Looking-Glass Selves

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

In the following passage, after the Jews accused Jesus of claiming to be equal with God, Jesus totally rejects their charges. It is clear from the below (John 5) that Jesus would never have approved of the non-biblical dogma of the Trinity subsequently formulated by the church fathers. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. 19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. 21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he wil...

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

"There is a liberal media." The Fox News Channel is "fair and balanced." Both of these are examples of useful lies: "A harmful truth is better than a useful lie." - Thomas Mann

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

IMO, morality is **always** relative. For instance, many social conservatives (those in the Christian/New Right) complain about abortion and call themselves "pro-life." However, for the most part, they have no problem with the execution of capital offenders or with the killing of "enemies" during times of war. What is *not* relative, in my view, are virtues. Virtues are qualities of the soul. They are the image and likeness of God reflected in the innermost reality of the individual. However, virtues are a spiritual substance. They are not directly observable. Morals, on the other hand, are values and social norms (behavioral rules) which may or may not be virtuous. Even if morality, a social (not spiritual) phenomenon, reflects spiritual virtues, such virtues are socially contextualized. In other words, morality, in this particular case, would synthesize virtuousness with existing social conditions.

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

>>religion has well passed it's sell by date, what was written even yesterday has only relevence to yesterday. IMO, the term "religion" is a meaningless essentialism. There is no such thing as religion. There are only different systems which some people have elected to call "religions." In other words, using the same term (such as religion) for differing phenomena does not make these phenomena the same. >>people of a religious bent tend to adhere to yesterdays news. Again, I do not know what a "religious bent" is. It is important to first specify the particular religious tradition. Then, to explain the branch (sect, denomination, etc.) of that religion that particular groups of people belong to. For instance: Religion is not a group. Christianity is not a group. The Baptists are not a group. On the other hand, the Southern Baptist Conference or Free Will Baptists are a group. >>shall we create a new 'religion'? Who is "we...

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

A news story just began on Fox News Channel with the following: In other axis of evil news ... More of the "fair and balanced" coverage we have come to expect from Fox.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org). However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages? In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Prediction: The imperialist war against Iraq will begin by October 2002 - before the November elections.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

Nader said on tonight's Donahue (MSNBC) that we must cleanse our system of its corruption, i.e., as an opportunity provided us by WorldCom, Enron, etc. But what if the system itself is corrupt? Nader is too much of a capitalist reformist and not enough of a revolutionary.

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

>>IMO, Andrea Yates was mentally ill at the time she killed her children, and as such, should not be in prison, but under medical treatment. Her doctors failed her, the system failed her, and her family failed her. As to why there was no "massive revolution", my only hypothesis is that the American public was "brainwashed" by the talking heads appearing on every news program, talk show, etc., each with their own agenda to advance. I also think it is a result of the extreme individualism and volitionism which dominate American society. Surveys show that most Americans believe that individuals should always be held responsible for their own actions, a viewpoint which is problematic at best. If you couple that attitude with the lack of understanding most Americans have of mental illness, it becomes a recipe for disaster. If anything is evidence of the lack of human rights and criminal justice in the U.S., it is the fact that the government was even permitted to p...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

I am trying to come to grips with the attack I was subjected to at the hands of a certain Korean Unification Church minister - pressuring me repeatedly to marry this Japanese woman, after I made clear to him that I did not wish to do so - before I ever met her. Originally, I said that I did not want to even meet her. I did not want to give her the wrong impression. However, after being subjected to pressure by this Korean "reverend," I said that I would meet her, so long as everyone concerned understood that I did not wish to get married. He assured me that he understood. Despite that, I was subjected to repeated harassment, including claims from the "reverend" that he had a vision that this Japanese woman was a gift sent by God for me. He asked me if that mattered, and I said that I would take it into consideration if the vision came to me , not to him. He then stopped for a few minutes, only to begin again. This time, I told him to stop. I said that he was rude. H...

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Please see my new essay: A Short Essay on the Radical Sociology of Religion

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Unificationism is a child-like, right-wing ideology originally developed to theologically justify the battle against North Korean communism. These days, it has been used by Moon and his followers to rationalize other right-wing causes. Its basis is conceptualizing the world as consisting of types of Cain (satanic) and Abel (godly). Furthermore, Bush's political Manichaeism, bifurcating the world into good and evil, reminds me of the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's unificationism. Since Moon publishes what is perhaps the most powerful conservative daily in the U.S., the Washington Times, and he has made extensive inroads into the Washington political establishment, it would not be inconceivable that he may have had an influence on King George, or the king's royal court, too.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Sharon is back in the U.S. Will there be another attack by Palestinian freedom fighters in Israel to disrupt his journey? It appears as though Sharon conducted the recent raid in Ramallah in order to forestall such a possibility.

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Of all the branches of Christianity, I am mostly fond of the Church of the Brethren, Friends General Conference, and the United Church of Christ. Christ taught a message which emphasized orthopraxy over orthodoxy, and He explicitly denied the claim made by some of the Jews that He was the incarnation of God (John 5:16-20).

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

Okay, I am playing with the template.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

I just posted an article to IamValley . You can read it here: Capitalist vs. Socialist Globalization Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

Please check out my article, Without Religious Terrorisms: A Praxis of Liberation Theology . I have made significant revisions.

Please check out my article, Without Religious Terrorisms: A Praxis of Liberation Theology . I have made significant revisions.