What is America's Future?.......Destruction?

[heights unknown]

Ok;

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

There are a few things of special note on this page:

1. The polls taken of Fox News viewers are skewed as expected.
2. The higher the education, the more skewed towards evolution.

Now, I am establishing a rough equivalency between the obviously religious fundamentalist  views that are apparently at the core of this thread and the results of the polling at the attached link, because it is the closest representation that I can easily find representative polling on. If you have other data, please feel free to present it.

Midway; I respect all views whether Godly, religious, Christian, Atheistic, Agnostic, satanistic, whatever I welcome them and respect them, and would hope that my views are respected as well regardless of whether we disagree or agree.  That's the beauty of these forums and freedom of speech; we list and/or discuss our beliefs, views, opinions but don't have to agree, but SHOULD respect others views, opinions and beliefs.

"HU"

P.S. - and yes I am a Born Again Christian; not religious but Godly (I have my faults but whose perfect?  Certainly not me)...however, I respect everything you say and will read, view, and receive it with an open mind and will not disrespect your views or you while disagreeing. - "HU"

[redglittercoffin]

The supremacy of the federal government and the limitation of states rights is the foundation of the American Constitution,

Huh? 

So the 10th Amendment is just for show?


...of course, thanks to the panty bomber, the 4th is about to be just for show too.  ...but I digress.

[Midway ®]

HU; I have no particular disagreement with you.

You never said that 90% of the people in America agree with your views. You never said that 10% do.

That's fine. BTW, if you have not seen this program, it is probably something you would enjoy:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/



NN: don't build your arguments upon the inadequate foundation of a non existent fact. How about maybe 35% of the people agree with you? Would that alter the persuasive elements of your argument?

I am not putting forth any bogeymen, just look at the polls I cited and draw your own conclusions.

[heights unknown]

HU; I have no particular disagreement with you.

You never said that 90% of the people in America agree with your views. You never said that 10% do.

That's fine. BTW, if you have not seen this program, it is probably something you would enjoy:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/



NN: don't build your arguments upon the inadequate foundation of a non existent fact. How about maybe 35% of the people agree with you? Would that alter the persuasive elements of your argument?

I am not putting forth any bogeymen, just look at the polls I cited and draw your own conclusions.

Thanks Midway; I try to never put out numbers because I don't know who agrees and who doesn't; just hope that all respect my views whether they agree or not.

"HU"

[Ocklawaha]

Heights, there is an excellent 2 books, by Michael Drosnin, a Jewish Atheist writer for the New York Times. They hit the NYT bestseller list in record time. Book one is simply called "The Bible Code" and book two is "The Bible Code II, The Countdown." Michael didn't know what to think when we wrote the first volume, but it's done with the top notch Israeli research university, government, and other world mathematicians. In book II he seems to be more Deist then Atheist... Still unwilling to surrender to what he has learned. He also puts the graphics of the Hebrew text of the Torah, where these codes are found, so you can see the rocket, towers etc... Many of the codes also appear in the plain text with some relationship to whatever the codex text says.

On Google Books At:
http://books.google.com/books?id=p4QtRzOJ0z0C&dq=The+Bible+Code+review&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=LVs5S9SID9SPtgfwvdmACQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=The%20Bible%20Code%20review&f=false

Drosnin describes an alleged "Bible code", in which messages are encoded in the Hebrew bible. The messages are purported to be hidden in the Torah, and can be deciphered by placing the letters of various Torah passages at equal intervals in a text that has been formatted to fit inside a graph.

Drosnin suggests that the Code was written by extraterrestrial life (which he claims also brought the DNA of the human genetic code to Earth). Drosnin elaborates on this theory in The Bible Code II, suggesting that the alien who brought the code left the key to the code in a steel obelisk. Drosnin attempted to find this obelisk, which he believes is buried near the Dead Sea.

Drosnin's book is based on the technique described in the paper "Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis" by Professor Eliyahu Rips of the Hebrew University in Israel with Doron Witztum and Yoav Rosenberg. The Bible Code makes numerous predictions and post-diction, such as the coming (not having come to pass) of the apocalypse in 2006, and "proof" that Lee Harvey Oswald was destined to assassinate John F. Kennedy.

A new book that I have not read yet, and can't wait to see it is:
   

Bible Code Bombshell: Compelling Evidence that God Authored the Bible by R. Edwin Sherman

Bombshell examines two massive clusters of codes in the Hebrew Old Testament. One cluster consists of dozens of lengthy codes about the terrorist attacks and the Iraq war. The other cluster is full of long, controversial codes about Christ found in Isaiah 53, a passage often cited as an Old Testament prophecy of the crucifixion. One of the world's leading experts on Bible codes, R. Edwin Sherman is the founder of the Isaac Newton Bible Code Research Society. Sherman is a nationally known consulting mathematician and has advised numerous large financial institutions, Fortune 500 companies and government agencies. He holds an M.A. in mathematics from the University of California at San Diego and is deeply committed to the objective examination of the phenomenon of Bible codes, apart from the advocacy of any particular religious viewpoint.

Anyone with an interest in what is coming, if your for it or against it, you should read these books.



OCKLAWAHA

[north miami]

We are now seeing a combination of 'economics' and 'social science'.
Back to the future-who recalls the "Club of Rome" insights decades ago-the "limits to growth".

The lmits to growth are behind most headlines.

[NotNow]

StephenDare!, I am sure we could both post previous post made by us and rehash if you wish.  I will stand by my opinions.  Most who post here are familiar with both of our positions, and our styles of debate.  I would suggest for the sake of brevity and so as not to bore others or veer to far from the thread that we stick to the point here.  

Please forgive me while I continue to ignore your habit of directing others what to write.  I'll argue my points as I see fit, if you don't mind.  

You appear to be attempting to apply the "necessary and proper" clause found in Article 1, Section 8 to the entire Federal Government.  This is not the case.  In context, the clause empowers "Congress" to do what is "necessary and proper" in carrying out the "foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution...".  That means that the clause applies only to the enumerated powers vested in the Federal Government by the Constitution.  It does NOT imply any supremacy of power or abridgement of any powers NOT enumerated to the Federal Government.  Heck, let's just print ALL of Article 1 and see it in context:

Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress


The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

I think Hamilton did a good job of arguing for the "necessary and proper" clause as well as the "supremecy" clause in "The Federalist 33".  Without going on and on, essentially he explains that it is necessary that the Federal Government have the unfettered power to exercise those powers vested in it by the Constitution and that supremacy of Federal law within the bounds of that Constitution was necessary to prevent individual States from usurping those powers.  In the context of the day, when Federalists such as Madison and Hamilton were arguing for ratification of the new Constitution, they were explaining the merits of this new Constitution over the Articles while putting at ease the fears of a people and States that had suffered the indignities of the recent British rule.  NONE of this had any bearing on the clearly enumerated role of the Federal Government and the CLEARLY stated fact that ALL power not vested in the Federal Government rests with the States.  The 10th Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The U S Constitution establishes what Congress CAN do...Article 1, Section 8
It establishes what Congress CANNOT do.......................Article 1, Section 9
It establishes what States CANNOT do..........................Article 1, Section 10
It establishes what Presidents CAN do...........................Article 2, Section 2
It establishes the Judicial Branch..................................Article 3, Section 1

It establishes the framework of the Federal Government and what its powers are, the relationship of the Federal Government and individual States governments, and the relationship of the individual States with each other.

StephenDare! (and others), if you keep in mind the time that this was occurring and the fears of the population against any "central" government, then this is not hard to understand.  The "Federalist" articles, written by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, were Federalist arguments for ratification of the new Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation.  These articles were published and have been used by the Supreme Court to understand the reasoning of the day written by men acknowledged to be the predominantly involved in authoring the Constitution.  While it certainly created a stronger central government that had the power of taxation and limiting certain activities of the States (printing money, etc.), it also clearly defined the roles of those governments.  This is why I stated a COMPLETE reading of ALL 85 articles.  Without trying to sound condescending, this is pretty much U S Constitution 101 and is widely accepted (at least at the schools and University I went to).  I do realize that the 10th amendment is much derided and has been weakened by previous courts, but (much like the 2nd) it is deafeningly clear and supported by the writings of the founding fathers so erosion of the principle is pretty difficult.  I have not attended law school and I am not an attorney, but I am a citizen and I can read.

Now, and this answers you as well Midway, all of this is not Germain to my core argument of a sea change in how we the people operate our government, not just the Federal, but State and local as well.  Midway, while I refer to my Christian values these terms are universal and not religious.  Your referenced polls about creation science are on a completely different subject than what I am talking about.  

Earlier I mentioned these points to StephenDare!:

1.  Follow the Constitution, if it is not listed as a Federal responsibility then it is a State issue.  Probably wouldn't get 90% on this one.  But I believe a majority of Americans would agree that the Feds are trying to do too much and trying to control too much of our lives.  I know that you disagree StephenDare!, but that is because you are a communist  


2.  Live within our means.  Whatever tax system is utilized, set a rate and live within it.  Barring a REAL emergency that endangers the Republic, what you get is what you have to spend.  The liberal/conservative stuff must be contained within that.  I think 90% is pretty easy here.  StephenDare!'s assertion that we need a $14 TRILLION dollar debt so that we have a "credit rating" is....just...dumb...ill conceived.

3.  The business of America is business, not government.  Govern with as few employees as possible.  Payroll should be in line with real civilian payroll.  StephenDare! is right on this one.  I mistated what I wanted to say.  I was trying to say that ALL of our governments should operate as leanly as possible, and allow the citizens of this country to pursue happiness in their own way with as little government interference as possible.  I think that is a 90%er.


4.  Simplify, simplify, simplify.  Consolidate redundant agencies and responsibilities.  Even StephenDare! and AlGore! are with me on this one!  Don't you secretly think that StephenDare! and AlGore! are probably a lot alike?


5.  Protect Americans and our interests, but otherwise avoid foreign entanglements.  Again, speak softly and carry a big stick (and don't be afraid to use it.)  Easy 90%.  General principle, not a referendum of our current war.


6.  Most important, we must hold our elected officials responsible for their actions.  Carry out the previous five, and do what you say.  No secret agendas.   Also an easy one.  The trouble is, who do we trust?  The current President promised change and openness and was widely accepted.  We will leave opinions of his performance out of this, but I think we can all agree that this is what we want, and we want a valid way of holding our government representatives responsible.

These are secular principles that I think rise above the Democrat/Republican or Conservative/Liberal flack.  If you don't think 90% of Americans would agree with this, well OK.  We are just exchanging ideas anyway.  Anyway, that's what I think.  Throw the rocks now.

[heights unknown]

I'll have to check those two books out Ock; thanks.

"HU"

[Ocklawaha]

I'll have to check those two books out Ock; thanks.

"HU"

Heights, I just tried the newer one The Bible Code Bombshell and discovered it and a host of others are on Google Books. Man, I'm already on PG 119! LOL!


If you use the Google book link I posted, just above the book, you'll see a "Search Google Books" window. Just post the name The Bible Code Bombshell, and watch that site light up with new books. I didn't notice if the New Testament Codes are in there too, but I'm hearing they are also being discovered, and more mind blowing, apparently in all of the standard language versions of the Bible. Wow. I wish our friend Bostech would read these works and tell us what his opinion is, I'd like to know if it means anything to him.

Enjoy HU, as the railroaders say, "Hold em in the Frog Brother!" (meaning within the complex criss-crossing rails of a switch - WITHOUT a derailment)

OCKLAWAHA

[Bostech]

Again,what about me?
Did you know your guy who predicted death of Rabin also predicted nuclear war in 2006?
Well we did get much bigger explosion....housing bubble burst.
Rest of findings doesnt make any sense to anyone,compilations of words to make it sound like there is something there.Unless we get something specific you cant take it serious.

Now if Bible is right about Jesus then that means Jews are wrong and Muslims partially wrong.

Reality,both Bible and Quran are written by PEOPLE.There might be mostly Gods words but its written by people after all.
So question is how accurately they wrote it and whether they changed anything in process.
Did some "add" something in it?
And what about all those writing,many are hard to understand or have multiple meaning or simple don't really tell you clearly its meaning.
So now we are left with analyzing and deciding what it means.

But the real question is : Are Jews and Muslims allowed to eat pepperoni pizza?

[heights unknown]

Again,what about me?
Did you know your guy who predicted death of Rabin also predicted nuclear war in 2006?
Well we did get much bigger explosion....housing bubble burst.
Rest of findings doesnt make any sense to anyone,compilations of words to make it sound like there is something there.Unless we get something specific you cant take it serious.

Now if Bible is right about Jesus then that means Jews are wrong and Muslims partially wrong.

Reality,both Bible and Quran are written by PEOPLE.There might be mostly Gods words but its written by people after all.
So question is how accurately they wrote it and whether they changed anything in process.
Did some "add" something in it?
And what about all those writing,many are hard to understand or have multiple meaning or simple don't really tell you clearly its meaning.
So now we are left with analyzing and deciding what it means.

But the real question is : Are Jews and Muslims allowed to eat pepperoni pizza?

Important point to remember though about the Bible or anything else that's written:  God calls certain people to do things for him, i.e., Prophet, Ministers, Preachers, Teachers, or anything else that might or might not coincide with that person's talent(s).  It's one thing for a human to write something and put it out...you can usually bank that it's not really the paper that it's written on; but if it's written with God himself overseeing, inspiring, and guiding the writing of the book, manuscript, psalm, or whatever it may be, you can bank on it being 100% perfect because God is perfect and, he doesn't lie.  God calls men and women to do things for him because he wants to maintain contact and communication with his children (men, women and some children on earth), he loves us very very much, more than any of us can imagine, and, the majority of the people on earth probably wouldn't listen to him (God) anyway even if he appeared in front of them, so he uses people, people that really love and care for him, to do his work and other things like writing the Bible.  Yes, the Bible was written by Men, but it was written by Men who were called, inspired, and guided by God in the writing of the scriptures...not just any human being.

"HU"

[heights unknown]

Heights, of course you believe all of that.  And Bostech clearly believes in prophets or something.

And I intend no disrespect to your faith in the truth of these things.  But I don't think this doomsday business is justified either from a rationalist or a faith based point of view.

But these beliefs are simply that.  Beliefs.

There is no destiny for Mankind except the one that we create for ourselves.  Even if you believe in the odder versions of Evangelicalism, you have to agree that the one rock solid principle upon which the entire belief system is based is the principle of Free Will.  Without it we are simply robots, and the creator is just a garden variety child with a deep sadistic streak.

And Free Will, by definition has to extend to the idea that we are capable of creating our own outcomes, or what is it after all?

Even Christ could have turned aside from the bitter cup.  If there wasnt a possibility that he could have done so, then the story of lucifer tempting Christ would be an unecessary joke.

I do not have much use for these apocalypses or the constant alarmbell of the supposed 'end times'

I know that there has always been a tribe amongst us that has fervently believed in these phantasms, in fact the Northeast of the United States was colonized by an early group of people who truly expected the "Rapture" to happen in 1725, and abandoned homes and belongings to gather (for a full year as it turned out) on the high ground so as to be the first to see Gabriel Blow his horn and the return of the Messiah.

But I think this is all just nonsense.  Interesting nonsense of course, even engrossing.

But no more meaningful than the kids who learn Elvish from Tolkien novels, or can argue the finer points of the history of Hobbiton.

We do have a Destiny, I think.  It is in the stars, and under the oceans and in the uncharted realms of a multidimensional reality whose borders have not even been discerned by our primitive stages of evolution.

This country is blessed because of the remarkable energy produced by its multiple cultures and peoples and the great intellectual dynamism that comes about when ideas come into conflict.

This is the heritage of the West, and the driving force behind its last 500 years of astonishing advances and development.

Will America be as it was?  Yes, and fervently No.  

I think that the US has boxed itself into a neat little corner through its post industrial development and monetary policy.  It has no option except to expand again---the same way that it has when faced with similar situations throughout its history.

I think we will end up being continental.  And I think that this will be not only in our own interest, but also in the interests of the rest of the world.  They need our energy and optimism, as much as they hate our hegemony and our arrogance.

Will there be a whole lot more people speaking spanish living under the American Flag?  yes.

But there will also be a whole lot more people speaking Quebecois French I think and Vancouverite Mandarin, and Toronto accented Hindi and Urdu.

And when we make the move to mining operations on Mars and the Lunar Ilmenite colonies.....who knows?

No doomsday here Stephen, because you're right, I really don't know, but God knows, and I know what he says in his word (Bible). What I am listing is in fact my beliefs, and my opinions based on my beliefs, which could be off (I could misinterpret what God is saying), I'm only human (LOL).  But one thing I know I'm right about; one day we all will see and know, and, one day soon, in the not too distant future, some of us will be right, and some of us wrong relative to what we are discussing.  We believe only what we want to believe and most of us not necessarily what we seek.  I used to think I believed (in God, etc.) but really didn't.  When I asked him to reveal himself to me, he did. That's the beauty of the choice mechanism within us that creator put into us, we don't have to believe in a Creator or worship him; but know this, nothing on this earth or the universe came from nothing.   If we continue on believing there is no God, or that God is something else other than what he really is, then in our human heart and spirit we will accept that; seek the Living God and you will find him and will see he is full of surprises (and I'm not trying to convert you Stephen).  Respect all that you say Stephen, and don't agree or disagree because that's what you think or believe, and it's probably the same with you towards me and I also respect that.  But again, we soon shall see.

"HU"

[NotNow]

StephenDare!  Again, as usual, you are so focused on hearing yourself you do not hear others.  You and Midway have misconstrued the entire debate.  I have never argued for supremacy of state's rights, only respecting what powers are reserved for the states.  It always amuses me when you lecture and tell me to study something until I see it your way.  I have a pretty fair formal education in this area and a good bit of professional education here as well.  By necessity, I am pretty familiar with the Constitution.  I have a firm confidence in my knowledge of our governments founding and its founding documents.  I have been subjected to testing and questioning by peers and educators.  I have put my knowledge and expertise into actual practice for many years.  Now I will be the first to admit that my views do not always coincide with those of the Federal Courts, but I will identify what is my opinion versus what is fact.  You would be well served doing the same.  

The core of the thread is that our country has abandoned certain core principles that made us a better and more stable nation.  I have listed what I think are some of those principles.  I have explained why I believe this is true personally which involves some of my own faith based values.  Your attacks on key phrases and ideas reveal a counter interest that does not refute the core argument of better government, but either an effort to disrupt the pursuit of a better nation or just a need to argue "points" on a forum and appease your own self image of accomplishments and knowledge.  Now if you have an alternative, throw it our there.  Which principles do YOU want the Federal Government to adopt?  What core values does this government hold that make you argue against my points?  I think the answer is obvious to most, you want just the opposite.  You want a larger government unrestrained by "rules" or "amendments".  You want no restrictions on Federal power hence the misrepresentation of the "proper and necessary" clause.  Like many who believe as you do, you seem to feel some need to cloak these beliefs in other terms and not just say straight out what you want.  I have read and understand the founding documents StephenDare!, and not just sitting at a computer by myself reinforcing my own beliefs as I went.  

As for what the majority thinks, well  I still think that most folks by far would agree with the points that I raised.  I don't think that most Americans by far are satisfied with the course our country has taken in many areas.  While we have made much progress in some cases, we have digressed in many more.  How many Americans do you think would support YOUR views on governance and civil conduct? I guess this is why we have these little talks.

[mtraininjax]

Good stuff guys, good stuff, how about some good ol fashioned Jacksonville posts. I can't handle the heavy stuff, sort of like 70s shag carpet.

[heights unknown]

Good morning all;

Stephendare, Bostech and SportMotor, please check your mail boxes; I left an email in there for all of you.

Thanks.

"HU"