Moving to ...

Moved to Pressing For Truth In seeking truth, one does not find it by these immature and primitive methods. See RULES FOR COMMENTS (Right Sidebar)

Search This Blog

FrontPage Magazine » FrontPage

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Mel Gibson's tirades are the distilled violence, cruelty, and bigotry of right-wing Catholic ideology. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine

Christopher Hitchens writes about Mel Gibson's Tirades

Mel Gibson's tirades are the distilled violence, cruelty, and bigotry of right-wing Catholic ideology. - By Christopher Hitchens - Slate Magazine: "n Isn't Just an Angry Narcissist
His tirades are the distilled violence, cruelty, and bigotry of right-wing Catholic ideology." Read more by going to slate.com.

My comments:

It is not often that I find agreement with Mr. Hitchens. However I do certainly agree with him regarding Mel Gibson's sect of Catholicism being the root cause of many of his racist outbursts.

I do have to take issue with the idea that Hollywood should just "shun and spurn" Mel Gibson entirely due to these issues. Since when has anyone shunned an actor or actress because of their stupid beliefs? If that were the case, Hollywood might no longer exist! I do tend use hyperbole but not much.

I separate the actor and director Mel Gibson who has played and created many memorable and enjoyable roles from the bigoted Mel Gibson.

The second point is regarding Chris's critique of The Passion of the Christ as being anti-Jewish.

I have a deep love for the Jewish people and nation as they have been kicked around for centuries but I see the movie of simply depicting what it was like for Christ to be crucified in all the gory detail. If anyone is singled out, perhaps it should be the Italians as the successors of the Romans who sponsored and carried out crucifixions. But then Mel would have to stop eating spaghetti and pizza.

Have a Great Day!
-Charles

Saturday, June 26, 2010

GetMotivated.com Seminars

Last August, 2009, I attended this conference put on by Peter and Tamara Lowe. It was an
amazing day at a cost of ONLY $19.95 which INCLUDED the workbook AND EVERYONE in
my family or my office could attend without forking over another penny.

A value beyond words! Listening to well-known speakers like Robert Schuller Sr., Zig Ziglar,
Rudy Giuliani, Colin Powell and other lesser known but equally effective motivational speakers
was a wonderful inspirational day.

I share this book newsletter with you.

Success Summaries
POWER POINTSFROM PETER LOWE
How to Win Friends and Influence People is required reading for every leader on the fast track to success. This is because success is about succeeding with people, and Dale Carnegie’s insight into this is as penetrating, powerful, and practical today as it was back in 1936 when it was first published. As you read this summary, I hope that you’ll particularly note that:
  • It’s better to soar than to scold. Don’t criticize, condemn, or complain. When you have to correct, do it in private—acknowledging your own failures first. It’s much better to give sincere, honest, and copious appreciation and praise. As a leader, it’s your job to catch people doing things right. As an influencer, the best way to gain a following is to arouse in the other person an eager want—and that comes through praise and taking a positive interest in others.
  • It’s better to smile instead of scowl. Smiling not only changes your physiology and attitude, it also makes people much more receptive to you, your leadership, and what you have to say. Always look for ways to send the message of friendship.
  • It’s better to listen instead of speak. People like to hear their own name and receive a warm, sincere, and heartfelt reception to their own ideas. So ask great questions, listen with your all, and make the other person feel important. It will make an important difference in your own success.
BUSINESS STRATEGIES
checkmarkCreativity & Innovation
checkmarkEconomics
Human Resources
checkmarkLeadership
checkmarkManagement
checkmarkMarketing
Negotiating
Personal Development
Personal Finance
Real Estate
Sales
checkmarkSmall Business/ Entrepreneurship
Stock Market
checkmarkStrategy
checkmarkSuccess/ Career Techniques
Get Motivated Seminars
Get Motivated Seminars, Inc., 4710 Eisenhower Blvd., Suite B-5, Tampa, FL 33634

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Day of Pentecost

Sunday May 23 was the day of Pentecost.


Without getting into the history, this was a Jewish festival HOWEVER

Acts 2: "5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language?"

Did you notice that it said that "God-fearing Jews from every nation" were gathered .....
When reading the rest of the passage it seems obvious to many that A NEW THING was happening; the Christian church was being born from its Jewish roots.

Did you notice also that they were God-fearing Jews? Not just your average go to Shabbot-a-few-times-a-year Jew, but GOD-FEARING Jews! These were really sincere people.

"37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"  38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

If these were God-fearing men, why did they need to repent? Why did they need to turn their lives around? 

It is because as they recognized the truth of what Peter spoke they may have realized that their religion [not Judaism] but their own personal "religion" or relationship to God was a shell. It needed filling up. It needed completion.

And so it was that 3000 or more people began that day to form the Church of Christ.

Now if you are Jewish, I am NOT preaching at you. All of us, Christians, Jews and the rest of the world, we all fall short of what God would have for us. We often need to repent and get back on track. 

I love following my boss, a Jewish carpenter and he wasn't exactly a bad preacher either! He was a Jew. However he came to bring a new revelation, an expansion of present understanding. All those who recognized his truth began to follow him. I can too. You can too. We can learn a lot from him. 

But we never forget he WAS a JEWISH rabbi and we give much credit to the Jewish people from whom was birthed the Messiah. It is because God selected the Jews according to the Bible to show to the world a better way that we honour them as a race and make our best attempt to follow the example of our Jewish Messiah.

Also if you check my blog at http://peace-in-Israel.blogspot.com you will see EXTREMELY UNUSUAL achievements that this small beseiged, maligned country has contributed to the world. 

Chances are that you may be reading this on a Windows computer which was pioneered by in Israel.

Check out the "Cool Things about Israel" videos! THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!

Friday, March 19, 2010

Arguments of Atheists

Brian is one of my former students. I sure messed up teaching him, didn't I? (:-)
I will present Brian's comments that need an answer and then my answer. [I may leave out certain non-critical parts of his quote for simplicity.]
 
Brian : I would have to say it is unlikely there is a God. Therefore I regard myself as an Atheist.
 
Charles: Using Brian's format: I would have to say it is VERY unlikely that there is NOT a God! No evidence or argument presented but just a statement. We can all make statements including me. The only difference is that mine are right (:-) grin

Brian: I know very few Atheists that would say dogmatically that there is 100% no chance of there being a supernatural power one could call God. Even Richard Dawkins would not say that.
Charles:All atheists that I have dealt with ,ALL, say there is NO GOD. In fact the definition of an atheist is one who believes there is no God. If you are not sure, which seems to fit Brian, then you are an agnostic.

Brian: All the evidence I have seen so far has been flawed in one way or other. The logical arguments, the physical evidence, once you delve beneath the surface they don't hold up. I've been through a lot of this stuff and I'm sure there is way more that I haven't seen.
Charles: No evidence is presented but how can anyone arbitrarily say "all the evidence I have seen is flawed"? The fact that you say that means you have set yourself up as a superior being to the beings, such as myself, who have seen the EVIDENCE pointing DIRECTLY TO A GOD. So if you are a superior being and I am supposed to believe you, then you have created a god, that god being the superior being, in your eyes, who happens to be YOU. [So Brian does believe in a god... that god or superior being is him." On the other hand if he is NOT claiming that his reasoning or observations are superior, then perhaps my reasoning or observations are superior to his. Who is to know? (:-)
Charles: All the evidence I have seen that declares there is not God, in my view is flawed because everyone believes in some being who is superior to themselves, unless you are the highest of egocentrics, who believes NO ONE could be smarter than yourself.

Brian: "It always comes down to personal experience." 
Charles: Exactly! Your personal experience says there is no god or God and mine says THERE IS A GOD! Now to present some ideas which do not hold water in the atheistic religion.

Friday, February 5, 2010

"Flowing with Milk and Honey" - to Kill with Allergies and High Cholesterol?

For some time now we have been hearing that it is unnatural to drink cow's milk since it was designed for baby cows .... and it causes allergies and all kinds of problems ... that is what they say .

My skeptical scientific-method trained brain has always taken that thought with a whole shaker of salt ... forget a few grains!

I was discussing this with a young couple who is trying to get rid of allergies and other problems and so is doing a cleansing diet. Nothing wrong with trying that but what about the total elimination of milk?

This morning I woke up, got out of bed and the first thing that came to my mind were these ...

  • we eat honey from bees which was created so young bees could live and grow...plus food for the hive's winter survival
  • we eat eggs and you know what they are ... the embryo of a chicken
For those of us who know that the Bible contains hidden gems of wisdom, check these out [NASB]

  1. Exodus 3:8
    (Whole Chapter)



    "So I have come down [Gen 15:13-16; 46:4; 50:24, 25; Ex 6:6-8; 12:51] to deliver them from the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a [Ex 3:17; 13:5; Num 13:27; Deut 1:25; 8:7-9; Jer 11:5; Ezek 20:6] good and spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of [Gen 15:19-21; Josh 24:11] the Canaanite and the Hittite and the Amorite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite.

  2. Exodus 3:17

    (Whole Chapter)


    "So [Gen 15:13-21; 46:4; 50:24, 25] I said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of [Josh 24:11] the Canaanite and the Hittite and the Amorite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite, to a land [Ex 3:8] flowing with milk and honey."'
  3. Leviticus 20:24

    (Whole Chapter)


    'Hence I have said to you, " [Ex 13:5; 33:1-3] You are to possess their land, and I Myself will give it to you to possess it, a land flowing with milk and honey " I am the LORD your God, who has [Ex 33:16; Lev 20:26] separated you from the peoples
  4. Numbers 13:27

    (Whole Chapter)


    Thus they told him, and said, "We went in to the land where you sent us; and [Ex 3:8, 17; 13:5] it certainly does flow with milk and honey, and [Deut 1:25] this is its fruit.
  5. Numbers 14:8

    (Whole Chapter)


    " [Deut 10:15] If the LORD is pleased with us, then He will bring us into this land and give it to us-- [Ex 3:8; Num 13:27] a land which flows with milk and honey. 
  6. Deuteronomy 6:3

    (Whole Chapter)


    "O Israel, you should listen and be careful to do it, that [Deut 5:33] it may be well with you and that you may multiply greatly, just as the LORD, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in [Ex 3:8, 17] a land flowing with milk and honey. 
Does it seem that God was warning them about milk? Or does the "flowing with milk and honey" seem like a reward?

I don't believe it certainly ever hurts but helps to fast, to take certain things out of our diets for a time period... all good ..

But I don't think the Bible was talking about breast milk from human to child here was it?

Just for your thoughts.

Just like medications save lives on a daily basis, that does not make THEM always good, because they also kill people [druggies].

Just like water is great but put 1/2 a cup in your lungs can cause you to drown and die ...

Air is wonderful to breathe but put in your veins can cause, I am told, your death. ...

If I was a cautious person I would shut up and listen and make no comment ... I guess I am never going to be that guy ... (:-)

Will you take this for what it is worth and not as a rebuke?

Okay now I am thinking about how aspirin was discovered.... did you know it was a folk remedy that if you had aches and pains, you should chew willow bark .... of course scientists rejected ALL of these old ideas until later when someone tested willow bark ... you know what is in willow bark in higher than average concentrations? .... acetylsalicylic acid otherwise known as ASPIRIN...

Holding on to every accepted "wisdom" may be ridiculous as accepting in whole every new thought that comes along.

Thinking critically, nothing is perfect including standard medicine nor new wholistic ideas..

Editor's Notes:
Being a science teacher for over 20 years trained me to question any new idea using various criteria. That does NOT mean all new ideas are rejected. It is simply a check to make sure that some alarmists or companies with profit to gain are not behind various scares like the milk allergy scare mentioned above.

Some Scientific Criteria To Determine Facts
  • Who is the authority that makes the claims?
  • Is he/she qualified in that area of science? 
  • Is there actually any research to support the claim or is it circumstantial or as a result only of case studies?
  • Has the research been tested and verified by other qualified scientists?
  • Has the person making the statement any bias or anything to gain by people believing the claim? [For example "health magazines" often published and distributed in "health food" stores is biassed as it is usually published by companies that sell "health food". It may be true and maybe not.
In that light I did a very little research on the web regarding the widespread belief that cow's milk should not be consumed by humans. Any research on the web or anywhere else can be subject to incorrect data. Ask yourself if this is a credible source or does the researcher have something to gain.

Calgary Allergy Network - formed by a group of parents whose children have allergies...

"The Calgary Allergy Network evolved from a local group of parents meeting to share their challenges of living with allergies and asthma. We met for 2 years until succumbing to people's busy schedules and the ease/reach of the Internet. We were reaching 10 times more people by the Internet than in monthly meetings.
It's now mainly a web site which offers practical information and resources to the Canadian (and by default) the international communities.
The founder and web master, N Wiebe, is a volunteer and parent of a formerly peanut-allergic child. We have other food and enviromental allergies and intolerances just to keep the fun going. Local support is still available on a limited basis. Please contact us by email and we'll likely phone you back. 


We are affiliated with the Allergy/Asthma Information Association (AAIA), a registered  Allergy/Asthma Information Association (AAIA), a registered Canadian charity dedicated to helping individuals and their families cope with allergies and asthma. It has been in operation since 1964.  



Does this organization sound credible? Do they care about their children and not want them to be exposed to any additional health problems?

Here are there conclusions about milk and allergies:
  • "Milk allergy results from hypersensitivity of the immune system to the proteins in cow's milk possibly caused by genetic disposition. Studies show that 2 to 3% of infants are milk allergic and most outgrow it within a couple of years. If drinking milk was really 'out of harmony with nature' one would expect the allergy incidence to be much greater. [Ed. due to the use of milk products in so many other products]
  • "There is NO evidence that dairy products cause asthma. A person with a milk allergy may develop asthma but there is no cause and effect relationship between the two. Note: An allergic reaction to milk may trigger wheezing, especially in infants."
  • "Constipation is not related to what we eat but rather to what we don't eat...."
Calgary Allergy Network website


Pediatric Myths by Dr Jen ......

Quotations for Consideration

"The nutritional content of soy isn't as good as cow's milk based formulas. Soy formulas are not recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics or your pediatrician. The soy formulas all advertise that they are gentler to the stomach or are easier to digest or will guarantee your child's admission to an ivy league school or something, but really, they don't. The truest sign of formula intolerance is diarrhea, and I mean water coming out, with gas, distention and sometimes blood in the stool. The overwhelming majority of kids who do not tolerate cow's milk protein based formulas do not tolerate soy. It really doesn't help spitting up because the spitting up is from an anatomical problem and not a digestive one.  And soy formulas don't have lactose in them.  See the Lactose Free section below : lactose is important in infants."
http://www.drjen4kids.com/myths/mythformula.htm

"Lactose Free formulas: Lactose is the sugar in breastmilk. And all formulas are designed after the content of breastmilk.  Since things in nature rarely happen by chance, it's worth it to figure out why, out of all the sugars in the world, we have lactose in human milk.
Lactose helps with the intestinal absorption of calcium and iron.  It helps promote the growth of good bacteria in the gut.  And probably most importantly, it is a component of a lipid needed for brain development. Now, I don't know about the other sugars we put in formulas, other than lactose, but I think the jury is still out whether or not they do as good a job as lactose does.  Lactose is important in brain development--I'd suggest keeping it in the diet if we can."

Created, written and maintained by Jenny Thomas, Pediatrician, Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Scott Smith since May, 2000. Her website is called Dr. Jen 4 Kids. 

From The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto one of the largest teaching hospitals in the world we have ....


When discussing the issue about drinking Cow's milk or not, this is what they have to say...

A few excerpts from their conclusions.


Cow's Milk: Pros and Cons

"Occasionally, recommendations are made that children over 2 years old and adults should not drink cow's milk. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association strongly disagree with this position. Here are the reasons the benefits of drinking cow's milk outweigh the risks.
The benefits of cow's milk
Dairy products are an inexpensive source of protein. They are a convenient source of calcium. In addition, they often taste good. These benefits of milk haven't changed."

There are also cautions for certain children who may have problems with milk on that same page. Check it out. 
No attempt has been made to present both sides of this issue. The other side is well presented in various media and from certain types of medical practitioners. However what is presented is as unbiassed as possible being from research by parents of kids who have allergies and medical researchers and doctors.



Saturday, January 9, 2010

Letter to Investment Executive Magazine and Gord McIntosh

Editor's Note: Investment Executive magazine [newspaper] is sent to enrich the understanding of financial advisors in Canada. I happened to notice one piece that seemed rather more partisan than financial written by Gord McIntosh. In his article he is slamming the Tories for being undemocratic.

Here is my answer:


You had better tell your email server that you really want feedback since it rejected my email without even reading it!

Therefore I decided to send it to you [i.e. Publisher Sylvain Bedard] since the "editorial@...." route bounced back.

Regarding Gord's Schoolyard Tactics piece:

Gord may be right on much of what he says. Where I take issue is when he seems to think that proroguing parliament is a new tactic with the Tories.

"Powers noted that Jean Chretien, Canada's Liberal Prime Minister from 1993 to 2003, prorogued government four times during his time in office while Harper has prorogued Parliament three times since he came into power in 2006."-- [http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091231/parliament_prorogued_091231/20091231?hub=TopStoriesV2]

I believe one also has to remember that Jean Chretien prorogued parliament WHEN he had a MAJORITY government. So if Gord thinks this time it is uncalled for, then what did he think then?

One must also remember that the Liberals in the Senate have been basically acting contrary to the will of the Canadian people who elected MP's from all opposition parties. 


Even though all parties in the House of Commons agreed,  the unelected Liberals in the Senate have held up or stopped the will of the Government of Canada. 

This should not be. It is time for an elected termed Senate which scrutinizes and "polishes" bills but does not go against the entire Parliament which WAS elected to do the will of the people.

I think this proroguing IS an appropriate tactic for many reasons at this time but most of all to support Canada's Olympic athletes during February. Also it may give the opportunity for all parties to cool down and decide what is in the greater good of Canada.

I have not heard ONE person in public, talking about the "treatment" of terrorists who would cut off our soldier's heads in a moment if they had the chance other than the news media and opposition complainers. 


I believe yes we do need to have standards but we certainly can not create an instant "little Canada" in Afghanistan when their culture has not progressed anywhere near to our own.

What do we do? Capture and imprison ALL terrorists or Taliban [not sure there is much difference] or realize that when we leave we cannot take them with us... sooner or later the enemy combatants will have to answer to the government of Afghanistan, infant that it may be and suffer the consequences of treasonous behaviour against THEIR government. Perhaps a few of them already have. 


It is certainly NOT our responsibility to FORCE our standards on the government of Afghanistan even though we may disapprove.

Yes we can explain why WE do not torture [If indeed there was any torture. Some reports seem to indicate that nothing more happened than would happen in a fight in a schoolyard. Are you listening Gord?] But inevitably THEY will have to decide what to do without us interfering with their due process given that it is NOT our country.

 
P.S. May I respectfully request that if the Investment Executive is going to engage in partisan politics rather than financial matters that you provide a comments section after each article sot that those who see another side to this political debate may have a chance to democratically have their say?

Or are you going to continue to prorogue comments which may not agree with your own? 
 
If that is the case, perhaps Gord should re-think or retract his article.