The Sacrifice of Ending Prejudice - Religon

Prejudice - Unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social or religious group


Human beings were created with free will but with a ton of emotions.  Humans experience joy, pleasure, satisfaction, love, compassion, empathy.  On the other side, humans also experience fear, anger, insecurity, hate, greed, self-importance, shallowness.  With all of these emotions existing, the result of this can be experiences of good but it can also create experiences of hate that eventually turn to prejudice.  Since we have these conflicting emotions, do we believe that we have what it takes to make the sacrifice to rid ourselves of prejudice?


Religion is something that is based on faith and in reality should be enjoyed by all that want to embrace it.  There are many religions in the world, enough for everyone to have their own, including Atheism.  However, a lot of time is spent on trying to instill that belief in others or making people pay for not believing the same thing as the individual.  This helps create religious prejudice that seems to never go away.

Religious prejudice has existed since the dawn of time.  If you think about the Garden of Eden, the story of Adam and Eve ends with prejudice.  God created man in his own vision but said do not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.  So once they ate from the tree, they were no longer in the image God created so he banishes them.  Punishing people for betrayal is one thing but banishing people because they no longer fit your image is another.  So even the 'creator' is not exempt from the evils of prejudice.

Over the life of man, many wars have been fought simply because of religious prejudice or in the 'name' of religion.  The Crusades, the Muslim Conquests are just a couple of examples of wars fought over religion.  In today's world, religious wars are still being fought, whether it is Israel/Palestine, Pakistan/India or Islamic fundamental extremists.  Religious wars that are causing thousands or even millions of people to die simply as punishment for not being part of the religion or to blame for others not being part of the religion.  Where does morality start and religion end when it comes to this?  How can anyone expect to end religious prejudice if people justify their immoral acts in the name of religion?

Alot of religions follow some kind of text that is almost as if it is written in stone.  A lot of people use this text to actually validate their religious prejudice.

Examples of this:

The Bible

Timothy 6:6-10


But godliness with contentment is great gain.  For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it.  But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that.  Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.  For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

So the way that I interpret the above is basically we should be content with what we have and always wanting more just creates a destructive life.  So a capitalistic society is actually against the Bible.  People who do not have a lot always want more and usually blame those that have more for their problems.  At the same time, the rich still always want more and it does not matter that it usually comes at the cost of those that do not have a lot.

The Quran

5:51


O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people [Quran 5:51]


So just reading this at face value, it seems that it says Muslims cannot be friends with Jews and Christians, doing so will isolate you from Islam.  However, if you look online they say that 'friend' means only if they are joined by Judeo-Christians alliance.  They say this because in reality Jews and Christians are not supposed to be joined at all like this.  Anyone confused yet?


Judaism

Judaism is supposed to believe in the strength of women but that is not always the case


http://www.jewfaq.org/women.htm

So here is the text from 3 places that drive 3 different religions.  These texts are the backbone of what people use to preach their religion and therefore used to create prejudice.  These documents were created thousands of years ago yet we try to instill bits and pieces into today's society as we see fit.  What is strange to me is that these documents are interpreted by humans so how can we not understand that they are fallible because they were also written by humans.  Each document is different in its preaching but also vague in its interpretation.  It is this vagueness that people use to justify treating people badly or even worse, killing people.  If people are willing to die/kill in the name of these religious documents, how can we really believe that religious prejudice will ever stop?


In the United States our country was built by people trying to find religious 'freedom'.    Since the beginning, we have continued to have religious prejudice.  States were even created because one religious group couldn't live with another religious group.  All religions believed the American Indians were lacking in religion so they thought instilling their beliefs would help 'civilize' them.  So in reality the foundation of this country was actually built in religious prejudice not the fight for religious freedom.

Look at the history:


http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-true-history-of-religious-tolerance-61312684/?all


Our first amendment gives people the freedom of religious expression.  It also says governments, states included, do not have the right to establish a national religion.  What this means to me is that the government should not be legislating laws based on religious views.  This country was not built to follow any one religion, Christianity included.  The separation of church and state is something that should be taken with more seriousness if we truly want to have religious freedom.  People have the right to not follow this separation based on religious views but they should not have the right to instill their beliefs in others by making laws or hurting others.  Having a school build a place to wash your feet is not more acceptable that that same place handing out Bibles in their classes.

From my point of view, the first amendment gives everyone who comes to this country the right to follow their own religion without discrimination.  It does not mean that you should be instilling your beliefs on anyone that chooses not to follow.  It also does not mean you should be condemning people who choose not to follow those same beliefs.  Areas such as abortion and homosexuality are two areas where religious views come into the most disagreement with the Constitution.  The government is doing its best to try to hold up the freedom from having religions views instilled upon us yet they are crucified for this because of religious prejudice.


Part of the issue with religious prejudice is also because we elect people not on the basis of they will do right by the country but a lot of time mostly on their religious views.  For example, how many 'Christian' people would vote for a Pro Choice candidate even if they agreed with everything else he says.  If these people are mostly elected because of their religious views, how can Congress not become a religious battle instead of what's best for the country.  To keep this separation is one of the few ways that we can believe we have religious freedom and start to remove religious prejudice.


http://www.countriesquest.com/north_america/usa/people/religion_in_the_united_states/religious_discrimination.htm


The world continues to be at war because of religion.  People continue to die because they do not believe the same thing as someone else.  We continue to act immorally against others in the name of religion.  People continue to fight for laws that instill religious views on others. With all of this prejudice and intolerance how can we truly believe that we can fight religious prejudice?  Until people are free to have their own beliefs without persecution or violence, we will continue to live under the illusion that one religion is better than another.  Until that sacrifice is made by all, we will have to live with the fact that we have only ourselves to blame for the continued religious intolerance.

Putting Too Many in Prison...Or Not Enough

On the night of the Oscars, John Legend said the words that have people finally taking an interest in the fact that blacks are being judged and jailed more than whites who commit the same crimes.

So my question really becomes what is the true issue that is getting lost in all of the back and forth.  Are we upset that people have committed crimes are being put in jail for it or are we upset that white people are not being jailed for the same crime?  I see alot of discussion but the real point always seems to get lost in the conversation.

Criminals are still criminals whether they are black, white or other.  If they have committed a crime they deserve the punishment that they get.  Who are we to say that we know what goes into a decision on when someone is sent to jail and when someone is not.  Are we in the minds of the judge, the jury, the prosecutor?  Whose issue is it when the person gets a bad lawyer because they can't afford a good one, is it the circle of lawyers who won't give up their high rate to help those that need it or is the poor overworked court appointed lawyer who doesn't take his job seriously?  We just assume that we know because it is easier for us to judge then to find out all of the information before we say anything.  How many times have people of color been given a break to only go out and commit another crime?  I do not see people discussing that.

They say that many people are jailed for victimless crimes such as marijuana possession but because of their color they are being persecuted more than whites.  Is it again because people think of marijuana as a victimless crime or is it because people of color get different treatment than whites?  Laws are created to protect us and if the law is unjust then it should be fought but until it is changed people should be arrested for it.  People think that carrying a concealed weapon should not be against the law but tell that to the person who is shot because a person doesn't like their religion.  The speed limit is a law but people always want to go faster than what it given, they don't seem to complain when the cops ignore them for doing this until of course people are killed because people drive like idiots.  Again is it because people really think these laws are unjust or because it intereferes with their circle of comfort.

One of the things I find to be funny is when a sport or hollywood star are given a pass because of their celebrity, whether they are black or white, no one seems to care about them compared to the ordinary citizen.  As long as they can still perform for us that is what we really want.  Does anyone remember Kobe Bryant sexually assaulting someone?  People bullied the victim, was this because they thought she was making up the story or was it because it was Kobe Bryant?  Would they have done the same if it was not a celebrity?

In the end, we need to get to the point of what we are fighting, is it that we want more criminals out on the street or is it that we want a fair and color blind justice system to put more criminals in jail?

No Logic...Ending the Debate of Banning Gay Marriage

I was really interested in seeing for myself if the gay marriage topic was worth fighting for on either side.  So I read some articles on what people thought were the top reasons for being against gay marriage.  I read some articles on why the reasons were not valid.  In the end, what I realized is that there was no logical reason for banning gay marriage.

Here are the arguments that I say make no logical sense:

Religious

            It is against God’s law.  SO WHAT!!

Actually, homosexuality is ‘against’ God’s law so marriage is just an extension of that.  If gay people want to go against God’s law then let them be judged when it is their time.  Everyone else who commits sins has to be judged so there is no difference.

            It is not natural. WHY!!

What is the definition of natural?  Being in nature?  Well, animals are part of the natural world and they cannot marry so doesn’t that must mean that marriage doesn’t follow natural law.  Are we saying that gay people deserve less than animals?  Humans are not the only species on this planet, even though we like to think we are.

            It will have reverse discrimination for religious groups.  HOW!!

Homosexuals are probably not allowed in church today so would that change if they were allowed to be married?  Churches already have the right to turn away anyone from getting married so in this case they will still be allowed to be the religious bigots they always were.

It will cause people to have to have to deal with gay couples in their jobs such as issuing marriage license, even though their religion is against it.  GET OVER IT!!

So now we are going to say that people have the right in their job to not service anyone they do not care for.  Does Jim Crow laws sound familiar?

            To make sure we cover the basics, let’s see how using the Bible as an argument against gay marriage is illogical:

            The Bible says that divorced people having sex after the divorce are committing adultery (Matthew 5:32).  In that case we need a law that bans divorce because God tells us to. 

The Bible also says that if someone sleeps with a virgin and is not betrothed to her, then he must pay a price for that virgin and marry her (Exodus 22:16).  We should have police make sure that people sleeping with virgins marry those said virgins.  If they are paying for the price of the virgin, is that prostitution or slavery?

The Bible states that a woman should submit to their husbands as the husband is the head of the wife( Ephesians 5:22:33).  Why is there not a law to make sure women obey their man?

 

Marriage

            It will ruin the institution of marriage.  NOT LIKELY!!

Let’s see, 50% of marriages end in divorce so I am sure that doesn’t ruin the institution.

Marriage is not a religious institution as someone can get married at the courthouse or by Elvis in Vegas.

            At one time it was not legal for people of different races to marry, now that this is legal does that ruin the institution of marriage?

            Going back to the bible again, it says polygamy is okay as long as it is in the laws of marriage.  So humans outlawed polygamy, not God. (Deut: 17:14-19 is about kings not polygamy).  Why then is this not fought to overturn?

There are many states that with parental consent, people under 18 can be married and in some with a court order can marry under the age of 16.

The institution of marriage has already been changed by man so how can anyone say that gay marriage will ruin the institution.

Lifestyle

            The gay lifestyle will be more highlighted with gay marriage.  HOW!!

Since when does a marriage of any kind highlight a lifestyle?  I have a Hispanic friend who married an Oriental woman, did their marriage highlight their different cultures to the outside world?

It's a good thing our laws have made the lifestyle of racial discrimination or bigotry go away.  Oh wait...they didn't.

Children go to school with all different people, including racists, poor people, etc.  So what does it matter if your children go to school with children of gay people?

The Bible says tattoos are against God's law (Leviticus 19:28).  So when are we going to create laws that ban tattoos and then make sure tattoo artists are put in jail for flaunting their lifestyle.

            Gay people are already in the world, so their lifestyle is already out there, how does that change with marriage?  People should be more highlighted by what makes them different maybe then it would bring out more tolerance.

 

Children

            I saved the best for last.

            The main reason for marriage is to procreate.  GREAT!!

If the act of sex is only to procreate, then we should:

Outlaw sex in any position that is not missionary (especially that doggy style) and oral sex.  We should have a monitor for all times that sex is being done when there is no chance to create a child.

            All couples that do not want a child need to have their marriage dissolved.

            All couples who cannot create a child need to have their marriage dissolved

            Children should have a mother and a father.  Then:

                        Single parents should be arrested for not being married.

                        No matter how abusive the significant other is, they should not divorce.

            Children who grow up with gay parents will become gay

                        So that means a child of a child abuser will always become a child abuser.

                        So that means an atheist will always become an atheist.

                        So that means a child of a porn star will always become a porn star.

In the end this is about people thinking everything they believe is what everyone else should believe.  So I say to those people:  The next time you are doing your sexual obligation, think if you want someone in your room judging you about it.  The next time you quote a Bible verse as your defense think about other parts of the Bible that you do not live by.  The next time you want to instill your belief on someone, ask yourself how would you react if they wanted to instill their belief on you. 

My final comment is for everyone to ask themselves how their life changes if gay people get married.  Then leave gay people alone and let them have the same expression of their love as anyone else.

           

 

 

Bottom Line Society: Doing Good Comes with a Price

In today's society I think we fight alot to try to make things better, healthier and move environmentally safe. I think our forefathers would be very proud of us. However, I think what has always happened over the history of this country and what continues to happen today is that when we make changes, whether for the good or the bad, we never think that it effects us financially.

Now I am not saying that things should not be taken away from our society that may cause heath issues or is bad for the society as a whole. I just want us to understand as we go through financial crisis and such that it isn't always about Wall Street and political greed.

For my example, I am going to bring up something that really over the last twenty years has impacted a great part of this country: smoking. Almost every state has some kind of law about smoking in public places and work places. Now I know the main reason for this was for the health of the non smokers more than the smokers but it has effected us all.

So to begin with let's look at some numbers. The cigarette business was worth 614 BILLION dollars in 2009 worldwide, the biggest of which was China. The nine cigarette companies also combined to generate 160 billion dollars in tax revenue. For the purpose of my writing, I am going to concentrate on Philip Morris since they are a US based company. In 2008, Philip Morris had revenues of 64 Billion dollars, which represented about 16% of the market share globally. If you take 16% of the tax revenue that comes out to roughly 25 billion dollars that Philip Morris would generate.

There is not alot of data on how much right now the smoking laws have decreased smoking and cigarette purchases. So let's say for ease that it has caused an overall decrease of 10%, which is not hard to say really since prices as well as the laws I am sure would cause 1 out of every 10 smokers to quit or decrease.

So here are some of the what can happen when you decrease smoking or cigarette purchases by 10%:
A. Phillip Morris loses 6.4 billion dollars in revenue.
1) They do not make their estimates for Wall Street, thus making them less attractive to stock investors which then makes people sell their stock and reduces the stock price.
a) This of course then reduces stock options that some employees may have and also people that might invest in them as part of their 401K investment.
b) It can cause the Dow as a whole to reduce because Phillip Morris doesn't make their estimates which then has an effect on the entire US economy.

2) They decide they can make up the revenue overseas where smoking has not become as conservative as it has in the US.
a) This of course is another case of where a US company now starts to invest more in overseas operations, thus causing less revenue streams to be coming into the US.

3) They decide that they have to reduce their costs at the same rate that their revenue has decreased.
a) This means more people are now unemployed.
1. Now there are more people on unemployment
2. Less consumer purchases are now being made
3. People could lose their house.

B. The company's that supply Phillip Morris with supplies such as the cigarette packages, the tobacco, etc will also have to reduce their revenue to PM or find other places to sell to.

C. What about businesses that have to put the smoking bans into place, bars are the ones that they feel are hit the hardest.
1) Now the bars not only have to ban smoking but to keep their regulars they have to build a place where their customers can go and still follow the ban rules.
a) Of course, each moment that the patrons are out smoking is less time they are purchasing alcohol which reduces their revenue even more.
2) If the bar decides that they do not want to build a smoking area, they will most likely lose at least 50% of their patrons which they will have to make up for.
a) Now maybe the bar will get new customers but bars are built to bring in regular patrons with new ones being a luxury. Bringing back 50% of new customers is a tall order.


D. Let's talk about tax revenue since most of the price of cigarettes now is taxes.
1) This means that programs that depend on this revenue have to find the the revenue somewhere else or the program will be underfunded or worse can close down.
a) Of course, people again can lose their job.
b) Politicians depend on some of these programs to get elected.
c) It could mean that they tax something else that citizen's do not want taxed
d) It could mean that they will tax the citizen's directly to make up the difference.

E. So since we are talking about health improvement, we cannot disregard the health care part of this conversation. So let's say that now people, smokers and others, are now more healthy.
1) Obviously health care costs are reduced but do we think insurance companies are going to reduce our rates?
2) Of course doctors may have time to attend other patients that are needed but at the same time they may lose more revenue which means they may have to close up shop.
3) What about living longer? They may add slightly more to the social security pot but if they live longer they are most likely going to take more out of the pot and leave less for future generations.


So in the end, the 6.4 billion dollar decrease may actually be a bargain compared to what the real amount would be once you take everything into consideration. Now I am not saying that we should stop trying to stop smoking from happening and people should not live longer. All I am doing is showing a different aspect of the financial troubles in this country.

Maybe this is an extreme example but don't underestimate the effect of changing over from McDonald's to a healthier food source. Some of us may never see this underbelly unless our favorite bar closes down or a friend is laid off from work. We should always try to do what is best when we see something is bad for the country and it's citizens, but we need to understand that it always comes with a price. A price that eventually needs to be repaid.

http://www.tobacco-facts.net/2010/11/global-tobacco-industry-cigarette-cost
http://www.ehow.com/list_6791046_benefits-smoking-being-banned_.html

Bottom Line Society: The Corporates

So what happened with businesses over the last few decades? I for one believe there is nothing wrong with making a profit, as long as those profits are being used to make a better business or country. It seems in today's society that not only are profits and cash not being used to make the business better, it is being used to make investors and CEO's richer. Even making a profit isn't enough anymore, we have to make more and more profits to increase that value for investors and CEO's, which increases the greed.


One of the big things that is happening is the sending of jobs overseas because it is cheaper. So what is the main reason for doing this? To help reduce the costs so the company can use those profits and cash to help the US? To promote better trade between countries? If companies are making billions of dollars in profits and have tons of cash on hand, why do they need to continue to employ jobs overseas?


We know all about Wal-Mart having jobs overseas but what about a company like Exxon. This company made 30 BILLION dollars in profit last year, has 7 BILLION dollars in cash on hand and yet still sends jobs overseas or uses overseas labor instead of US labor. Alot of the companies within the Forbes Top 500 companies have exported jobs or are using overseas labor. How does a company justify this and at the same time look America in the face and say it is doing what is best for this country and its citizen's?
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/popups/exporting.america/content.html


Corporations say they are going overseas more because of the tax code in this country which is unfair to businesses. So do corporations think they should not have to pay their fair share of taxes, just like its citizens? Our governments are driven on tax revenue, where do corporations get off thinking they should be exempt from being part of that. I do not think they should be unfairly taxed but at the same time saying that you are doing business outside of the US because of the taxes...that is crap. It is another excuse for doing more business overseas and justifying it to themselves and the people that do not agree with them. Most companies pay little or no taxes each year, they surely do not pay the 35% that they are suppose to. This in turn leaves less money for the states and federal programs. Once again, doing business in this country should be part of helping this country.
http://patriotupdate.com/12622/coke-chief-criticises-us-tax-rules-says-china-more-business-friendly


The stock market is all on paper there really is no tangible output from this business, yet it drives our economy. Do we wonder then why it is so volatile? Companies are asked to estimate earnings and they usually put them so high to attract investors but are they reasonable? A corporation then will do whatever it has to do to make that earnings number, even if it means laying people off unnecessarily or even worse doing something illegal. Should we really use a system that is so volatile to push a company to make unreasonable decisions, even illegal ones, to make a profit? How can something be good when making a profit can still be a bad thing? Recently, Apple announced they made 100 BILLION dollars in sales but still missed their estimates. At the same time, Yahoo announced their sales decreased by 26% but still reached their estimates.


How do we make it so that when a company makes a profit it is good for all stakeholders, not just for the stock holders and CEO's? Maybe we should push to have agencies such as the SEC and IRS to be better funded and hire more staff so they can go after these companies like they should. If these people are not allowed to go after the people who are approving their funding, how can we expect those people to be held up to a standard.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/republicans-taxpayer-money


Maybe the politicians need to talk with the corporations and find out what they need to make this a better country. I believe corporations have a right to a voice about what is best for this country. Of course, at the same time they should also be held to the same standards as its citizen's. I am sure alot of people would say this is a crazy idea, but at the same time, how can we fix the problems of all, if we do not hear everyone's voice.


It might take something so drastic that one person would have to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. What if someone who was laid off from a company for 'financial' reasons, sued that company for unfair dismissal? What would be unfair about it? If that company made a profit, a large profit or had large cash on hand, what would the reason be for making the layoff? If this layoff put that person's job onto someone else which decreased the efficiency of that job, would that not mean they actually did not add value to the company? This would be a tough one to go through but think of the results if they won the case.


Business is based on supply and demand, so who is it that provides the demand for these businesses? So if we drive the demand, how do we not have the power to change the way the system works? Just by you not accepting a $5 fee for your debit card so you move your account to another bank can make a difference that you might not understand.


In the end, there are alot of questions out there that need answers to help fix the issues. These are not all questions that one person can answer, they are questions that need to be answered by the country themselves. Businesses have always been a part of our bottom line society, hell they have been driving it for hundreds of years. I just think somewhere, the greed and corruption has them thinking they are above the country as a whole and they need to be stopped. We have to make them understand that pushing profits and cash to other places besides America is wrong and they should be held as accountable as a citizen who lies, steals or betray its country.

Bottom Line Society: Prologue

We see right now the protests happening around the world called Occupy Wall Street. The people are angry and this is their way of expressing their anger at what is happening in the world today. It is making an impact because it is already part of the political conversation and it is already being infiltrated by the powers that be to demean it. This is a great example of what happens when people stand together. But is what they are protesting only a small part of the problem?


Our country was created to be a bottom line society, the opportunity to make a better life for ones self and family. The reason why most people came to this country was to be free land owners, again the opportunity for a better life. Over the years, the changes in our country have been to make it a better country but we never strayed from being a bottom line society. Each war, each technological change, each improvement we did made the country better but an end result was it also created a larger economic gap between its citizen's. Its seems only now where the gap has become so large that we see it as a problem. This gap needs to be reduced to bring our country back to the way it should be.


So even though we protest the way Wall Street has been allowed to be destructive on our country, it is only a small part of the problem. As with alot of our problems we only seem to focus on a small part or something that clouds the real problem. When you only focus or fix part of the problem, the issues will still exist, it is like only cutting off the one of the heads of a three headed dragon. Each problem has to be tackled because if they are not dealt with then it will continue to be an anchor on the country. The answer to the problems cannot be fixed by one person, one election or even one president. It is something that has to be done by everyone, the citizen's, the politicians and yes even the greedy Wall Street executives that are being protested. If all levels do not get involved, then all levels do not have a voice and that is what is happening now. We have ignored our problems to where we are not hearing all of the voices that need to be listened to.


So what are the other problems we are seeing as a bottom line society. Obviously, the greed and corruption on Wall Street has been the highlighted one. What about the corporations of America that have also used greed and manipulation as part of business? What about the politicians? Have we ever looked back on the good or bad part of the changes that we make from a financial aspect? What about us as citizen's, do we really think we have no stake or responsibility in what is happening in this country? Is it now time for us to look at the in efficiency of our country that may have caused us to not keep up with the every changing world?


Corporations have been allowed to make changes based on greed that effect people's lives yet no one has held them responsible for it. Enron, World Com, the list goes on and on. The companies make millions, even billions, of dollars of profits and millions of dollars of cash on hand, yet are still laying off workers or sending jobs to cheaper countries. The agencies and representatives that are suppose to be protecting the countries are being deregulated or are understaffed to provide the support.


Have we ever thought about when we fight for something to be changed how the financial impact effects us all? When something is bad and should be removed, do we ever wonder how we are going to replace the financial impact of it? For instance, slavery was a bad thing and should have been changed a long time before it was. However, the financial impact to the country for abolishing slavery was billions of dollars loss to the economy, something that hurt several states. Mississippi went from one of the richest states in the country to one of the poorest because of this one thing. Should there not have been something in place to help replace that loss?


Do we really think that we as citizen's get a free pass on responsibility in this crisis? We are the consumers that drive the business decisions that are made. We are the one's who vote these corrupt people into office yet complain when they are corrupt. We are the ones who complain that our taxes are too high. Just by going to buy your coffee at Starbucks instead of the mom and pop coffee shop down the street, you have effected our economy in a way you may not have realized.


I believe that we have always been an inefficient society, we have always done more work than we needed to get the end product. We always wanted to be paid more for doing that same work, even if that work was not efficient. Now people are asked to do even more work for the same pay, which still makes it inefficient but harder to accept. We lay off someone and expect that work to be taken up by someone else, who then gets stressed out and leaves as well. Have we ever just bothered to go through our processes and see where the inefficiencies are and do the right amount of work for the right pay?


I see these as the problems because they have always been the problems of our society, no matter how far back in our history you go. We just have either chosen to ignore them or maybe they were hidden beneath a pile of other problems that never allowed them the priority they should be given. Well, now is the the time to give these problems that priority. Maybe Occupy Wall Street is the start of that priority but it should not be the end.

Seven Deadly Sins of America

So I was watching an episode of 'Charmed' about the seven deadly sins and an idea popped into my head. I wondered how we react as a country to these sins.

Wrath. (Anger). Why do we respond to our anger with blazing violence? The London riots. The LA Riots. Dropping nuclear bombs because of Peal Harbor. The war in Iraq and killing of Osama Bin Laden due to 9/11. Yelling at a waitress because your order was not exactly what you wanted. I myself have let my anger get the best of me like yelling at a subordinate that didn't deserve it. When we express our anger aren't we only hurting ourselves or those around us?

Greed. In a capitalistic society how can you not have greed? The stock market is all about greed, people trying to get rich determining whether companies do good or bad. People going on reality shows trying to win money by calling other people names and screwing them over. Spending money to play the lottery when they drive a broken down car. Athletes trying to show they have the bigger dick by asking for the most money hurting their team and the fans. People trying to always get 'paid', moving from job to job for more money. I never thought greed would ever get me but I can say that I fell for money scams because I wanted to be shown the money. So then I ask when is enough money enough not to hurt people,the country and yourself?

Lust. Look at most commercials, they show some beautiful person selling some product but do we ever remember the product? Reality shows are about getting hot people to show off trashy television. The Weiner scandal is the most recent of what seems to be yearly sex scandals. Do we not think child molestation and child pornography is because of lust? I use to call these things 'lustful stupidity' and I can say that I have had many incidents of this stupidity.

Envy. How many times do you show a friend something but they have to try to show you up by having something better? How many marriages have ended because someone wants something better than what they have? How many murders have been committed because someone wanted what someone else had? Do we not see how the current financial crisis is based on a combination of greed and envy as people wanted more than what they could afford. A long time ago envy almost made me ruin my friendships as I use to resent the friends that I felt were smarter than me or getting things that I wanted.

Pride. This is an interesting one. I believe that pride actually keeps us from doing many of the things that could potentially better ourselves and those around us. How many times have you done something wrong and not apologized for it because of pride? The current debt ceiling battle was about pride and nothing else. It's why we can never say no to other countries that ask for our help because it may make us look bad to the world or so we preceive. How about someone like me who has an inflated ego that blinds him to logic and almost gets him fired?

Gluttony. Someone once said to me there is nothing wrong with things as long as they are done in moderation. Let's see how that works. Someone getting so drunk from having 'fun' that they puke in the street, your car or in thier bed. Waking up with a hangover, do we think the overindulgance was fun? How much food do we leave in a restaurant or have to throw away each week because we bought too much? How many cars, boats, toys do we own that we rarely use? How much porn do some people indulge in a day, week, month? Having a passion such as collecting autographs can also cause one to be obssessed to the point of spending too much money they do not have.

Sloth How do these people contribute to themselves let alone to society? The 1000 lb woman who could not move and was on disability because he couldn't stop eating the ding dongs?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1257850/Super-sized-mother-determined-worlds-fattest-woman-years.html

What about a man who dies from playing video games for 3 straight days? http://www.themedguru.com/node/43775
Having people in your life that have given up on life and the people around them, thus hurting those that love them the most.

I am sure we all have stories that relate but the real question is how much damage have we done to ourselves and to others because of these sins? Would our country be better off if we did things in moderation? I write this hoping people share their stories and the impacts!!!