I am not sure who is more crazy, those who believe that all the people in the world will one day coexist in loving and peaceful harmony, or psychopaths who know what they do and why they do – but they don’t care.
Okay, so that statement might be a little extreme.
In the past 24 hours I have heard varying viewpoints from different sources:
1. A conservative talk radio host and a couple of callers were lambasting the President’s Administration for wanting to help the Middle East economically in order to mitigate more people joining the likes of ISIS instead of killing them all in some sort of massive blood bath.
2. The sound bite played was of a female from President Obama’s administration trying to make a point that killing people does not support our future goals.
3. A coworker arguing on multiple fronts against things like police brutality, racism in Congress (she claims that 6 members in the Senate today voted against the Civil Rights Act back in 1964 – I can’t find the information via a couple of google searches, but maybe she is right), and in general the prejudices and biases that litter our land. She has lost faith in the American system (not sure what that means exactly, but it sounded like it was a lack of faith in our legislature specifically – not the judicial and executive branches).
4. I watched a video of the Eric Garner arrest to make my own decision about what happened. I don’t have an opinion on it as of now, but I do have some observations and questions:
- Who were the two NYPD guys in plain clothes? It sounded like they might have been undercover to observe Garner selling cigarettes but the camera guy kept saying that Garner was being harassed for breaking up a fight.
- Why did the NYPD need so many people on the scene? 4 plain clothes cops, around 6 uniformed officers, and a bald guy in a business suit with a lanyard thing around his neck who was enforcing his will on the camera guy (not sure what laws he was using to tell the guy filming what to do…)
- The initial take down was not with a choke hold, or rear cateroid restraint. Even after the take down the guy in the green shirt has a modified choke hold for at least 8 seconds, but no more than 10 seconds. As someone who has been choked out properly, a true choke hold takes about 5 to 8 seconds before you lose consciousness. Improper choke holds can last for minutes without damage (again, speaking from experience). The guy in the green shirt did not have a proper choke hold in place and appeared to be holding on for the fall down while other officers moved in. Once on the ground he released.
- I understand that people being arrested say things while being arrested in their defense. Watch old episodes of ‘Cops’ to see this happen every other arrest. But…Garner is a huge guy. He is on the ground. And he is saying he can’t breath. Get off the guy’s head dude in green shirt. The pain you are inflicting on his face isn’t helping with anything.
- And my last observation is that if Garner was in cardia arrest or showing any sign of needing medical attention then why weren’t they treating him accordingly? That was weird to see a perimeter being formed by the police with two uniformed officers standing by his body, and one plain clothes officer a few feet away. Why isn’t anyone helping him by doing CPR?
5. An article in National Geographic about the war on science by ‘reasonable people’. The areas of contention where science is right and others are wrong:
- climate change does not exist
- evolution never happened
- the moon landing was fake
- vaccinations can lead to autism
- genetically modified food is evil
To me this is all conflicting information. It is a world of conflict based on presuppositions (the beliefs and opinions that we bring to every argument whether rational or irrational). It is an irreconcilable world, with people who do not desire reconciliation. I will prove my point with a series of questions:
1. Will you submit to Allah and allow Sharia law (moral and civil law based on the Koran) to take effect in your community and govern the way you live?
2. Will you give over every aspect of your life to Jesus the Christ, and use the Bible of the Catholics or Protestants to tell you how to think, act, and feel?
3. Will you agree to surrender to the laws, mores, and torts of the state and/or federal government regardless of if their decision conflicts with your current beliefs and opinions?
4. Will you allow sexual acts of any nature (homosexual, bestiality, orgies, heterosexual, child molestation, etc…) in all spheres of society to be acceptable?
Do I need to ask some more?
5. Do you agree that governments can use remote technology to kill people they believe a threat to your way of life, even though that government system disagrees with your world view? What if they start killing people where you live that they say are a threat to society and the benefit of the masses?
6. Do you believe that it is okay to destroy hundreds of thousands of people in a single attack if the world view of those people had demonstrated itself in physical violence against people who did not believe their way? I actually believe that a majority of those reading this will agree that it is okay. Interesting…
Not very encouraging today, am I?
What to do about it?
Ask yourself the tough questions. Not sure where to start? Go through the questions above and figure out what you believe and don’t believe. How would you handle life and death decisions if the decisions were in your hands?
Here are a few more:
7. Does it matter whether someone believes in evolution on any level – micro or macro, creationism, intelligent design, that we were planted here by aliens for whatever reason, or ________? Why?
8. Instead of climate change as an issue, look at it from a different standpoint. What role and responsibility does mankind have in taking care of earth and the resources we find and use here? Can we destroy earth and end our own existence? (Hint: the last question is loaded with presupposition material to include answers from question 7)
9. Should we trust each other? What evidence exists to indicate that people are trustworthy or untrustworthy? (I believe a large portion of society bases their answer for this one on subjective experience alone, I know I do)
10. If all religious beliefs are invalid and relic from the age of cavemen seeking answers to things that science can now explain, then what do we replace religion with? Will that ideology be a new religion for us? Can we ever escape religion in all its forms?
Enough for now. Get your answers.