As more and more U.S. couples decide to have children without first getting married, a group of 18 family scholars is sounding an alarm about the impact this may have on those children.
In a new report out on Tuesday, they say research shows the children of cohabiting parents are at risk for a broad range of problems, from trouble in school to psychological stress, physical abuse and poverty.
The study is put out by the National Marriage Project and the Institute for American Values, groups whose missions include strengthening marriage and family life. It suggests a shift in focus is needed away from the children of divorce, which has long been a preoccupying concern for such scholars.
Brad Wilcox, a report co-author and head of the National Marriage Project, says divorce rates have steadily dropped since their peak in 1979-80, while rates of out-of-wedlock childbearing have soared. Forty-one percent of all births are now to unwed mothers, many of them living with — but not married to — the child’s father. – Continued here with audio
So once again, the Bible is proved true, including where it commands rapists to marry a virgin they rape. Can you figure out why now? And for you who say, “AWWW OOOOOH OH MY GOD WHAT ABOUT THE WOMAN’S RIGHTS!?” You’re forgetting the study just mentioned, forgetting that such a law would be to the benefit of the child, especially in the culture of the world at that time (especially if the rapist learned his lesson by not running away, or just paying some small fine or some other inadequate compensation or God letting him be free to decide, “I’ll just kill her or the baby to get away with what I did.” During those times (and still among many Orthodox Jews and many millions of Muslims), women were discriminated against if they were thought to be adulterous and that the Israelites were in a barren desert, and were going to wander there for 40 years. And how many men today would want to marry a woman with a child not there own or from a racist? So it’s in favor of the woman. And as for “rights”, what “rights”? The concept of human rights developed from ancient Greek Sophists (ever heard of “sophistry”?) who claimed that all humans were equal, which is a false statement. Physically, they are not equal: women are at a disadvantage because of their strength and are not as aggressive as men in general, and in my opinion, it’s apparent that they are not as innovative, at least not in the same way men are. The lesser innovation ability is due to the way God programs female minds and how he programmed their DNA in my opinion, or God programmed them in general to me innovative at other things, like weaving, cleaning and visual design. For those who argue, “So God lets you rape virgins and you don’t have to pay for it?” I’d say you didn’t study the link or listen to the law if you read it and didn’t read or forgot the points I just made: Deuteronomy says he must be fined and stay with her for life as her husband. And how many times do you think anyone can get away with rape if they keep having to pay fines? The law also suggests that the rape victim has the full right to accuse the one who raped her of having raped her without penalty, unlike in the Quran, or Muslim law, or Muslim tradition, in which it’s a heavy and dangerous burden for a woman to accuse anyone of anything. And God, as Bible-haters know, who’ve bothered to study the Bible in general well, records every evil (and good) act a person does, and if a person isn’t forgiven of their sins – if Jesus hasn’t suffered and died for their past and future sins – they will pay the penalty of eternal pain, limited movement and limited company, forever, for every rape they committed, besides all their other sins.
Some idiotic and simpleton replies to the article I found, no doubt from liberals, were:
“No preconceived notions or bias, I’m sure.”
I thought someone would say that. So then is a homosexual automatically biased if he or she says, “Homosexuality is good” or finds that gay marriage is good or when they say that gay marriage is equal to straight marriage, or when a father of a raped 13 year old demands she kill the baby “so you can feel better”? Is it biased when a mainstream scientist, liberals who trust in them or atheists make claims in favor of the Big Bang, abiogenesis, Darwinian evolution, or anything in such a way that it says or implies that the Bible is false, that creationism is false, that intelligent design is false or that Christians are wrong for believing whatever Christ says, or anything at all, or that he even existed? It’s as dumb as saying that if a Counsel on Single Life did the study and found marriage was less beneficial than being single that they were biased too. The idiot is just speculating and it’s poor speculation since he’s merely judging by the name of the group that did the study.
Another liberal poop reply was, “I’m sure More proof that gay marriage would be beneficial to the same sex parented families.”
That’s as stupid as saying that if someone found “eating salmon raw is beneficial” that therefore eating Puffer fish/fugu raw was good too”. The moron liberal took the research out of context. It was on straight couples, not gay. And why did he capitalize “more”? Weird.
For the second time this week I’ve heard the logical fallacy that the (US) government has no secrets because it’s not good at keeping secrets. If that isn’t circular reasoning than what is? I just heard it repeated again on Coast to Coast AM by Ronald L. Mallett. The show edition is described by the Coast site as,
Host: George Noory
Guests: Ronald L. Mallett, Lauren Weinstein
Physics Professor Ronald Mallett will discuss his breakthrough research on time travel, as well as share an update on the latest in theoretical physics.
Ronald was responding to a caller who asked if the government was hiding a secret program on time travel. Ronald then immediately contradicted himself by saying, “Whatever the human mind can think of, it can and will achieve.” In other words: “IF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT CONCEIVES OF A WAY TO KEEP SECRETS THEN IT WILL SUCCESSFULLY DO SO.” So, once again, a non-Christian, a Mainstreamer Cultist severely contradicts himself in a breath without even realizing it, and if he did realize it, he should have corrected himself, but failed and allowed others to be deceived. Some might ask, “What does that matter?” It matters because it helps people to be gullible and naive that they can believe whatever the government says, which is utter nonsense. The statement that the government is bad at keeping secrets is also nonsensical in that it contradicts itself, because it’s implying to opposite things: that the government can’t do anything in secret, and the opposite: when it does do something in secret it’s exposed right away. That is what people mean but are vague. Vague as in, how long can’t the government keep a secret? Ronald made it clear, “really bad” at it, so, not long. But what is the evidence that the government can’t do so? That’s also a logical fallacy because it’s the same as saying, “I know that the government can’t keep a secret for long because because it can only do so for a short time because it’s bad at keeping secrets” but saying so without evidence. Ronald is claiming he knows all the secrets and therefore knows all the secret departments of the military, all military secrets, that none have been kept for long, like a year? (vague), everything said in secret by every individual apart of the government, including the FBI, CIA and NSA, and that even when they classify something as above top secret and make UFOs more secret than the atomic bomb (which the military stated it did do), that he would know soon. So then, China and every other country with spies in America must know all the secrets of our government, because it has none, or accidentally reveals it soon after. So can Ronald tell us what the secret craft are that the military has? Can he tell us what happened at Area 51 for the past 40 years? Can he tell us what crashed at Roswell?: Which story out of three conflicting ones that the military gave is correct? What are the names of the many Area 51 workers that are flown and bussed in to Area 51? What are the launch codes for all the nuclear missiles of the USA and what are the names of the ones who possess the launch keys? Ronald’s claim is also logically fallacious and arrogant in another way: he’s negating that any non-government person, no citizen, can find out about the secrets, and only the government and military would in their incompetence or by accident, or that some spy would reveal it (but not a citizen who is spying on behalf of some government like China). In other words: us stupid citizens are stupid, only government and the military is smart and wise, just not smart and wise enough to keep secrets from us… uh wait, but us stupid citizens can’t find out about their secrets because we’re stupid… and there is yet another contradiction from the Royal Mainstream Scientist Ronald Mallett, wannabe time traveler, who’s motivation for going back in time, according to his self-proclaimed Skeptic self, to see his dad again. Can anyone say “shallow”? How much more needs to be pointed out about the Mainstream cult to show that they are very bad at logic in general, and that also effects their effectiveness in scientific research, and therefore can’t be trusted with their fundamental(ist) claims: There was a Big Bang billions of years ago, we evolved from some simple creatures that were created by lightning hitting chemicals (able to reproduce and think and sense what was around them), and that after billions of years, turned into (super complex and much more intelligent animals and super intelligent) humans, with many characteristics (that can’t be reasonably explained without resorting to God as having designed us), and that aliens can’t get here, because… well one guest evolutionist this or last year, on Coast to Coast AM said because it would be too coincidental. And it would be too coincidental that they showed up during this time of our evolution. But why? If there are trillions of planets with possible life and some aliens evolved to become intelligent much sooner then us, then why wouldn’t there be any chance of “just another planet out of trillions” being visited by some alien out of those trillions? Mainstream scientists truly are confused and forgetful of what they study, ever learning and never able to reach the truth. I think that if they would stop obsessing on money and selfish and shallow desires they wouldn’t be so “scatter-brained” and forgetful.
I’ve also been noticing, that recently (others would probably say often) Noory has been asking really stupid questions. During the show he asked Mallet if the time travel he was working on would be MENTAL or physical. What the Hell kind of question is that? George was asking “is your time travel device going to be metaphysical and use spiritual time travel”, because the mind is a spiritual thing, it’s not material. That’s a fact by the way, you materialists, because awareness for example, which you must have a mind for, is not a physical thing, just as actions and information are not physical things. But Ronald Mallett obviously was not talking about a spiritual device or one that manipulated the mind. I wonder if George prepares questions long before the show starts. It doesn’t seem he does, otherwise his questions wouldn’t be so dumb. But, at least God lets me use them to teach profound, deep and useful things.
There was also something else that Ronald implied which is typical of how Mainstreamers, and which shows how their morality leads to things like the 500+ million people killed by atheists (not all atheists obviously): when he said that humans can achieve anything they can think of, he was answering the same caller I mentioned earlier who brought up a stupid example for his question, which was that Suparman’s dad said that going back in time was forbidden and so asked Ronald if God ever forbade it (how about read the Bible and study religion idiot, and ask a religious person and not a materialist Mainstreamer?). Ronald, besides saying humans could do whatever they wanted to, said that if we weren’t meant to do something, then God wouldn’t allow it. That answer implies that if child molestation happens and anything that is obviously evil, it’s good or permitted by God, because we were able to do it. That besides being evil reasoning, is also a logical fallacy: if you aren’t doing something then it can be said you aren’t meant to do anything that you aren’t doing. So then it’s also contradictory. And Ronald was implying that to know if something is permitted by God, you should do it, and he surely meant that, because he also said in his answer, and I’m paraphrasing this part till I can listen again to what he said, that it was wrong to not learn and progress.
And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. – Romans 8:28
Here is a repost of an 11 day old news report from the UK by Watch Angus Stickler of the BBC
Ethiopia ‘using aid as weapon of oppression’
8/5/2011 12:48 UK/11:48 GMT
A joint undercover investigation by BBC Newsnight and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that the Ethiopian government is using billions of dollars of development aid as a tool for political oppression.
Posing as tourists the team of journalists travelled to the southern region of Ethiopia.
We are just waiting on the crop, if we have one meal a day we will survive until the harvest, beyond that there is no hope for us
Villager in southern Ethiopia
There they found villages where whole communities are starving, having allegedly been denied basic food, seed and fertiliser for failing to support Prime Minister Meles Zenawi.
The investigation has also gathered evidence of mass detentions, the widespread use of torture and extra-judicial killings by Ethiopian government forces.
Yet Western donors including Britain – which is the third largest donor to Ethiopia – stand accused of turning a blind eye by continuing to provide aid money despite being warned about the abuses.
The aid in question is long-term development aid, not the emergency aid provided in response to the current drought in Ethiopia and its neighbours in the Horn of Africa.
Ambassador Abdirashid Dulane, the Deputy Head of Ethiopia’s UK Mission, has rejected the allegations saying that the Newsnight/Bureau report “lacked objectivity, even-handedness”.
“The sole source of the story was opponents of Ethiopia who have been rejected by the electorate, and time and again it has been shown that their allegations are unfounded”.
Our reporters visited one village in southern Ethiopia with a population of about 1,700 adults.
Despite being surrounded by other communities which are well fed and prosperous, this village, which cannot be named for fear of reprisals, is starving. We were told that in the two weeks prior to our team’s arrival five adults and 10 children had died.
Lying on the floor, too exhausted to stand, and flanked by her three-year-old son whose stomach is bloated by malnutrition, one woman described how her family had not eaten for four days.
“We are living day to day on the grace of God,” she said.
Another three-year-old boy lay in his grandmother’s lap, listless and barely moving as he stared into space.
“We are just waiting on the crop, if we have one meal a day we will survive until the harvest, beyond that there is no hope for us,” the grandmother said.
In another village 30 km (19 miles) away it was a similar story.
Almost all of the aid goes through the government channels… in terms of relief food supply and some of the safety net provisions, they simply don’t get to the needy of an equitably basis
There our team met Yenee, a widow who along with her seven children is surviving by begging, eating leaves and scavenging scraps from the bins in the nearest town.
“The situation is desperate,” she said. “We have been abandoned… It is a matter of chance if we live or die.”
The two villages sit just 15km (9 miles) either side of a major town, surrounded by other communities where the populations are well fed and healthy. They are in desperate need, but no-one is helping.
According to local opposition members they are being punished for failing to vote for the ruling party, the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF), which Mr Meles leads.
Further north a group of farmers alienated by Mr Meles’ government met the BBC/Bureau team at a secret location on the edge of a remote village.
One farmer described how he had been ostracised for failing to support EPRDF: “Because of our political views we face great intimidation. We are denied the right to fertiliser and seeds because of political ideology,” he said.
The Ethiopian federal and regional governments control the distribution of aid in Ethiopia.
Professor Beyene Petros, the current vice-chairman of the Ethiopian Federal Democratic Forum, an alliance of eight opposition parties known as Medrek, told our reporters that aid is not distributed according to need, but according to support for the EPRDF:
“Almost all of the aid goes through the government channels… in terms of relief food supply and some of the safety net provisions, they simply don’t get to the needy of an equitably basis.
“There is a great deal of political differentiation. People who support the ruling party, the EPRDF, and our members are treated differently. The motivation is buying support, that is how they recruit support, holding the population hostage,” he said.
Mr Beyene said that the international community, including the British government, is well aware of the problem and that he has personally presented them with evidence:
“The position of the donor communities is dismissive… they always want to dismiss it as an isolated incident when we present them with some proof. And we challenge them to go down and check it out for themselves, but they don’t do it.”
The UK International Development Minister Stephen O’Brien issued a statement in response to the allegations raised by the investigation, saying:
“We take all allegations of human rights abuses extremely seriously and raise them immediately with the relevant authorities including the Ethiopian Government, with whom we have a candid relationship. Where there is evidence, we take firm and decisive action.
They raped me in a room, one of them was standing on my mouth, and one tied my hand, they were taking turns, I fainted during this – Ethiopian woman from the Ogaden – continued here
The U.S. Unemployment Rate From 1980-2011 (from Reagan to Obama). A bar graph version by months, from the end of World War 2 (1948) to 6/2011 can be seen here (the original link no longer works, so I just linked to the home page of the site of the linked no longer existing page).
I was listening to radio station 100.5 FM (KXNT) this morning, and at about 8:30 heard some guest on the morning show from Nevada say, “Job’s is the most important thing… If that’s not your number one priority as president of the United States, you better get out of the race.” No, that’s not the most important thing. What matters most is a having a moral president who loves God and can communicate correctly, a president who won’t pander or compromise. A leader without morals and who cannot communicate correctly is a corrupt and worthless leader, which is one of the reasons why Nevada is one of the most corrupt states and has over 12% of its residents unemployed. Is what was important for Adolph Hitler simply having any job? Was he appropriate to be Germany’s ruler? And of course, wisdom is also the most important for people to have, because without it you will have less of a chance of getting a job, doing a job well or better than others, keeping it or getting a better job. Knowledge of course is also important, without it you can’t be wise or “grow in wisdom.”
So what a president should do, is help the nation to to turn to God, so that they won’t stay corrupt and can be moral and stay that way, and to help those already turned to be more obedient (moral) till they are perfected. Everything else comes second. Though some say that you can’t promote a particular religion because of “the law” (the law of the founders), a president can do what I just said by pointing out what is logical and what religions DON’T follow the rules of logic and use a certain symbol to point out what religion that leaves left. Those with wisdom will be able to figure out what he or she is pointing to. In that way, the law of man will not be broken and wisdom will be spread.
On a related subject, Michele Bachmann was being hypocritical when she explained away her comment that wives should be submissive to their husbands by saying she meant “respect”. She clearly didn’t mean that, but meant what the Bible said. But because she lacked wisdom, and was afraid of persecution from the world (which includes liberals and Christian-hating “Skeptics”) and did not trust in God for that moment, pandered to the world, and made herself look weak and hypocritical to those who know what the Bible says about family and government. What she should have said was that she was right to say what she did, but that as a President she would not have to make political decisions based on what he husband wanted because he would not be the President, but on personal matters she would still be under his leadership. This is common sense: If a king died the queen, if there was one, would be in charge of the Kingdom unless she was too young, she would not have to submit to men merely because she was a female, or else every man would be the ruler of the kingdom and could tell her what to do, which would lead to conflicting commands. It would be simpler if she ruled till she found another husband. And if she gave authority to her son when she was still in her right mind and healthy, that would also be unseemly, because the mother is the head of the son (unless he is Christ).
“There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, an error which comes forth because of [godless] fear of a ruler: Folly is set
Folly is set in great dignity and the noble seated in the lowly place. I have seen servants upon horses and princess walking as servants upon the earth.” – Ecclesiastes 10:5
At Gibeon Yahweh appeared to Solomon during the night in a dream, and God said, “Ask for whatever you want me to give you.” Solomon answered, “…I am only a little child and do not know how to carry out my duties. Your servant is here among the people you have chosen, a great people, too numerous to count or number. So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong. For who is able to govern this great people of yours?” The Lord was pleased that Solomon had asked for this. So God said to him, “Since you have asked for this and not for long life or wealth for yourself, nor have asked for the death of your enemies but for discernment in administering justice, I will do what you have asked. I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. Moreover, I will give you what you have not asked for—both wealth and honor—so that in your lifetime you will have no equal among kings.” – 1 Kings 3:5,7-13
“If you do whatever I command you and walk in obedience to me and do what is right in my eyes by obeying my decrees and commands, as David my servant did, I will be with you.” – 1 Kings 11:38
“If you ever forget Yahweh your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed. Like the nations Yahweh destroyed before you, so you will be destroyed for not obeying Yahweh your God.” – Deuteronomy 8:19-20
“You cannot serve both God and money. Therefore I tell you, don’t worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life? And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But first seek his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you too. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.” – Matthew 6:24-34
I was listening to Coast to Coast again, this edition described as,
Guest host Rob Simone (email) was joined by founder and President of Ramtha’s School of Enlightenment, JZ Knight, for a discussion about her experiences connected with the channeling of a 35,000 year old warrior from the lost continent of Atlantis, called Ramtha.
According to Wickedpedia, “Judy Zebra Knight (born Judith Darlene Hampton on March 16, 1946, in Roswell, New Mexico), usually known as JZ Knight, is an American mystic teacher and author. She is also the reputed channel of a spiritual entity named Ramtha. Knight has appeared on US TV shows, such as Larry King, MSNBC and The Merv Griffin Show, offering spiritual insight and inspiration. Her teachings have attracted figures from the entertainment and political world such as Linda Evans and Shirley MacLaine. Knight claims to bridge ancient wisdom and the power of consciousness together with the latest discoveries in science. Some of the ideas are similar to those of Shirley MacLaine, which have in turn been criticized for being “kindergarten metaphysics” by mathematician and skeptic Martin Gardner.
So, I listened to JZ Knight, an obvious liberal from what I heard, who seems to allow herself to be possessed by a demon, and I noted some severely ironic contradictions she made on the show, which some may find funny. I got the impression that host Rob thought she was a liar, because at one point he said that a psychologist (as in any) would label her “a nut” for saying what she did, and asked how she knew she wasn’t being possessed by a demon. Those two things the host, George Noory, has and probably never would say to any guest, unless they were a fundamentalist Christian, at least not in the way Rob put it. George tries not to offend anyone except those oh so bad fundamentalists who try and force everyone to have babies and believe the Bible so that they can rule the world, a book which says not to steal, murder or lie or “Lord it” over anyone, to help the needy with money, not the rich and that both should share if they can, and to seek the truth will all your heart, to be quick to listen and slow to speak and anger, to not show partiality and hate all such immoral things and not to listen to anyone who lives life doing those things, and that those who do live like that and listen to people like that she die and go to Hell forever… A great book to use if you want to deceive and dominate the world right? Moving on.
JZ reminded me of another popular liar, much more popular (because he uses “God” to endorse his babble), who allegedly wrote, “Conversations With God : An Uncommon Dialogue”. That liar’s name i Neale Donald Walsch. I call him a liar because I found that he made severe contradictions in his claims about humans and God. I don’t call someone a liar for nothing. But back to JZ: Rob asked if she or her followers went out and preached, and she told an utter lie, which was that she didn’t “prosetize” or said in some incorrect way like that, contradicted by the fact that she moves around and leaves her house and lets the demon Ramtha speak through her! And was on the show preaching about her religion, which she also claimed wasn’t religion, though it obviously was, since those following Ramtha allow it to take control of their lives and want it to in order to “ascend”. She didn’t say ascend on the show but knowing these types of cults I’m sure she’s used it before. Demons like Ramtha are called “ascended Masters”. The concept was used heavily in Stargate, an atheistic sci-fi series. How can someone say they aren’t attempting to get anyone to follow their way of life when they are emphatically endorsing it and putting religion in a bad light? She said that in the ancient times people would listen to prophets, but then religion got mixed into it, as if that were a bad thing. Why would it be a bad thing? Is simply listening going to get you anywhere if you don’t apply the truths you here? If you don’t live them? Blind ignorants and liars who hate truth, like forget and don’t want to learn that that is what TRUE religion is, as opposed to human-invented rituals and reasonless parroting like Catholicism, Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnessism.
She also said on the show, “it’s about free will” then almost right after said, “we’re predestined”. This is very strange since most people, except Calvinists, would say that that is a contradiction. Near the end of the show she was asked by Rob Simone if it was true that (according to her x-Catholic friend, who left Catholicism “for Ramntha”) that Ramntha was in a UFO which shined a beam on the Holy of Holies which is what tore it when Jesus died. She replied, “I wouldn’t know, I’m not here when Ramtha speaks.” What happened to free will!? And doesn’t this person record, or anyone else, what she says when she babbles supposed ultimate truths or truths that lead to it?! And no one writes it down even!? Not even about what happened in the time of the perfect one Jesuss!? WOW! How worthless Ramtha’s words must be if the very whom the spirit “master” of the truth speaks through is ignored by her! And how is it she said that if she repeates other things Ramtha’s said to her? And how can you endorse your cult if you don’t know what it is your cult leader says!? AAAAAHHHH!!!!! Liberals are so frustrating! Frustrating because they claim to have the truth and living free while bashing truth and twisting the meaning of freedom and accusing those who point out that they do that with condemnation, that they are the ones who do that! In other words, frustrating because they are hypocrites claiming to be honest accusing the honest of being hypocrites. The worst ones are the ones who are conniving to those who point out there errors, who point it out to help them.
When the host asked if it was true that she believed that she was being spied on at some point, she replied as if preparing to lie, “If I personally believed that?” and then the host seemed to think he accidentally threw her a hard ball (oh no, can’t ask tough questions to clearly deluded people who wreck lives can we?), and changed what he said by asking if she or others (apart of her cult) thought that. And she said she was sure, and that it was the CIA and knew this because of remote viewer who was amazed to have finally been with her. It was a remote viewer who was on Coast to Coast AM a few times I think, becacuse the host repeated his name in a way like he was well-known. She then said absurd things like that everyone was being spied on, and therefore, she said, “it’s not like we’re really free… it’s like we’re in a bubble… in a great experiment… but they can’t control your mind, if you realize you have one” and that the CIA monitors YOUR EVERY WORD, yes, all of them, and that evidence of this is that they can read the letters of a dime with a satellite, basically a rant reply. So, a cult leader JZ, who for some strange reason doesn’t know what her leader Ramtha teaches, while teaching what Ramtha teaches, he says that we have free will while being trapped in a bubble-like world and therefore aren’t really free [because the CIA will stop you or hurt you for it?!] unless you realize you have a mind [a poor way of saying free will that allows you to do whatever you want to?]. But that’s not all of the incredible infant-talk by this woman at 65 years of age she said with a depressed tone, who has been leading her cult for 36 years: she said in set-up-knock-down fashion, “I just make up my own reality.”…
The sins of some are obvious, reaching the place of judgment ahead of them; the sins of others trail behind them. – 1 Timothy 5:24
A very strange coincidence happened to me this morning: I was writing down the lyrics to a song to find out what song it was, “it’s Friday night” (and “Friday night” seemed to be the theme of the song) and about two minutes later some man on the radio said that a teacher said to her students that the most important day was Friday and that she used it for studying rather than partying, I think she meant when she wasn’t a teacher, but a student. I tried figuring out what the radio discussion was about, like if it was a guy selling some book, but it got boring and I zoned out while working on my laptop. I did record it though, but missed the repeated comments he made about the importance of Friday. The song I’ve found out was called, “Last Friday Night” aka “T.G.I.F” by Katy Perry.
Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters
By Max Hastings
A few weeks after the U.S. city of Detroit was ravaged by 1967 race riots in which 43 people died, I was shown around the wrecked areas by a black reporter named Joe Strickland.
He said: ‘Don’t you believe all that stuff people here are giving media folk about how sorry they are about what happened. When they talk to each other, they say: “It was a great fire, man!” ’
I am sure that is what many of the young rioters, black and white, who have burned and looted in England through the past few shocking nights think today.
It was fun. It made life interesting. It got people to notice them. As a girl looter told a BBC reporter, it showed ‘the rich’ and the police that ‘we can do what we like’.
If you live a normal life of absolute futility, which we can assume most of this week’s rioters do, excitement of any kind is welcome. The people who wrecked swathes of property, burned vehicles and terrorised communities have no moral compass to make them susceptible to guilt or shame.
Most have no jobs to go to or exams they might pass. They know no family role models, for most live in homes in which the father is unemployed, or from which he has decamped.
They are illiterate and innumerate, beyond maybe some dexterity with computer games and BlackBerries.
They are essentially wild beasts. I use that phrase advisedly, because it seems appropriate to young people bereft of the discipline that might make them employable; of the conscience that distinguishes between right and wrong.
They respond only to instinctive animal impulses — to eat and drink, have sex, seize or destroy the accessible property of others. – More here
British rioters the spawn of a bankrupt ruling elite
By Theodore Dalrymple
THE riots in London and elsewhere in Britain are a backhanded tribute to the long-term intellectual torpor, moral cowardice, incompetence and careerist opportunism of the British political and intellectual class.
They have somehow managed not to notice what has long been apparent to anyone who has taken a short walk with his eyes open down any frequented British street: that a considerable proportion of the country’s young population (a proportion that is declining) is ugly, aggressive, vicious, badly educated, uncouth and criminally inclined.
Unfortunately, while it is totally lacking in self-respect, it is full of self-esteem: that is to say, it believes itself entitled to a high standard of living, and other things, without any effort on its own part.
Consider for a moment the following: although youth unemployment in Britain is very high, that is to say about 20 per cent of those aged under 25, the country has had to import young foreign labour for a long time, even for unskilled work in the service sector.
The reasons for this seeming paradox are obvious to anyone who knows young Britons as I do.
No sensible employer in a service industry would choose a young Briton if he could have a young Pole; the young Pole is not only likely to have a good work ethic and refined manners, he is likely to be able to add up and — most humiliating of all — to speak better English than the Briton, at least if by that we mean the standard variety of the language. He may not be more fluent but his English will be more correct and his accent easier to understand. – more here