Going beyond the gays

[Captain_America]

. . . what’s the next real social justice issue?

I’m bored with the homosexual stuff/shenanigans/justifications for perversity/activist pressure, etc. So much is moderately disguised malarky.

BUT what’s real?

What’s the next horizon for social justice?

Will anyone in the room begin to seriously talk about poverty and its impacts?

 

[edwest2]

. . . what’s the next real social justice issue?

I’m bored with the homosexual stuff/shenanigans/justifications for perversity/activist pressure, etc. So much is moderately disguised malarky.

BUT what’s real?

What’s the next horizon for social justice?

Will anyone in the room begin to seriously talk about poverty and its impacts?

You’re asking two separate questions. One is general and one is specific. Poverty can be addressed but it will require a number of lengthy posts regarding why it isn’t. But, I’ll make a short list: purchase, transport, paying a tax or fee to the poor country who has a well-fed army, having to rent/lease vehicles to get the food to where it’s needed, hoping your drivers aren’t ambushed and killed and the shipment is diverted to someone else, making sure that medicine and vitamin supplements get to where they are going, repeating the process, raising funds, getting donations. There is Doctors without Borders but just like the natives, they need food, drink and the supplies, medicine and other equipment to work with. Areas undergoing civil war, tribal conflicts and border disputes means your people may have to be dodging mortar rounds and automatic gunfire and may decide to pull out. And kidnapping. Sometimes foreigners are kidnapped and held for ransom.

Then there’s the United States.

Ed

 

[Least]

Yes.

You cannot give anyone anything without ruining some existing economy.

A Christian missionary friend of mine in Africa (Swaziland) recently relayed some proof for me.

In areas where water wells were installed, women had health, mental and social issues related to their inactivity as they were no longer required to walk 25k a day to bring their families water.

It is wrong to barge-in and say “we have more, what you have is worthless” but that is often the effect of much world charity.

Also, Charity is important, but one maxim must prevail for it to (aside from absolute Divine Intervention) be able to be continued, and that is “I WILL NOT PAY TO RAISE AN ARMY AGAINST MYSELF” (TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012)

 

[Least]

AND, the gay issue is only over but the shouting, and you’ve properly phrased the incipient quality of it by using the singular “issue.”

It’s been a divide and conquer battle that jabs with disruption of social norms, then feints to the position of equal rights, and is not over, whether you’re done talking about it, it will probably never over GOD help us.

It’s like a U.S. election, no matter the outcome, you haven’t really lost until you’ve allowed yourself to believe that the election means the fight is over, or will cease.

 

[edwest2]

AND, the gay issue is only over but the shouting, and you’ve properly phrased the incipient quality of it by using the singular “issue.”

It’s been a divide and conquer battle that jabs with disruption of social norms, then feints to the position of equal rights, and is not over, whether you’re done talking about it, it will probably never over GOD help us.

It’s like a U.S. election, no matter the outcome, you haven’t really lost until you’ve allowed yourself to believe that the election means the fight is over, or will cease.

Yes, the cause to disrupt social norms will continue unless the new permutations are identified, explained and the truth is given out. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and that includes religious freedom.

Have hope.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Yes.

You cannot give anyone anything without ruining some existing economy.

A Christian missionary friend of mine in Africa (Swaziland) recently relayed some proof for me.

In areas where water wells were installed, women had health, mental and social issues related to their inactivity as they were no longer required to walk 25k a day to bring their families water.

It is wrong to barge-in and say “we have more, what you have is worthless” but that is often the effect of much world charity.

Also, Charity is important, but one maxim must prevail for it to (aside from absolute Divine Intervention) be able to be continued, and that is “I WILL NOT PAY TO RAISE AN ARMY AGAINST MYSELF” (TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012)

That’s beginning to change.

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/24/when-food-isnt-the-answer-to-hunger/?_r=0

Please get the word out. Buy food from local producers, do not just automatically ship it in, disrupting the economy. Find out first, if those bags of food are needed, and stop sending them the second destroyed bridges, etc. are repaired and food can be bought locally with outside funds, helping local growers and those who need it.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

As far as water, I’d like to offer the following for informational purposes only.

vestergaard-frandsen.com/lifestraw

There may be water available but too often, it is contaminated. This is one solution.

Ed

 

[GEddie]

For that matter, “social justice” is not really about “feeding the poor” via external assistance (or, for that matter, tasking the nonpoor to provide that assistance).

Either, both or neither may be necessary at any given time, but social justice is really about making changes in societies such that human needs can be met locally; without external assistance as a normal matter. Much harder!

ICXC NIKA

 

[edwest2]

For that matter, “social justice” is not really about “feeding the poor” via external assistance (or, for that matter, tasking the nonpoor to provide that assistance).

Either, both or neither may be necessary at any given time, but social justice is really about making changes in societies such that human needs can be met locally; without external assistance as a normal matter. Much harder!

ICXC NIKA

Take the United States. 5% of the population controls/owns 80% of the wealth. We are still living in Feudal times. The King, the Nobles and the Landowners are the wealthy nobility. The peasants get what’s left over. No, I’m not talking about forcing the wealthy to give away money, but they should be encouraged to pitch in.

washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/13/millions-of-americans-live-in-extreme-poverty-heres-how-they-get-by/

Ed

 

[john78]

. . . what’s the next real social justice issue?

I’m bored with the homosexual stuff/shenanigans/justifications for perversity/activist pressure, etc. So much is moderately disguised malarky.

BUT what’s real?

What’s the next horizon for social justice?

Will anyone in the room begin to seriously talk about poverty and its impacts?

YES ,

I can tell you first hand that my city is taking small steps to make being poor or homeless in our town a crime, they have taken small steps to make moronic laws that says one can not shave in a public place or restroom ( so please tell me who in the world is going to inforce that brilliant law ) then to say aggressive panhandling needs to stop. which I can agree to a degree but the problem is, who is to say who determines who is being aggressive to which I say it should not be law enforcement, but citizens, if one feels they are being harassed by another person who is either poor, or homeless an begging for money, and wont stop, then get to a safe place and call the police and then let them handle the situation, but we do not need city councels making laws to slowly force the homeless out of our cities only to go to another city.

I hate my city to no end, they spend so much money on moronic things that do not generate any real growth, and only last for a few years, and the only thing supporting this town is our military naval base, that is where the money is, so what happens, they make a nice baseball stadium clean up down town, an the homeless still have nothing, the poor have nothing, the city does nothing to help them.

it is a shame, an all the city wants is those dirty poor people out of their beautiful down town an to leave people alone who are there to bring in more money.

 

[edwest2]

Then get the poor some food or give them money. I do it in a town that is literally falling apart, except for the downtown area where buying something for almost nothing has been occurring and will continue to occur until the downtown that people only visit remains. Jobs are hard to find. In fact, too many areas look like they have been carpet-bombed. So police can arrest the poor, or drive them out of town, which is occurring in some cases.

Do what you can.

Ed

 

[Corki]

. . . what’s the next real social justice issue?

I’m bored with the homosexual stuff/shenanigans/justifications for perversity/activist pressure, etc. So much is moderately disguised malarky.

BUT what’s real?

What’s the next horizon for social justice?

Will anyone in the room begin to seriously talk about poverty and its impacts?

I don’t think homosexuality is a social justice issue at all. For Catholics, it’s a matter or morals. For some others, it’s license.

As for poverty, I don’t think the discussion ever ended. It is still ongoing, especially within the Church. It is just popular to paint Christians, especially Catholics, as being more concerned about sex than hunger. Just because you read it in the Enquirer (or the NYT) doesn’t make it true.

 

[Least]

Take the United States. 5% of the population controls/owns 80% of the wealth. We are still living in Feudal times. The King, the Nobles and the Landowners are the wealthy nobility. The peasants get what’s left over. No, I’m not talking about forcing the wealthy to give away money, but they should be encouraged to pitch in.

washingtonpost.com/blogs/…w-they-get-by/

Ed

Nobody ‘controls’ anything, people have said they do, but over time, when the option is called, they often get drug through the streets behind horses. Anyone thinks they have “full-control” let me know and I’ll re-direct more of my attention to that problem.

3% of the population pays 95% of the taxes (keeping this wobbly pie-pan spinning).

You are already on-the-dole, those receiving “charity” even moreso.

Remember the maxim.

 

[edwest2]

Nobody ‘controls’ anything, people have said they do, but over time, when the option is called, they often get drug through the streets behind horses. Anyone thinks they have “full-control” let me know and I’ll re-direct more of my attention to that problem.

3% of the population pays 95% of the taxes (keeping this wobbly pie-pan spinning).

You are already on-the-dole, those receiving “charity” even moreso.

Remember the maxim.

Could you provide references for your comments?

The Oil Industry controls oil and gas production.

Wall Street runs the country.

The two football teams that make up Congress are controlled in proportion to the number of special interest groups that have access to them.

Agri-Business controls food production. Just ask Archer-Daniels-Midland.

Defense Contractors control military hardware production, including bombs and ammunition. And they need to move inventory on a regular basis.

Ed

 

[Ridgerunner]

Take the United States. 5% of the population controls/owns 80% of the wealth. We are still living in Feudal times. The King, the Nobles and the Landowners are the wealthy nobility. The peasants get what’s left over. No, I’m not talking about forcing the wealthy to give away money, but they should be encouraged to pitch in.

washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/13/millions-of-americans-live-in-extreme-poverty-heres-how-they-get-by/

Ed

One thing needs to be remembered is that, among the 5% are people whose only real asset is their business or perhaps their farm. Such people are, in fact, the majority of those who are in the 5%. All livelihoods other than that of hunter-gatherers require “capital” in the way of tools, machinery, operating revenue, land, and so on. Those whose livelihoods are adequate or even good, as well as those whose livelihoods are poor, still depend on the “wealth” of someone even if it’s not their own. If I work in a factory and make a living wage, that wage is dependent on the “wealth” of whoever it is that owns the factory and whoever it is who buys the product, and whoever it is who owns the raw materials and the energy production facilities and the trucks that move the goods. I am, in a sense, “borrowing their tools”. But for them I would be just another hunter-gatherer fighting the coyotes for the remains of a dead groundhog.

It’s not all cash sitting in a bank somewhere. All the same, it is true that those who are more greatly blessed materially have a greater obligation to their fellow man. But there is a point at which the whole structure and everyone’s livelihood fails if one goes too radical in executing that obligation.

 

[Least]

Could you provide references for your comments?

Taxes:whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/

The Oil Industry controls oil and gas production.

no EPA regulations and taxation (api.org/oil-and-natural-gas-overview/industry-economics/fuel-taxes.aspx) does.

Wall Street runs the country.

Wall street, in some ways holds economic reins, but “Wall Street” can’t make the horses pull the cart, and is a euphemistic term at best for the forces at work there.

The two football teams that make up Congress are controlled in proportion to the number of special interest groups that have access to them.

I only agree that K-Street needs to be moved outside a 50 mile radius of our reps, the same way that campaigning is prohibited within certain distances of polling places (except in blue states [shut up donkey]).

Agri-Business controls food production. Just ask Archer-Daniels-Midland.

Only to the extent that you refuse to live someplace where you can grow your own. Think about it over your trucked-in lunch.

Defense Contractors control military hardware production, including bombs and ammunition. And they need to move inventory on a regular basis.

correct, as long as people ***** about $600 toilet seats, and refuse to wrap their minds around what the absolute ridiculous costs to these people to comply with a government contract.

Plus we will always have war, I want us a step or five ahead of “cutting edge.” Military might is the one darn thing Congress can actually legally tax for.

 

[Ridgerunner]

, I want us a step or five ahead of “cutting edge.” Military might is the one darn thing Congress can actually legally tax for.

I agree with being ahead of “cutting edge”. I will never forget, before Desert Storm, people were calculating how many thousands of body bags would be needed, and how doomed our armed forces were, going into prepared positions against a “modern” army and all.

I remember some newsman (who was probably ostracized for it) interviewing some kind of junior officer about casualties. I think maybe he was a major or something. Anyway, this young officer just snorted when the newsman suggested we were going to have innumerable casuaties. He replied “No, it will be World War I fighting World War III”. And he was right, if a trifle hyperbolic.

 

[edwest2]

Too bad. I prefer peace, but last I heard, there’s no money in that.

Ed

 

[Least]

You don’t know where peace comes from, if you think it is not warred-over daily.