Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Thomas Square Are You Gonna Kiss Me Or Not Lyrics


Beauty of Romantic Innocence


a few of my very favorite romantic poems of innocence:

from the poet, Gary Soto--

Oranges

The first time I walked
With a girl, I was twelve,
Cold, and weighted down
With two oranges in my jacket.
December. Frost cracking
Beneath my steps, my breath
Before me, then gone,
As I walked toward
Her house, the one whose
Porch light burned yellow
Night and day, in any weather.

A dog barked at me, until
She came out pulling
At her gloves, face bright
With rouge. I smiled,
Touched her shoulder, and led
Her down the street, across
A used car lot and a line
Of newly planted trees,
Until we were breathing
Before a drugstore. We

Entered, the tiny bell
Bringing a saleslady
Down a narrow aisle of goods.
I turned to the candies
Tiered like bleachers,
And asked what she wanted -
Light in her eyes, a smile
Starting at the corners
Of her mouth. I fingered
A nickle in my pocket,
And when she lifted a chocolate
That cost a dime,
I didn’t say anything.

I took the nickle from
My pocket, then an orange,
And set them quietly on
The counter. When I looked up,
The lady’s eyes met mine,
And held them, knowing
Very well what it was all
About.

Outside,
A few cars hissing past,
Fog hanging like old
Coats between the trees.
I took my girl’s hand
In mine for two blocks,
Then released it to let
Her unwrap the chocolate.
I peeled my orange
That was so bright against
The gray of December
That, from some distance,
Someone might have thought
I was making a fire in my hands.


--Gary Soto,
retired professor at U.C. Berkeley;
Grew up poor in Fresno.

--

from songwriters David Lee Murphy and Jim Collins--


Are You Gonna Kiss Me or Not?

We were sittin' up there on your momma's roof
Talkin' 'bout everything under the moon
With the smell of honeysuckle and your perfume
All I could think about was my next move

Oh, but you were so shy, so was I
Maybe that's why it was so hard to believe
When you smiled and said to me
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

Are we gonna do this or what?
I think you know I like you a lot
But you're 'bout to miss your shot
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

It was the best dang kiss that I ever had
Except for that long one after that
And I knew if I wanted this thing to last
Sooner or later I'd have to ask for your hand

So I took a chance
Bought a wedding band and I got down on one knee
And you smiled and said to me
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

Are we gonna do this or what?
I think you know I love you a lot
I think we've got a real good shot
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

So, we planned it all out for the middle of June
From the wedding cake to the honeymoon
And your momma cried
When you walked down the aisle

When the preacher man said, "Say I do"
I did and you did too, then I lifted that veil
And saw your pretty smile and I said
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

Are we gonna do this or what?
Look at all the love that we got
It ain't never gonna stop
Are you gonna kiss me or not?

Yeah baby, I love you a lot
I really think we've got a shot
Are you gonna kiss me or not?


Songwriters: David Lee Murphy / Jim Collins
Are You Gonna Kiss Me or Not lyrics © Spirit Music Group, Carol Vincent & Assoc LLC

--

And romantic innocence when faced with problems and trials:

from the songwriters Jon Nite and Ross Copperman--

Glass

Trying to live and love,
With a heart that can't be broken,
Is like trying to see the light with eyes that can't be opened.
Yeah, we both carry baggage,
We picked up on our way, so if you love me do it gently,
And I will do the same.

We may shine, we may shatter,
We may be picking up the pieces here on after,
We are fragile, we are human,
We are shaped by the light we let through us,
We break fast, cause we are glass.
'Cause we are glass.

I'll let you look inside me, through the stains and through the cracks,
And in the darkness of this moment,
You see the good and bad.
But try not to judge me, 'cause we've walked down different paths,
But it brought us here together, so I won't take that back.

We may shine, we may shatter,
We may be picking up the pieces here on after,
We are fragile, we are human,
We are shaped by the light we let through us,
We break fast, cause we are glass.

We might be oil and water, this could be a big mistake,
We might burn like gasoline and fire,
It's a chance we'll have to take.

We may shine, we may shatter,
We may be picking up the pieces here on after,
We are fragile, we are human,
And we are shaped by the light we let through us,
We break fast, cause we are glass.
We are glass.


Songwriters: Jon Nite / Ross Copperman
Glass lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

Jon Nite grew up in Amarilo, Texas, married his sweetheart,
and they had an infant while still in high school; then they
moved to Nashville.



In this time of twisted views, lurid obscenities, and sexual assault,
let us turn away from such ethical darkness!


Turn to the Light of Romantic Innocence and Beauty,


Daniel Wilcox

Monday, November 20, 2017

Please Write for Lee Su-jun, NOT to be forced back to North Korea


RISK OF FORCIBLE RETURN (CHINA: UA 253.17)

FROM AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL, URGENT ACTION:
"Lee Su-jung (name being used in China, aged 24) and her son (aged 4) are currently in detention in Shenyang, China, along with 8 other North Koreans. If forcibly returned, they are at risk of persecution or other serious human rights violations, such as arbitrary detention, torture or other ill-treatment and possibly execution.

1) TAKE ACTION

Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:

Stop the forced return of any person to North Korea, including Lee Su-jung and her son;
Grant refugee status to those North Koreans who are entitled to it, give them immediate access to UNHCR or allow them to travel to South Korea or other countries to seek asylum;
Ensure Lee Su-jung, her son and the other eight North Koreans in the group are protected from torture and other ill-treatment while in detention and have prompt access to legal counsel of their choosing and any necessary medical treatment.
Contact these two officials by 27 December, 2017:

President
Xi Jinping
The State Council General Office
2 Fuyoujie
Xichengqu, Beijing Shi 100017,
People’s Republic of China
Fax: +86 10 6238 1025
Email: gov@govonline.cn
Salutation: Dear President

Ambassador Cui Tiankai, Embassy of the People’s Republic of China
3505 International Place NW, Washington DC 20008
Phone: 1 202 495 2266 I Fax: 1 202 495 2138
Email: chinaembpress_us@mfa.gov.cn OR chineseembassyspokesperson@gmail.com
(If you receive an error message, please try calling instead!)
Salutation: Dear Ambassador


https://www.amnestyusa.org/urgent-actions/urgent-action-mother-and-child-at-risk-of-forcible-return-china-ua-25317/
----



In the LIGHT,

Daniel Wilcox

Friday, November 17, 2017

Light and Rearranging Chairs in the Midst of Multiple Hurricanes


Again, and again...rearranging deck chairs in the midst of multiple hurricanes...
one discouraging image that comes to mind when reflecting-ruminating-contemplating
on the recent breakups of two more Friends Yearly Meetings (NCYM and NWYM)
while the world suffers endless severe crises,
millions are destitute,
many persecuted, abused, and slaughtered.

And on the current absurd political wranglings--leftovers and rightwrongs...

Been there:

Was a member and leader in California Yearly Meeting shortly before it broke from Friends United Meeting, back when the Yearly Meeting opposed freezing nuclear weapons. In fact, many members defended nuclear weapons, though their Faith and Practice clearly condemned ALL war.

Instead most time was focused on lesser doctrinal points and the danger of possible uncontrolled behavior during open worship...

Attended a local Arizona meeting of Intermountain Yearly Meeting with my wife, where to our bafflement and shock, some Friends followed forms closely, yet defended killing...

Was a member of Pacific Yearly Meeting where some members opposed support and involvement in peacemaking in Iraq because the word "Christian" was part of the name, even though Friend Tom Fox, as a member of Christian Peacemaker Teams, had already been died witnessing for and working for peace in Iraq.

Instead, we spent considerable time on plans to get a peace pole erected....:-(

And worse...

Since I'm an extremely liberal Friend far out on the edge and have plenty of my own shortcomings and failures,
no doubt, other Friends could point out many ways that I, too, don't live up to the Light.

STILL.

Think about this: What is the Friends/Quakers beyond an empty form?

Even back in the 19th century, social activist Friends were opposed by their meetings because of their abolition work.
Most Friends instead focused on their religious forms.

Modern Friends insert totally contrary, contradictory views,
advocate opposing ethics,
even deny that the Light exists,
or insist that only a doctrinaire understanding of God is the Light.

At times, as a UU-leaning Friend, I'm tempted to jump ship.


Only the Unitarian-Universalists are also rearranging chairs, still order their services like traditional churches! And are caught down in a severe controversy right now, too (including opposition to their UU president).

And, strangely, like some Friends, many UU's claim the lifestance of Pagan!

Huh? How could any rational, contemplative members of Quakers and UU ever think that the cosmos is polytheistic?

Furthermore, such a worldview--Paganism--is completely contrary to everything that is essential to being a Friend (and a UU).

If you think differently, please comment on why you believe my observation is incorrect.

What if instead of inserting almost any and all contrary ethics and philosophies into the empty-bucket called Quakers...

What if instead of acting like lawyers arguing over minutia and forms...


What if all of us, instead, centered,
then
stood up against all war, inequality, injustice
and focused on seeking
the True, the Good, the Just, the Beautiful?

















In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Despairingly UN-funny: MOORE and LESS


Probably no one needs more sordid details about 32-year-old Alabama district attorney Roy Moore's alleged molestation of a 14-year-old girl. Or that Moore told the young teen's mother that he would watch out for her!

So, let's skip to some very Kurt-Vonnegut sort of commentary on this moral debacle, neither moore nor less:

Infidel753 already has made a number of very strong points on his web blog. For instance, he wrote, "What's striking to me is how closely the divide over Moore on the right correlates with the religious/secular divide. The very people who generally exhibit an outright obsession with Christianity's sexual taboos are going all out to defend a man plausibly accused of sexual misbehavior..."

It's even more absurd than that. Because in the past Christian leaders obsessed on Bill Clinton (and others) "sexual misbehavior" BUT
all of those ethical choices were
with adults.

Even Christian leaders' past defense of Newt Gingrich (who twice committed adultery, once when his wife at the time was dying of cancer!:-( isn't as bad as this current hypocrisy.

This Christian defense of Moore is much more like the Roman Catholic leaders' responses to priests having sexual relations with young teens.

How could anyone defend such immoral, unjust actions against innocent young teens?!

How can so many Christian defend a famous Christian leader, former Alabama Supreme Court Judge who in the past, when a 32 district attorney, committed alleged sexual relations with a 14-year-old and made unethical advances to other teen girls.
(Of course, his legal 'out' is that he, Moore, didn't go all the way. BUT
that was also true of the priests who molested young teens.)

So really nothing new here.

Christian leaders have been defending fellow Christians who engage in serious sexual misconduct for many years.

BUT WHAT DOES surprise me is the nearly complete condemnation of Ray Moore's actions by secularists (after you ferret out their hostility to right-wing politics).

Heck, many secularists have claim that sexual misconduct--even rape!--isn't really wrong.

Instead they assert that all ethics are "subjective," even raping, enslaving, slaughtering!! All ethics are only "personal opinion."

Some even claim that various unethical actions are only about "like" or "dislike."

According to these secularists, enslavement,
slaughter,
rape,
dishonesty,
little girl mutilation, etc.
are no different than liking (or not liking) coffee or tea or soda.

ON THE CONTRARY:
All humans need to promote the view of the Humanist Manifesto III, the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the Enlightenment view of thinkers such as Thomas Paine--
that humans have "inherent value."

THAT ethics are real!

THAT molestation, sexual misconduct, statutory rape and adult rape are ALWAYS wrong.

Deeply troubled in this "ocean of darkness" that corrupts and poisons the religious and secular world today.

Daniel Wilcox

Friday, November 3, 2017

Guest Post: "Why I am a Free-Speech Fundamentalist"



from Secular Outpost on Free Speech by Keith Parsons:
"I am a free-speech fundamentalist. That is, I hold that public forums, including public universities, should be open to the free expression of opinion. Period. Even when the opinion is offensive and obnoxious. Especially when the opinion is offensive and obnoxious. There can be no free speech if it is required that the speech not offend anyone.

There can be no free speech if only certain viewpoints or ideologies are permitted. There can be no free speech if certain topics are sacrosanct and not allowed to be touched. Does that mean that white supremacist Richard Spencer should be allowed a platform? Yes.

Does it mean that professional provocateurs such as Ann Coulter and Milos Yiannopoulos should be allowed to do their odious act? Yes.

But what about those whose feelings would be deeply hurt by the mindless effusions of such trolls?


Tough. You have no right not to be offended.


You also have no right to shout down such speakers or prevent their audience from hearing them. If you do so, you should be forcibly ejected from the premises."
Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2017/10/30/free-speech-fundamentalist/#jB30jA1OoQoSeE0z.99
Why I am a Free-Speech Fundamentalist



--

Thank you, Keith Parsons!!

Though I never thought you would describe yourself as a 'fundamentalist;-) of any sort. (Though, of course, I get your humorous hyperbole:-)

It is so scary, so irrational, so undemocratic, so aberrational that these many humans now want to deny for others what they claim for themselves.

And the strange current view that you mention, "But what about those whose feelings would be deeply hurt by the mindless effusions of such trolls? Tough. You have no right not to be offended."

When did civilization, democracy, progress come to mean not being "offended"?!

Also, during the many years that I taught literature to high school students including basic debate (on the most controversial topics from abortion to same sexuality to war), our school never had a problem, nothing like the current upsets at some universities from New England to Berkeley. By my insisting on a few courtesy rules and that they present their views with reasoning and evidence, 9th graders and 11th graders, for years, were able to espouse ANY view they wanted to, without censure.

During all of those debates, students learned much. Never once, though they were immature teens, especially some of the 9th graders:-), did I ever have to send any one out for discipline problems. NOT once.

What is wrong that so many now demand that the free speech of others with whom they disagree, be restricted?!

In the Light of Freedom--freedom of speech, freedom of religion or non-religion, freedom of the press, freedom, freedom, freedom!

Daniel Wilcox

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

What Is the Essential Nature of Reality? Many Leaders Claim to “Know.”


How do so many human leaders "know" the essential nature of reality?

Exactly how and why such human hubris exists among most Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and Atheists is uncertain.

I’m not going to try and unravel that conundrum in one blog post.

Rather I am going to describe the most common alleged claims for us seekers to take a careful look, study, and then make a tentative, educated guess about.
Here goes; hold on to your virtual hats;-):

Living in a universe about 27 billion light-years across, and about 13 billion years old and, according to cosmologists, a cosmos that will last more billions of years, that is the huge existence which we humans in cosmic time 'blipped into'. And there is a real possibility that this cosmos is only one of an infinite number in an alleged multiverse--
that is educated speculation by many prominent human thinkers, scientists, and philosophers.

What is "essential or inherent reality"?

#1 All reality came about by cosmic chance. Seemingly the view of the French biologist Jacques Monod in Chance and Necessity, a powerful book I read a few years back, and the view of the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould.
The human species came about by “luck.”

My take on this as an average person: I think this view is possible. I guess given cosmic time even the "laws" of nature, math, reason, life, ethics, consciousness could all blip into existence eventually.

#2 All reality came about by a cosmic determinism of meaningless matter and energy which is eternal. Everything is lock step. There are no choices, not even about what to have for lunch or whether or not to commit murder or what to choose for my career.

Indeed, every molecule, everything, every event, every human action was petrified to happen at the moment of the Big Bang. Consciousness, reason, etc. are all illusions. According to the scientist Sam Harris, even our sense of “I” is an illusion. And even if existence happened again a “trillion” times, everything would happen exactly the same.

So the Germans will gas millions in the Holocaust eternally, never able to choose a different action:-(
Despite my studying this determinism at university, and for many years since, and so many times trying to imagine my "I" as an illusion who is only 'done to' by the cosmos, I still think this is one of the least likely views of reality.

But the view is very popular these days--sort of an atheistic version of Calvinism.

#3 All reality came about somehow by a temporary, finite, imperfect, even distorted, expression of the perfect eternal Ideal Forms of Platonism.
But why did this happen? Where did evil come from?

#4 All reality came about by emergent possibilities in a quantum singularity vacuum or some unknown ultimate reality. But how did the quantum singularity vacuum originate? Here goes "turtles all the way down."

This view seems to posit an eternal matter and energy reality with no meaning 'transcending' it.
Like in #1, life, consciousness, humankind, reason, ethics are all "flukes," "accidents," "lucky" breaks.

#5 All reality came about by an impersonal ultimate reality of cosmic beauty. Scientists such as Albert Einstein stated this was his view, that he thought the cosmos was meaningful, but impersonal. This view seems similar to a combination of #3 and #4.

However, unlike #2 and #4, the emergent-possibility cosmos isn't meaningless and purposeless, but is filled with intellectual meaning.
Interesting, but I doubt it.

#6 All reality is coming about by the everlasting but limited cosmic reality that is becoming. This is the view of thinkers including philosopher and mathematician Alfred Lord Whitehead, process philosopher Charles Hartshorne, etc.

This cosmic but limited God who is far beyond human understanding works toward changing matter and energy and conscious life such as homo sapiens into increasing patterns and forms of beauty, meaning, and purpose. This is also the view of some Reform Jews.

But where is the evidence for this?

Process thinkers explain that consciousness, reason, ethics, mathematics, natural law, creativity, aesthetics, life itself, etc. are evidence, the hints that this isn’t a “meaningless” cosmos.

This view is appealing, but most of the technical philosophical explanations are BEYOND me. I'm still trying to understand the science tome, The Elegant Universe by the cosmologist Brian Greene.

I'm a relatively average literature teacher (who got born with a "why" in his throat;-)

#7 All reality came about as just one of an infinite number of universes of an infinite multi-verse, the view of some modern cosmologists. What is the ultimate of the multi-verse is unknown or maybe the multiverse itself is ultimate. And, besides, while finite humans can seek to understand, the actual nature of reality is probably forever beyond finite mental abilities.

Intriguing, but seems too speculative for me. However, I'm not as skeptical as Martin Gardner, one of the co-founders of the modern skeptical movement who wrote a scathing dismissal of this view.

#8 All reality came about by the impersonal Brahma God of Hinduism and modern New Age
(such as Ken Wilber with his Integral Theory, and Deepak Chopra, etc. ).

The impersonal God Brahma is conducting a cosmic dance in which IT forgets its self and dreams into billions of separated forms including in one minor edge of the universes, illusionary thinking humans.

But all is illusion. And all events both good and evil are produced by Brahman. That is why Ken Wilber and other such leaders claim that Brahman caused 9//11, causes all murders, all rapes, etc.

Not significantly different from Christian, Muslim, and Atheist determinists who use very different terms but come to, basically, the same results.

Given that I am a human rights worker, ethicist, and educator from way back, for about 55 years, obviously this isn't my cup of philosophical tea.

Also, I still vividly remember as a Gandhi devotee in the 60’s being shocked when a Hindu priest in L.A. tried to persuade me to go to Vietnam to kill (when I was drafted), saying insects are killed all the time in reality.:-( Or as I learned later that Gandhi claimed, that all humans are “playthings” of the gods.

#9 All reality came about by unknowable factors. Everything beyond and before the Big Bang is such a complete unfathomable mystery that it will probably not ever be solved by finite humans at least not for a very long time.

Allegedly, this is the view of the Mysterians such as the modern skeptic Martin Gardner and Roger Penrose, the English physicist, mathematician, and philosopher, etc.

#10 All reality continually comes about by infinite impersonal reality which never had a beginning. No creator god exists. Some forms of Buddhism hold this view (though other forms of Buddhism are theistic).
--

At this point in my life, I lean toward some view of #3 and #6, though I am open to #1 as a real possibility.

And furthermore realize, as I already said, that maybe we finite humans don't have enough knowledge to even decide this question.
But we need to operate from some worldview, engage in life as it happens, hold to some form of ethics.
So.

In the Light,
Daniel Wilcox

Tuesday, October 31, 2017

Morning Glory



Morning Glory

Just-before-sunrise

around a switch-backed blacktop loop--
confronted--
confounded
surprised stop
yanked by the mountain-rise above

vast flowing river’d expanse below,
that glistened watered width to distance’s horizon,

and those high forested foothills across in Oregon,
here
--shocked in beauty--

off a 2-lane routed asphalt low-way road
belaying up Cape Horn’s side--
Immense, eyed-wide
That vast Vista!

Mellowed Gorge, oh Columbia,
awe-souled
shade of dawn,
down
to the swift water's
insomnia
below

Caught in the Rise


-Daniel Wilcox


In the light of confounded Beauty,

Daniel Wilcox

Friday, October 27, 2017

Catalonia Voted. Once the British Colonies Voted. Do Humans Have the Right to Leave Their Nation?


CATALONIA VOTED!

BUT Madrid's central government denied the democratic vote, in fact, previously, sent national police who attacked largely peaceful Catalonians who were only trying to vote!

Here we go again: DO humans have the right to vote to leave a nation?

The Founding Fathers said "Yes."

The British Parliament and King George said, "No."

What do you think?

Do humans have the democratic right to leave a nation they currently belong to?

#1 American colonists voting to leave Britain?

#2 Catalonians voting to leave Spain?

Etc.


What is the truth in the Light, when it comes to human rights?

Daniel Wilcox

Thursday, October 26, 2017

Please Protest Against U.S Deportation of 10-year-old, arrested after gall bladder surgery


Please protest against U.S. deportation of 10-year-old, arrested after gall bladder surgery:

from 10-Year-Old Immigrant Is Detained After Agents Stop Her on Way to Surgery
By VIVIAN YEE and
CAITLIN DICKERSONOCT. 25, 2017

"Rosamaria Hernandez, a 10-year-old unauthorized immigrant, in a photograph provided by her family. She was detained after undergoing emergency gall bladder surgery.
A 10-year-old girl with cerebral palsy has been detained by federal immigration authorities in Texas after she passed through a Border Patrol checkpoint on her way to a hospital to undergo emergency gall bladder surgery.

The girl, Rosamaria Hernandez, who was brought over the border illegally to live in Laredo, Tex., when she was three months old, was being transferred from a medical center in Laredo to a hospital in Corpus Christi around 2 a.m. on Tuesday when Border Patrol agents stopped the ambulance..."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/girl-cerebral-palsy-detained-immigration.html

How demeaning, lacking in compassion, unjust, unfair...

What is happening to the United States?


Stand against injustice!

In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Tuesday, October 24, 2017

Don't "Make America Great" Again!


With so many endless claims of how we need to “make American great again,” here’s why that makes little sense:

Consider John C. Calhoun, one of America’s greatest, most honored American leaders of the past:
A government committee led by John F. Kennedy chose John C. Calhoun as one of the five greatest United States Senators ever!
John C. Calhoun became the seventh Vice President of the U.S.,
also ran for president,
was Secretary of State,
was Secretary of War twice,
was a U.S. Congressman,
and then South Carolina’s Senator, etc.

Calhoun was a committed slave owner like 12 American Presidents including Andrew Jackson who invaded another country, who, allegedly, according to the news is one of President Donald Trump's heroes.

America used to be much worse than now, NOT "Great" by any stretch of the mind.

Read John C. Calhoun's views opposing human rights, equality, freedom, etc.: “…nothing can be more unfounded and false—the prevalent opinion that all men are free and equal.”

” These great and dangerous errors have their origin in the prevalent opinion that all men are born free and equal;—than which nothing can be more unfounded and false.”

“It [universal human equality and freedom] never did, nor can exist; as it is inconsistent with the preservation and perpetuation of the race.”

“It follows, from what has been stated, that it is a great and dangerous error to suppose that all people are equally entitled to liberty.”
“It is a reward to be earned, not a blessing to be gratuitously lavished on all alike;—a reward reserved for the intelligent, the patriotic,
the virtuous and deserving...an all-wise Providence has reserved it...”
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/…/disquisition-on-gover…/


Become seekers of the truth, goodness, equality, liberty, justice, beauty...

Maybe in the future that could help America become great ethically for the first time.

In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Thursday, October 19, 2017

Best Visual Satire against religion and for Science!





Move over Swift, Huxley, and Vonnegut:-)

Make way for Telescope Hero!

Though too bad the photographer didn't picture a reason-math-science woman...
but realize he's alluding to the Terminator.


I'm still laughing,

Daniel Wilcox

Monday, October 16, 2017

a News Story of Caring and Medical Wonder, Conjoined Twins

In the midst of all of the political and religious darkness, here's a news story of the WONDER of human caring and medical expertise!

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-41607653


Go and do thou likewise:-) at your own ability and career level.
Help those in need, care for the dying, rescue the perishing...

In the LIGHT of caring,

Daniel Wilcox

Thursday, October 12, 2017

To Live in the Light, to Act Truly Human


Of late, there have been so many negative actions by religionists and politicians, that it's hard not to focus on that chasm, and spend time 'cursing the darkness,'
BUT as the title of this blog emphasizes, instead, become a "lightwave seeker."



So, today,
here is a short summary of Transcendent Humanism and Moral Realism.



To Act Truly Human

Part #1: To Live in the Light, Focus on the New Ought, Not on the Past---of What Is or Has Been

"I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the "isness" of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal "oughtness" that forever confronts him."
--Martin Luther King Jr.

Part #2: To Act Truly Human, Be Generous—Freely Give to Those in Need

Part #3: To Live in the Light, Treat All Others as Equal—View All Humans as Inherently of Worth and Value

Part #4: To Act Truly Human, Focus on the Transcendent—Live for the Good, Beyond the Temporal and Transient and Any Action that Is Wrong

Part #5: To Live in the Light, Do LovingKind Acts—Live with Empathy, Compassion, and Caring for All Others; Cherish and Help


Part #6: To Act Truly Human, Seek Justice—Work for Human Rights, Fairness, Impartiality


Part #7: To Live in the Light, Live in Fidelity--Commit to One Other Person in a Covenanted Relationship Meant to Be for Life;

Reject and Resist the Wiles of Adultery, Promiscuity, Polyamory, Polygamy, Pornography

Part #8: To Act Truly Human, Speak the Truth in Love to Everyone--Be Honest; Oppose Lies, Deceptions, Manipulations,
Obscene Cursings, and All Forms of Propaganda

Part #9: To Live in the Light, Cultivate and Cherish Community. Commune with Ultimate Reality (whatever you want to term it--God, the Divine, the Good, etc.) and Commune with Other Humans. Share Deeply

Part #10: To Act Truly Human, Live in Wonder; Rejoice in Beauty and the Mysteries of the Universe

(For instance, Albert Einstein
explained that he wasn't an Atheist
because, unlike them, he was enthralled
with the beautiful structure of the cosmos and said, if he wasn't Jewish, he would become a Quaker.)

Part #11: To Live in the Light, Care for Nature and Its Creatures
(This ethical goal is a good alternative against
the wrong extremes--
that of Paganism and Hinduism which claim that
natural evils such as malaria are somehow "holy"
and okay!
versus
that of Secularism which too often sees
the natural world as only a thing to use,
even exploit.)

Part #12: To Act Truly Human, Create New Concepts and Things of Wonder

Part #13: To Live in the Light, Focus on the New Ought, Not on the Past of What Is or Has Been

"I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the "isness" of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal "oughtness" that forever confronts him."
--Martin Luther King Jr.


I'm working on the central concept of what it means to be truly human, not in the basic evolutionary sense, but in the ethical one, in the transcendent sense.

(Most of us know that we are homo sapiens, one branch of primates resulting from over 3 billion years of evolutionary history.
For a biological explanation of our species, check out any fine book on evolutionary biology.)

What ethical truths should I add to the beginning list of 10 for 2018?

Become a committed theist, humanist, Enlightenment ethicist, moral realist, free-seeker.

Do avidly seek the Good, the True, the Beautiful, equality, peace, justice, mercy, compassion, fidelity, monogamy, generosity, meticulous honesty, and so forth.

In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox
Posted by Daniel Wilcox at 9:48 AM 2 comments: Links to this post
Labels: adultery, compassion, covenant, empathy, equality, fidelity, honesty, human rights, justice, lovingkindness, obscenity, polyamory, polygamy, pornography, promiscuity

Monday, October 9, 2017

"A Better Country"


Nationalism in the United States, again, is often far right or far left.

BUT both extremes are actually dead center.


In the U.S. whether we are liberal or a conservative, we, probably, are culpable.

If the latter—Trumpers, right-wingers, you champion the U.S. calling it the best country in the world, but deny
selfhood to emerging nations and minorities, and fail
to admit your own nation’s shortcomings and unethical actions, past and present.

Your whole focus is on U.S. First, U.S. First. (Talk about selfish!)

If the former—BLMers, Antifaers, you enthusiastically support the cause of any ethnic or other religion
or group or foreign nation in the world to be self-determined, yet look with abhorrence
at the U.S. if it defends itself.

Your whole focus is on U.S. Last, U.S. Last. (Talk about negative!)

But those who follow the Light "desire a better country."


In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Friday, October 6, 2017

A LAS T


Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images



A Las t

Alas, grieving sorrow,
Tribulating
Don’t ask from where—
Shenandoah; Shiloh...Meadows
Down to Sheol

Welted eyes again, shadowed tears,
Wind-cuffed faces with ‘full’d’ lashings
Dusted wind
Of more less and less,

Wiping away
With wept wetness
In a downward swirling wet sweep,

Faces lost, lastless,

The torn night sky, starless in
A multiple series of weeping losses,

Stark--
Abyss’d fall of all welling reveries
Wailing
In this wreck--aging.

How long, how many tomorrow’s tomorrow

This a las—ting loss lostness?

Selah


--Daniel Wilcox
First pub. In The New Verse News
in different form

Sunday, October 1, 2017

The Tragic Evil of the Holocaust: Whether to Forgive Nazis?


WATCH: Holocaust Survivor Explains Why She Forgave Dr. Mengele
September 27, 2017 By Aiden Pink

"Holocaust survivor Eva Mozes Kor forgave the Nazis, including Dr. Josef Mengele, who experimented on her.

A Holocaust survivor explained in a video for BuzzFeed that has been watched more than 40 million times why she forgave the Nazi doctor who experimented on her and her twin sister.

Eva Mozes Kor and her family were deported from Romania to Auschwitz in May 1944. She and her twin sister Miriam were saved from death and sent to be experimented upon by Dr. Josef Mengele and his team, who sought to study twins.

Her father, mother, and other siblings were sent to the right, she and her twin to the left, never to see their family again.


She explained how, 50 years later, she met with Dr. Hans Munch, one of the doctors there, who was convinced to sign a document attesting to the veracity of the Auschwitz gas chambers. Mozes Kor also signed a document there forgiving him and all Nazis, and later explained that she had specifically forgiven Mengele."


Eva Mozes Kor: “I felt free, free from Auschwitz, free from Mengele...We cannot change what happened. That is the tragic part. But we can change how we relate to it.”

"While she said that most Holocaust survivors had denounced her, Mozes Kor called it “an act of self-healing, self-liberation, self-empowerment..."

Read more: http://forward.com/fast-forward/383753/watch-holocaust-survivor-explains-why-she-forgave-dr-mengele/




Live in the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Monday, September 25, 2017

The Debacle of Empty-Bucket Words


Like in the old days of English literature when books had really long phrased OR titles:

The Debacle of Empty-Bucket Words
OR
How I Learned to Love Humpty-Dumpty
by Shoving the Egg-Head of a “God” off the Wall
OR
How I Learned to Stop Using the Vacuous, Empty-Headed Term, “Love”


Preface:
“Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'
'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
http://sabian.org/looking_glass6.php

First, the last. I suppose for centuries, “love” has been empty-headed, empty-bucketed, meaning whatever any one in changing centuries applied to the term. Like all words, “love” that chameleon’d-squiggled-word changes in time and place and comes to mean whatever any particular human means it to mean.

Need I give many examples from history, literature, and media, especially movies, to show how ambiguous, contradictory, and empty-bucketed, “love” has been?

Heck, even Christian leaders can’t agree. Millions of them disagree about what “God is love” means. And some leaders get etymological, scholarly, and cite Greek, speaking of the over-inflated word, “agape.” But even in Greek, they don’t agree! (It's Greek to me;-)
Because even then they often mean something entirely different from other Christians.

For instance, Augustinian-Reformed Christians claim that God both loves and predetermines billions of humans to eternal damnation. What?! How could God lovingly torture billions of humans for ever?

And God "loves" some humans so much, he wills for them to get cancer, die in car accidents, drown, burn to death, and so forth!

OR take a look at how the Anabaptist leader Chuck McKnight claims that multiple sexual partner relationships—polyamory--are based in “love,” in “agape-love”!

Huh?!
According to McKnight, and others, the only rule of Christianity is “love.”

We've heard this before!

Paul Tillich, the famous Protestant theologian claimed, "Love is the ultimate law” while himself committing adultery, etc.
Tillich, Systematic Theology, v. 1, p. 152

And Christian ethicist Joseph Fletcher wrote an infamous, controversial book, Situation Ethics, in 1966.

It closed with this view:
“When the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the plane crew were silent. Captain Lewis uttered six words, "My God, what have we done?" Three days later another one fell on Nagasaki. About 152,000 were killed, many times more were wounded and burned, to die later. The next day Japan sued for peace. When deciding whether to use "the most terrible weapon ever known" the US President appointed an Interim Committee made up of distinguished and responsible people in the government. Most but not all of its military advisors favoured using it. Top-level scientists said they could find no acceptable alternative to using it, but they were opposed by equally able scientists. After lengthy discussions, the committee decided that the lives saved by ending the war swiftly by using this weapon outweighed the lives destroyed by using it and thought that the best course of action.”

Supposedly, the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of civilians was more loving in the long run and therefore more justified!

Whew…Talk about Orwellian…yes, war is peace, hate is love, slaughter is kindness…
--
LOOK at this STRANGE DIALOGUE BETWEEN JOSEPH FLETCHER AND A CONTRARY CHRISTIAN LEADER:

"This book is a transcript of the February 11, 1971 dialogue between Montgomery and Joseph Fletcher (who wrote Situation Ethics: The New Morality). Here are a few examples of their exchanges:

FLETCHER: "I think there are no normative moral principles whatsoever which are intrinsically valid or universally obliging.... If we are, as I would want to reason, obliged in conscience sometimes to tell white lies, as we often call them, then in conscience we might be obliged sometimes to engage in
white thefts
and white fornications
and white killings
and white breakings of promises
and the like." (pg. 15)

FLETCHER: “I want to suggest that methodologically there are basically only three alternatives strategies… the three options open to conscience at work are to be simply labeled as legalism, antinomianism, and situationism… In between these [first] two extremes lies situationism… and a mediating position in the spectrum. The situationist enters into troubling moral situations armed… [with] some reflective generalizations about what is ordinarily and typically the right thing to do. But unlike the legalist he refuses to absolutize … any normative principle… he is prepared to depart from a usually applicable generalization if in the particular case the consequence of following the rule is to minimize rather than to optimize … the first-order value to which he’s committed.” (Pg. 19, 23-24)

MONTGOMERY: “The insurmountable difficulty is simply this: there is no way… of knowing when the situationist is actually endeavoring to set forth genuine facts and true opinions, and when he is lying… Why? Because deception is allowed on principle … .as long as the ultimate aim is love. Consider: if Professor Fletcher acts consistently with his premises… he can to this end introduce any degree of factual misinformation, rhetorical pettifogging, or direct prevarication into the discussion… Our restatement goes: ‘If a situation ethicist … tells you that he is not lying, can you believe him?’… [This leaves] the audience entirely incapable of ever being sure that Professor Fletcher means what he says.” (Pg. 31-32)

MONTGOMERY: “This is precisely the claim of the historical Christian faith: that biblical revelation constitutes a transcendent word from God establishing ethical values once for all… Absolute moral principles are explicitly set forth; these inform love and guide its exercise.” (Pg. 44)

FLETCHER: “Are you saying, sir, that we must in conscience always tell the truth? And if there are exceptions, when might we prevaricate and why?... are you saying that tyrannicide is never justifiable? If it might be, when and why?... were you or weren’t you saying that interruptions of pregnancy are always wrong? But if there are times when it might be done, why would it be?... Christian ethics … have never allowed that human rights are anything but… relative and contingent.” (Pg. 49)

MONTGOMERY: “the greatest difficulty in situation ethics is revealed exactly at this point. The situation ethicist properly recognizes the ambiguity of situations and the extreme difficulty, often, in knowing what ought to be done; but he endeavors, in these situations, to JUSTIFY HIMSELF. In terms of the ethical approach that I outlined, one CANNOT so justify oneself. If, concretely, I were put in the position that you described of either informing a killer as to where a child was hidden or lying about it, it's conceivable that I would have to lie. But if I did so, I would be unable to justify this ethically; in short, I would be unable to get off the hook. In Christian terminology, I would have committed a sin which should drive me to the cross for forgiveness. This is what I find almost totally lacking in your writings: no one is driven to the Cross.” (Pg. 51)

FLETCHER: “you have said in reply to my question ‘Is it always wrong to have an abortion?’---‘Yes, it always is.’ It seems to me absolutely unbelievable that anybody could say that… Since the tragic complexities of life sometimes call us to do what we might call the ‘lesser evil,’ you WOULD be an instrument because the alternative to the abortion would be greater evil than the evil of the abortion.” (Pg. 52-53)

FLETCHER: “It is ethically foolish to say we ‘ought’ to do what is wrong! What I want to argue philosophically… is that the rightness or the wrongness of anything we do is extrinsic, relative, and dependent upon the circumstances, so that to have an abortion out of loving concern for everybody’s best interests involve, is not an excusably evil thing to do, but a good thing to do.” (Pg. 53-54)

FLETCHER: “And I have to say in all candor that when I examine the Gospel account of Jesus’ teaching in light of our question… he said nothing directly or even implicitly about it one way or another. Jesus was a simple Jewish peasant.
He had no more philosophical sophistication
than a guinea pig,
and I don’t turn to Jesus
for philosophical sophistication.” (Pg. 55)

MONTGOMERY: “Well, sir, I think that’s your trouble.” [Laughter and applause from the audience.] (Pg. 55)

FLETCHER: “Aren’t you in effect telling us that in your ethics we are sometimes morally obliged to do what is wrong, and does that make any sense in terms of ethical analysis?” [Applause from the audience.]
MONTGOMERY: “No, obviously it does not make any sense in terms of YOUR ethical analysis, but that’s what we are trying to determine---whether that ethical analysis is right… What I’m saying is that it may be necessary to choose a lesser of evils. But such a choice still remains an evil.” (Pg. 69-70) Situation ethics; true or false?: A dialogue between Joseph Fletcher and John Warwick Montgomery (Dimension books)
Quoted by reviewer Steven H. Propp on Amazon
--

Even the word "LIGHT" means various contradictory things to different humans, including different Friends.

No, we can't escape semantics, so it behooves us to very carefully define words when we use them. And give very lucid examples.

Daniel Wilcox

Thursday, September 21, 2017

Ensaf Haidar pleads with Saudi Arabia at the UN

Ensaf Haidar holds a picture of her husband Raif Badawi






Seek the release of prisoner of conscience Raif Badawi who was sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years in prison for writing a blog for freedom in Saudi Arabia.

Urge the U.S. to suspend all treaties and contracts with the Saudi government until it honors freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.

Ask the UN to remove Saudi Arabia from the Human Rights Council immediately!


Speak up for human rights, justice, and freedom of speech.

Work for the freedom of all prisoners of conscience.

In the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Friday, September 15, 2017

"History...a Nightmare" vs. "History...to Hope"?



"History is a nightmare we are trying to wake up from."
-James Joyce
VS.
"It is history that teaches us to hope."
-Civil War Talk website
---

"In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies."
-Winston Churchill

“If the people really knew [the truth] the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don’t know and can’t know.”
-British Prime Minister Lloyd George, on Great War

"“It is necessary to know how to conceal...and to be a great pretender and dissembler...those princes who have done great things have considered keeping their word of little account, and have known how to beguile men’s minds by shrewdness and cunning. In the end these princes have overcome those who have relied on keeping their word.” “Occasionally words must serve to veil the facts. But let this happen in such a way that no one become aware of it..."
-Machiavelli
VS.
"The first casualty when war comes is truth, and whenever an individual nation seeks to coerce by force of arms another, it always acts, and insists that it acts in self-defense."
-American senator Hiram Johnson, on Great War

“.... more deliberate lies were told than in any other period of history, and the whole apparatus of the state went into action to suppress the truth”.
-War Journalist Phillip Knightley, on Great War

"When war is declared, Truth is the first casualty."
-Member of Parliament Arthur Ponson, Falsehood in War-time, Containing an Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout the Nations During the Great War


from Wikipedia:
Historian Anne Morelli's explanation of "Ponsonby's classic in "ten commandments of propaganda":

"We do not want war.

The opposite party alone is guilty of war.

The enemy is the face of the devil.

We defend a noble cause, not our own interest.

The enemy systematically commits cruelties; our mishaps are involuntary.

The enemy uses forbidden weapons.

We suffer small losses, those of the enemy are enormous.

Artists and intellectuals back our cause.

Our cause is sacred.

All who doubt our propaganda, are traitors."


Notice how ALL--or at least most--of those characterize nearly all wars in history, and include present-day conflicts, especially the 7 ones that the U.S. and other countries are currently engaging in!

See also, Jesus Wars and The Great and Holy War by Historian Phillip Jenkins

At this juncture in my aged life--
after at least 57 years of reading history tomes--it would seem that history is
neither "a Nightmare"
nor a "Hope,
but
rather our past life, and so we ought to study it for dear life, hoping that we can ferret out what is true from all the myths, all the intentional lies and semi-lies, and all the misunderstandings, confusions, and distortions that comprise the FOG of HISTORY.

Seeking the Truth,

Daniel Wilcox

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

Stepping to Art


Stepping to William Wordsworth

I call to you
Out of the sandpaper scuff of my boots on the sidewalk
Where I come to its cantered edge,
I step down the curb side and walk across the width of that coastal street,
Munching construction gravel under foot
And stare down into the aqua wash of low lands of a California
Morning
Briskly brushed over raptap cottages and electric-blinking monoliths,
And the worth of words to describe this wonder does not yet appear—
Even you would have been wordless.

--

Fall Impression

In that loud shout drenching our senses,
Sun-jaded trees ungreened and thundered color

Reverberating the world--to 'Gogh' over the limit;
They left tremoring rainbows burst earthbound, and shingled

In that wind--melted yellow, orange, and maroon,
Fingerpaints jagged, leaved in black wrought branches;

Then wild strokes of northerly gusts rogued down,
Zagged etchings counterwheeled in swirling emotion--

Hacking our senses, hueing our minds until glazed--
And so reeled sideways down in that kaleidoscoping
Monet


-Daniel Wilcox
First pub. in The Write Side Up
--revised

--


after

all my nerves torn loose
in the streets dancing jangles
staccatoed electric wires
ripped loose from my telephone-souled
dangerous lightning night


-Daniel Wilcox
First pub. in Mad Swirl

--


walking night

saplings blacken along
our sidewalk against the misted night
a refracted light sky over
wrought iron candelabras on stands
lamping the coasted evening


-Daniel Wilcox
First pub. in Writer's Ink

--






In the Light of Beauty,

Daniel Wilcox

Saturday, September 9, 2017

Guest Post from Neil Carter on Fallacious Beliefs


This is a lucidly powerful article by Neil Carter showing the fallacious nature of many religious people's beliefs when tragedy strikes, especially horrendous natural disasters.


Note: While I agree with Carter's in depth analysis of what is wrong--that the major religions' answers are false and delusional, I strongly disagree with his own alternative answer. He promotes "Godless" as the alternative answer to the ultimate nature of reality.

BUT I think that the real answer is more a matter of God-MORE and Divine-LIGHT:-)

We humans--aware, ethical, rational primates, very finite in an incredibly complex cosmos, don't "know" the ultimate nature of existence, but we can agree that there are good hints toward what that transcendent reality includes inherent within it--life, conscious, finite awareness, math, reason, ethics, the awesome structure of the universe itself (often termed "natural law").


What Praising God in the Storm Reveals About Faith

by Neil Carter

"Nothing puts the cognitive dissonance of faith on display like a destructive storm system ripping through a religious community. “Does disaster come to a city, unless the Lord has done it?” –Amos 3:6 “I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the LORD, who does all these things.” –Isaiah 45:7

This week people all over the southeastern United States are bracing themselves for another potentially disastrous storm, thanks to a significant uptick in oceanic temperatures the world over. People in southeast Texas have already suffered massive damages and now the nation turns again to prepare for Hurricane Irma, whose path we have yet to sufficiently predict.

Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/2017/09/06/praising-god-storm-reveals-faith/#bB8cerVO4xbsXpZb.99
Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godlessindixie/#1qaWuurKA5Ri4Kk8.99






















Separating from fallacious concepts and beliefs, seeking the truth about Reality,

Wilcox

Friday, September 8, 2017

Guest Post by Professor Randal Rauser: "Could God be punishing Texas?"


“I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth…” Could God be punishing Texas?
by
Randal Rauser


In addition, there is a more in depth article, too. Randal Rauser: "Ten days ago I posted an article titled “‘I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth…’ Could God be punishing Texas?” Since then I rewrote and expanded the article and this morning it was posted at Strange Notions as “Does God Punish People Through Natural Weather Events?“

https://strangenotions.com/does-god-punish-people-through-natural-weather-events/

The answer is NO!

Reject the false and often horrific views of God that so many Christian and Muslim leaders are claiming.

Instead, seek the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Thursday, September 7, 2017

the god of infinite evil and hurricane harvey, irma...



Christian spokesperson and actor Kirk Cameron's god is totally opposite from the God that my parents thought existed. We grew up in Nebraska thinking that any God who intentionally slaughtered millions of humans via disease, war, and natural disasters is NO God at all.
Cameron makes God look like, not only an abusing father, but a mass-murdering parent, infinitely evil.

--

"In video taken this morning at an airport in Orlando (Florida), Cameron explained how the natural disasters were obviously signs from God."

"One thing we know about hurricanes — and all weather — is that...This is a spectacular display of God’s immense power."

"And when He puts His power on display, it’s never without reason. There’s a purpose. And we may not always understand what that purpose is, but we know it’s not random. And we know that weather is sent to cause us to respond to God in humility, awe, and repentance."

"God wanted us to be humble, so he killed dozens of people in Houston, decimated an entire island, and is still creating chaos in the Caribbean."
--Kirk Cameron

Read more at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/09/07/kirk-cameron-the-hurricanes-were-sent-by-god-to-make-us-more-humble/#qTgVoSL2ubMcpKUl.99

On the contrary...

In the Light of Compassion, Equality, and Goodness,

Daniel Wilcox

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

Save the Dreamers!


"Meet Larissa Martinez. She was the 2016 valedictorian of McKinney Boyd High School, and is on full scholarship to Yale. She is bright, hardworking, and is a credit to her family and community."

"She is also in danger of being deported at any moment. She was brought to America with her mother, who was fleeing an abusive alcoholic husband."



DACA is Literally the LEAST we can do: Here's Why Ending it is Stupid

"Dreamers are an economic boom"

"Dreamers have passed background checks, paid fees, stayed in school, obeyed the law, attended college, paid taxes, and served in the military. Dreamers and their families pay taxes just like everyone else, but in most cases they are not eligible for many of the benefits and services that citizens receive especially when it comes to education. Most are not eligible for federal or state aid."

"Extending hospitality to the dreamers costs America exactly nothing. In fact it’s a huge net gain to the economy."
by Tim Suttle

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/paperbacktheology/2017/09/daca-is-literally-the-least-we-can-do-heres-why-ending-it-is-stupid.html#DJv7eB6Yhl2ThrXI.15



In the Light of Compassion and Hope and Dreaming,

Daniel Wilcox

Israel Evicts Elderly Palestinian Family--Who Owns the Land?




http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41159653


Tragic how humans only think of themselves--in this case Jewish settlers:-(, focused on their own lives, not caring that they have forced an elderly Arab family out of their home of many years.

At other times, Palestinian haters do the same, and much worse as when they praise Palestinian murderers as "heroes."

Have both sides forgotten each other's histories, all the suffering, injustice, etc.?

Yes, the problems of land ownership are incredibly difficult.

Why didn't the Arab family buy the house if they have lived there for 53 years?

Since they have lived there for so long, why didn't the Jewish owners of the property--who sold it to Jewish settlers--help this elderly Arab family to stay?
(It's true that the Israeli owners allowed the Palestinians to stay while the case was legally fought through in the courts. BUT why not help the elderly Arab family keep it?)

Why go back now and change things from back in 1948, punishing this elderly Arab family now, who probably had nothing personally to do with the loss of the house in the 40's?

And why, if this is necessary, WHY has NOTHING been done for all the Arab lands lost, stolen back then by Jewish soldiers?

Look at the maps, study the histories. Jewish people confiscated millions of acres of Palestinian land.

Of course, everything is unfair in war.

And why is the Israeli government also still trying to take away land owned by a Palestinian family near Bethlehem, who have a Turkish legal deed from about 1906?!

All of this smacks of nationalistic and religious selfishness, prejudice, inequality, injustice, and inhumanity.

Based on Israeli reasoning, here in California in the U.S., I ought to lose my home that my family has lived in for 26 years.

And it ought to be given back to Mexicans who used to own this land before it was stolen.

Of course, the Mexicans also stole it from the Chumash native Americans.

So utterly sad.

Two wrongs don't make any right.

(Note: I lived for most of a year on an Israeli kibbutz near Bet Shean, have seen and studied the Israeli-Palestinian chasm for many years. Have also been a guest of a Palestinian family in the city of Nablus, Palestine.)






Troubled in the Light,

Daniel Wilcox

Sunday, September 3, 2017

Quilters' Heaven: Starred Night













STARRED NIGHT is another beautiful, creative quilt by Betsy Wilcox



Here is another one of her incredible quilts: PSYCHEDELIC COLORBURST.



My sweetheart created this sunburst quilt of color for me last year. What if I had gotten this quilt from her back when I drove my Chevy van, "The Mystical Hippopotamus," across country in September 1967?:-)

At university, Long Beach State, I was a painting and drawing major for a couple of years--especially liked working in oil and acrylic, so am an avid follower of my wife's quilting heavenly pursuits.



Betsy is an amazing artist, good at math, structure, and has a degree in French and Linguistics from the University of California at Irvine.

In the Light of BEAUTY,

Daniel Wilcox