Where was God when Julie was getting molested as a child? Where was the Church when she needed acceptance, love and reassurance? Where was society’s compassion when she needed a clean slate?

True enough, personal responsibility is something lacking in the world, but who’s going to tell grandma, “tough shit, you should’ve saved up for retirement,”?

There’s a lot of hatred for big government down here in the land of cotton, but there has to be some sort of authoritative entity out there to delegate and provide help for people who… (me included) maybe were not the wisest in their choice making.

Jeff

I think we should do away with affirmative action as it pertains to jobs, and assert affirmative action in schools and section eight housing.

Maybe? Just a thought.

Jeff

We should FORCE our leaders to bring companies back from Mexico and to stop employers from hiring illegal immigrants. We should stop importing goods made in China. We should “STIMULATE” production companies in the US.

There’s no reason why American companies can’t produce goods of equal quality to that of Japan. Ford and GMC should step up. We should DEMAND that they do.

I’m no economist… I even suck at math, but that’s just my take.

Jeff

That being said, I don’t think one can really argue either side of this question. One side says that anyone who kills hundreds of thousands of non-combatants is definitely a war criminal. The other side says that dropping those bombs saved a million lives.

I don’t know. I don’t think we can say with certainty that Truman saved lives by dropping those bombs… but he did end the war. I can’t help but say… what would Jesus do? Would Jesus approve of killing half a million non-combatants… including children… for that matter, why would God allow all those children to suffer and/or die. I don’t think I can accept that as “right.”

Currently, we are supposed to be fighting three fronts to the same war. We’re supposed to fighting the war on terror at home, in Afghanistan and in Iraq, but the war in Iraq turned out to have little to do with terrorism or Saddam having weapons of mass destruction. We also fought a war in Vietnam that had little to do with preserving our freedom (as it was sold to us).

Did the United States really even NEED to get involved in WWI? I think not. Many, if not most of the wars that are fought, shouldn’t have been fought at all. Should we have fought the Revolutionary War? Maybe. Should we have fought the Civil War? From the Union’s point of view… YES! The Confederacy should never have risen up. Should someone have stopped us from exterminating the American Indians? YES! Someone should have kicked our ass.

There are very few wars in history that I see as “Noble.” The Union fought a noble fight against the Confederacy. Hitler definitely had to be stopped. We had to fight in Afghanistan to stop Al Quaida and the Taliban… other than those… I think you’ll be hard-pressed to find truly “Noble” acts of war.

Jeff

The first statement that stuck with me was that you believe the teachings of Christ and his disciples to be “truths.” I won’t challenge the teachings of Christ, but his disciples? That’s a different issue. Christ’s disciples were no more divine, perfect or trustworthy than you or I. The teachings of the disciples may be good, but flawless? I think not. The same goes for the entire Old Testament. I’ll just stop there for now.

Moving on… How can you assert that Homosexuality is not “normal” in nature? First, it is nearly impossible to define what is “normal” in the realm of psychology and human behavior, and equally as difficult to define, philosophically speaking, what is “normal” in nature. If you are defining “normal” as events that occur “most” of the time (as opposed to the anomalies), then an eclipse is not “normal.” As we all know, eclipses do occur in nature nonetheless and would hardly be referred to as, “unnatural.”

As for the issue of sex and the purpose of it… Is reproduction the ONLY purpose of sex? I think not. Sex is clearly the ultimate source of pleasure and emotional bonding in human existence. If the assertion that reproduction is the ultimate purpose of sex, then is it “wrong” to have sex for other reasons? If the purpose of sex is not ONLY for reproduction, and it is not “wrong” to have sex for other reasons, then nature does not dictate that homosexuality is “wrong” either.

As for “Marriage is a religious institution” point… I’m not convinced of that. Marriage existed in ancient Egypt and ancient Greece and had nothing to do with Jewish Law or any other western religion. Marriage was a societal norm… just as homosexuality was in ancient Greece.

On separation of church and state… I do scream it. I scream it with no regard for it being in any founding documents or not. It is an intelligent statement that should be heard regardless. Are we, as Americans, to continue trying to live in 1776, or evolve and adapt to 2010?

Oddly enough, with all our differences in views, we arrive at the same conclusion. I absolutely agree with your final paragraphs. Bravo.

Jeff

Unfortunately, Dave he falls flat when he bad-mouths precious metals as “stupid.” His mantra that “metals are never used in the barter economies that follow disasters” is a straw man argument (though somewhat understandable, given that some metal and coin dealers seem to imply that metals will be money when the feces hits the fan).

Precious metals shouldn’t be bought/held primarily for a “social meltdown” scenario, but as an historically-reliable store of value.

A couple of ignorant things I’ve heard Dave say recently about precious metals:

• “They have no more intrinsic value than a shoelace.” (IOW, precious metals only have value because man assigns it value and does so arbitrarily — we could just as easily assign similar value to dirt!) I’m utterly amazed that Dave doesn’t grasp fundamental principles of value found in precious metals such as world-wide recognizability and desirability, ease of divisibility and transportability, and high value in relation to volume and weight.

• “Precious metals haven’t been a medium of exchange since the Roman empire.” This is simple ignorance of history. What does Dave think the value of US currency was pegged to by law until only 1971? (Not to mention the fact that US quarters, dimes, and dollar and half-dollar coins were 90% silver until 1964!)

It is a paradox that, while preaching so faithfully against personal indebtedness, Dave won’t/can’t preach against our government’s indebtedness and the central-bank-issued fiat currency that aids and abets it. I know Dave is a Bible-believing Christian — well, the Bible vehemently condemns theft by the use of unjust weights and measures, which is precisely what fiat currency is: “faith-based” money that is backed up by absolutely nothing and which results in that most insidious a invisible of taxes, a.k.a. inflation. (Oh, incidentally, Dave has defined “inflation” as price increases due to variables of supply and demand. Yes, prices do fluctuate as a result of supply and demand, but inflation is an increase in the amount of money in circulation at the hands of central banks and government-owned printing presses. When more money is pumped into the system via the printing press or electronic credits, it serves to devalue the money already in circulation, and prices rise in response to that. IOW, long-term price increases are not inflation, but rather they are a symptom of inflation — more money chasing after a fixed amount of goods. The best example I can point to is the artificial boom in home values earlier this decade, which were the direct result of the ease with which more and more people were able to get loans. I.e., more money — in the form of credit — chasing after a fixed supply of houses.)

For a different — and reliable — take on our current economic mess, I would urge you to spend some time reading the articles and watching the videos of Peter Schiff. Just Google him … you’ll find him. Peter is also “death on debt” — but he called the current financial mess a few years ago, based on the fact that Americans and their government borrow endlessly to buy things they simply cannot afford. I.e., rampant consumerism and endless lines of credit.

I love Dave for what he does well, but he has a ways to go to understand the government-monetary-policy basis for the dire straits in which our nation currently finds itself.