How People Die in America / Gov Facts

One of the most annoying habits of Asperger types is our desire to interject facts into nasty neurotypical debates over “who counts” on the social pyramid – fights over where groups “belong” in the vicious hierarchy that is the American Social Order, and the various and necessary attempts at “rearranging” the “value” of individuals / groups on The Pyramid. One traditional method is “politicizing” “moralizing” “social justice-izing” any and all facets of daily life into conspicuous “tools” of realignment: that is, using a phony “values” argument for improving the status of “minorities” of all types, which in actual practice defends and promotes the inequality of hierarchical social structure.

The totally irrational practice of social “quotation wars” (the chaos of verbal pushing and shoving called “having a national discussion”) utilizing The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, interpretations of the Bill of Rights, accumulated legislation and judicial opinion-decisions, The Bible, patriotic poetry, pop-celebrities, professional athletes, memes from the internet, dead people, pretentious and phony “experts” – bureaucrats and paper-shufflers now unemployed and with revenge on their minds, retired military “minds” from failed wars, and scattered “citizens” wandering the streets is totally “traditional” and “supernatural”. But! All this “word-slapping” is considered by neotenic narcissistic neurotypicals to represent the absolute facts of “reality” that “ought to” dictate outcomes in their actual physical existence. 

The people close to you are dangerous; not strangers. 

Factual information does not exist, except as ammunition for social wars of domination.

This is the case today; it has been the case in social human life from the beginning of “social life” as it replaced earlier “wild human” behavior in natural environments; behavior that was shaped and dictated by the laws of nature – physical parameters. 

One of the “useful” activities of the United States government is the ongoing collection, tabulation, and presentation of “data” on American Life. And the easy access to this information in many forms, notably, “free” and easy internet accessibility. As an Asperger, I find this to be amazing! Pages and pages of PDFs, charts, tables, summaries; categories, subcategories, topics, recent trends, archival reports, historical snapshots, and on and on. A world of curiosity-satisfying “stuff” about “us” – the American People, past, present and projected into the future. 

As a fundamental outsider(that is, an egalitarian who is de facto rejected and ejected  from The Social Pyramid by virtue of a hyposocial, reality-based “brain type”) my interest in “the human experience” begins with what we all have in common: birth and death. The great equalizing facts of all mankind which serve to “shut up” the narcissistic and delusional shouting about who is “more worthy, more valuable, more important” than “the rest of” the species.

Women need to understand that the “character” of the males they choose to associate with is crucial to their safety and mental health and to that of their children. This consideration seems to be “absent” in far too many choices that women make. 

Do neurotypicals care about any of this? No. It’s their fate to fight each other to the end; because the “discussions” always end in violence. Words are the precursors to violence. The structure of a social pyramid of “worth” dictates failure to utilize the facts to solve problems. 

For anyone interested in all that information taxpayers pay the government to compile, the Census Bureau and National Vital Statistics System provide millions of “data” points with which to gain a perspective on American Life. 

 

Advertisements

The Heritage Foundation / Poor? What poor?

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/08/how-poor-are-americas-poor-examining-the-plague-of-poverty-in-America

The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder #2064 on Poverty and Inequality

How Poor Are America’s Poor? Examining the “Plague” of Poverty in America

By Robert Rector 

“As a group, America’s poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. Most poor children today are, in fact, supernourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier than the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II.”

“While the poor are generally well nourished, some poor families do experience temporary food shortages. But even this condition is relatively rare; 89 percent of the poor report their families have “enough” food to eat, while only 2 percent say they “often” do not have enough to eat.”

“Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He (!!! most of the poor are women and children)  has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family’s essential needs. While this individual’s life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians.”

This document is quite long and filled with graphs and charts which “prove” that quality of life is determined by what one owns; at least these guys are honest about their low opinion of what constitutes a happy and secure life. The concept that underlies the conservative social pyramid is that supremacy of a select few is “the natural order” in which white males are pre-ordained as God’s elect.

I'm not inferring that His Mormoness has any ties to the Heritage Foundation

I’m not inferring that His Mormoness has any ties to the Heritage Foundation

The Heritage Foundation is an American conservative think tank based in Washington, D.C. Heritage’s stated mission is to “formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of … Wikipedia

Founded: February 16, 1973

CEO: Edwin Feulner

Nonprofit category: Public, Society Benefit Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Tax deductibility code: 501(c)(3)

Assets: 174.1 million USD (2011)

Founders: Paul Weyrich, Edwin Feulner, Joseph Coors

______________________________________________________________

 

Winter / Bare Feet / Aspie Footwear

It’s that time of year again: 80s a week ago; now into the 30s at night. “Hard freeze” forecast this week. My potted flowers hanging on… doomed.

So – one of my “Aspie” adjustments is the problem of footwear, having gone barefoot since May… Outdoor winter boots are no problem; but indoors? My house is almost 100 years old. Frame with no insulation nor carpeting and a dirt crawl space below. Heat is uneven at best and the wood floors are perpetually cold.

That means “house slippers” an odd, neglected (design-wise) and frustrating category of footwear that has barely changed or improved since the mid 1900s.

Today’s choices uphold the “Novelty – neoteny” trend of modern social humans, for whom “childish” footwear applies to adults. 

Crocheting never dies…. and guess what? Leg Warmers are back…

Japanese “toilet” shoes…

This is labeled “fashion tip”

The choices available in “nowhere” Wyoming come down to leftovers shipped here from China via the basement stores of “major national retailers” – pink and purple crap that was unsold from last year…

It’s truly sad that I’ll likely order something cheap and benign from ebay…

Oh look – this is what poor “uncivilized” and savage Native Americans had to “settle for” … 

What Mormons Believe About Jesus Christ / By The Mormons

 

The “thing” about the Mormons is that they can SOUND RATIONAL about the most IRRATIONAL “things” !!!

Add this post to: Why Asperger’s say that neurotypicals are stupid…

from: http://mormonnewsroom.org

Check out: http://templestudy.com/tag/holyofholies

The following excerpts are taken from an address to the Harvard Divinity School (Puritans)  in March 2001 by Robert L. Millet, former dean of religious education at Brigham Young University. It is offered on Newsroom as a resource.

What Do We Believe About Jesus Christ?

Latter-day Saints are Christians on the basis of our doctrine, our defined relationship to Christ, our patterns of worship and our way of life.

What Do We Believe About Christ?

  • We believe Jesus is the Son of God, the Only Begotten Son in the flesh (John 3:16). We accept the prophetic declarations in the Old Testament that refer directly and powerfully to the coming of the Messiah, the Savior of all humankind. We believe that Jesus of Nazareth was and is the fulfillment of those prophecies.
  • We believe the accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in the New Testament to be historical and truthful. For us the Jesus of history is indeed the Christ of faith. While we do not believe the Bible to be inerrant, complete or the final word of God, we accept the essential details of the Gospels and more particularly the divine witness of those men who walked and talked with Him or were mentored by His chosen apostles.
  • We believe that He was born of a virgin, Mary, in Bethlehem of Judea in what has come to be known as the meridian of time, the central point in salvation history. From His mother, Mary, Jesus inherited mortality, the capacity to feel the frustrations and ills of this world, including the capacity to die. We believe that Jesus was fully human in that He was subject to sickness, to pain and to temptation.
  • We believe Jesus is the Son of God the Father and as such inherited powers of godhood and divinity from His Father, including immortality, the capacity to live forever. While He walked the dusty road of Palestine as a man, He possessed the powers of a God and ministered as one having authority, including power over the elements and even power over life and death.
  • We believe Jesus performed miracles, including granting sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, life to some who had died and forgiveness to those steeped in sin. We believe the New Testament accounts of healings and nature miracles and the cleansing of human souls to be authentic and real.
  • We believe Jesus taught His gospel — the glad tidings or good news that salvation had come to earth through Him — in order that people might more clearly understand both their relationship to God the Father and their responsibility to each other.
  • We believe Jesus selected leaders, invested them with authority and organized a church. We maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ was established, as the Apostle Paul later wrote, for the perfection and unity of the saints (Ephesians 4:11–14).
  • We believe that Jesus’ teachings and His own matchless and perfect life provide a pattern for men and women to live by and that we must emulate that pattern as best we can to find true happiness and fulfillment in this life.
  • We believe Jesus suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane and that He submitted to a cruel death on the cross of Calvary, all as a willing sacrifice, a substitutionary atonement for our sins. That offering is made efficacious as we exercise faith and trust in Him; repent of our sins; are baptized by immersion as a symbol of our acceptance of His death, burial and rise to newness of life; and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:37–38; 3 Nephi 27:19–20). While no one of us can comprehend how and in what manner one person can take upon himself the effects of the sins of another or, even more mysteriously, the sins of all men and women — we accept and glory in the transcendent reality that Christ remits our sins through His suffering. We know it is true because we have experienced it personally. Further, we believe that He died, was buried and rose from the dead and that His resurrection was a physical reality. We believe that the effects of His rise from the tomb pass upon all men and women. “As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (Corinthians 15:22).
  • We do not believe that we can either overcome the flesh or gain eternal reward through our own unaided efforts. We must work to our limit and then rely upon the merits, mercy and grace of the Holy One of Israel to see us through the struggles of life and into life eternal (2 Nephi 31:19; Moroni 6:4). We believe that while human works are necessary— including exercising faith in Christ, repenting of our sins, receiving the sacraments or ordinances of salvation and rendering Christian service to our neighbors — they are not sufficient for salvation (2 Nephi 25:23; Moroni 10:32). We believe that our discipleship ought to be evident in the way we live our lives.

In essence, we declare that Jesus Christ is the head of the Church and the central figure in our theology.

How Are We Different?

Latter-day Saints do not accept the Christ that emerges from centuries of debates and councils and creeds. Over the years that followed the death and resurrection of the Lord, Christians sought to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3). We believe that the epistles of Paul, Peter, Jude and John suggest that the apostasy or falling away of the first-century Christian church was well underway by the close of the first century. With the deaths of the apostles and the loss of the priesthood, the institutional power to perform and oversee saving sacraments or ordinances, learn the mind of God and interpret scripture was no longer on earth. To be sure, there were noble men and women throughout the earth during the centuries that followed, religious persons of good will, learned men who sought to hold the church together and to preserve holy writ. But we believe that these acted without prophetic authority. 

In an effort to satisfy the accusations of Jews who denounced the notion of three Gods (Father, Son and Holy Ghost) as polytheistic, and at the same time incorporate ancient but appealing Greek philosophical concepts of an all-powerful moving force in the universe, the Christian church began to redefine the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One classic work describes the intersection of Christian theology and Greek philosophy: “It is impossible for any one, whether he be a student of history or no, to fail to notice a difference of both form and content between the sermons on the Mount and the Nicene Creed. … The one belongs to a world of Syrian peasants, the other to a world of Greek philosophers. … The religion which our Lord preached … took the Jewish conception of a Father in heaven, and gave it a new meaning.” In short, “Greek Christianity of the fourth century was rooted in Hellenism. The Greek minds which had been ripening for Christianity had absorbed new ideas and new motives.”[i]

What is the result? Such Platonic concepts as the immutability, impassibility and timelessness of God made their way into Christian theology. (Yes, this is all true, but it’s ALL neurotypical madness, so what’s the point?) As one group of Evangelical scholars has stated: “Many Christians experience an inconsistency between their beliefs about the nature of God and their religious practice. For example, people who believe that God cannot change his mind sometimes pray in ways that would require God to do exactly that. And Christians who make use of the free will defense for the problem of evil sometimes ask God to get them a job or a spouse, or keep them from being harmed, implying that God should override the free will of others in order to achieve these ends. …

“These inharmonious elements are the result of the coupling of biblical ideas about God with notions of the divine nature drawn from Greek thought. The inevitable encounter between biblical and classical thought in the early church generated many significant insights and helped Christianity evangelize pagan thought and culture. Along with the good, however, came a certain theological virus that infected the Christian doctrine of God, making it ill and creating the sorts of problems mentioned above. The virus so permeates Christian theology that some have come to take the illness for granted, attributing it to divine mystery, while others remain unaware of the infection altogether.”[ii]

Latter-day Saints believe that the simplest reading of the New Testament text produces the simplest conclusion — that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are separate and distinct personages, that They are one in purpose. We feel that the sheer preponderance of references in the Bible would lead an uninformed reader to the understanding that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are separate beings. That is, one must look to the third- and fourth-century Christian church, not to the New Testament itself, to make a strong case for the Trinity. Sounds kind of sane, (for neurotypicals) n’est-ce-pas? 

Some Distinctive Contributions

What, then, can the Latter-day Saints contribute to the world’s understanding of Jesus Christ? What can we say that will make a difference in how men and women view and relate to the Savior?

Now for the bat crap crazy stuff:

The First Vision

Joseph Smith’s First Vision represents the beginning of the revelation of God in our day. President Gordon B. Hinckley has observed: “To me it is a significant and marvelous thing that in establishing and opening this dispensation our Father did so with a revelation of himself and of his Son Jesus Christ, as if to say to all the world that he was weary of the attempts of men, earnest through these attempts might have been, to define and describe him. … The experience of Joseph Smith in a few moments in the grove on a spring day in 1820, brought more light and knowledge and understanding of the personality and reality and substance of God and his Beloved Son than men had arrived at during centuries of speculation.”[iii] By revelation Joseph Smith came to know that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost constitute the Godhead. From the beginning Joseph Smith taught that the members of the Godhead are one in purpose, one in mind, one in glory, one in attributes and powers, but separate persons.[iv]

There was reaffirmed in the First Vision the fundamental Christian teaching — that Jesus of Nazareth lived, died, was buried and rose from the tomb in glorious immortality. In the midst of that light that shone above the brightness of the sun stood the resurrected Lord Jesus in company with His Father. Joseph Smith knew from the time of the First Vision that death was not the end, that life continues after one’s physical demise, that another realm of existence — a postmortal sphere — does in fact exist.

The Book of Mormon

Through the Book of Mormon, translated by Joseph Smith, came additional insights concerning the person and powers of Jesus the Christ. We learn that He is the Holy One of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (1 Nephi 19:10) and that through an act of infinite condescension He left His throne divine and took a mortal body (1 Nephi 11; Mosiah 3:5). We learn from the teachings of the Book of Mormon prophets that He was a man but much more than man (Mosiah 3:7–9; Alma 34:11), that He had within Him the powers of the Father, the powers of the Spirit (2 Nephi 2:8; Helaman 5:11), the power to lay down His life and the power to take it back up again.

Another prophet, Alma, contributed the unfathomable doctrine that the Redeemer would not only suffer for our sins, but that His descent below all things would include His suffering for our pains, our sicknesses and our infirmities, thus allowing Him perfect empathy — “that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities” (Alma 7:11–12). Truly, the Book of Mormon prophets bear repeated witness that the atonement of Christ is infinite and eternal in scope (2 Nephi 9:7; 25:16; Alma 34:11–12)

One could come away from a careful reading of the second half of the New Testament somewhat confused on the matter of grace and works, finding those places where Paul seems almost to defy any notion of works as a means of salvation (Romans 4:1–5; 10:1–4; Ephesians 2:8–10) but also those places where good works are clearly mentioned as imperative (Romans 2:6; James 2:14–20; Revelation 20:12–13). It is to the Book of Mormon that we turn to receive the balanced perspective on the mercy and grace of an infinite Savior on the one hand, and the labors and works of finite man on the other.

In the Book of Mormon, the sobering realization that no one of us can make it alone is balanced by a consistent statement that the works of men and women, including the receipt of the ordinances of salvation, the performance of duty and Christian acts of service — in short, being true to our part of the gospel covenant — though insufficient for salvation, are necessary. The prophets declared over and over that the day would come when people would be judged of their works, the works done “in their days of probation” (1 Nephi 15:32; 2 Nephi 9:44). That is, “all men shall reap a reward of their works, according to that which they have been — if they have been righteous they shall reap the salvation of their souls, according to the power and deliverance of Jesus Christ; and if they have been evil they shall reap the damnation of their souls, according to the power and captivation of the devil (Alma 9:28). In summary, the undergirding doctrine of the Book of Mormon is that we are saved by the grace of Christ “after all we can do” (2 Nephi 25:23), meaning above and beyond all we can do. As we come unto Christ by covenant, deny ourselves of ungodliness and love God with all our souls, His grace—His divine enabling power, not only to be saved in the ultimate sense but also to face the challenges of each day — is sufficient for us (Moroni 10:32).

The Book of Mormon has a high Christology; that is, the doctrine of Christ is thick and heavy on the pages of this scriptural record, and the testimony of the divinity of the Lord and Savior is powerful and direct. One cannot read the Book of Mormon and honestly come away wondering what the Latter-day Saints believe about the Divine Sonship. The Book of Mormon establishes clearly that “Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself to all nations” (Book of Mormon title page; 2 Nephi 26:12).

At the heart of the doctrine restored through Joseph Smith is the doctrine of the Christ. “The fundamental principles of our religion,” he observed, “are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that he died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”[v] The glorious news, the glad tidings is that Christ our Lord has come to earth, offered Himself as a ransom from sin and made available deliverance from death and hell. We rejoice in the message of redemption that fell from the lips of Old and New Testament prophets. More especially we exult in the realization that knowledge and truth and light and understanding concerning Jesus Christ — who He was, who He is and what marvels have come to pass through Him — have been delivered through additional scriptural records and modern prophetic utterances.

“Him Declare I Unto You”

One of the main reasons Latter-day Saints are often relegated to the category of cult of non-Christian is because we believe in scripture beyond the Bible. To be sure, we love the Bible. We cherish its sacred teachings and delight in reading and teaching it. We seek to conform our lives to its marvelous precepts. But we do not believe that the Bible contains all that God has spoken or will yet speak in the future.

Occasionally we hear certain Latter-day Saint teachings — like some of those concerning the Savior that I have detailed earlier — described as “unbiblical” or of a particular doctrine being “contradictory” to the Bible. Let’s be clear on this matter. The Bible is one of the books within our standard works, our scriptural canon, and thus our doctrines and practices are in harmony with the Bible. There are times, of course, when latter-day revelation provides clarification of additional information to the Bible. But addition to the canon is hardly the same as rejection of the canon. Supplementation is not the same as contradiction. All of the prophets, including the Savior Himself, brought new light and knowledge to the world; in many cases, new scripture came as a result of their ministry. That new scripture did not invalidate what went before nor did it close the door on subsequent revelation.

Most New Testament scholars believe that Mark was the first Gospel written and that Matthew and Luke drew upon Mark in the preparation of their Gospels. One tradition is that John the Beloved, aware of the teaching of the synoptics, prepared his Gospel in an effort to “fill in the gaps” and thus deal more with the great spiritual verities that his evangelistic colleagues chose not to include. How many people in the Christian tradition today would suggest that what Matthew or Luke did in adding to what Mark had written was illegal or inappropriate or irreverent? Do we suppose that anyone in the first century would have so felt?

Would anyone accuse Matthew or Luke or John of writing about or even worshipping a “different Jesus” because they were bold enough to add to what had been recorded already? Surely not. Why? Because Matthew and Luke and John were inspired for God, perhaps even divinely commissioned by the church to pen their testimonies.

If Luke (in the Gospel, as well as in Acts) or John chose to write of subsequent appearance of the Lord Jesus after His ascension into heaven, appearances not found in Mark or Matthew, are we prone to criticize, to cry foul? No, because these accounts are contained in the Christian canon, that collection of books that serves as the rule of faith and practice in the Christian world.

The authority of scripture is tied to its source. From our perspective, the living, breathing, ever-relevant nature of the word of God is linked not to written words, not even to the writing of Moses or Isaiah or Malachi, not to the four Gospels or the epistles of Paul, but rather to the spirit of prophecy and revelation that illuminated and empowered those who recorded them in the first place. The Bible does in fact contain much that can and should guide our walk and talk; it contains the word and will of the Lord to men and women in earlier ages, and its timeless truths have tremendous normative value for our day. But we do not derive authority to speak or act in the name of Deity on the basis of what God gave to His people in an earlier day.

Just how bold is the Latter-day Saint claim? In a letter to his uncle Silas, Joseph Smith wrote the following:

Why should it be thought a thing incredible that the Lord should be pleased to speak again in these last days for their salvation? Perhaps you may be surprised at this assertion that I should say ‘for the salvation of his creatures in these last days’ since we have already in our possession a vast volume of his word [the Bible] which he has previously given. But you will admit that the word spoken to Noah was not sufficient or Abraham. … Isaac, the promised seed, was not required to rest his hope upon the promises made to his father Abraham, but was privileged with the assurance of [God’s] approbation in the sight of heaven by the direct voice of the Lord to him. … I have no doubt but that the holy prophets and apostles and saints in the ancient days were saved in the kingdom of God. … I may believe that Enoch walked with God. I may believe that Abraham communed with God and conversed with angels. … And have I not an equal privilege with the ancient saints? And will not the Lord hear my prayers, and listen to my cries as soon [as] he ever did to theirs, if I come to him in the manner they did? Or is he a respecter of persons?[vi]

Latter-day Saints feel a deep allegiance to the Bible. It seems odd to us, however, to be accused of being irreverent or disloyal to the Bible when we suggest to the religious world that the God of heaven has chosen to speak again. Our challenge is hauntingly reminiscent of that faced by Peter, James, John or Paul when they declared to the religious establishment of their day that God had sent new truths and new revelations into the world, truths that supplemented and even clarified the Hebrew scripture. And what was the response of the Jews of the day? “Who do you think you are?” they essentially asked. “We have the Law and the Prophets. They are sufficient.” Any effort to add to or to take away from that collection of sacred writings was suspect and subject to scorn and ridicule. And so it is today.

A Willingness to Listen and Learn

A number of years ago a colleague and I traveled with two Evangelical Christian friends to another part of the country to meet with a well-known theologian, author and pastor/teacher in that area. We had read several of his books and had enjoyed his preaching over the years. As a part of an outreach effort to better understand those of other faiths (and to assist them to understand us a little better), we have visited such institutions as Notre Dame, Catholic University, Baylor, Wheaton College and various religious colleges and seminaries. We met this particular pastor and then attended his church services on both Sunday morning and Sunday evening and in both meetings were impressed with the depth and inspiration of his preaching.

The next day we met for lunch and had a wonderful two-hour doctrinal discussion. I explained that we had no set agenda, except that we had admired his writings and wanted to meet him. We added that we had several questions we wanted to pose in order to better understand Evangelical theology. I mentioned that as the dean of religious education (at that time), I oversaw the teaching of religion to some 30,000 young people at Brigham Young University and that I felt it would be wise for me to be able to articulate properly the beliefs of our brothers and sisters of other faiths. I hoped, as well, that they might make the effort to understand our beliefs so as to represent accurately what we teach.

Early in our conversation the minister said something like: “Look, anyone knows there are big difference between us. But I don’t want to focus on those differences. Let’s talk about Christ.” We then discussed the person of Jesus, justification by faith, baptism, sanctification, salvation, heaven, hell, agency and predestination, premortal existence and a number of other fascinating topics. We compared and contrasted, we asked questions and we answered questions. In thinking back on what proved to be one of the most stimulating and worthwhile learning experiences of our lives, the one thing that characterized our discussion, and the one thing that made the biggest difference, was the mood that existed there — a mood of openness, candor and a general lack of defensiveness. We knew what we believed, and we were all committed to our own religious tradition. But we were eager to learn where the other person was coming from. (Blah, blah, blah)

This experience says something to me about what can happen when men and women of good will come together in an attitude of openness and in a sincere effort to better understand and be understood. Given the challenges we face in our society — fatherless homes, child and spouse abuse, divorce, poverty, spreading crime and delinquency — it seems so foolish for men and women who believe in God, whose hearts and lives have been surrendered to that God, to allow doctrinal differences to prevent them from working together. Okay, you believe in a triune God, that the Almighty is a spirit and that He created all things ex nihilo. I believe that God is an exalted man, that He is a separate and distinct personage from the Son and the Holy Ghost. He believes in heaven, while she believes in nirvana. She believes that the Sabbath should be observed on Saturday, while her neighbor feels that the day of corporate worship should be on Friday. This one speaks in tongues, that one spends much of his time leading marches against social injustice, while a third believes that little children should be baptized. One good Baptist is a strict Calvinist, while another tends to take freedom of the will quite seriously. And so on, and so on.

Latter-day Saints do not believe that the answer to the world’s problems is ultimately to be found in more extravagant social programs or stronger legislation. Most or[S1] all of these ills have moral or spiritual roots. In the spirit of the brotherhood and sisterhood of humankind, is it not possible to lay aside theological differences long enough to address the staggering social issues in our troubled world? My recent interactions with men and women of various faiths have had a profound impact on me; they have broadened my horizons dramatically and reminded me — a sobering reminder we all need once in a while — that we are all sons and daughters of the same Eternal Father. We may never resolve our differences on the Godhead or the Trinity, on the spiritual or corporeal nature of Deity or on the sufficiency or inerrancy of the Bible, but we can agree that there is a God; that the ultimate transformation of society will come only through the application of moral and religious solutions to pressing issues; and that the regeneration of individual hearts and souls is foundational to the restoration of virtue in our communities and nations. One need not surrender cherished religious values or doctrines in order to be a better neighbor, a more caring citizen, a more involved municipal. (So rational! So Puritan!)

In addition, we can have lively and provocative discussion on our differences, and such interactions need not be threatening, offensive or damaging to our relationships. What we cannot afford to do, if we are to communicate and cooperate, is to misrepresent one another or ascribe ulterior motives. Such measures are divisive and do not partake of that Spirit that strengthens, binds and reinforces. President Gordon B. Hinckley said of the Latter-day Saints:

We want to be good neighbors; we want to be good friends. We feel we can differ theologically with people without being disagreeable in any sense. We hope they feel the same way toward us. We have many friends and many associations with people who are not of our faith, with whom we deal constantly, and we have a wonderful relationship. It disturbs me when I hear about any antagonisms. … I don’t think they are necessary. I hope that we can overcome them.[vii]

There is, to be sure, a risk associated with learning something new about someone else. New insights always affect old perspectives, and thus some rethinking, rearranging and restructuring of our worldview are inevitable. When we look beyond a man or a woman’s color or ethnic group or social circle or church or synagogue or mosque or creed or statement of belief, when we try our best to see them for who and what they are, children of the same God, something good and worthwhile happens to us, and we are thereby drawn into a closer union with the God of us all. (Okay, okay! Just stop!)

Conclusion

Jesus Christ is the central figure in the doctrine and practice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He is the Redeemer.[viii] He is the prototype of all saved beings, the standard of salvation.[ix] Jesus explained that “no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). We acknowledge Jesus Christ as the source of truth and redemption, as the light and life of the world, as the way to the Father (John 14:6; 2 Nephi 25:29; 3 Nephi 11:11). We worship Him in that we look to Him for deliverance and redemption and seek to emulate His matchless life (D&C 93:12–20). Truly, as one Book of Mormon prophet proclaimed, “We talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, … that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins” (2 Nephi 25:26).

As to whether we worship a “different Jesus,” we say again: We accept and endorse the testimony of the New Testament writers. Jesus is the promised Messiah, the resurrection and the life (John 11:25), literally the light of the world (John 8:12). Everything that testifies of His divine birth, His goodness, His transforming power and His godhood, we embrace enthusiastically. But we also rejoice in the additional knowledge latter-day prophets have provided about our Lord and Savior. President Brigham Young thus declared that

we, the Latter-day Saints, take the liberty of believing more than our Christian brethren: we not only believe … the Bible, but … the whole of the plan of salvation that Jesus has given to us. Do we differ from others who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? No, only in believing more.[x]

It is the “more” that makes many in the Christian world very nervous and usually suspicious of us. But it is the “more” that allows us to make a significant contribution in the religious world. Elder Boyd K. Packer observed: “We do not claim that others have no truth. … Converts to the Church may bring with them all the truth they possess and have it added upon.”[xi]

Knowing what I know, feeling what I feel and having experienced what I have in regard to the person and power of the Savior, it is difficult for me to be patient and loving toward those who denounce me as a non-Christian. But I am constrained to do so in the spirit of Him who also was misunderstood and misrepresented. While it would be a wonderful thing to have others acknowledge our Christianity, we do not court favor nor will we compromise our distinctiveness.

We acknowledge and value the good that is done by so many to bring the message of Jesus from the New Testament to a world that desperately needs it.

The First Presidency of the Church in 1907 made the following declaration: “Our motives are not selfish; our purposes not petty and earth-bound; we contemplate the human race, past, present and yet to come, as immortal beings, for whose salvation it is our mission to labor; and to this work, broad as eternity and deep as the love of God, we devote ourselves, now, and forever.”[xii]

Actually, it’s not some “Trinity doctrine thing” that “other Christians” care about (or know about) it’s the whacko “archaeology” of Mormon history and beliefs that put them at the top of the list of Bizarre Cult Fantasies, over and beyond those of New Age Cults and “Ancient Aliens”

Google: “Mormon Archaeology”

 

From the Edge of the Mormon Empire / PBS Video

Hmmm….. speaking of Puritans, few people realize that the Mormons are “renegade descendants” of those money-loving, east coast Chosen Ones: God loves Money more than he loves People! Mormons are above all, about business $$$ today. Social typicals love bat crap crazy “Money Men”

And yes, I live at the edge of the Mormon Empire…

The F’d Up World of Parrots in Captivity / Entertainment

Nature: Parrots are simply wacky… and so are social humans, who love to “mess with” (tease and torture) other living things. A screeching baby AND a screaming parrot? What fun!

From the Archives / Quotes about Women

Having loaded old files into the new PC, I’m going through them, eliminating those not currently relevant. These random quotes are a good reminder of what female Homo sapiens have put up with…

 

What is (wo)man?

The torment that so many young women know, bound hand and foot by love and motherhood, without having forgotten their former dreams.  ~Simone de Beauvoir

Men at most differ as Heaven and Earth, but women, worst and best, as Heaven and Hell.  ~Alfred Lord Tennyson

I would rather trust a woman’s instinct than a man’s reason.  ~Stanley Baldwin

The supply of good women far exceeds that of the men who deserve them.  ~Robert Graves

Brains are an asset, if you hide them.  ~Mae West


Women are like dogs really.  They love like dogs, a little insistently.  And they like to fetch and carry and come back wistfully after hard words, and learn rather easily to carry a basket.  ~Mary Roberts Rinehart

A husband only worries about a particular Other Man; a wife distrusts her whole species.  ~Mignon McLaughlin, The Second Neurotic’s Notebook

What men desire is a virgin who is a whore~Edward Dahlbert

Women have very little idea of how much men hate them.  And… Is it too much to ask that women be spared the daily struggle for superhuman beauty in order to offer it to the caresses of a subhumanly ugly mate?  ~Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch


Nature has given women so much power that the law has very wisely given them little.  ~Samuel Johnson

When a woman has scholarly inclinations there is usually something wrong with her sexualityFriedrich Nietzsche 

Once a woman is made man’s equal, she becomes his superior. ~ Margaret Thatcher   

I agree today that a man has no business trying to tell women what their characteristics are, which ones are inborn, which are more admirable, which will be best utilized by what occupations. ~ Benjamin Spock 

If I were asked … to what the singular prosperity and growing strength of Americans ought mainly to be attributed, I should reply: To the superiority of their women. ~ Alexis De Tocqueville

There are only two types of women: goddesses and doormats. Pablo Picasso

The only question left to be settled now is: Are women persons?  And… No man is good enough to govern any woman without her consent.~ Susan B Anthony

One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman. ~ Virginia Woolf, Second Sex

Women are never so strong as after their defeat. ~ Alexandre Dumas

Because man and woman are the complement of one another, we need woman’s thought in national affairs to make a safe and stable government. ~ Elizabeth Cady Stanton 

Women speak two languages – one of which is verbal.  ~William Shakespeare

Fighting is essentially a masculine idea; a woman’s weapon is her tongue.  ~Hermione Gingold

 

 



Anxiety Disorders cont., / Panic Attacks, Panic Disorder

This is a continuation of post – Diagnosis and Management of Anxiety Disorders, by Charles Shelton, Doctor of Osteopathy. Dr Shelton is a national speaker on the visiting speakers bureau of Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. He is also on the speakers bureaus of GlaxoSmithKline; Pfizer Inc; Cephalon, Inc; and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Dr Shelton is also on the CNS advisory panels of Pfizer Inc and Elan Pharmaceuticals.

I’m using this article for reference because Dr. Shelton is obviously thoroughly embedded in the “Big Pharma” industry. I’m not concerned here with the wildly predatory “business” model of pharmaceuticals, but with the “drugs” that are “recommended” for treatment. Drug manufacturers are more conservative about which medications should – should not be prescribed for specific conditions than are many prescribers! Instructions and warnings are included with medications, which are so “legally protective” that reading them is often skipped – by prescribers! They go by what the drug sales rep. tells them; it’s an incredibly careless system; a crap shoot that depends on the integrity of your prescriber.

I’m not giving “medical advice” but clarifying some pitfalls in the “game” of American healthcare, based on a lifetime of experience with the “mental” healthcare system.

WARNING: Your prescriber may be ignorant of drug “chemistry” – side effects, conflicts between different drugs when taken together, or may simply be “pill happy” – the “try this” scenario of passing out pharmaceutical samples and adding more, more, more drugs. Do not trust a “randomly-assigned” prescriber – always read the side effects and other warnings: ask THE PHARMACIST about the drug’s potential for harm and any other concerns.


Back to the article:

“In general, individuals with PD may see up to ten practitioners before a correct diagnosis is made, have continuous increases in health care utilization spanning 10 years before diagnosis, and have a 5 to 8 times greater likelihood of being high users of health care.”

Now that’s a great confidence-producing set of statistics! What arrogance to claim that this dismal record indicates “expert” knowledge on the part of the psychology-psychiatry-therapy healthcare system.

Panic Attacks

Figure 1. Agents used in pharmacotherapy for panic disorder.

As discussed, panic attacks, defined as discrete periods of sudden symptom onset usually peaking in 10 minutes, can occur with most anxiety disorders.

The DSM-IV-TR criteria for panic attack are as follows: palpitations, pounding heart, or accelerated heart rate; sweating; trembling or shaking; sensations of shortness of breath or smothering; feeling of choking; chest pain or discomfort; nausea or abdominal distress; feeling dizzy, unsteady, lightheaded, or faint; derealization (feelings of unreality) or depersonalization (being detached); fear of losing control or going crazy; fear of dying; paresthesias; chills or hot flushes; one or more unexpected panic attacks. (?)

A “PA” is a single event; it may have one of many “causes” and occur only once or infrequently. To be a disorder, it must meet criteria below. One attack does not constitute a disorder. It is always a good idea to be checked out by a MEDICAL doctor first, to rule out a physical condition before consulting a “therapist” of unknown quality.

Panic disorder: at least 1 month of worry, including change in cognition or behavior;     presence or absence of agoraphobia; or attacks not accounted for by another mental disorder, or general medical condition. That’s pretty vague! It’s obvious HOW EASY it is for a “potential patient or client” to meet the requirements and to be diagnosed – a real profit bonus for “assembly line” type therapists and clinics!

Panic attacks must be differentiated from PD. Panic disorder as defined by the DSM-IV-TR includes: recurrent unexpected panic attacks; and at least one of the attacks has been followed by 1 month (or more) of one or more of the following:

persistent concern about having additional attacks; worry about the implications of the attacks or their consequences (eg, losing control, having a heart attack, going crazy); or a significant change in behavior related to the attacks.

In general, individuals with PD may see up to ten practitioners before a correct diagnosis is made, have continuous increases in health care utilization spanning 10 years before diagnosis, and have a 5 to 8 times greater likelihood of being high users of health care.

Now that’s a great confidence-producing set of statistics! What arrogance to claim that this dismal record indicates “expert” knowledge on the part of the healthcare system.

_______________________________________________

What really is a “panic attack”? It’s the activation of the “fight, flight or freeze” response. 

Myriad papers and articles about panic attacks are fairly repetitive:

1. There is no “real danger” present in the environment (at the time of that attack) that would justify the “extreme or “over” reaction.

2. Therefore, the PA is an abnormal event. The trigger is a memory of a prior experience with similar conditions (crowds, etc) that has “taken over” the response by the fight, flight freeze system. “Phobia”.

3. The PA is “illegitimate” given the benign circumstances that “actually” exist at the time of the PA.

4. The FFF system will shut down and return to “normal” in 10 minutes, so don’t “panic”!

5. Underlying these assumptions is the “belief” that the FFF response is an “animal thing” – that is, designed for wild environments and encounters between predator and prey. It’s “archaic” in essence; not suited to “modern life” but resurrected if a person is in “real danger” – a physical attack, natural disaster, an accident. Otherwise, the modern “environment” is safe, benign, non-threatening. HAH!

6. The descriptions are subtly judgmental: WOMEN are more likely to experience PA and anxiety than men, therefore the “cause” must be the unstable female psyche! (Hormones) Her system is “broken” – abnormal or damaged, which is a traditional view of “being female”.

Well! What does this indicate? Conditions that were “present” during a traumatic experience (example: a child being locked in a closet as punishment for “bad behavior” in a social situation) are not “imaginary” – confronting similar conditions (a crowded  event in which “good behavior” is a social requirement) are not imaginary: this is a normal fight, flight or freeze function. If a prey animal “survives” a predation event by the automatic physiological response of “OMG! I’m gonna die – run like Hell” OF COURSE it will “remember” the situation; it learns by the experience. If it simply “forgot” the experience, it probably would not survive for long. This is unconscious  processing: it’s the same in humans. These deep survival mechanisms did not go away because in our “imagination” we are no longer “truly animals” but live in wonderful cities and suburbs safe from natural consequences.

Why women? Because females are prey animals: females are “trapped” as the objects of sexual predation, violence and psychological imprisonment in “belief systems” that classify females as “lesser beings.” Females must repress “survival” behavior in order to survive.

Any child who has been traumatized by a single “life-threatening” event, or subjected to chronic abuse, is a candidate for ANXIETY which is the anticipation of both the horrible event reoccurring and the physical response of fight, flight or freeze, which is a frightening physical response. “Life and Death”

Telling a person who has a “panic attack” that it’s not real, or serious, or that it’s all in the mind, or that it will “go away” in ten minutes, or that they are being “a baby” or that they are weak, or are a “social embarrassment” is cruel. Saying these things in effect devalues the original trauma as “unimportant or imaginary” – telling him or her that they ARE CRAZY. This is stimulus for more anxiety and painful behavior.

Underlying the very high rates of “pathology” in American culture is the principle belief in, and unshakeable use of, punishment for any and all “social disobedience”  – from serious crime to the crime of simply being “a child.” Brutality, whether or not it’s physical or psychological, is held to be an “American Virtue”.

Researchers can fiddle with “the brain” AFTER THE FACT that the developing child brain has been compromised by maltreatment during pregnancy, premature birth, horrific medical intervention, abusive parents, malnourishment or neglect, or the prevalent (although denied) guidepost of spare the rod, spoil the child –  but this is madness: the origin of “disorder” is the diehard belief that brutality “toughens people” “produces superior individuals” especially males, and that life is a competition for “promoting one’s DNA”. This perversion means that only predators “win” –

Whoopee! More hypotheses, more studies, more verbiage, more funding, more denial that human on human predation causes damage to individuals, societies and the degeneration of Homo sapiens as a viable species.

A paper that flogs the obvious: Hyperventilation accompanies and exacerbates panic attacks.

Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2009 May 30;167(1):133-43. doi: 10.1016/j.resp.2008.07.011. Epub 2008 Jul 25.

Panic disorder and control of breathing.

Abstract

Anxiety disorders, particularly panic disorder (PD), are associated with respiratory abnormalities. PD consists of unexpected panic attacks (PA) with anxiety, fear and many autonomic and respiratory symptoms. There is a substantial body of literature demonstrating that stimulation of respiration is a common event in panic disorder patients during PA. A number of abnormalities in respiration, such as enhanced CO(2) sensitivity, have been detected in PD patients. As a result, some investigators advanced that there is a fundamental abnormality in the physiological mechanisms that control breathing in PD. Studies indicate that PD patients with dominant respiratory symptoms are particularly sensitive to respiratory tests compared with those who do not manifest dominant respiratory symptoms, possibly representing a distinct subtype. Accumulated evidence suggests that respiratory physiology remains normal in PD patients and that their tendency to hyperventilate and to react with panic to respiratory stimulants like CO(2) represents the triggering of a hypersensitive fear network. However, some recent evidences support the presence of subclinical abnormalities in respiration and other functions related to body homeostasis. The fear network, composed by the hippocampus, the medial prefrontal cortex, the amygdala and its brainstem projections, may be abnormally sensitive in PD patients. This theory might explain why both medication and psychosocial therapies are clearly effective. The evidence of abnormalities in several neurochemical systems might be just the expression of the complex interactions among brain circuits. Our aim was to review the relationship between respiration and panic disorder, addressing the respiratory subtype of panic disorder, the hyperventilation syndrome, the respiratory challenge tests, the current mechanistic concepts and the pharmacological implications.

 

 

From the Archives / Essay on Social Petri Dish

One “fun” result of getting a new computer (with a CD drawer, no less) is being able to go back through all those CD back ups that I should have thrown away years ago, but kept. This dates to ca. 2006…

 

Early One Morning in the Universe

Humanity may be stuck on a wheel of incarnation (repeating the same mistakes, generation after generation), but the individual need not be

What if the form and content of human belief come down to a design preference, with the majority of people preferring a hierarchical plan, based on the family: a design fated to bog down in jealousy and unfair treatment: a system based on parental rage – life in a social petri dish that breeds implacable tragedy from which the individual cannot escape, even in death?

At the other end of the spectrum of ideas, and so far, a neglected alternative, is something clean and random and spontaneous: a scheme based on experience, which does not require supernatural affirmation of our collective and primeval family delusions. The fact that the body will die, permanently and forever, opens the imagination to that which lies beyond human control, and frees the individual from bondage to the group, because it is my body, not theirs.

Society tells its children that a glow worm, or some larval stage of development, was inserted into each of their bodies at conception, or at birth, or baptism, or when the sex hormones turn on, depending on the cultural context they were born into and that this ghostly thing was activated by the supernatural, thus causing the child to be alive. In actual practice, we proceed through life guided by infinitely more ancient and practical instructions called DNA. The results are not perfect, certainly. In Homo sapiens, it is apparent that the code results in a brain of dubious reliability. It is painful to admit, but necessary.

The claim is that this supernatural thing will leave my body when it perishes; a thing which is held by the majority of people in my culture to be my true identity, but which is alien to me – unknowable, in fact. A temporary resident that has no particular form or substance, but which is locked in combat with an inherently evil physical body – a body that for as long as I may live, never really belongs to me. This is put forth as a stupendous delusion: I am expected to believe that my real self is on loan from a supernatural source, and my individual abilities and pursuits discarded as worthless except in reference to this source: my status is that of a puppet activated by magic.

Creation stories, devised by primeval tribes and salvaged or scavenged or embroidered by civilizations of size and material sophistication, fail the pure design test, which requires consonance with Nature. These schemes begin by naming and claiming pieces of existence, an approach to conceptualizing the environment that is understandable in primitive circumstances, hatched by the need for power in the childhood of humankind. The leap our ancestors made to magical connections between objects and ideas is significant in animal evolution, but faulty. Our ancestors had to be satisfied with what their brains could do constructively, which is to make analogies.

Many of these early connections are elegant, while other myths are positively stupefying, perhaps because the original symbolism is lost to us. Many stories that have come down to us betray the weaknesses in human memory, just as each copy of an image is farther removed from the original and loses its distinction. What we have is a cultural junk drawer jammed by absurdities, which have been patented by repetition and fanciful interpretation, which served our species in their time, but we now hoard these errors at terrific cost; cultural ideas have not kept pace with technology. Mythology has become an end in itself. Reality is lost.

Like the genetic code itself, human culture is both repetitive and additive. Genetic information is not thrown away; unnecessary bits are instead stashed in great unused collections of instructions, which is why most of our DNA matches that of both extinct and existing species; why the human fetus recapitulates evolution, why each of us is a portable portion of an ancient sea. Nature is conservative, and yet favors the workable mutation and the turning on and off of old switches.

By means of language and technology, human beings also gather vast amounts of information. Certain knowledge remains active in a culture, some lies dormant: certainly, not all information is of equal value. The results are a mixed affair. An advance in technology may be valued because it can be used in war, while its peaceful uses are ignored, or eventually borrowed and put to a different use.  An idea may be valued because it sanctions the rights of ruthless rulers. A war may be fought because it appears to be motivated by moral good, but which in reality merely exploit greed. There is no way to judge cultures as a whole any more than we can judge DNA, or the results of evolution.  And yet, we do, because we can, because we have a brain built to contrast and compare; ideas are a product of human thought, but most ideas are  not at all helpful to survival.

Our peril to ourselves and to the life of the planet lies in obsessing over and hoarding bits of cramped opinion that will never produce a picture of existence that is new in any way. The picture that mankind persists in using as its model of the universe was created by ignorant and fearful minds that were driven by the necessity of wresting control from a powerful environment, but we are mature and ought to have learned something from the history of our species. Our current picture is as jumbled as those clots of discarded DNA; useful, not useful.

We are perfectly capable of accepting the totality of the universe in an attitude of respectful silence, in recognition of what we do not know, and with a comprehensive view that doesn’t require a beginning and ending point in us. We are the sole creature to arise on earth (as far as we know) to have the ability to view the many threads of existence. Throughout life, each of us will perceive these mysteries in changed ways, even if we are not aware of it. That is, we learn.

For our species, the universe of mind is whatever we make of it. Despite this creative attribute, physical reality does exist, and we are ultimately powerless when faced with this truth. From deep within us great fear arises, causing us to cast our theories, dreams, imaginings, fears, and limitations onto a sublime unknown. We write our own story, one that explains how it was all meant to be, but these ‘meant-to-be’ stories are wishes designed to soothe our nerves and explain our cruelty. Why do we need to deflect ownership of our perpetual violence, cruelty, and destruction when this is actual behavior?

We respond to beauty as strongly as to food or sex. Beauty is inherent in physical reality: contrary to what one might assume, mathematicians and physicists understand this best, since mathematics is the language of physical reality. What could be more beautiful and concise than E=mc2? We are a product of physical reality, therefore beauty is built into us. Beauty is the motivation for civilized and sane behavior, for kindness and for learning. Why paint animals in the deep recesses of a cave, why labor for decades to erect temples, why undertake near-fatal journeys just to collect fantastic and beautiful materials from around the earth, if not to participate in a beauty that is also within us? What we desire from beauty is fusion with the universe.

What has happened to mankind that our cultures are so out of balance with the physical world? Beauty and light did not leave our world, but are abandoned by the mass of human beings for various dreary versions of existence, in which every living thing is worthless when compared to profit. These plodding schemes are crowded and disorganized and not beautiful at all because they do away with possibility. Tangled loops of anti-knowledge go around and around in the minds of those who are stuck on limits within the brain. But the universe does not stop evolving in order to satisfy their need for a finite answer, and yet the mass of humans dwell on the tired details of texts and rituals that ignore common experience. We think that the universe will become whatever we want it to be, but whatever it may be, it exists ‘as is’ and we merely constrain our knowledge with beliefs, preferences, and delusions.

I feel more free as a body that will die, than believing that something unnatural will leave my body, to proceed onward and upward into a supernatural domain. Most of it seems a design preference. There is something clean and spontaneous in a design that is not required to house itself in levels of existence freed only for a time from the great overseeing One. I fear I am a renegade soul out to proceed on my way alone.