American election.

[attofishpi]

ON HOW MANY FRONTS IS THIS AMERICAN POLITICAL CRAP GOING TO CONTINUE?

[Walker]

Walker defines human nature

You're quite perceptive, hopefully enough for the content and not just the direction.

It isn’t found in a book, that’s for sure. Yes, I have yet to surrender my access to mind, to the undeplorable "betters."

When clarity is the purpose and relativists muddy the waters in the name of socialism, then for the sake of truth, justice, and the American way, someone has to supply some rational definitions that apply to reality, rather than indulging some hair-brained ideology that ripens conditions for suffering.

[Walker]

ON HOW MANY FRONTS IS THIS AMERICAN POLITICAL CRAP GOING TO CONTINUE?

Stop the world I want to get off?

[attofishpi]

ON HOW MANY FRONTS IS THIS AMERICAN POLITICAL CRAP GOING TO CONTINUE?

Stop the world I want to get off?

Nah.. I just wish 45% of the US population would.

[Walker]

Historic times. This is when everything changed.

I prefer eyes open, no blinking.

But I get your drift.

The threads are good, and they could vanish if too noisy.

[henry quirk]

ON HOW MANY FRONTS IS THIS AMERICAN POLITICAL CRAP GOING TO CONTINUE?

we're like beer virus: we're everywhere

[henry quirk]

human nature isn't all good

no, it's not...but it ain't all that bad either

man is a spicy gumbo: we gotta lotta ingredients

[Nick_A]

. Henry wrote: grace is needed not to defy human nature but to preserve it, to preserve what is birthright: the natural right to one's self, to choose, to make of one's self as one sees fit, to profit from one's labors, to suffer the consequences of one's bad choices

The Pledge of Allegiance:

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Henry, for a free society to sustain itself what if any obligations does the free man have to his neighbor to pursue freedom? How does the free man grow to feel his objective conscience as opposed to being enslaved by indoctrination?

I contend it is only the help of grace which enables a man to "FEEL" objective conscience. Without the help of grace "one nation under the God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all is an impossible task. One nation under the Great Beast, indivisible with liberty and justice for all is a futile attempt The hypocrisy of the human condition prevents it.

A short poem from Simone Weil

There Comes

If you do not fight it---if you look, just
look, steadily,
upon it,

there comes
a moment when you cannot do it,
if it is evil;

if good, a moment
when you cannot
not.

The indoctrinated are incapable of looking

[henry quirk]

Henry, for a free society to sustain itself what if any obligations does the free man have to his neighbor to pursue freedom?

best I can tell: the only obligations a man has are...

...do not treat others as property

...&...

...do not allow himself to be treated as property

[Nick_A]

Henry, for a free society to sustain itself what if any obligations does the free man have to his neighbor to pursue freedom?

best I can tell: the only obligations a man has are...

...do not treat others as property

...&...

...do not allow himself to be treated as property

I basically agree but do see one problem; who tells people what to do? Socialism for example has three main goals: 1) distribute wealth equally among the people, 2) government control of society and 3) public ownership of most land.

Some institution must make this possible so in that sense you are their property. America with the ideal of a free society has blind justice reflecting one nation under God. In that sense we are the property of God. Freedom is only possible when people admit that collective freedom is only possible through grace and laws reflecting the commandments.

The question is if we want to be the property of that which offers the potential for inner freedom or that which offers external slavery to man made institutions? This election offers the choice on which direction to take.

[henry quirk]

Henry, for a free society to sustain itself what if any obligations does the free man have to his neighbor to pursue freedom?

best I can tell: the only obligations a man has are...

...do not treat others as property

...&...

...do not allow himself to be treated as property

I basically agree but do see one problem; who tells people what to do? Socialism for example has three main goals: 1) distribute wealth equally among the people, 2) government control of society and 3) public ownership of most land.

Some institution must make this possible so in that sense you are their property. America with the ideal of a free society has blind justice reflecting one nation under God. In that sense we are the property of God. Freedom is only possible when people admit that collective freedom is only possible through grace and laws reflecting the commandments.

The question is if we want to be the property of that which offers the potential for inner freedom or that which offers external slavery to man made institutions? This election offers the choice on which direction to take.

well, we got some disagreement here, Nick

let me list 'em...

*there ain't no collective freedom...a man is free...he is the atom

*god (my god, anyway) doesn't own us

*the election, and who gets the Big Chair, is a symptom of sumthin' that's been brewin' in 'murica for a long time: the latest iteration of the conflict that's been at play since -- as I say-- before man fell out of the trees

it's all about the free man vs the slaver

it's that black & white, that simple

-----

who tells people what to do?

a free man sez, I don't need or want direction

a slaver sez, oh yes you do!

[commonsense]

Henry, for a free society to sustain itself what if any obligations does the free man have to his neighbor to pursue freedom?

best I can tell: the only obligations a man has are...

...do not treat others as property

...&...

...do not allow himself to be treated as property

I basically agree but do see one problem; who tells people what to do? Socialism for example has three main goals: 1) distribute wealth equally among the people, 2) government control of society and 3) public ownership of most land.

Some institution must make this possible so in that sense you are their property. America with the ideal of a free society has blind justice reflecting one nation under God. In that sense we are the property of God. Freedom is only possible when people admit that collective freedom is only possible through grace and laws reflecting the commandments.

The question is if we want to be the property of that which offers the potential for inner freedom or that which offers external slavery to man made institutions? This election offers the choice on which direction to take.

well, we got some disagreement here, Nick

let me list 'em...

*there ain't no collective freedom...a man is free...he is the atom

*god (my god, anyway) doesn't own us

*the election, and who gets the Big Chair, is a symptom of sumthin' that's been brewin' in 'murica for a long time: the latest iteration of the conflict that's been at play since -- as I say-- before man fell out of the trees

it's all about the free man vs the slaver

it's that black & white, that simple

-----

who tells people what to do?

a free man sez, I don't need or want direction

a slaver sez, oh yes you do!

A slaver doesn’t tell a free man what to do. The slaver tells a free man what not to do to others’ persons or property., which basically is leave them alone, which after all is what a free man wants.

[henry quirk]

I basically agree but do see one problem; who tells people what to do? Socialism for example has three main goals: 1) distribute wealth equally among the people, 2) government control of society and 3) public ownership of most land.

Some institution must make this possible so in that sense you are their property. America with the ideal of a free society has blind justice reflecting one nation under God. In that sense we are the property of God. Freedom is only possible when people admit that collective freedom is only possible through grace and laws reflecting the commandments.

The question is if we want to be the property of that which offers the potential for inner freedom or that which offers external slavery to man made institutions? This election offers the choice on which direction to take.

well, we got some disagreement here, Nick

let me list 'em...

*there ain't no collective freedom...a man is free...he is the atom

*god (my god, anyway) doesn't own us

*the election, and who gets the Big Chair, is a symptom of sumthin' that's been brewin' in 'murica for a long time: the latest iteration of the conflict that's been at play since -- as I say-- before man fell out of the trees

it's all about the free man vs the slaver

it's that black & white, that simple

-----

who tells people what to do?

a free man sez, I don't need or want direction

a slaver sez, oh yes you do!

A slaver doesn’t tell a free man what to do. The slaver tells a free man what not to do to others’ persons or property., which basically is leave them alone, which after all is what a free man wants.

that almost sounds like yer callin' me a slaver...

[commonsense]

well, we got some disagreement here, Nick

let me list 'em...

*there ain't no collective freedom...a man is free...he is the atom

*god (my god, anyway) doesn't own us

*the election, and who gets the Big Chair, is a symptom of sumthin' that's been brewin' in 'murica for a long time: the latest iteration of the conflict that's been at play since -- as I say-- before man fell out of the trees

it's all about the free man vs the slaver

it's that black & white, that simple

-----

who tells people what to do?

a free man sez, I don't need or want direction

a slaver sez, oh yes you do!

A slaver doesn’t tell a free man what to do. The slaver tells a free man what not to do to others’ persons or property., which basically is leave them alone, which after all is what a free man wants.

that almost sounds like yer callin' me a slaver...

Almost! Slavers are actually a lot like free people. I’m saying that slavers are like you, more than most would think.

[henry quirk]

A slaver doesn’t tell a free man what to do. The slaver tells a free man what not to do to others’ persons or property., which basically is leave them alone, which after all is what a free man wants.

that almost sounds like yer callin' me a slaver...

Almost! Slavers are actually a lot like free people. I’m saying that slavers are like you, more than most would think.

so: if I refuse to be treated as property, and refuse to treat others as property, I'm almost like folks who treat others like property

that's profound...I'm humbled by profundity...you, you're profound