I'll snip out the parts that don't apply
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:02:40 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:41:08 -0700, Mark & Juanita
calmly ranted:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:06:06 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:38:54 GMT, (Dave Mundt) calmly
ranted:
It is a complicated issue, and one that I was discussing
with an acquaintance a week or so ago. He feels, and I agree,
that America is at a crossroads. We can, as a society, decide
to run down the path of increasing extremities, decadance and
decay, or we can turn to the path of becoming that shining beacon
that folks THOUGHT we were at the time that France gifted us with
the Statue Of Liberty. It might be a harder path, but, in the
long run, it will do more than all the guns in the world to make
us safer from terrorism and decay, both internal and external.
Ooh, ooh! I vote for the latter, to be sure. The question
remains: What will it take to accomplish this? It certainly
won't happen with the current crop of either Republicans
OR Democrats in power + the herds of voters grazing on their
daily ration of pork.
I fear Larry, that the prior comment was actually advocating expanding
the pork. i.e. by taking from the upper "extreme" and giving that taken to
the "lower" extreme.
I just reread it and don't find that angle at all.
(Say it ain't so, Dave!) I see the proper amount of
contempt for the legal system and a wish for better
leadership by and for the people.
Please quote the part which gives you that idea, Mark.
-snip-
Where I found that implication was the following:
Back to the looting problem...that may well come from the
social stresses caused by the ever increasing distance between the
"haves" and "have nots" in America.
So how do we decrease that distance between the have's and the have-nots?
This is where I was getting the feeling that Dave was implying that somehow
we have to narrow that gap. One of the ways to do that is through
government intervention and the perennial, "tax those who have benefited
most from our society" in order to "help those who need it most".
We are still bombarded by
thousands of ads a day pushing consumerism and having "stuff" that
validates our existence. On the other side of the coin, there are
fewer and fewer sources that might point out that having "stuff"
does not make a person's life better, or make one a better person.
That sort of spiritual teaching is falling into disrepute in
America, alas. The bottom line is that there are more and more
pressures to fill that spiritual void with "stuff" and the economy
is making it harder and harder for folks to do so...which pushes
a person to the point of theft.
BTW, I certainly agree with portions of the above paragraph -- people
have allowed materialism to become their god. Thus more things translates
to more happiness in such a mindset. At the same time, I don't believe
that the lack of funds necessarily means that this drives people to steal.
Lack of morality training is more of a contributor than lack of money.
.... snip
It is a complicated issue, and one that I was discussing
with an acquaintance a week or so ago. He feels, and I agree,
that America is at a crossroads. We can, as a society, decide
to run down the path of increasing extremities,
Again, that comment about increasing extremities -- does this mean he
wants the government to somehow, through regulation or taxation to decrease
the extremes?
decadance and
decay, or we can turn to the path of becoming that shining beacon
that folks THOUGHT we were at the time that France gifted us with
the Statue Of Liberty. It might be a harder path, but, in the
long run, it will do more than all the guns in the world to make
us safer from terrorism and decay, both internal and external.
Ok...I am stepping away from the soap box now.
Regards
Dave Mundt
-snip-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Heart Attacks: God's revenge for eating his little animal friends
-- http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development --