Truth in a Restaurant

[tamccrackine]

Philip P:

It’s not the words in themselves, but rather the words as a symptom I’m pointing to. Do you think it’s a good thing that Americans have such a low opinion of one another that they feel such language is the only way to convey their feelings? Read through these forums, listen to some talk radio, watch a few talk shows – accusations of fascism, communism, treason, anti-americanism, comparisons to Hitler and Pol Pot and Stalin – are these good signs of our national character, in your opinion?

War corrupts freedom, democracy, and national character. This is about more than just Iraq - it’s about the way my country has embraced what President Eisenhower warned us about - the military-industrial complex - and the deleterious effects that has had.

Our massive military spending did not stop 9/11. War won’t keep us safe. Let us follow George Washington’s advice and stand down our enormous military entanglements.

Don’t get me wrong… I find it insulting when people use ignorant words to convey a feeling… but I will restrict those to people that curse worse than a drunken sailor to try to get a point across.

However… the phrase that was picked out of the blog was “I was so angry I wanted to punch them in the chops.” (paraphrased, of course) and questioned with “is this what Jesus believed.” And it just goes downhill from there with moral relativism. I don’t need to watch any more news, read any more threads, magazines, whatever to know that the lefts HATE us with such a diabolical hate that there is NO words for me to use to describe their hate. There is no reasoning with them either. The definition of insanity is to repeat the same action over and over, expecting a different result each time… and I refuse to drive myself insane trying to explain that just because people hate my president, hate the fact that my husband is military, hate that he’s in Iraq, hate what I support, hate me for being pro-life, doesn’t give them the right to shove their drivel down my throat WITHOUT expecting some type of response. Bless some of others on this board as they have better patience than me, but I start to tell people where to go when I get past my tolerance point of listening to their stupidity.

Off my soapbox now. By the way… war does stink, but taking a look at history, war has benefited this world in more ways then one. I’m sure the French appreciate not speaking German right now, and I sure appreciate being in a free country.

 

[Philip_P]

tamccrackine:

Don’t get me wrong… I find it insulting when people use ignorant words to convey a feeling… but I will restrict those to people that curse worse than a drunken sailor to try to get a point across.

However… the phrase that was picked out of the blog was “I was so angry I wanted to punch them in the chops.” (paraphrased, of course) and questioned with “is this what Jesus believed.” And it just goes downhill from there with moral relativism. I don’t need to watch any more news, read any more threads, magazines, whatever to know that the lefts HATE us with such a diabolical hate that there is NO words for me to use to describe their hate. There is no reasoning with them either. The definition of insanity is to repeat the same action over and over, expecting a different result each time… and I refuse to drive myself insane trying to explain that just because people hate my president, hate the fact that my husband is military, hate that he’s in Iraq, hate what I support, hate me for being pro-life, doesn’t give them the right to shove their drivel down my throat WITHOUT expecting some type of response. Bless some of others on this board as they have better patience than me, but I start to tell people where to go when I get past my tolerance point of listening to their stupidity.

Off my soapbox now. By the way… war does stink, but taking a look at history, war has benefited this world in more ways then one. I’m sure the French appreciate not speaking German right now, and I sure appreciate being in a free country.

Well, I’ve live in both conservative and liberal places, and I’ve found that the ideology of both can be equally as inflexible and intolerant. It’s very depressing to me to have a conversation with someone I admire and who I believe to be a good, honest, and sincere person, who nonetheless absolutely cannot stand the “left,” and then to have the exact same experience talking to a friend of mine who feels an equal hatred for the “right.” There’s something wrong when people who share the same country, and even the same faith, simply cannot speak to each other. And I do think our status as a global hegemonic power (a more accurate term than “empire”) has a lot to do with that.

As far as the whole war being a necessary evil thing (if I can sum up your position that way), I kind of used to buy that, but increasingly I’m not. The main reason for this is that, increasingly, I believe that there are realistic, effective alternatives that get better results. For example, Ghandi managed to free India, Poland freed itself from the Soviets, and the Danes managed to save their entire Jewish population. I’ve also been studying pre-Civil War America, recently, and increasingly I’ve been wondering if maybe there was a better way. Britain managed to emancipate mostly peacefully, while here in the US we had the most violent conflict in our entire history.

We spend more on the military than any other nation. No one else even comes close. Maybe, at the height of the Cold War, this made sense (though even then, did we *really *need so many nukes?), but I just don’t see how this level of military investment helps the average American these days.

 

[mlchance]

Philip P:

We spend more on the military than any other nation.

That depends on what you mean by more. Do you mean the U.S. spends more money on the military than any other nation? If so, that is certainly true. Do you mean the U.S. spends more of its GDP on the military than any other nation? If so, this isn’t true. Communist China, for example, spends a larger percentage of GDP on its military (and so do 34 other countries).

It is also quite sensible to note that military investment is of benefit to the average American. Always has been. Cell phones, space exploration, computers, the Internet, GPS, better bulletproof vests, and microwaves are just a few examples of technologies developed or improved by the military.

We also cannot ignore the fact that about 25% of the military budget goes toward things like salaries, housing, et cetera, for an all-volunteer military of professional soldiers who require higher pay, better benefits, et cetera, than the forcibly conscripted militaries of many other nations (such as, again, Communist China).

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Lance]

Philip P:

If we’re going to discuss relative safety of Baghdad vs NYC, as Lance has attemted to do, then yes, you should include these categories.

I’ll stand by what I said. A fine police force, such as the NYPD, is far more effective at preventing terrorism and maintaining public safety than soldiers and tanks.

And a fine job of preventing 9/11 they did.

 

[Philip_P]

Lance:

And a fine job of preventing 9/11 they did.

One alert airport security officer would have done more than all the tanks, planes, and rifles in the world to prevent 9/11.

Once the planes hit, it was the police, firefighters, and EMTs who went in and saved folks.

 

[Lance]

~~~
Once the planes hit, it was the police, firefighters, and EMTs who went in and saved folks.

Well DUH! I don’t know any military units in the NYC area on red alert for this type of thing. Who patroled the skies afterwards? The NYPD airforce?

 

[Lance]

Philip P:

If we’re going to discuss relative safety of Baghdad vs NYC, as Lance has attemted to do, then yes, you should include these categories.

I’ll stand by what I said. A fine police force, such as the NYPD, is far more effective at preventing terrorism and maintaining public safety than soldiers and tanks.

And I will stand by my opinion that you don’t have a clue about national security.

 

[Philip_P]

mlchance:

That depends on what you mean by more. Do you mean the U.S. spends more money on the military than any other nation? If so, that is certainly true. Do you mean the U.S. spends more of its GDP on the military than any other nation? If so, this isn’t true. Communist China, for example, spends a larger percentage of GDP on its military (and so do 34 other countries).

Could you link to your source? Not a challenge to your numbers - I just like to check out these sources myself (they usually have other interesting info worth taking a look at as well).

It is also quite sensible to note that military investment is of benefit to the average American. Always has been. Cell phones, space exploration, computers, the Internet, GPS, better bulletproof vests, and microwaves are just a few examples of technologies developed or improved by the military.

Military investment can assist technological development, but it’s hardly a prerequisite.

I would have no problem taking what we spend on the military and instead spending it on non-military space program, for instance, which would also have significant spin-off value for average Americans. I think it’s pretty cool we can go to the moon - I don’t feel a need to develop technology to blow it up

We also cannot ignore the fact that about 25% of the military budget goes toward things like salaries, housing, et cetera, for an all-volunteer military of professional soldiers who require higher pay, better benefits, et cetera, than the forcibly conscripted militaries of many other nations (such as, again, Communist China).

I have no problem with the personnel costs. I think soldiers should be paid well, and receive good benefits (but then I think all people should). Some military benefits programs are models of successful public sector investment. The VA provides some of the best care, and at the best cost-efficiency, of anywhere in the USA. Wouldn’t it be nice to have access to this without having to risk an IED?

As far as the size of the military - I don’t see how our permanant global presence is beneficial. In the first place its expensive. In the second, it often breeds resentment (many countries - the people, not their governments - don’t like having us on their territory). In the third place, it’s unclear exactly what purpose these bases serve.

 

[mlchance]

Philip P:

Could you link to your source?

Start with cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ Lots of good information here.

As for the rest of your post, it is, I think, noteworthy that much of you says seems to hinge on what you don’t see. I’m always skeptical when people seem to always fall back to not seeing the reason for or the benefit of something. Not seeing doesn’t demonstrate anything. It may be the result of myopia.



Now, all of that said: Could our military budget be trimmer and more efficient? Certainly. But what part of the federal budet couldn’t be? This is, after all, the government we’re talking about.



– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Philip_P]

mlchance:

Start with cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ Lots of good information here.

That is a useful source, thanks. I’ve used it in the past, though it didn’t occur to me that this was the source of your figures.

Now, all of that said: Could our military budget be trimmer and more efficient? Certainly. But what part of the federal budet couldn’t be? This is, after all, the government we’re talking about.

If this were the type of conversation happening - are we getting the most bang for our buck, etc - that would be great. But it’s not. It seems presidents (both parties) are prone to waving the magic wand of “national security” over defense spending and poof - no one’s allowed to ask any more questions.

We regularly subject all the rest of spending sectors to hard questioning. The same rules should apply to defense spending. We ought to be able to have a serious discussion about why we spend so much, and what we’re getting for it, without having to worry about being branded anti-American or appeasers.

 

[mjdonnelly]

As far as spending, my social security taxes are higher than what is taken out for federal income tax (some of which I’ll get back).

 

[mlchance]

Philip P:

We regularly subject all the rest of spending sectors to hard questioning.

Not really. Spending in nearly all areas of the budget continues to increase, often with very little real debate, especially where that debate would expose slopping at the pork trough.
Philip P:

The same rules should apply to defense spending. We ought to be able to have a serious discussion about why we spend so much, and what we’re getting for it, without having to worry about being branded anti-American or appeasers.

Agreed.

Unfortunately, it must be admitted, there exists a very loud minority of critics who are anti-American and/or appeasers. Until the mainstream divorces themselves of this influence, the more reasonable critics will be ignored.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Matt25:

Is that what Jesus believed?

Matt25:

What do you think our Lord was doing here?

*Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all those engaged in selling and buying there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

And he said to them, “It is written: ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you are making it a den of thieves.” Matt 21:12-13 NAB*

And here?

*hey came to Jerusalem, and on entering the temple area he began to drive out those selling and buying there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

He did not permit anyone to carry anything through the temple area.

Then he taught them saying, “Is it not written: ‘My house shall be called a house of prayerfor all peoples’? But you have made it a den of thieves.” Mark 11:15-17 NAB*

And here?

*He found in the temple area those who sold oxen, sheep, and doves, as well as the money-changers seated there.

He made a whip out of cords and drove them all out of the temple area, with the sheep and oxen, and spilled the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables, and to those who sold doves he said, “Take these out of here, and stop making my Father’s house a marketplace.”

His disciples recalled the words of scripture, “Zeal for your house will consume me.” John 2:14-17 NAB*

And, what were the Macabbees doing to the Greeks who were trying to destroy the Jewish religion and culture?

And, What about this saying: *Is this not the David of whom they sing during their dances, ‘Saul has slain his thousands, but David his ten thousands’?" 1 Sam 29:5 *

Yet, when Solomon was compared to David:

*When Solomon was old his wives had turned his heart to strange gods, and his heart was not entirely with the LORD, his God, as the heart of his father David had been.

By adoring Astarte, the goddess of the Sidonians, and Milcom, the idol of the Ammonites, Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD; he did not follow him unreservedly as his father David had done. I KIngs 11:4-6 NAB *

And, Jesus was called “The Son of David”, not the “Son of Solomon”… In spite of this:

Jesse the father of David the king. David became the father of Solomon, whose mother had been the wife of Uriah. Solomon became the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asaph. Matt: 1: 6-7

Jesus isn’t all “meek and mild” as said by the parables in your moniker and by the following:

*Then I watched while he broke open the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake; the sun turned as black as dark sackcloth and the whole moon became like blood. The stars in the sky fell to the earth like unripe figs shaken loose from the tree in a strong wind. Then the sky was divided like a torn scroll curling up, and every mountain and island was moved from its place.

The kings of the earth, the nobles, the military officers, the rich, the powerful, and every slave and free person hid themselves in caves and among mountain crags. They cried out to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, because the great day of their wrath has come and who can withstand it?” Rev. 6:12-17 NAB*

I wouldn’t be so sure about Our Lord Jesus not giving someone who needs it a bust in the chops…

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Philip P:

The official budget shows military spending about even with non-military, and that’s including non-discretionary funds.

If you look at only discretionary funds, military spending is at the top. What exactly are we getting for all that money?

And as far as illegal immigration - I’m all for legalizing them. Let everyone who wants to work do it legally. Why let unscrupulous employers get away with exploiting workers and cheating the system?

Philip:

Budgets are usually published with Social Security EXCLUDED. You also never see the TOTAL US Budget which includes STATE and LOCAL spending which includes an average of $6,000+ per pupil in LOCAL & STATE funds. If those are included, Defense spending is about 1/5 of out total spending (Including Social Security and State & Local) and is about 5% of our GDP.

Defense spending is mandated by the Constitution. Welfare and social spending isn’t.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Preamble states the Purpose of the document and the reason for creating a government. Words have meaning - the people who wrote this document meant PROVIDE when they wrote "provide’ and PROMOTE when they wrote “promote”, not the other way around.

They intended the government to Provide for a national defense but not for a welfare state.

According to Matthew 25, Acts 2, other Scriptures and the Didache we Christians are supposed to HELP each other according to our abilities and needs - That’s the topic for another thread.

But, we don’t get to debate the MORALITY of the Iraq War based on the COST. On that basis, converting to Christianity in an Islamic Republic would be an IMMORAL ACT (The cost of the act being one’s life).

In Christ, Michael

 

[MikeWM]

Traditional Ang:

Matt25:

What do you think our Lord was doing here?

*Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all those engaged in selling and buying there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

And he said to them, “It is written: ‘My house shall be a house of prayer,’ but you are making it a den of thieves.” Matt 21:12-13 NAB*

It sounds like he is saying that your religion ought to be more important than slavish devotion to money. Yes, another good lesson from Jesus that we all need to take on board

And fun and interesting as Revelations and the Old Testament are, it seems far more sensible to go straight to the source and listen to the words of Jesus. You know, ‘Turn the other cheek’, ‘forgive seventy times seven’ times, ‘blessed are the meek’, those kinds of things.

Mike

 

[mlchance]

MikeWM:

And fun and interesting as Revelations and the Old Testament are, it seems far more sensible to go straight to the source and listen to the words of Jesus.

Interesting. Other parts of the Bible aren’t straight from the source? Sure, “Revelations” is “fun and interesting,” but since it very clearly depicts Christ Jesus as a soldier destroying evildoers, let’s just ignore that part.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[MikeWM]

mlchance:

Interesting. Other parts of the Bible aren’t straight from the source? Sure, “Revelations” is “fun and interesting,” but since it very clearly depicts Christ Jesus as a soldier destroying evildoers, let’s just ignore that part.

Not at all. But as a model for how we should live our lives, the living, breathing, human Jesus is by far the most important thing., and the things he directly said the most important words. The Gospel is the most important reading of the mass, is it not? I find the sheep and the goats a far more satisfying (and alarming) story of what happens to us in the end, than I do the book of Revelations.

Mike

 

[mlchance]

MikeWM:

Not at all. But as a model for how we should live our lives, the living, breathing, human Jesus is by far the most important thing., and the things he directly said the most important words. The Gospel is the most important reading of the mass, is it not? I find the sheep and the goats a far more satisfying (and alarming) story of what happens to us in the end, than I do the book of Revelations.

So, what it boils down to is, in your opinion, the Gospels are more “satisfying (and alarming).” I can live with that. Heck, I agree. But the question that started this particular subthread was about what Jesus Christ would do, not what we should do. The implication behind the question was that Christ is a pacifist who would not offer aggressive resistance to evil. That implication is false.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Philip_P]

Traditional Ang:

Philip:
Budgets are usually published with Social Security EXCLUDED.

Most of the budget sources I’ve seen, including the OMB, include social security and medicare.

You also never see the TOTAL US Budget which includes STATE and LOCAL spending which includes an average of $6,000+ per pupil in LOCAL & STATE funds. If those are included, Defense spending is about 1/5 of out total spending (Including Social Security and State & Local) and is about 5% of our GDP.

It would be inaccuarte to include local spending as the “total US budget” since we don’t all contribute. You don’t pay NY state and city tax, for instance, yet including this in the total budget would imply you do. The federal budget, in contrast, applies to all of us.

Defense spending is mandated by the Constitution. Welfare and social spending isn’t.

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Having a defense is mandated. How much we spend on it, and how we spend it, is not, any more than it is for the promoting of the general welfare. My argument is not that we should have no defense. It’s that our current spending and deployment priorities are not furthering our defense. We do not need a global military hegemony to provide for the common defense - and in fact our current policies may actually be making us more likely to suffer attacks.

And I highly disagree that cost is not a moral question. Spending tells you where a nation’s priorities really are. When you cut education and increase defense (as the president’s most recent budget does, for instance), you are making a choice with moral consequences. But, I would recommend that a discussion on whether budgeting priorities are moral actions more properly belongs in Moral Theology (in other words, feel free to post such a thread, but I don’t intend to debate that particular topic on this one).

 

[MikeWM]

mlchance:

So, what it boils down to is, in your opinion, the Gospels are more “satisfying (and alarming).” I can live with that. Heck, I agree.

Good

But the question that started this particular subthread was about what Jesus Christ would do, not what we should do. The implication behind the question was that Christ is a pacifist who would not offer aggressive resistance to evil. That implication is false.

But saying ‘the troops must be brainwashed’ is hardly an ‘evil’ that requires aggressive resistance. Do you really think Jesus would whack someone for saying that, or do you think he would try to talk to him?

Mike