There was considerable interest earlier today on the thread about the health problem of obesity, lack of exercise, etc. There is another health problem that might be of even more interest to avid Arkansas Razorback fans:

“Cheering for a losing team could cost you your life. When the Los Angeles Rams lost the Super Bowl in 1980, a new analysis shows, cardiac deaths in L.A. County spiked 15 percent for men and 27 percent for women over the following two weeks. The Rams’ victory in the big game four years later had no impact on local health. Many fans see their team as ‘a family member,’ says study author Robert Kloner, and become emotionally stressed when it’s in trouble. A high-stakes game can increase a passionate fan’s pulse rate, raise blood pressure, and potentially ‘trigger a cardiac event.’”

http://theweek.com/article/index/222716/he…

report 1 like, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

The big shootout of '69 stunted my growth.

report 5 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

I tuned in late to the KC v Denver Bronco game, just the last few minutes to see CBS giving adequate coverage to Tebow on his knees at his team's bench in deep prayer. He seemed so isolated. Other players were watching the game intently or engaged with a coach. Tebow, head bowed, moving lips indicated he was talking to Jesus, just detached and removed as he could be from the game at hand. His last plays looked like that too. I agree, Jesus musta been busy with Iowa calls.

report 8 likes, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

That's a wrap for Obama.

". . . President Obama, after objecting to provisions of a military spending bill that would have forced him to try terrorism suspects in military courts and impose strict sanctions on Iran’s oil exports, signed the bill on Saturday. . . . “The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it,” Mr. Obama said in a statement issued in Hawaii, where he is on vacation. “I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists. . . . ”

But it means that once again he lied! It also means that anyone . . . YES, ANYONE of you that he or anyone other Washington A__hole thinks is a threat to them can have you arrested and imprisoned by the military by saying you are a terrorist supporter and presenting any allusion of complicity with "terrorists."

I know there will be many of you throwing up your hands and saying, ". . . but, but he's better than anyone else . . . "

The classic definition of a fool is performing the same action over and over expecting a different outcome.

A new definition of a fool is supporting and voting for a man who has repeatedly lied to you and readily admits he lied and tries to rationalize it. Those of you who adamantly continue to support and will vote for President Obama after he lied to you in the 2008 campaign, lied to you throughout his tenure as President and now not only has lied, but has ignored his oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" are . . .

report 8 likes, 7 dislikes   like  dislike

4 Scary Economic Trends for 2012:

Top economic thinkers explain why 2012 will be a year of continued – and escalating – predation by financiers.
.....
1. Back-door Bailout of the Eurozone

Would you like more of your hard-earned money to flow to fatcats? Wish granted! Attorney Walker Todd, who spent two decades in the legal departments of the Federal Reserve Banks of New York and Cleveland, names the back-door bailout of the eurozone banking system by our very own Federal Reserve as the top economic story of the upcoming year – or, at least one of the most outrageous. In a nutshell, the Fed is helping European banks by opening up the short-term ‘emergency’ lending pipeline, which means that U.S. taxpayers are indirectly bailing out private European capitalists.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153604/vampi…

report 1 like, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

Dott, who the Hell are your going to vote for? One of those wingnuts currently on display in Iowa. Get realistic. Practical politics, it's called. Do you really think you could vote for a Republican against Obama, or are you going to waste your vote on a third-party nut. Let's face it. That's who runs on third party tickets anymore.

report 10 likes, 6 dislikes   like  dislike

For what it's worth, I think the defense authorization bill that President Obama just signed passed the Senate something like 86-13. Remind me how many votes are needed to over ride a veto?

report 9 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

As I said, you will have to rationalize that the man you are supporting has lied to you straight in your face for four years. If you can, then vote for him. But don't try to claim you have superior reasons for voting for a man that lied to you repeatedly and has admitted it. The second definition still applies.

http://www.truth-out.org/obama-signs-ndaa-…

". . . The president, for example, said that he would never authorize the indefinite military detention of American citizens, because “doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.” He also said he would reject a “rigid across-the-board requirement” that suspects be tried in military courts rather than civilian courts.
. . . ", but he just made it the law of our land!!!

That's the same man who told you he would veto that bill, he would close Guantanamo, he would try accused terrorists in civilian courts, he would ". . . preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States . . ." You believe him. After four years of proof, he is lying again and does not deserve and will not get my vote or support. I will also do my best to ensure that every one who votes for him realizes what they are doing.

And yes, if it results in a Republican being elected President, so be it. I refuse to vote or support a liar and a traitor who can not uphold his oath of office. You may do as you prefer . . . It was a free country . . . once upon a time!

report 9 likes, 7 dislikes   like  dislike

wow!

report 3 likes, 3 dislikes   like  dislike

So be it, Dott. I would rather vote for a pragmatist who will do the best he can to carry out the program he outlined in 2008 over the most vitriolic and viscious opposition any president has faced in my lifetime, than any of the idiots currently pandering to the worst in American voters in Iowa. Who are you going to vote for, or are you simply going to stay home, and thereby abdicate your civic responsibility?

report 11 likes, 3 dislikes   like  dislike

"4 Scary Economic Trends for 2012"

The scariest trend to me is demonstrated by the required reserves of banks: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/serie…
and the excess reserves: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/serie…
Required is going up, excess is going down. All the money from the quantitative easings is entering the system, and I don't think Bernanke will be able to take it out should prices start rising.

Good news for today, though. Subsidies for corn ethanol and the tariff against imported ethanol expired yesterday.

report 2 likes, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

Sic semper tyrannis!

report 3 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

"I know there will be many of you throwing up your hands and saying, ". . . but, but he's better than anyone else . . . ""

Yup...sadly...that would be me; and, yup, I'm voting for him 'cause eight years of Bush taught me that the worst of Obama is light years ahead of the best of one of those nincompoops currently dancing around Iowa. I regret my Nader vote; it may have made me feel good 'cause I was voting for the best candidate regardless of reality but the years of Bush weren't worth that piece of happy.

And, no, I'm not happy with the state of things...actually the state of our civil liberties sickens me. And I do everything within my power to voice my outrage at Obama's sins; but I don't see how allowing another Bush (or, more than likely, someone WORSE) spend eight years telling us science must defer to the neighborhood preacher, women/blacks should step back and gays should crawl back to the closet will help set right any of Obama's sins--in fact it's obvious (by their own words) that any Republican President will make Obama look like a flaming liberal.

"The classic definition of a fool is performing the same action over and over expecting a different outcome."

Exactly how I feel about repeating 2000 all over again. I remember many, many liberals (myself included) who felt as strongly about Clinton's failures/betrayals as they do Obama's; and thus 2000 and beyond. So...how does not voting for Obama prevent another 2000? Or, perhaps, the point is that the 'ethics' of not voting for him is worth the outcome to you. Obviously a personal decision.

report 10 likes, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

Brantley, with your snide comments about God and the Broncos, are you trying to make fun of Tim Tebow for his faith, or the national media for playing it up? Because if you are making fun of Mr. Tebow for his faith (he never once asked that his faith be a news story) then I will have a few things to say in rebuttal.

report 5 likes, 11 dislikes   like  dislike

I recall the adage that a conservative was someone who new things were fucked up but didn't care. A liberal was one who knew things were fucked but didn't have the balls for change.
Capitalism is the problem, not the particular figurehead selected to play puppet. Not a lot of room for optimism. That doesn't mean we have to yield to the fascists without recourse. It does mean we should be so much more demanding of those politicians who make us hold our nose at the polls. Good luck w that.

report 3 likes, 5 dislikes   like  dislike

Plainjim,

Ask me again on November 5, 2012. I hope I will have an answer for you, A good one.

It won't be Barack Hussein Obama. I made that mistake once before. I will not support a man who cannot uphold his oath of office . . . Ever!

P.S. plainjim, keeping an obvious and blatant liar who does not protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, especially after swearing on a Bible to do so, is my civic duty. I'm sorry you don't think it is yours, but that is your decision, not mine. Just don't expect me to be silent about your abrogation of your civic duty.

report 8 likes, 8 dislikes   like  dislike

.
>>Subsidies for corn ethanol and the tariff against imported ethanol expired yesterday.

Yet market for corn futures increased today

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15839171/site/14081…

report 1 like, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

One comment Zelda, Clinton's actions angered me and made me realize, how stupidly immature he was . . . and how stupid we were for electing him despite past experience and knowledge of his sexual immaturity, but at least he did not swear to keep his zipper up and his wick dry in the oath he took. He also, IMO, upheld his oath faithfully.

The results of his immature actions could have been much, much worse. So his sexual indiscretion with a unpaid aide was censorable, but did not rise (pardon the pun) to an impeachable offense and did not, IMO, tear down the U.S. Constitutions. I can not say that about President Obama's signing into law a bill whose provisions authorize indefinite military detention of anyone accused of terrorism or support of terrorist organizations without due process and overturns the law and principle of posse comitatus.

So realize President Obama has signed into law an attack on the U.S. Constitution as bad as and probably even worse than George W. Bush. At least he and Cheney did not authorize by law or fiat the overthrowing of posse comitatus.

report 4 likes, 5 dislikes   like  dislike

Oh, good grief, Jtsims. Of COURSE Tim Tebow’s making his religion a news story. That’s why he’s so PHONY!

Genuinely rich, secure, accomplished people, men or women, don’t walk around proclaiming, “I’m rich. I’m secure. I’m accomplished.”

Genuinely religious people who are secure in their faith don’t walk around saying, “Look how faithful I am!”

Which is exactly what Tebow does with his grandstanding drop-to-one-knee-and-pray for the cameras routine. So talk to God, already, Tim. Millions do, all the time, without making a production out of it.

But that's not Tim's agenda.

What’s phony about it (Tebow’s religious performance, if not his playing skills) is that it’s anything but what it says it is.

It’s both a needy child acting-out for attention and a controlling adult proselytizing his religious cult. (For Big Bucks, as in the case of his infamous half-time commercial.)

“Faith,” it is certainly clear by now, is nothing more than what you – or your chosen authority figures – say it is. Tim Tebow’s “faith” is no better / worse than Tom Cruise’s or Bob Marley’s.

Yet each magically revealed "religion" is quick to call all the others except itself a "cult."

Each claims a more preposterous "truth" than the last.

ALL marketed on fear of a wrathful God's torture and punishment if dogmatic rules are disobeyed. ALL cheerleading martial phrases about "enemies" and "soldiers" and "warriors" and "conquests" designed to boost shaky, near-non-existent, self-esteem completely dependent on the mantle of their "faith's" approval.

Hence, Tim Tebow.

What he does and what he IS is just the latest in the series of reminders on national television, again and again like any ad campaign, that Tim Tebow’s “faith” is America’s MAJORITY faith (whether true or not) – with all its attendant “values” and “politics” – namely, misogynistic anti-choice laws; unconstitutionally discriminatory laws against same-sex Americans; teaching fundamentalist Christianity in schools; dictating content in science and history books; not questioning authorities; abolishing social safety nets; fulfilling archaic gender roles and much, much more.

Tim Tebow is a tool – willing, no doubt, and well-paid.

There are reasons if you look, not pretty, why it’s SO important for Tim Tebow (and his people) to make a public spectacle of his “faith” and keep it “newsworthy,” none having a thing to do with football.

Let's be real.

report 14 likes, 6 dislikes   like  dislike

>>for his faith (he never once asked that his faith be a news story)<<


Yes, I'm certain that's true and that's why he prays very publicly and frequently in front of national TV cameras (he knows they focus on it) instead of quiet, private communion with the Lord as called for in the Bible.

Matthew 6:5-6 "....but thou when thou pray, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut the door, pray to thy father in secret, and thy father which seeth in secret shall reward thee".

report 8 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

In other words, James of the Plains, voting the way YOU want and not the way Dott wants you to is "abrogation of your civic duty" and he's not going to be silent about it.

report 5 likes, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

dott,
The provision in the Defense Authorization Act of 2011 is only that, an Act of Congress signed by the President.

It can be overturned by SCOTUS. If we're to continue being a Constitutional Republic then eventually SCOTUS will overturn it. If not then it's been a long, good experiment replaced by a corporatatized MIC-Government.

report 3 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

New Rules for New Year
...
New Rule Now that we have no money, and all our soldiers have come home from Iraq and they’ve all got experience building infrastructure, and no jobs ... we must immediately solve all of our problems by declaring war on the United States.

New Rule If you were a Republican in 2011, and you liked Donald Trump, and then you liked Michele Bachmann, and then you liked Rick Perry, and then you liked Herman Cain, and then you liked Newt Gingrich ... you can still hate Mitt Romney, but you can’t say it’s because he’s always changing his mind.

New Rule Starting next year, any politician caught in a scandal can’t go before the press, offer a lame excuse and then say, “Period. End of Story.” Here’s how you indicate a “period” and the end of a story: shut up.

New Rule The press must stop saying that each debate is “make or break” for Rick Perry and call them what they really are: “break.”

New Rule You can’t be against same-sex marriage and for Newt Gingrich. No man has ever loved another man as much as Newt Gingrich loves Newt Gingrich....
--Bill Maher NYT

report 3 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

"So realize President Obama has signed into law an attack on the U.S. Constitution as bad as and probably even worse than George W. Bush. At least he and Cheney did not authorize by law or fiat the overthrowing of posse comitatus."

Yes, sadly, I've been paying attention...and even when I try to stick my head underground for temporary respite, hubby seeks me out to inform me of the latest Constitutional decimation. I also remember the first time I realized Obama was not...my Kucinich: When Sen. Obama voted to give AT&T retroactive immunity for wiretapping (without the requisite warrant) the entire country. But, and again, what is the alternative to the Presidential race in 2012? I can't sit it out, not after 2000 and I won't vote for any of the current Republican candidates. So though I may loath my choices and understand your anguish, the lesser evil for me is to NOT repeat 2000. I'll hold my nose and vote for him just like I voted for Blanche...(after saying I wouldn't...over and over).

My comments about Clinton weren't meant to compare his Presidential sins with Obama's; they were simply my recollection about how outraged liberals were with his entire Presidency...aside from his loose zipper. From NAFTA to his Draconian trashing of welfare, his presidency was one big move to the right, and liberals squealed constantly and loudly with disappointment and ultimately failed to get behind Gore because of that 'disappointment.' Sure, dot, it's not the same Constitutional decimation that Obama's engaged in, but it's the same liberal abandonment by liberals...and without a viable alternative.


I honestly don't know how or if we'll ever get a President who will undue the Constitutional decimation of Bush and Obama...very depressing...especially for my innocent little grandson's generation. Unless things change, they won't know what it is to have the Rights granted by our forefathers.

report 4 likes, 2 dislikes   like  dislike

"In other words, James of the Plains . . ." Yes, baby sister, you read it right and you'll hear it again and again over the next 309 days. Although, I am sure President Obama will do more to make my point and keep the topic from being too stale.

Zelda,

I agree with your last. However, we won't ever see a candidate who can or will "undue," if we keep accepting the lesser . . . instead of demanding better from all the parties.

I still hope that one day, within my lifetime, a moderate won't equate to "flaming liberal" for the Republicans and "John Bircher reactionary" for the Democrats.

God night to all and good luck . . . we are going to need it!

report 4 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

dot & jim, the electoral system has been manipulated to prevent meaningful choices for american voters. After the Wallace debacle, the two major parties schemed to prevent other challengers to their status.

Independents and third parties were effectively blocked by impossible impediments to ballot access. Whenever courts threw out the locked gates, the dems and repugs would machine a new one.

Of course the efforts to meet the restrictive requirements (which differed state-by-state) or to challenge the restrictions in court cost money. The money expended in those efforts sap the funds needed for campaigning.

Thus the corporate parties perpetuate their monopoly. Challengers are portrayed as "spoilers" in a system that has already been corrupted (spoiled) by the dems and repugs.

In our current electoral system, choice is an illusion. The only wasted vote is one cast for either of the 1%er parties.

report 3 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

On December 31 and after signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law, President Obama issued a statement on it that addressed "certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of terrorism suspects." In the statement Obama maintains that "the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. [...] My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law. [...] As my Administration has made clear, the only responsible way to combat the threat al-Qa'ida poses is to remain relentlessly practical, guided by the factual and legal complexities of each case and the relative strengths and weaknesses of each system. Otherwise, investigations could be compromised, our authorities to hold dangerous individuals could be jeopardized, and intelligence could be lost. I will not tolerate that result, and under no circumstances will my Administration accept or adhere to a rigid across-the-board requirement for military detention."

Obama issued a signing statement that I'm too tired to research further. Yes, in many ways Obama is a disappointment to us liberals, but there is absolutely no one else to vote for.

I also believe that the Occupy Movement will have a great effect on the 2012 elections and on Obama's 2nd term. If you think Occupy is sleeping the winter away twiddling their thumbs...think again. The American Spring is a few months ahead of us. It will change this country for the good and eventually bring us better government than we've seen in decades. The OccuBaby crawled in 2011...you ain't seen nothing yet!

report 7 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

I think god was busy watching reruns of the Kardashians....who could blame him?

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Kardashians? Weren't they the evil people in "Deep Space 9?" Is this a new Star Trek spin-off series? I guess I missed it while watching the repug demolition derby.

Enough circuses, where's the bread? Repugs are telling us to eat cake ... or eat shit. Where's our Robert Allen Zimmerman and MLK for the 20teens? Occupy was a beginning, now it's our turn to follow through with action, not the usual resignation or complacency.

report 2 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

Recap 2011 in 100 seconds?

TPM's got it for ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfF2CSu3ve8…

report 1 like, 1 dislike   like  dislike

When you fear for the Constitution, zelda, please pause to remember that the citadel where it is defended is not the Oval Office. Presidents come and go, with no more than eight years of struggle with an often recalcitrant Congress to do the work that in any case is subject to the change of the winds in the next Congress.

But in this presidential election I will vote, and work, and pray* with the Supreme Court of the United States in mind. The question of your grandson's constitutional rights will turn most decisively on whom the next president appoints -- not on what he or she signs, ignores or advocates.

I could never be so mad at President Obama that I participate in handing over the keys to the citadel to RickNewtMittMichele.

But that's just me.

report 8 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

THIS, Tap. Where have you been? Your sweet and wise voice of reason is sorely needed in these threads.

report 5 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

Yes, TAP, we have missed you. Stick around because the level of discourse always improves when you join in.

report 3 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Regarding Tebow, his vision of a god who decides the outcomes of everything from football games to who lives and dies was perfectly illustrated in a PBS play which was aired in the 70's. "Steambath" portrayed God as a Puerto Rican steambath attendant who ruled by whimsy. The steam bath was actually limbo and the people there didn't know they were dead yet. It starred Bill Bixby and a lovely, winsome Valerie Perrine clad only in a short little towel around her waist and long hair covering her breasts.

Can anyone imagine the hoohaw if PBS were to air something like that today? My kids bought the DVD for me several years ago, but the format is outdated and I can no longer play it.

report 5 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

Call in the prayer police.

If there's anything an unbeliever can't stand, it's seeing someone praying in public--or having to hear someone's prayer over a public address system. It's likely to corrupt them.

Supreme Court should rule it illegal for anyone, ever, to pray where anyone else can see him/her do it.

And how the unbelievers love to quote the scriptures, in which they don't believe in the first place, to point out someone else's violation.

And how upset they get over any references to God, who they do not believe exists--in the first place.

Scantily-clad females shaking their tits and asses on the sidelines? No problem.

Football player dancing the hokey-pokey in the end zone? No problem.

A football player praying? Scandalous. Hypocritical. Phony. Shouldn't be permitted. String him up. Cheer for his opponent. Ridicule him. Destroy him in any way possible. Don't let him cram his religion down my throat!!!

But I want my religion of unbelief to prevent the practice of his religion of belief, because I believe in religious freedom for me, but not for him!!!

IMHO

report 1 like, 4 dislikes   like  dislike

Tebow has never said that God will bless him with a victory every game. I don't see how mocking God is in your best interest. http://haltingarkansasliberalswithtruth.co…

report 1 like, 3 dislikes   like  dislike

"Yet market for corn futures increased today"

I'm not exactly delivering breaking news here. There were probably folks that knew the subsidy and tariff were expiring months ago. The futures price for 2012 delivery would have reflected that then.

Also, sample sizes of one are pretty much worthless.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

People like Sky and Saline redefine reality to have something to say.

No one on this thread has posted any of the hyperbolic boilerplate that either claims.

They regurgitate the usual persecution fantasies religionists use as straw men to fuel their war for attention-grabbing displays of "faith" in every conceivable public business and venue.

Praying personally and privately? No. Pre-game prayers over PA systems; ostentatious poses in end zones and on sidelines; congressional Prayer Breakfasts, commercials at halftime? You betcha.

If praying personally and privately to express their "religious freedom" were what they're about, that's what they'd do. Those are lies.

PUBLIC displays of dogma and "faith" are what they're about, vehemently supported by those just like them. Imposing their values and rules on everybody everywhere, in every venue, is what they're about.

Intimidation, in numbers, in disguise. Constantly reinforcing that they're the "majority" religion, the "true" religion, and the three branches of government are in fact Christian -- that's what they're really about.

Theocracy, the real majority now realizes.

Not their "religious freedom" -- which isn't hampered in the least.

What IS hampered is evading constitutional laws and demanding public funds to install religious dogma in government, education, health care, science, medicine, finance, entertainment, business -- even in doctors' offices and people's bedrooms.

No one anywhere is trying to control what religionists teach their flocks. No one anywhere tries to prevent religionists from practicing their beliefs if they're legal. No one anywhere tells religionists whom they can and can't marry, visit in hospitals, build loving lives with, vote for.

It's the other way around.

What Sky, Saline and Tim don't want you to know is that PUBLIC validation of their faith is not just what they're really about, it's all they've got.

People with tried, true and tested core beliefs, secure in themselves, in their relationships with others, their knowledge and experience, with god or not, have nothing to prove to anybody, much less crowds.

Their lives are already tangible approval. They're not dependant on rote parroting for group attention and validation.

They're unthreatened by diversity, disagreement, questions, facts, other viewpoints, other colors, other classes, other accents. Truly secure instead of pretending.

Then there are the Tebows, Bachmanns, Santorums, Romneys and Huckabees constantly flaunting their religiosity for gain -- flashing the same nakedly paralyzed deer-in-the-headlights fury if anybody brings up talking snakes.

Offstage, they're all equally insecure, insincere, pretentious, socially unbearable and insufferable except with their own kind. No families or friends. Teams instead, all on some kind of payroll.

Their superior "faith," the most important thing in their lives, turns out on examination to be so thin and porous that their universal response, individually and collectively, to rational facts and questioning is escalating threats -- bullying -- ultimately climaxing in vividly imagined exquisitely vicious blood-drenched mayhem unless non-believing Evil Ones, Suppressives, Infidels, don't back down, convert and conform.

So they huddle together behind literal and figurative gates and cults from Westboro to Saddleback, frightened and angry at the rest of the world for thriving with other ideas.

They're united and stoked through artificial fears, real ones apparently insufficiently rousing, and paranoid delusions of their winning team's glorious vengeance, someday . . . just around the corner . . . never now . . . .

Flag on the play. What a game! Two minutes remaining! Let's go now to the Anheuser-Busch Prayer-Cam down on the ten-yard line with the players, where --

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

May the goddess bless you, Norma. Well said!

report 1 like, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Isn't it strange?

People who are gay severely resist and resent people who aren't gay defining when, where, and how they have sex or otherwise display their sexuality?

And people who drink severely resist and resent people who don't drink defining when, where, and how they drink?

And people who gamble severely resist and resent people who don't gamble defining when, where, and how they gamble.

Yet those who don't believe in God and don't pray seem to feel it is absolutely appropriate to tell people who do believe in God and who do pray when, where, and how it is appropriate for them to pray, and otherwise display their belief in God.

People who oppose religion seem to feel it is proper for them to prescribe correct practice for those who favor it.

People who can simply ignore malicious trolls on this blog find it impossible to resist criticizing a football player who occasionally (apparently) prays in public or otherwise expresses his faith.

Where's all that live-and-let-live attitude? Where's all that free-spirit non-judgmental attitude? Where is all that support for diversity in a democratic society attitude? Where is all that respect for the views and practices for people who are "different from us"?

If someone who prays in public is truly interested only in the attention s/he can attract, why are you so intent on giving her/him that attention? Wouldn't your cause be better served by simply ignoring her/him?

Just wonderin'.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Sky, even as an atheist, I have no problem with someone displaying their personal faith in whatever way they choose. What I do object to, however, is the insistence that EVERYONE, regardless of their personal beliefs, be forced to endure the interjection of some christian ritual in places or events where it really has no place, such as a sporting event, public school or government function, or any other place where it is only assumed that everyone in attendance is a christian.

I have yet to attend any civic luncheon or dinner that didn't begin with a christian prayer of some kind. Why does this have to be some kind of group activity? By all means, if it's important to someone to pray before a meal, no one is stopping that. But to force that upon the entire group is as offensive to me as it would be for a christian to have the group prayer of another faith forced upon them in a setting that should not be associated with any religious preference or affiliation.

Personally, I think a person's faith should be kept in their heart and in their church where it belongs. Certainly, one can live their faith by their deeds and thoughts. Just don't assume that everyone else wants to participate in that particular belief system and its rituals.

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike