Filed under: Christian Living, Philosophy, Political Issues
Politicians Respond Best
To Persistent People
And Thoughtful Arguments
It may not stay this way forever but for the present the most powerful political office in the world is that of the president of the United States of America. That means that US presidential elections mark a very important phase in the political cycle. Every four years the whole world is effected by this one election.
The President, or POTUS as he is referred to by the secret service, makes decisions in the oval office that have a ripple effect around the world and the rub is, only a fraction of the world’s population have a say in who sits behind the desk. It’s even more aggravating that only a fraction of those who can vote actually mark a ballot. It doesn’t seem fair that one person for whom most of the world cannot vote, makes decisions that effect every economy.
Frustrating! Not only for the non-voting but also for US citizens who feel a sense of separation from POTUS and his decision making process. When it comes to politics the commonly shared feeling is a sense of helplessness.
Modern political machinery is so super sized it overshadows constituents. It makes us feel victimized and insignificant, even smaller than ants. Politicians appear like giants, distant and disinterested.
Because of that, some people never do anything political other than grumble about the “bad” government too which we are unwillingly and unavoidably subjected. Some people never even vote because they can’t see how one measly vote can make a difference.
Well, I would like to counter that type of thinking by suggesting that any person with enough passion and thoughtfulness can influence public policy. We have choices that can make a difference and following are several examples of individuals who’ve proven that one person can influence change. Read more
Following are a few thoughts I threw together for a group discussion on the topic of the “Home.” The intention was to put this institution in perspective relative to other important institutions. So the discussion began with…
The Home is one of three primary institutions
An institution is any organization or structure in society which influences or regulates human behavior or encourages social interaction. There are two categories: primary and secondary.
A Primary Institution is an organization that…
- Is designed and created by God
- Derives its authority to exist from God
- Is sustained by God
- Is regulated by God
The three primary institutions are: Read more
Filed under: Family, Political Issues
On 29 April 2011 William and Kate tied the knot and it was quite a do. According to Bloomberg.com an estimated 1 million people lined the streets locally and another 2 billion watched from various parts of the world. In case you’re not counting that is a third of the world’s population and the numbers are a testament to British Royal appeal not technology.
No wedding ceremony has ever been witnessed by so many. Most watched with joy and wonderment. Romantics were teary eyed and traditionalists were comforted. A few were negative but that is always to be expected where British Royalty is concerned.
And kudos to the organizers. Security was tight, events were well ordered, the ceremony message was clear and as far as you could tell everyone was happy. It was a demonstration of great organization between many government departments.
In spite of the tension that normally accompanies events of this magnitude, William and Kate smiled at one another and made what must have been endearing remarks occasionally. Unlike other Royal weddings you got the sense they actually love one another. The world is not used to seeing such sentimental displays at important state events.
And, even though they made an effort to introduce a human element to the occasion, inviting friends from their past rather than just heads of state, it was still politics and business as usual. There was a wedding buried below all the hoopla somewhere and the ceremony gave us a glimpse but I’m not sure the rhetoric will do much good. Read more
Filed under: Political Issues, Sport
I grew up in the States so Soccer (football) was something I knew little about. Kick ball was the closest I got to soccer and it was more like a foot version of baseball. It wasn’t until a few years ago that I learned about FIFA’s World Cup.
The most popular sporting events for American kids are national championships of various kinds: football, baseball, basketball, all of which happen on pro (private franchises) and college levels and are played on American soil.
Teams from other countries, however, often play internationally and are national not private. Competitors are developed through clubs and begin aspiring at a young age to represent their local and national governments playing sport. This marks a huge difference in the way sporting structures are organized between the US and other countries.
US competitors are developed through a collegiate system and are channeled into private sport franchises. As a rule they don’t grow up aspiring to represent their nation in athletic competition. That may be one reason the Ryder Cup boys haven’t faired so well in recent years. Americans aren’t as motivated to “play” for national pride as Europeans. Why else would Colin Montgomerie perform so well during the RC? Only in recent years have Americans begun to take nation-based competition seriously and we’re still trying to master the mindset.
Interestingly, it wasn’t until the European Ryder Cup teams began beating the slap out of the US that American spectators started paying attention. Living in the largest sporting bubble on planet earth produced a sense of invincibility which the Ryder Cup experience proved was more imagined than real. The RC helped open the eyes of a sleeping giant that had previously been unaware of international possibilities.
Filed under: Philosophy, Political Issues
The Huffington Post has a habit of featuring well known but sometimes senseless writers. The strategy is good for attracting readers but it fails at the point of objectivity. These writers come with an agenda – usually personal, are not philosophically neutral, offer no specific solution to any problem, real or not, and if one is not familiar with all the material that made them popular in the first place its difficult to see where these writers are coming from or headed to. Like preachers who make unsubstantiated, illogical statements, bolstered mostly by emotion, they state a point without actually making it.
That is the case with Mr. Chopra; Deepak that is. Read more