From: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org (eda-thoughts-digest) To: eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Subject: eda-thoughts-digest V3 #164 Reply-To: eda-thoughts@smoe.org Sender: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-eda-thoughts-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk eda-thoughts-digest Wednesday, April 26 2000 Volume 03 : Number 164 * If you ever wish to unsubscribe, send an email to * eda-thoughts-digest-request@smoe.org with ONLY * the word unsubscribe in the body of the email * . * PLEASE :) when you reply to this digest to send a post TO the list, * change the subject to reflect what your post is about. A subject * of Re: eda-thoughts-digest V3 #xxx or the like gives readers no clue * as to what your message is about. Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: ET: Re: abortion....the ultimate evil of the 20th century ["~* cymbal] Re: ET: elian [Summer Burton ] Re: ET: elian ["Seth D. Fulmer" ] ET: ~my own personal mats sundin~ [shivergirl ] Re: [ET: an intriguing perspective, in light of recent debate] [genben@us] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 02:34:41 GMT From: "~* cymbaline *~" Subject: Re: ET: Re: abortion....the ultimate evil of the 20th century I've got to admit, I actually agree with you on this one. Abortion is horrible. Just because the child is not officially born, does not mean its not a living being. Hmm... if it wasn't a living being, that would make the fetus something like... a rock? a chair? I saw a picture of a little girl. She was the product of a failed abortion. Since the abortion didn't work, she was born deformed and mulitalated. I once saw a picture, (I don't remember where), of a sonogram that was taken during an abortion. You could literally see the silent scream of the fetus as it was being poked. There are so many alternatives to having an abortion: A> Don't have sex! B> If "A" wont work, WHERE A CONDOM! C> If that doesn't work: Be responsible, and take responsiblity for your actions! D> Adoption. There are SO MANY people out there who can't have children on there own, and want to adopt children and give them loving homes! You know, I probably wont be having chldren of my own, because I do not want to pass on a gene I have to my children. I'd be one of those people who'd love to adopt! Peace, Kelly >A human being is a human being regardless of how old >they are. There was a >girl I once read of, who had a >twin brother who was murdered through >abortion. But the >abortion failed to kill her, and so she was born and > >grew up. As a young woman she experienced horrific >nightmares about >witnessing the death of someone she >loved. When she told her mother of >these dreams, her >mother burst into tears and told her about the abortion. > >Abortion is a horrible crime, the worst of all murders. >I believe in the >next ten years we will see liberation >from this holocaust, for my >generation is already >rejecting this evil, and young doctors are > >overwhelmingly refusant to perform this hideous >operation. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:58:25 -0700 From: Summer Burton Subject: Re: ET: elian OKAY. I have a lot to say to disagree with you (surprise!)... >First of all, what the governemnt (The Clinton/Gore Administration) did was >not only completely uncalled for, but a crime against this child and his >family. First of all, this child's "family" is most immediately his father and young half-brother. The "relatives" we're talking about are second cousins and great uncles -- I have trouble remembering the names of my second cousins, and they are certianly not family to me with the same intensity that my dad is. >What CNN won't tell you is that more children were found washed ashore at the >same time as Elian, and they were allowed to remain here, despite the fact > that several of them had parents/a parent back in Cuba. First of all: you say CNN "won't" tell us that, but you don't tell us where YOU heard it. Bad debate style. Always quoth your sources, you've had a problem with that before. I can't say anything about this because I don't know where it came from. > him back, and so, Castro, not the father, demanded Elian be returned to Cuba. I'm pretty sure his dad wanted him back "too". > from the family who he loves, and take such good care of him. >See above. Besides, he loves his dad too. That's obvious. >The government began negotiating with Reno and with Cuban Ambassadors. Elian >was happy where he was, and said himself he wanted to say. Mmm... Well, first of all most republicans were saying a few years ago that children SHOULD NOT have the right to "divorice" their parents unless there was a physical abuse situation. It's stated pretty plainly in the contract with America that parents, unless physically abusive (which Elian's father wasn't, obviously) know what's best for their kids, and their rights should be upheld. Now there's a turnaround, simply because they like to disagree with Clinton. Second of all, of COURSE Elian was told to say that. Duh. That "family" wanted him, and a six year old boy is a pretty moldable thing. I don't think he was given all the facts. >If we listen to >children in countless sexual abuse and custody battles, then why not listen >to Elian's wishes? First of all, we only listen to children in custody battles when the parents say they want their kids to decide. Otherwise, the parents fight it out and the kids have no say. And sexual abuse is obviously a COMPLETELY differen thing than this seperation from a loving parent situation. >understandable. But this is not what Reno wanted, She wanted to have the >child handed over amidst armed guards and Cuban officials. This isn't logical. As a writer, I know that every character, even the "bad ones", have to have some motivation. Do you really think Janet Reno is "evil" and "wanted" the child to be handed over amidst armed guards? No, there's details you are leaving out. That doesn't make sense. >We haven't heard the last >of this little boy. Well, he seems pretty happy and quite frankly... there's really no more issue, now that he's back with his daddy. It doesn't matter what country dad lives in, he has all the rights by both countries laws. It doesn't MATTER if these distant relatives can "provide" for Elian "better" in a "better" country. My great uncle and second cousins might be able to prove in some court that they have more money and live in a better state than my parents, but it doesn't mean anything. You can't just take a little boy away from his dad because someone else can take care of him "better". It's wrong. It's so wrong.. - -Summer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 09:43:37 -0400 From: "Seth D. Fulmer" Subject: Re: ET: elian Ok, I sorta agree with Summer with everything except a few things... At 10:58 PM 4/25/00 -0700, Summer Burton wrote: >Second of all, of COURSE Elian was told to say that. Duh. That >"family" wanted him, and a six year old boy is a pretty moldable >thing. I don't think he was given all the facts. Dear...Depending on the person, an 18 year old is "a pretty moldable" person. People are not their ages by the years behind their back but the experiences behind their belt. There are some 6 year olds that through their experiences can kick 30 year old adults' to the moon and back. But like I don't think anyone but the key players(the father, Reno, Castro, and Clinton) were given all the facts, and without all the facts, the human mind will normally believe what it is lead to believe...hence all the power the media has. >First of all, we only listen to children in custody battles when the >parents say they want their kids to decide. Otherwise, the parents >fight it out and the kids have no say. And sexual abuse is obviously >a COMPLETELY differen thing than this seperation from a loving parent >situation. Also here though...This is like one point I agreed with Joe about. If a child yells "Molestation"...NO MATTER WHAT, he is listened to, and the person who is accused is guilty in the eyes of people. In court, they bring the children to the stand to testify and basically use "child innocence" and stuff without caring about whether the child is telling the truth or not. >Well, he seems pretty happy and quite frankly... there's really no >more issue, now that he's back with his daddy. It doesn't matter what >country dad lives in, he has all the rights by both countries laws. Actually, he has only the rights of Cuba, which unless they've changed in the last few weeks, is not very many rights at all. Cuba's a Socialist Dictatorship(If the name is wrong, correct me please)...i.e...Fidel Castro's "da shit" and if he says you die..you die. I remember in public school, my teachers would scare the crap out of me telling us how they have these tiny prisons that are barely the size of closets and totally uncomfortable, and how the Cuban government can just stick you there for no apparent reason for lengths of time of like many years(3 years was always the number my teacher used but I can imagine that's not the longest). THAT breaks human law. I don't give any number of (pick your word) about the law of man, but human law, i.e..human rights, morality...is what matters. Now, someone said to me that in the US he doesn't really have many rights here, as Reno so boldly pointed out with the armed raid, but in America, you can stand in the middle of a street corner and tell the whole world to F* off and if that's the only thing you're doing, I doubt anything would happen because it's covered by the first amendment. If Reno would have tried this armed raid around the year 1775, she'd have gotten her head on the chopping block and a revolution on her hands. I don't know why I care so much for this, as this breaks my rule of "If it's not your life Seth don't bother yourself with it", but I'm taking a class in history on the American Revolution and I see what life was like then, how they thought it was unfair and how it was in my opinion too, and I always am for people being fair with everyone, no matter how difficult it makes the situation. >It doesn't MATTER if these distant relatives can "provide" for Elian >"better" in a "better" country. My great uncle and second cousins >might be able to prove in some court that they have more money and >live in a better state than my parents, but it doesn't mean anything. >You can't just take a little boy away from his dad because someone >else can take care of him "better". It's wrong. It's so wrong.. It may be wrong but if I'm a young kid and I'm not given a choice and I'm stuck in a prison(named "Cuba" in this case) just because my "father" chooses to live in that prison...that's as inhumane and wrong as anything. Elian has Absolutely no hope of escaping. Well perhaps the same hope as his mother, and look at her..she's dead(sorry for the blunt image but I don't know how to better state it). If it was any other country but Cuba, I'd have been either not caring or said to send the boy to the father; but being that the country is Cuba, the father is irresponsible, and incompetent in his role as "father". By the way though I would say the same thing about the poor and homeless who have 2,3,4,etc. children when they barely can take care of themselves. I believe if you are going to be in custody of a child, take care of it as if it was yourself, only younger. Juan Miguel did not look at how the child would be living in 20 years or so. Well I better stop my ranting before I start attacking character soon. Take care and Have a Good Day everybody :o) Seth D. Fulmer mailto:kaosking@voicenet.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 10:12:03 -0400 From: shivergirl Subject: ET: ~my own personal mats sundin~ + sitting here with this letter i am feeling fragile and salty i am feeling never better with love-tears and old fears blurring and disappearing into an amorous bubble with sheer meanings and marriage leanings i embrace to my chest all the content (within the context of you are) my lamp of illumination my gas fire truth you hold up and you profess the long-lasting qualities of love's youth + par avion je tu veux maintenant sans le pleut tout le temps seulement le printemps pour tu et moi + honest, he never rests, even when he sleeps-- he's really completely voluntarily never free from me-- and it's actually the way we both want it to be; closer than unison or communion, with the added bonus of sexual friction; the fingertips of excitement tracing, creeping, ever steadily-- quickly, and full of first-time wonderment: the knowledge that love means total vulnerability, the realization we're slowing figuring out, (what god meant) belatedly + the explanation of the interchange eludes my human comprehension but just cause it's out of most people's range doesn't mean a spark isn't formed at conception; and the dynamics of being suddenly psychic defy round-trip flights to logic but that doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't exist--does it-- in the mirror, swirling and mysterious silvery and whispering metaphysics while we simply breathe in and out the cosmic mist + i see you in the looking glass of my inner soul, he wrote; and i shivered, sat forward, and felt my spirit hesitantly move one foot toward all that is warm; in the realm of male emotion, as all my long-time darkness-friends crept unnoticed and sad and silently past + you know what we are both waiting for: to build a home upon this foundation, to go gallantly and gallavantingly into love's examining room, holding hands, side by side, through the door; and yet you state you know there has to be something more; that height and weight, indifference and hate, have got no place in the designs we have been crayoning all this time, since before anticipating the end of the interim, the agonizing preliminary of meant to be, what we're here for + i kept getting all the fucked-up versions, despite what i'd always heard all my soot-filled life; so i shoved my foot into the archetypal woman's shoe, just to see what it felt like, to feel what becomes of you when you are crammed into conformity so easily, and severed oh-so permanently (effectively); but then he offered to kneel down again, for the first time, and massage my Achilles' heel; making me finally be able to feel the truth of the myth, without having of my self to steal + ------------------------------ Date: 26 Apr 00 10:13:16 EDT From: genben@usa.net Subject: Re: [ET: an intriguing perspective, in light of recent debate] shivergirl wrote: > > by kerry knudsen, a journalist > > > > > "The definition of propoganda is to repeatedy report only one > > side of the story, and to exclude other points of view. this is a rather poor definition of propaganda, if you ask me (which many of you don't). propaganda is a word with much farther reacing connotations. propaganda is literature, images, journalism, and general information disseminated to the public for the intention of influencing opinion and essentially brainwashing the people. before WWII, propaganda was an acceptable, and much used, term for what we now refer to as advertising. in my mind, this is an important point to make: ADVERTISING is nothing but a euphemism for PROPAGANDA. let that stew for a moment... > > It is my belief that a democracy functions best when its > > people are informed, not just of one side of an issue, but > > of all sides. To me, the public is served best when there is > > open and vigorous debate between strongly opposed points of > > view. this, of course, is assuming that democracy ever functions with the intention of serving the public. > > John Milton said you should never repress the writings of > > debating parties for several reasons. For one, by letting a > > fool write, you don't add to his foolishness. For another, > > by allowing the wise to read the writings of a fool, you don > > 't diminish their wisdom, although by letting them read, it > > increases their knowledge of the workings of a foolish mind. > > Third, Milton said we need to read to understand our > > enemies. okay, let's discuss for a moment John Milton. There is a great webpage devoted to Milton at this address: http://www.urich.edu/~creamer/milton/ Basically, he was a religious scholar who wrote three very important social/religious pieces: 'Paradise Lost', 'Paradise Regained', and 'Areopagitica'. This third, although the least well-know of the three, is probably the most significant, for it really was the catalyst in forming the idea (and practice) of free speech. It was a speech that Milton gave to Parliament (England) in 1644 concerning a law they had passed a few years earlier that all published materials have a license from the government, pending government approval of the text. Surprisingly, it took a while for anyone to reallyt challenge this idea, and Milton was one of the more vocal. He had been rejected a few times for some pieces he had written on divorce, and was upset. this prompted his dissenting speech, which is what we can now read as 'Areopagitica'. I highly recommend that everyone read it, it's a very important piece of writing, especially for those who plan to publish in the future. Unfortunately, having been brought up in a restrictive, hierarchical system and studying religion his whole life, Milton was prone to statements like those above. While these are liberal paraphrasing, the idea of 'enemies' and 'adversaries' is present in some of Milton's work. In context, these are noble ideas, but in reality, they are harmful. The first problem we have with the open acceptance of everyone's ideas is precisely that: we constantly view those harboring opposing opinions as 'enemies'. This is truly unfortunate. The first step to open-mindedness is to realize that the distinction between 'enemies' and 'allies' is feeble at best, if not wholly non-existant. For an appropriate example, I will say that Joe is not my enemy, although we do disagree on many things. If anything, he is my ally, for he forces me to examine and update my own ideas by exposing his differing opinions. This is, in my opinion, a step on the path to open dialogue. We must drop these assessments of others based around 'enemy' and 'ally'. > > Similarly, Milton said you should never restrict the > > writings of the wise. You have no way of knowing what damage > > you do if you restrict ideas you cannot understand. (This is > > why nobody should ever be silenced for disagreeing with > > people.) There is an elitist undertone here that is not born out of the interpretation of the journalist. Milton himself would have said something like this (referring to the first sentence). If we examine this, the implication is that the writings of the unwise are irrelevant, which is another part of the problem i discussed above. 'Wise' and 'unwise' are qualitative assessments of something subjective. The further implication is that the wise are the judges of what is wise and what is unwise, which proliferates the horrible assumption that some people's ideas are more valuable than others, which is simply not true. > > Areopagitica also says it's better to kill a person than > > kill a written idea. According to Milton, when the writer is > > dead, the work lives on, but when the work is killed all of > > posterity loses." A brilliant statement. Remember this. Read your history. So much of the atrocity has been documented, and if we don't seek it out, it will slip between the cracks, and the people who want us to forget them will succeed in burying the truth. A few months ago, someone wrote to the list about the mass murders in Turkey. this is the kind of thing I am referring to. I am a firm believer in the adage that "Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it." Go out and learn about stuff. Knowledge will change your life. ben > ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ------------------------------ End of eda-thoughts-digest V3 #164 **********************************