LDS leaders on physician assisted suicide and other topics

[Windseeker]

2 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I don't understand this way of thinking.  For example, our Church Leaders have been talking about the war on the family for sometime (and rightfully so) under Morgan Freeman logic they should just stop talking about it and the problem will go away. Right?  

I guess it depends on your perspective. I believe I share Morgan Freeman's perspective that Racism is currently being kept alive and perpetuated by a soulless ideology that believes the end justifies the means and in order to maintain power must ensure people are divided as much as possible.  It also relies on sowing victimization. 

We see just like Hitler had Jewish decent, we have had a mixed race man in the highest office of the land who has spent the last eight years ensuring Black people remain victims, dependents and have a healthy hate for white people. While I like to think people like myself and Anatess are doing our part by breeding the problem away ......, it's very possible that despite the truth literally covering an individuals skin, people will believe the lies coming out of said individuals mouth that tells them "You can't make it because of your skin color". It's my belief that if this ideology could go back and erase the contributions of Martin Luther King they would. It's with the greatest reluctance that they honor him, he served his purpose. You will never hear them quote Martin Luther Kings actual dream. Is not that telling? They simply cannot maintain power if his dream comes true. 

The bottom line is we are post-civil rights, you either believe we were all created equally or you don't. And no matter a individuals belief the laws of the land ought to be color-blind. There is no need for special laws or appropriations. A crime is a crime. 

Why is this issue considered a "Black" issue?  Is it not a Human one? Doesn't it affect us all? 

You want Racism to disappear, remove all mentions of race in Government, stop tracking race in statistics or consensus, remove all race based holidays etc (ie Black History Month). Once the Government moves beyond race, the media will eventually have to follow, or risk more and more people identifying them as the racebaiter and dividers they are. Once the lie that race matters is no longer on constant repeat by our Government, Media, News and Academia, you will see the dawn break and people will realize that we are the least racist country on the planet and we are all lucky to live here. 

Won't there always be racist individuals among all races? Yes, but as we have seen with the KKK, the Black Panthers and soon to see with Black Lives Matter, they will be relegated to a hiss and a byword, where they belong.  

 

 

Edited October 21, 2016 by Windseeker

[Traveler]

 

In the 80’s I was working as an engineer for Boeing in the Seattle area – not long after the LDS church allowed Blacks (African Americans) to hold the priesthood.  I met a remarkable guy by the name of Paul Smith that was a black African American and one of the first to receive the priesthood in the LDS church.   He taught me more about prejudice than any other single person I have ever known – before or since.

What he taught me is that there is in essence two very different kinds of “racial” prejudice and both have their very dark side of separating (isolating) individuals in cultures.  The first kind of prejudice is a bitter or even hateful prejudice – we are all aware of this prejudice.  It is the hateful prejudice that all good people try to avoid.  It is also what most think is the engine of all prejudice – or at least that is what we are told and made to believe.

There is another kind of racial prejudice.  Sometimes this other kind of prejudice raises its ugly head in a strange makeover manner in people trying to be kind, compassionate and loving; that are being deceived that this very ugly prejudice has a beauty of its own about it.  It is a much more subtle kind of prejudice but the result of any prejudice is always the same – it causes people to pigeon hole others and give excuse for thinking that they are or ought to be thought of as different.   

Paul Smith worked with me and convinced me of my other kind of racial prejudice.  As we talked about problems I would make a statement like, “What Blacks need is a great leader.”  He would respond and say, “No! that is not what Blacks need – what people need is a great leader.”  Then he would remind me that as soon as I see a different need for Blacks – I was exercising a prejudice – and I needed to get over that prejudice.   As Paul said – we need to be truly color blind.   We are all children of the same G-d – with the same needs and Celestial destiny.

I could give many examples of how well-meaning people exercise a very dark prejudice thinking that somehow it is good and kind because they think hate does not have any part in motivating it.   But the truth is – it does not matter all that much if we enter into temptation thinking that we are justified in doing so because we are motivated by love rather than hate.  Like the adulterer that thinks their disloyalty in marriage is justified; not by hate of their spouse (that they do not hate but do love somewhat) but rather their deep (thinking somehow deeper) love of someone else – and that love is a good thing. 

As soon as we see through colored goggles and think someone or some group is different for whatever excuse we can think up – we are engaging in prejudice – a prejudice that if allowed to continue will do more harm than whatever good we may think we are dreaming up about it in seeing a difference and making an excuse for it.

If police are treating anyone improperly we should be concerned – not because they are black but because they are humans.  As soon as we allow race to be an element – we create more to the problem and take away from or perhaps even prevent the legitimate solution.

 

The Traveler

[Windseeker]

7 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

In the 80’s I was working as an engineer for Boeing in the Seattle area – not long after the LDS church allowed Blacks (African Americans) to hold the priesthood.  I met a remarkable guy by the name of Paul Smith that was a black African American and one of the first to receive the priesthood in the LDS church.   He taught me more about prejudice than any other single person I have ever known – before or since.

What he taught me is that there is in essence two very different kinds of “racial” prejudice and both have their very dark side of separating (isolating) individuals in cultures.  The first kind of prejudice is a bitter or even hateful prejudice – we are all aware of this prejudice.  It is the hateful prejudice that all good people try to avoid.  It is also what most think is the engine of all prejudice – or at least that is what we are told and made to believe.

There is another kind of racial prejudice.  Sometimes this other kind of prejudice raises its ugly head in a strange makeover manner in people trying to be kind, compassionate and loving; that are being deceived that this very ugly prejudice has a beauty of its own about it.  It is a much more subtle kind of prejudice but the result of any prejudice is always the same – it causes people to pigeon hole others and give excuse for thinking that they are or ought to be thought of as different.   

Paul Smith worked with me and convinced me of my other kind of racial prejudice.  As we talked about problems I would make a statement like, “What Blacks need is a great leader.”  He would respond and say, “No! that is not what Blacks need – what people need is a great leader.”  Then he would remind me that as soon as I see a different need for Blacks – I was exercising a prejudice – and I needed to get over that prejudice.   As Paul said – we need to be truly color blind.   We are all children of the same G-d – with the same needs and Celestial destiny.

I could give many examples of how well-meaning people exercise a very dark prejudice thinking that somehow it is good and kind because they think hate does not have any part in motivating it.   But the truth is – it does not matter all that much if we enter into temptation thinking that we are justified in doing so because we are motivated by love rather than hate.  Like the adulterer that thinks their disloyalty in marriage is justified; not by hate of their spouse (that they do not hate but do love somewhat) but rather their deep (thinking somehow deeper) love of someone else – and that love is a good thing. 

As soon as we see through colored goggles and think someone or some group is different for whatever excuse we can think up – we are engaging in prejudice – a prejudice that if allowed to continue will do more harm than whatever good we may think we are dreaming up about it in seeing a difference and making an excuse for it.

If police are treating anyone improperly we should be concerned – not because they are black but because they are humans.  As soon as we allow race to be an element – we create more to the problem and take away from or perhaps even prevent the legitimate solution.

 

The Traveler

Very well said. Exactly. 

The other racism which is so prevalent that most people don't recognize it is sometimes referred to as the "Soft Racism of Lowered Expectations". 

 

 

[Guest]

@Windseeker I want to draw your attention back to your remarks about making racism disappear presumably by not talking about it.  I don't want you to feel as though I'm playing gotcha. I want to arrive at a clearer understanding of what you mean as I compare the thoughts going on in my own mind to your viewpoint. You seem to say that removing mentions of race in Government will result in media ceasing to talk about it and that eventually academia will stop talking about it, as well. And racism will disappear. But then you seem to say there will always be racists among all races.  So, as I ponder this I must conclude that in other words racism will never disappear. 

I'm having great difficulty wrapping my mind around the notion that silence will make problems go away. But maybe I'm misrepresenting your meaning. In any event I agree with (what I think you believe) that racism will never truly disappear because there will always be racists. Is it possible that we both believe simply focusing upon personal racism for its own sake is sort of a dead-end if what we really want to do is identify solutions to problems on the ground? I suspect that you and I and others on this thread recognize that even *we* have human weaknesses that we could say are somewhat racist, but we are in good faith striving to live as examples of what we think it means to be color-blind and treat all of God's children as God's children. In that regard @Traveler's experiences with his friend, Paul Smith, make sense to us. 

[estradling75]

8 minutes ago, UT.starscoper said:

@Windseeker I want to draw your attention back to your remarks about making racism disappear presumably by not talking about it.  I don't want you to feel as though I'm playing gotcha. I want to arrive at a clearer understanding of what you mean as I compare the thoughts going on in my own mind to your viewpoint. You seem to say that removing mentions of race in Government will result in media ceasing to talk about it and that eventually academia will stop talking about it, as well. And racism will disappear. But then you seem to say there will always be racists among all races.  So, as I ponder this I must conclude that in other words racism will never disappear. 

I'm having great difficulty wrapping my mind around the notion that silence will make problems go away. But maybe I'm misrepresenting your meaning. In any event I agree with (what I think you believe) that racism will never truly disappear because there will always be racists. Is it possible that we both believe simply focusing upon personal racism for its own sake is sort of a dead-end if what we really want to do is identify solutions to problems on the ground? I suspect that you and I and others on this thread recognize that even *we* have human weaknesses that we could say are somewhat racist, but we are in good faith striving to live as examples of what we think it means to be color-blind and treat all of God's children as God's children. In that regard @Traveler's experiences with his friend, Paul Smith, make sense to us. 

 

Simple...  saying "a man was shot by a police officer"... is not racist or supporting or encouraging racism... and allows one to focus on the facts of the case to determine if the shooting of the man person by a cop was justified.   Whereas saying "a <insert skin color here> man was shot by a <insert skin color here> police officer"  forces race into the equation.  If we truly believe Martin Luther King's dream of not judging people by the color of there skin but by the content of the character then we need to stop injecting race into the discussion and focus on character and actions.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, UT.starscoper said:

@Windseeker I want to draw your attention back to your remarks about making racism disappear presumably by not talking about it.  I don't want you to feel as though I'm playing gotcha. I want to arrive at a clearer understanding of what you mean as I compare the thoughts going on in my own mind to your viewpoint. You seem to say that removing mentions of race in Government will result in media ceasing to talk about it and that eventually academia will stop talking about it, as well. And racism will disappear. But then you seem to say there will always be racists among all races.  So, as I ponder this I must conclude that in other words racism will never disappear. 

I'm having great difficulty wrapping my mind around the notion that silence will make problems go away. But maybe I'm misrepresenting your meaning. In any event I agree with (what I think you believe) that racism will never truly disappear because there will always be racists. Is it possible that we both believe simply focusing upon personal racism for its own sake is sort of a dead-end if what we really want to do is identify solutions to problems on the ground? I suspect that you and I and others on this thread recognize that even *we* have human weaknesses that we could say are somewhat racist, but we are in good faith striving to live as examples of what we think it means to be color-blind and treat all of God's children as God's children. In that regard @Traveler's experiences with his friend, Paul Smith, make sense to us. 

 

As long as we are mortals in this fallen earth, there will always be racists just like there will always be that kid who gets pushed out of the sandbox.  It is a natural-man instinct of survival.  You can play anti-bully videos all day long.  It only serves to fix the social acceptance of such behavior.  It won't fix the desire for the behavior itself that is instinctive.  And that is just fine.  You can be racist all you want but when society recognizes your racism and makes you pay consequences for it, everything is working as it should be.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

Simple...  saying "a man was shot by a police officer"... is not racist or supporting or encouraging racism... and allows one to focus on the facts of the case to determine if the shooting of the man person by a cop was justified.   Whereas saying "a <insert skin color here> man was shot by a <insert skin color here> police officer"  forces race into the equation.  If we truly believe Martin Luther King's dream of not judging people by the color of there skin but by the content of the character then we need to stop injecting race into the discussion and focus on character and actions.

Not so simple.  I agree that saying "A police officer shot a man" is not racist. Nor is it racist to say, "A white police officer shot a black man".  Both statements tell us the facts. But knowing that we live in a country where racism exists, and that our country hasn't arrived at a color-blind condition it should also be apparent that facts and truths can be revealed or withheld for other than simply determining whether the shooting was justified. So, it seems to me that purposely ommitting some of the facts is ironically only an example of another kind of political correctness, which I suppose you eschew (as do I). You believe that inserting the facts of skin color isn't pertinent. You may be right on a case basis, but as a matter of policy regarding investigations of shootings by police officers it is indeed pertinent. If you had given me an example such as "A man argued with a woman," where one was white and the other black, I would be more prone to agree that nobody ought to care about the respective skin colors.

Edited October 21, 2016 by UT.starscoper

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

As long as we are mortals in this fallen earth, there will always be racists just like there will always be that kid who gets pushed out of the sandbox.  It is a natural-man instinct of survival.  You can play anti-bully videos all day long.  It only serves to fix the social acceptance of such behavior.  It won't fix the desire for the behavior itself that is instinctive.  And that is just fine.  You can be racist all you want but when society recognizes your racism and makes you pay consequences for it, everything is working as it should be.

 

As on other occasions, I agree with you.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, Windseeker said:

I believe I share Morgan Freeman's perspective that Racism is currently being kept alive and perpetuated by a soulless ideology that believes the end justifies the means and in order to maintain power must ensure people are divided as much as possible.  It also relies on sowing victimization. 

So let me see if I understand you correctly, you think that one person caused everything I posted above?  One person...

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

12 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

You can be racist all you want but when society recognizes your racism and makes you pay consequences for it, everything is working as it should be.

Yes, I love this.  I look forward to a day when we will be there.  

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Yes, I love this.  I look forward to a day when we will be there.  

Despite my personal struggles to remain optimistic as I continue to grow older, I am less sanguine than I was when I was younger. When I was a teen I believed that when I arrived at adulthood the headlines would change. I was wrong. I've come to see that things I once thought were achievable aren't.  There will always be guns and there will always be a need for them. There will always be poverty and starvation, and there will always be a need to fight poverty and starvation. There will always be racism and there will always be the need to guard against it's more dangerous effects. And so it goes. Perhaps this is part and parcel of what @anatess2 said above--"everything working as it should be."

Edited October 21, 2016 by UT.starscoper

[estradling75]

40 minutes ago, UT.starscoper said:

Not so simple.  I agree that saying "A police officer shot a man" is not racist. Nor is it racist to say, "A white police officer shot a black man".  Both statements tell us the facts. But knowing that we live in a country where racism exists, and that our country hasn't arrived at a color-blind condition it should also be apparent that facts and truths can be revealed or withheld for other than simply determining whether the shooting was justified. So, it seems to me that purposely ommitting some of the facts is ironically only an example of another kind of political correctness, which I suppose you eschew (as do I). You believe that inserting the facts of skin color isn't pertinent. You may be right on a case basis, but as a matter of policy regarding investigations of shootings by police officers it is indeed pertinent. If you had given me an example such as "A man argued with a woman," where one was white and the other black, I would be more prone to agree that nobody ought to care about the respective skin colors.

It was in answer to how does not talking about it helps...  If a cop shoots someone there are always investigations in to the shooting.  Such investigation need to run and proper response need to happen based on that investigation..  For the ignorant John Q Public the color of the skin of the people involved should not matter... only that it get investigated and handled properly... 

Instead you get everyone and their dog making it about race (by talking about it) and deciding what the results should be based on skin color and soundbites.  That is all about skin color and nothing about the content of their character... and it Keeps racism alive by having society validate and approving such actions

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

It was in answer to how does not talking about it helps...  If a cop shoots someone there are always investigations in to the shooting.  Such investigation need to run and proper response need to happen based on that investigation..  For the ignorant John Q Public the color of the skin of the people involved should not matter... only that it get investigated and handled properly... 

Instead you get everyone and their dog making it about race (by talking about it) and deciding what the results should be based on skin color and soundbites.  That is all about skin color and nothing about the content of their character... and it Keeps racism alive by having society validate and approving such actions

OK, so we appear to agree about the investigation part as long as the investigation gets handled appropriately. But it does get handled appropriately until it doesn't. And censorship has a nasty habit of growing out of control. So I don't agree about the public part. John Q. Public includes you, and it includes me. You think it doesn't matter, but I think it does. I can handle the truth. I'm confident you can, too. And so can millions of other Americans. Truth can indeed be used as fodder or to fan a flame by those with such motives; and it can be suppressed in the name of everything from public safety to avoiding racism but I'd rather know the truth. To claim that such truth keeps racism alive is to mischaracterize racism, I think. I keep my racism alive by practicing it. I keep my racism in check by talking about it and learning from people with better ideas. At least that's the way I see it now. But keep going. Maybe there's more that I haven't considered.

[estradling75]

5 minutes ago, UT.starscoper said:

OK, so we appear to agree about the investigation part as long as the investigation gets handled appropriately. But it does get handled appropriately until it doesn't. And censorship has a nasty habit of growing out of control. So I don't agree about the public part. John Q. Public includes you, and it includes me. You think it doesn't matter, but I think it does. I can handle the truth. I'm confident you can, too. And so can millions of other Americans. Truth can indeed be used as fodder or to fan a flame by those with such motives; and it can be suppressed in the name of everything from public safety to avoiding racism but I'd rather know the truth. To claim that such truth keeps racism alive is to mischaracterize racism, I think. I keep my racism alive by practicing it. I keep my racism in check by talking about it and learning from people with better ideas. At least that's the way I see it now. But keep going. Maybe there's more that I haven't considered.

Yes John Q Public includes you and me... and yes unless we are directly involved with the cases we are ignorant of the facts and what happened...  That is why we have a court system in the first place... so a small group (aka a jury) can have both sides presented and then render a judgement...  Is it a perfect system?... no... but it million of times better then trial in media and mob rule.

Yet the later is what we head to every time we let people play the race card

 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Yes John Q Public includes you and me... and yes unless we are directly involved with the cases we are ignorant of the facts and what happened...  That is why we have a court system in the first place... so a small group (aka a jury) can have both sides presented and then render a judgement...  Is it a perfect system?... no... but it million of times better then trial in media and mob rule.

Yet the later is what we head to every time we let people play the race card

 

I think you and I both admire our court system in similar ways. And apart from differences we may have in how much to trust government or what levels (municipal, county, state, and federal) of government we trust or distrust, I think we both have respect for police officers in general.  So of course the relative degree of successes and failures of "the system" isn't the issue we're discussing. Nor is the comparison between the merits of the system and the evils of mob rule--which strikes me as a strange comparison in the first place.

I'm having difficulty processing the relevance of a term like race card in the context of the conversation we've been having about the effects talking about racism has on racism. 

[estradling75]

18 minutes ago, UT.starscoper said:

 

I'm having difficulty processing the relevance of a term like race card in the context of the conversation we've been having about the effects talking about racism has on racism. 

Simple you have a court system... designed to be all about law... and irrespective of the color of the skin of the persons involved.  You have the police that are a part of that system.  When the police shoot someone there is already a system in place to investigate.  Now maybe there are some places and cases where the system is broken, corrupted or otherwise not working.  I think everyone can agree that those instances need to be fixed.

However when such events happen we don't have a discussion on if the system worked or failed... It becomes about RACE it overrides every other consideration... the content of the character of the people don't matter, nor do their actions, just the color of their skin and that is fundamentally racist... Thus instead of moving away from Racism it get reinforced and entrenched,

 

Edited October 21, 2016 by estradling75

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

 ... However when such events happen we don't have a discussion on if the system worked or failed... It becomes about RACE it overrides every other consideration... the content of the character of the people don't matter, nor do their actions, just the color of their skin and that is fundamentally racist... Thus instead of moving away from Racism it get reinforced and entrenched,

Alright, it looks like you and I have exhausted our exchange regarding the effects which talking about racism has on racism, itself--for now anyway.

So, now you're talking about when the system [of police investigating police and/or court hearings] succeeds or fails, but people don't talk about the successes or failures. Instead one side "throws down the race card" by deliberately or falsely accusing the other side of being racist as a means of obstructing the process of investigation. Is this what you want to talk about?

Edited October 21, 2016 by UT.starscoper

[NightSG]

On 10/16/2016 at 4:29 AM, LiterateParakeet said:

The thing I'm struggling with is this: while I know recreational marijuana is unhealthy, I see no reason to fill our jails with marijuana users.

Obesity kills a lot more people than marijuana.  

Quote

Now, if we had some sort of mandatory rehab like Portugal, then I could really consider that. 

Sure, just as soon as the courts are also forcing people into Weight Watchers.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

1 hour ago, NightSG said:

Obesity kills a lot more people than marijuana.  

Sure, just as soon as the courts are also forcing people into Weight Watchers.

So youre saying we should jail overweight people instead?

[NightSG]

33 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

So youre saying we should jail overweight people instead?

Potheads get the munchies, so think of it as an indirect penalty.

[anatess2]

7 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Yes, I love this.  I look forward to a day when we will be there.  

I believe if you get rid of establishment Democrats and Republicans we will immediately be there.

[Windseeker]

I'm sorry I don't have time to address each response but I think estradling75 gets it and I appreciate him understanding what I meant. 

I will share a story that illustrates from our Church History the concept that Morgan Freeman is hitting on when he says the following -

 

Back in the early sixties a young apostle with the last name of Kimball was called to resolve a major problem that was occurring in Brazil. You see what was happening was unprecedented number of demonic possessions were affecting not only investigators but also members of the Church. These valiant missionaries were on the front lines battling evil first directly welding the  power of the priesthood but they were losing.

Scary stuff right? 

As Elder Kimball continued to investigate he found these missionaries were sharing these faith inspiring testimonies to investigators and to members during sacrament meetings as well as sharing their experiences with other missionaries. After much prayer he came up with a solution...and no he didn't call down angels from heaven to purge the demons from Brazil instead he told the missionaries to essentially SHUT UP!.  Stop talking about it. Guess what happened? It went away. It just disappeared. Now were there still some possessions after, sure, but not nearly the epidemic it had been, not even close. Does that mean all those encounters with evil spirits were fake? No. How do I know this, I read an account of this story and also my own father was in Brazil and went thru this. He never told me about it, but I remember hearing some scary things after sneaking out at night when he thought I was in bed and listening in to him talking to his close member friends late at night. It wasn't till I found this story after my mission that he confirmed this occurred during his mission. 

So what can we learn from that? There are some things discussion cannot fix. Dwelling on certain things prevents progress. Another way to look at it is demons promote demons and racism promotes racism. How about this. Take a wrong in your relationship that was cleared up. Now discuss that wrong every single night with your partner for the rest of your life, What do you think would happen? Hearing that wrong every night, how could it affect you? How does forgiveness or the lack of forgiveness affect an individuals growth and progression? 

While our racial woes stem from real issues that occurred in our past, the only thing preventing people of color from succeeding today are themselves and it's not even their fault. Big Democrats, Big Media and Big Academia have colluded in replacing the real chains of slavery with very real psychological chains of victim hood and dependency.  They do so intentionally to meet their ends. It does not mean that everyone in the Democratic Party, Media and Academia have a quest for power, many reinforce these psychological chains unintentionally and out of the goodness of their hearts. They are incapable of seeing Black people as anything other than victims and they feel it's necessary to denigrate their potential by offering them sympathy for past wrongs and promising race based solutions to counter their oppression at the hands of what exactly?...evil Republicans?...the Police?...White People. They oppose every thoughtful solution to poverty, immigration, healthcare with progress inhibiting allegations of racism. Which group is sowing contention. Black against White, Women against Men, Gays against Straights, Young against Old. And tell me who is the father of contention?

The victimology has become so vital and the left has been so successful in stirring up racial contention and racial hatred, that I fear if Martin Luther King were alive today he would be assaulted if he dared mention his dream of a colorblind society. Yet that is what it's going to take to move forward. The only racial discussion worth having is one about ending the discussion. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2016 by Windseeker

[Traveler]

 

Many of my lessons of life came to me under my father’s mentorship.   Often I would present problems and he would guide me.  One such lesson came from raising chickens.  One problem I had as a child was becoming emotionally involved with the chickens (capons) we were raising for our table.  Many may have heard stories about helping new chicks break out of eggs.  I went through that experience myself.  When chicks hatch it is quite a difficult physical ordeal for the fragile little chicks – most make it through the shells but they are exhausted.  There are a few that die trying.

There is a great temptation to help chicks through the process by breaking up the egg shell for them – but breaking the egg is a bad idea.  There is something about a chick breaking out of its shell that is necessary for a chick to survive and helping a chick break the shell does more harm than good. 

My father often used this example when I would complain about getting pushed around at school (bullied) or being treated unfairly – or just having bad luck.  He would explain that no matter how difficult life may seem there are always some that not only survive the difficulty but thrive and do better and become stronger because of it.  He would then also explain that no matter how easy life was that there would always be some that would fail. 

One great lesson of life, he would explain is that it is always the same ones that succeed and the same ones that fail regardless of how easy or difficult a task was.  And that the lesson was not just to get through and be one that succeeds but to learn to love the process of success.  Sometimes when we think we are helping others we prevent them from learning the process of success.  We have to be careful to make sure that when we help others that we never take over and prevent others from solving their own problems.  I do not want to create a big argument about this over some individuals that are incapable of success – I know there are always exceptions – but for the most part – people can learn and need to learn to succeed.

 

The Traveler

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

I believe if you get rid of establishment Democrats and Republicans we will immediately be there.

Interesting thought.  I neither agree or disagree, but I do think the two party system is big part of the problem.  I'm often amazed how so many things become political.  For example, the environment, whether or not bees are endangered, the issue of homelessness....all these issues have definite Democrat or Republican views.  But why? I suppose it's because people look to government to deal with these issues, and then it becomes a problem of whose solution is best.  

 

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

@Windseeker, You avoided my question, and then continue to talk about why we should stop talking but racism, but you so realize that you are still talking about it, right?  

There are times that not talking about something may help (I suppose, I can't really think of any), and there are times when it will not.  Can we stop abuse by not talking about it? Let's just tell all the children, women (and men) who are being abused to stop talking about it.  Does anyone, including Morgan Freeman really think that will help?  Could the world have stopped the Nazi's by just ignoring them and not talking about it?   Could we stop the Communists or the Terrorists by just not talking about it?  

Those things sound ridiculous right?  So what I think you and MF are really saying is that you don't think racism is real, so therefore like a child's imaginary friend, if we just stop talking about it, it will go away.  But up thread, I gave plenty of examples of how racism is alive and well and effecting people's lives.  Like abuse, and terrorism, it's real and ignoring it will not make it go away.  

The fact that Morgan Freeman is an awesome actor and he's Black does nothing to make his opinion important to me.  Morgan Freeman does not speak for all Black people anymore than I speak for all LDS people.  I strongly disagree with him and so the majority of the Black people I know.  It doesn't matter if he's a celebrity, Bill Cosby was a celebrity.  And you could say, Obama, is a celebrity as well, and you made it clear what you think about him.