
Faith in spiritual reality and authority is the sole liberating force which can supply freedom and integrity to individuals. Rights endowed by the state can be retracted by the state. Rights endowed by a Creator are beyond manipulation.
POWER TO CONTROL
Power is the ability to compel the will and action of another through influence, physical force, or intimidation. To gain total control rulers must control the authority structure, the distribution of rewards and punishments, and the surveillance mechanisms of society.
Dictators who seek to gain total control must eliminate alternatives which are beyond their ability to manipulate.
Social moral authority
In a discussion of the sources of moral authority in a sociology class, I mentioned The Ten Commandments as basic to Judeo/Christian moral understanding. A Muslim student in class raised his hand to correct me, saying "The Ten Commandments are basic to Judeo/Christian/Islamic moral understanding".
In our society, The Ten Commandments, The Sermon on the Mount, and the Declaration of Independence have been accepted as directives, truths, and inalienable rights endowed by the Creator.
Religious humanism, as outlined in The Humanist Manifesto, declares that modern science makes unacceptable inalienable human values.
The removal of The Ten Commandments from the foundation of our court system seeks to remove from our society faith in a transcendent authority and higher source of moral rightness beyond the state.
The radio commentator Dennis Prager said, "I regard the demise of Christianity in America (as a) nightmare - and I say that as a believing, religious Jew... The battle is no longer Jew versus Christianity, but Jew and Christian versus secular nihilism." 4.
Social Control
Social power requires control over the rewards that motivate people to strive and the punishments that deter. The rewards most available to managerial distribution are money, status and prestige.
Transcendent religions, however, maintain that the most desirous rewards relate to spiritual integrity rather than the transient rewards of personal gain.
Persecution for righteousness sake is the refining fire of the soul and 'great is your reward in heaven'. Attempts at coercion, harassment and intimidation lose their power to destroy, oppress and compel.
Social Surveillance
Control requires surveillance. In a nation that trusts in the all-seeing eye of a just God, control is maintained by bringing individuals into awareness of the expected and appropriate spiritual and social behaviors. People are then expected to control their own behaviors in light of this knowledge. With the elimination of the concept of God new types of surveillance must be used to ensure compliance with appropriate social norms.
STEPS TOWARD TOTAL POWER
Total power is not power for the 'good of the people' but rather power to determine what the people shall perceive as their good. It is the power to define or rather redefine right and wrong.
Transcendent religions which remove this authority from would be dictators must be destroyed by them.
A series of steps is used to de-program a society from the concept of spiritual authority, reward, and surveillance.
The first step is toleration. The word is used not as respect for religious seeking and diversity, but rather is used to imply endurance.
The second step is ridicule in the form of sarcasm, cartoons, and mocking caricature.
The third step is oppression. This includes deliberate obstruction through such avenues as economic sanctions and exclusion from the roles of social status, prestige and responsibility.
The fourth step is persecution and consists of physical harassment and removal and destruction through brainwashing or death
The most necessary step, however, is control over the shaping process of the children. Total control must be gained over the process whereby people learn to assign legitimate authority, reward, and surveillance.
VULNERABLE TO OPPRESSION
With the removal of the concept of spiritual reality and rightness, individuals are left ultimately vulnerable to being controlled (and crushed) by the capricious distribution of rewards and punishment.
The courage to dissent, the courage to live authentically, the courage to stand alone for what you believe to be right can only be born of the assurance that the ultimate rewards of personal integrity will surpass the immediate punishment.
The society that is unable to grant inalienable value, liberty and integrity to individuals cannot be good for the people.
REFERENCES:
1. Freedom From Religion Foundation. 12/18/2008. http://www.ffrf.org.
2. Humanist Manifesto I. The New Humanist. Vol. VI. No.3 (May/June) 1933.
http://www.jcn.com/manifestos.html.
3. Bugbee,Shane and Amy Bugbee. "The Doctor is in...MF Magazine.No.3.1997.
http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/MFInterview.html.
4. Laconte, Joe."The battle to define America turns violent". Christianity Today. Vol. 37. No. 12 (Oct 25) 1993:76.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
The New Morality Threatens Us All.
Fifty years ago Nikita Kruschev prophesied, "We will bury you". While this statement may be ambiguous, the direction our society has taken is not ambiguous. We have become willing accomplices in our own execution. We have dug our own graves.
LIBERATION NOW
In 1884, Friedrich Engels, the lifelong friend of Karl Marx and co-author of the Communist Manifesto, wrote a major citation of 'liberation' literature entitled "On the Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State". 1. This article outlined the blueprint for the liberation of men and women from binding family relationships and the 'oppression of monogamy'.
Engels saw two problems in the practice of lifelong, monogamous marriage. The first problem: after marriage a woman becomes the private property of her husband. Consequently unmarried men are able to find very few women willing to give themselves to them outside of prostitution. Engels contended that the exchange of sex love for money "degrades the character of the entire male world".
The second problem: marriage makes women the slave of their husbands. The husband earns and controls the economic base of the family, keeping the woman dependent upon him.
A NEW MORALITY
Engels proposed the solution to both of these problems by outlining a new morality and a new social order which involved:
* drawing "the entire female sex into public industry",
* making men and women equal "in rights and responsibilities",
* passing "the means of production into common property",
* abolishing the family as "the economic unit of society",
* transforming private housekeeping "into a social industry", and
* having society "take care of all children equally irrespective of whether they were born in wedlock or not".
SEX LOVE REPLACES COMMITTED FAMILY LOVE
Engels contended that this new social organization would give rise "to more unrestrained sexual intercourse, and along with it, a more lenient public opinion regarding virginal honour and feminine shame". The new moral standard for judging sexual intercourse would not be whether it is legitimate, but "whether it arose from mutual love or not."
From these changes will spring the new morality that Engels identified as Sex Love. "If only marriages that are based on love are moral, then also only those are moral in which love continues". Because "the urge of individual Sex Love differs," when affection is "displaced by a new passionate love", separation becomes a blessing.
Engels' new morality attacked and sought to overturn the behavioral and authority patterns of committed family practices. He outlined basic changes in social and personal interaction patterns and responsibilities.
OUR CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS BOUGHT IT AND SOLD IT TO US.
In the last 50 years the mainstream media, liberal influences in the universities, and social legislation have replaced the foundation of family love with support for sex love.
When changes are made, some things of value may be gained but others are lost.
Can such ideas lead us to greater happiness, or will such disposable love lead us to the even greater oppression of our own passions?
CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES
# Before 1960, the expectation of marriage was to "love and cherish, till death us do part, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health".
In 1960, the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act outlined No-Fault divorce laws where fault was eliminated as a grounds for divorce. The first No-faultlaws were established in California in 1970, and within 10 years most of the other states followed. These laws removed power from the person wanting to remain married and gave it to the person wanting to leave a relationship.
The number of divorces in the United States rose rapidly, creating large numbers of single parent homes and emotional, financial, and structural problems for adults and children.
# Divorce accelerated the feminization of poverty. After divorce, the man's income generally rises, while the income of women and children falls, often drastically.
Children suffer in a divorce in many ways. Besides losing the nurturing presence of a parent, a study by the Census Bureau found that children could expect to become 37% poorer following the divorce of their parents. 2.
The effects of divorce on children often accumulate over time, getting worse instead of better. 3.
# Another troubling spinoff of divorce occurs when one parent, in violation of court orders, violates conditions of visitation or tries to remove a child from contact with the other parent. It is estimated that 350,000 parental abductions occur each year. The child is traumatized and the offending parent becomes a criminal. 4.
# Venereal disease has risen to epidemic proportions. Sex outside of committed, monogamous relationships has become normalized in our society, even among teens. In March of 2008, researchers at the federal Center for Disease Control announced that 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted disease. The most common, the human papilloma virus, causes cervical cancer. The second most common, Chlamydia, can lead to infertility. 5.
The cumulative estimated deaths of persons with AIDS in the United States in 2005 was 530,307 persons. The first cases were reported in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those affected with AIDS are male. Bisexual behaviors have transferred the disease to the heterosexual community. 6.
# In the wake of Roe v. Wade in 1973, more than 45 million abortions were performed in the United States by the year 2000. 80% of abortions are to unmarried women, and 52% are to women younger than 25 years of age. 7.
WHERE WILL THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR BEHAVIOR END?
As we consider the acceleration of our descent into destruction, it becomes evident that we must change if we are to regain control of our relationships and our society.
If we are unable to remove the blinders from our eyes and see beyond the Pollyana smiles that tell us all is well, if we are unable to regain our moral convictions, and more importantly, the courage of our convictions, we may discover that the prophecy of Kruschev becomes the prophecy of the poet T.S. Eliot, who predicted:
THIS IS THE WAY THE WORLD WILL END.
This is the Way the World Will End.
this is the way the world will end.
Not with a BANG, but with a whimper.
References
1. Engels, Friedrich. "The origin of the family, private property, and the state". In: The Marx-Engels Reader. Robert C. Tucher (ed.) NY:Norton. 1978 (1884) pgs. 743-751.
2. Boublin, Gina. "Study: Children lose more than just parents in divorce." Bryan/College Station Eagle (TX) March 2, 1991.
3. Wallerstein, Judith. The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Study.
4. Child Abduction Statistics. The National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Throwaway Children (NISMART). http://www.lostchildren.org/statistics.htm. Nov. 28, 2008.
5. The Associated Press. March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940.
6. Center for Disease Control Statistics. July, 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheet/print/msm.htm.
7. Center for Disease Control - Abortion Surveillance - U.S, 2000.
LIBERATION NOW
In 1884, Friedrich Engels, the lifelong friend of Karl Marx and co-author of the Communist Manifesto, wrote a major citation of 'liberation' literature entitled "On the Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State". 1. This article outlined the blueprint for the liberation of men and women from binding family relationships and the 'oppression of monogamy'.
Engels saw two problems in the practice of lifelong, monogamous marriage. The first problem: after marriage a woman becomes the private property of her husband. Consequently unmarried men are able to find very few women willing to give themselves to them outside of prostitution. Engels contended that the exchange of sex love for money "degrades the character of the entire male world".
The second problem: marriage makes women the slave of their husbands. The husband earns and controls the economic base of the family, keeping the woman dependent upon him.
A NEW MORALITY
Engels proposed the solution to both of these problems by outlining a new morality and a new social order which involved:
* drawing "the entire female sex into public industry",
* making men and women equal "in rights and responsibilities",
* passing "the means of production into common property",
* abolishing the family as "the economic unit of society",
* transforming private housekeeping "into a social industry", and
* having society "take care of all children equally irrespective of whether they were born in wedlock or not".
SEX LOVE REPLACES COMMITTED FAMILY LOVE
Engels contended that this new social organization would give rise "to more unrestrained sexual intercourse, and along with it, a more lenient public opinion regarding virginal honour and feminine shame". The new moral standard for judging sexual intercourse would not be whether it is legitimate, but "whether it arose from mutual love or not."
From these changes will spring the new morality that Engels identified as Sex Love. "If only marriages that are based on love are moral, then also only those are moral in which love continues". Because "the urge of individual Sex Love differs," when affection is "displaced by a new passionate love", separation becomes a blessing.
Engels' new morality attacked and sought to overturn the behavioral and authority patterns of committed family practices. He outlined basic changes in social and personal interaction patterns and responsibilities.
OUR CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS BOUGHT IT AND SOLD IT TO US.
In the last 50 years the mainstream media, liberal influences in the universities, and social legislation have replaced the foundation of family love with support for sex love.
When changes are made, some things of value may be gained but others are lost.
Can such ideas lead us to greater happiness, or will such disposable love lead us to the even greater oppression of our own passions?
CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES
# Before 1960, the expectation of marriage was to "love and cherish, till death us do part, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health".
In 1960, the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act outlined No-Fault divorce laws where fault was eliminated as a grounds for divorce. The first No-faultlaws were established in California in 1970, and within 10 years most of the other states followed. These laws removed power from the person wanting to remain married and gave it to the person wanting to leave a relationship.
The number of divorces in the United States rose rapidly, creating large numbers of single parent homes and emotional, financial, and structural problems for adults and children.
# Divorce accelerated the feminization of poverty. After divorce, the man's income generally rises, while the income of women and children falls, often drastically.
Children suffer in a divorce in many ways. Besides losing the nurturing presence of a parent, a study by the Census Bureau found that children could expect to become 37% poorer following the divorce of their parents. 2.
The effects of divorce on children often accumulate over time, getting worse instead of better. 3.
# Another troubling spinoff of divorce occurs when one parent, in violation of court orders, violates conditions of visitation or tries to remove a child from contact with the other parent. It is estimated that 350,000 parental abductions occur each year. The child is traumatized and the offending parent becomes a criminal. 4.
# Venereal disease has risen to epidemic proportions. Sex outside of committed, monogamous relationships has become normalized in our society, even among teens. In March of 2008, researchers at the federal Center for Disease Control announced that 1 in 4 teen girls has at least one sexually transmitted disease. The most common, the human papilloma virus, causes cervical cancer. The second most common, Chlamydia, can lead to infertility. 5.
The cumulative estimated deaths of persons with AIDS in the United States in 2005 was 530,307 persons. The first cases were reported in 1981 in the homosexual community. 77% of those affected with AIDS are male. Bisexual behaviors have transferred the disease to the heterosexual community. 6.
# In the wake of Roe v. Wade in 1973, more than 45 million abortions were performed in the United States by the year 2000. 80% of abortions are to unmarried women, and 52% are to women younger than 25 years of age. 7.
WHERE WILL THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR BEHAVIOR END?
As we consider the acceleration of our descent into destruction, it becomes evident that we must change if we are to regain control of our relationships and our society.
If we are unable to remove the blinders from our eyes and see beyond the Pollyana smiles that tell us all is well, if we are unable to regain our moral convictions, and more importantly, the courage of our convictions, we may discover that the prophecy of Kruschev becomes the prophecy of the poet T.S. Eliot, who predicted:
THIS IS THE WAY THE WORLD WILL END.
This is the Way the World Will End.
this is the way the world will end.
Not with a BANG, but with a whimper.
References
1. Engels, Friedrich. "The origin of the family, private property, and the state". In: The Marx-Engels Reader. Robert C. Tucher (ed.) NY:Norton. 1978 (1884) pgs. 743-751.
2. Boublin, Gina. "Study: Children lose more than just parents in divorce." Bryan/College Station Eagle (TX) March 2, 1991.
3. Wallerstein, Judith. The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Study.
4. Child Abduction Statistics. The National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Throwaway Children (NISMART). http://www.lostchildren.org/statistics.htm. Nov. 28, 2008.
5. The Associated Press. March 11, 2008. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23574940.
6. Center for Disease Control Statistics. July, 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheet/print/msm.htm.
7. Center for Disease Control - Abortion Surveillance - U.S, 2000.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Be Wary of Socialism, Very Wary!
Socialism is a vast bureaucracy dictated by the few for the good of the few and the control of the many. A small, elite governing body is responsible for making decisions. Socialism requires total control over the teaching of its citizenry and control over the relationships of its subjects. Citizens are asked, even required, to report their neighbor to government officials for even suspected violations of government directives.
NEED FOR CHECKS AND BALANCES
The beauty, freedom and strength of America, however, and of existence itself lies in a multiplicity of ideas and variations in cultural interpretations. This multiplicity of ideas maintains the checks and balances that prevent abuses of power and encourages evaluation and growth. It is the faith of the free system of government that open and honest debate provides a foundation where the general population can choose what form of laws and regulations will best serve the greatest good. The government is then held accountable to the people for its continuing existence.
U.S. MOVES TOWARD ECONOMIC SOCIALISM
As we watch the economic breakdown in the United States two weeks now before the election of a new president, it becomes evident that decisions by small, elite groups in both business and government have undermined our free economic system and replaced it with economic socialism. We have been misled and misdirected.
We are informed that it is in our best interest to move toward socialism in this time of economic crisis.
POLITICALLY CORRECT SOCIALISM
Socialism has been rampant in the universities for decades. I entered Cornell University to return to graduate school in the early 1970's, another era of social crisis. Watergate trials were playing non-stop on the television. The Vietnam war was waging. Minorities and women were challenging the university system for equal rights. The ideology being presented by the elite academic gurus was that we needed to move toward socialism. 'Benevolent dictatorship' was whispered to be the obvious solution. A chill ran down my spine, because 'benevolent dictatorship' is a contradiction in terms. Socialism continues to be 'politically correct' in the major universities.
In the 1800's, the historian and moralist, Lord Acton, noted the corrupting behavior of absolute power.
"POWER CORRUPTS AND ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY"
Germany, the Soviet Union, and other communist countries have shown us the tragedies related to socialist perspectives in governance, and how all citizens can be drawn into these tragedies.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in his book, The Gulag Archpelago, describes the atrocities of the Soviet prison system. He asks, "Where did this wolf-tribe appear from among our people? Does it really stem from our own roots? Our own blood? It is our own."
He concluldes, "If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."1.
THE BANALITY OF EVIL
In 1961, Hannah Arendt reported on the trial of Otto Adolf Eichmann. She describes the banality of evil, noting that while the deeds Eichmann committed were monstrous, Eichmann, himself, was quite ordinary, neither demonic nor monstrous. What Arendt noticed was thoughtlessness, an inability to think. His responses were cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression.2.
We revolt in horror when we consider what was done in Nazi Germany by medical doctors. Robert Jay Lifton researched and reported the systematic genocide in Auschwitz and elsewhere. He noted that the Nazi motivation of 'killing as a therapeutic imperative' for the good of the Volk compelled medical doctors to participate in the Nazi eugenic vision. Doctors held no authority in deciding orders. They were powerless cogs in a vast machine, a faceless detached bureaucracy.3.
Lifton outlines the principle of 'doubling' which involves the formation of a second, relatively autonomous self, which enables one to participate in evil, while maintaining a prior self that continues as a family person and humane member of society.
CALL FOR CRITICAL THINKNG
Lifton notes that most Nazi doctors were not beasts, they were very ordinary people with families and children. However, the whole society failed to exercise the faculty of thinking critically.
Our present day 'preachings of political correctness' come dangerously close to careless and thoughtless cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression. We are being intimidated into accepting behaviors that render atrocious consequences.
Lifton concludes his discussions on doubling by saying, "In light of the recent record of professionals engaged in mass killings, can this be the century of doubling? Or, given the ever greater potential of professionalization of genocide, will that distinction belong to the twenty-first century? Or, may one ask a little more softly, can we interrupt the process - first, by naming it." 4.
COURAGE OF OUR CONVICTIONS
A crisis is that point in an illness where the patient either recovers or dies. The survival of democracy and the maintenance of the free citizen is dependent upon the vital reactivation of citizen awareness and critical thinking on the part of all. Most importantly, it requires the courage to speak out in support of our convictions.
REFERENCES:
1. Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. The Gulag Archipelago. In Literary Cavalcade. Jan. 1976. Vol. 28, No. 4. Pg. 41.
2. Assy, Bethania. "Eichmann, the Banality of Evil, and Thinking in Arendt's Thought". Pg. 1. http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContAssy.htm.
3. Lifton, Robert Jay. The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. Basic Books. (1986)2000. Pgs. 14-15.
4. Lifton, pg.465.
NEED FOR CHECKS AND BALANCES
The beauty, freedom and strength of America, however, and of existence itself lies in a multiplicity of ideas and variations in cultural interpretations. This multiplicity of ideas maintains the checks and balances that prevent abuses of power and encourages evaluation and growth. It is the faith of the free system of government that open and honest debate provides a foundation where the general population can choose what form of laws and regulations will best serve the greatest good. The government is then held accountable to the people for its continuing existence.
U.S. MOVES TOWARD ECONOMIC SOCIALISM
As we watch the economic breakdown in the United States two weeks now before the election of a new president, it becomes evident that decisions by small, elite groups in both business and government have undermined our free economic system and replaced it with economic socialism. We have been misled and misdirected.
We are informed that it is in our best interest to move toward socialism in this time of economic crisis.
POLITICALLY CORRECT SOCIALISM
Socialism has been rampant in the universities for decades. I entered Cornell University to return to graduate school in the early 1970's, another era of social crisis. Watergate trials were playing non-stop on the television. The Vietnam war was waging. Minorities and women were challenging the university system for equal rights. The ideology being presented by the elite academic gurus was that we needed to move toward socialism. 'Benevolent dictatorship' was whispered to be the obvious solution. A chill ran down my spine, because 'benevolent dictatorship' is a contradiction in terms. Socialism continues to be 'politically correct' in the major universities.
In the 1800's, the historian and moralist, Lord Acton, noted the corrupting behavior of absolute power.
"POWER CORRUPTS AND ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY"
Germany, the Soviet Union, and other communist countries have shown us the tragedies related to socialist perspectives in governance, and how all citizens can be drawn into these tragedies.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, in his book, The Gulag Archpelago, describes the atrocities of the Soviet prison system. He asks, "Where did this wolf-tribe appear from among our people? Does it really stem from our own roots? Our own blood? It is our own."
He concluldes, "If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being."1.
THE BANALITY OF EVIL
In 1961, Hannah Arendt reported on the trial of Otto Adolf Eichmann. She describes the banality of evil, noting that while the deeds Eichmann committed were monstrous, Eichmann, himself, was quite ordinary, neither demonic nor monstrous. What Arendt noticed was thoughtlessness, an inability to think. His responses were cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression.2.
We revolt in horror when we consider what was done in Nazi Germany by medical doctors. Robert Jay Lifton researched and reported the systematic genocide in Auschwitz and elsewhere. He noted that the Nazi motivation of 'killing as a therapeutic imperative' for the good of the Volk compelled medical doctors to participate in the Nazi eugenic vision. Doctors held no authority in deciding orders. They were powerless cogs in a vast machine, a faceless detached bureaucracy.3.
Lifton outlines the principle of 'doubling' which involves the formation of a second, relatively autonomous self, which enables one to participate in evil, while maintaining a prior self that continues as a family person and humane member of society.
CALL FOR CRITICAL THINKNG
Lifton notes that most Nazi doctors were not beasts, they were very ordinary people with families and children. However, the whole society failed to exercise the faculty of thinking critically.
Our present day 'preachings of political correctness' come dangerously close to careless and thoughtless cliches, stock phrases, and standardized codes of expression. We are being intimidated into accepting behaviors that render atrocious consequences.
Lifton concludes his discussions on doubling by saying, "In light of the recent record of professionals engaged in mass killings, can this be the century of doubling? Or, given the ever greater potential of professionalization of genocide, will that distinction belong to the twenty-first century? Or, may one ask a little more softly, can we interrupt the process - first, by naming it." 4.
COURAGE OF OUR CONVICTIONS
A crisis is that point in an illness where the patient either recovers or dies. The survival of democracy and the maintenance of the free citizen is dependent upon the vital reactivation of citizen awareness and critical thinking on the part of all. Most importantly, it requires the courage to speak out in support of our convictions.
REFERENCES:
1. Solzhenitsyn, Aleksandr. The Gulag Archipelago. In Literary Cavalcade. Jan. 1976. Vol. 28, No. 4. Pg. 41.
2. Assy, Bethania. "Eichmann, the Banality of Evil, and Thinking in Arendt's Thought". Pg. 1. http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Cont/ContAssy.htm.
3. Lifton, Robert Jay. The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. Basic Books. (1986)2000. Pgs. 14-15.
4. Lifton, pg.465.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
