pattygreen

I was explaining how man is made in God's image and animals are for man's enjoyment and service. When people put animlas on a higher pedestal than humans, and they do sometimes, it is crazy. Sometimes environmentalsits go to the extreems. A man can't mow his own back yard, cause he might destroy some crazy insect that was found there. Those kind of extreems. Also, any thread you bring about will be subject to my speaking of the wonders of God. I can NOT stop talking about God. He is in every subject. FYI: I hate religion. I prefer a relationship with God, not organized religions.

It didn't take long for this thread to morph into another bible quoting, religious one. Yawn. :thumbup: Get used to it. It's who I am.

I agree totally. why do so many young men and women devote themselves to the animal rights movement? Perhaps it's because they are seeking meaning and purpose for their lives. Strangely, they're looking for God, but they just don't know it. Thus, they spend themselves in a vain cause based on wrong values. God made man in His image. None of the animals in the creation were made in the image of God—only human beings. God gave man dominion over all the animals. That mankind was the apex of God's creation is proven by the fact that God placed all the other creatures and the rest of creation under his rule and care. Have people always taken good care of the animals? No, certainly not. Some have and do mistreat animals, including some in greed-driven, factory-farming methods employed in the mega-agriculture industry. God is not pleased about that. But the wrong actions of human beings do not elevate the moral standing of animals. People are still people in need of redemption, and animals are still animals. God promises only human beings eternal life as His divine children in His Kingdom. Animals live here and now. Humanity is unique compared to all animals and even to the angels. God gave human beings a mind vastly greater than that of any animal. Beavers build dams, but none ever developed the technologies to build a Hoover Dam or Aswan High Dam. God made animals for the provision and enrichment of human beings. People were created to be children in the spirit family God is forming. Everything in the creation on earth, including the animals, He made for our provision, such as clothing and food; for our enrichment, through enjoyment of their beauty and variety; and for helping us develop the qualities of divine character. Animals are powerful teaching tools in the hands of God. The Bible doesn't talk about "animal rights." But God did give human beings responsibilities concerning animals. He commands and expects people to take care of animals as good stewards of His creation. "The godly are concerned for the welfare of their animals," but the wicked are cruel (Proverbs 12:10, New Living Translation). The six syllables of anthropomorphizing mean ascribing human attributes or characteristics to nonhuman animals, plants or things. This is the logical fallacy of the animal rights movement—it tries to make animals into pseudohumans. Cartoonists also personify animals, but their cartoons are funny because almost everyone knows that animals don't think and talk like human beings. God alone defines true moral and ethical values—no matter how many philosophers conduct how many international conferences in how many universities. Because it rejects God's divine revelation as found in the Bible, human ethical philosophy draws wrong conclusions and has no moral authority. The animal rights movement has arbitrarily proclaimed artificial ethics. Like virtually all other human philosophy, it lacks vertical thinking skills. Excerpts from R. Stiver

Wow! you really Hate hypocritocal people. Are'nt you hypocritical at anything?

I read it in the paper. There was no author listed.

Is a tree hugger spomeone who puts the saving the environment above everything else in life?

What gets me is that even thogh he would actually lie about his service, people still have him in the running. That's a democrat for ya!

The real unemployment rate? 16.6% The Labor Department's statistics don't include the underemployed and those who have stopped looking for work. This alternative measure creates a much higher number. [Related content: jobs, construction, manufacturing, economy, financial crisis] By Mary Engel MSN Money It's bad enough that the nation's jobless rate is 9.7%. But the real national employment rate is even higher than the U.S. Department of Labor's May figure shows. The official unemployment index, based on a monthly survey of sample households, counts only people who reported looking for work in the past four weeks. It doesn't account for part-time workers who want to work more hours but can't, given the tight job market. And it doesn't include those who have given up trying to find work. When the underemployed and the discouraged are added to the numbers, the unemployment rate rises to 16.6%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics, a unit of the Labor Department, began tracking this alternative measure -- known as the U-6 for its department classification -- in 1995 after economists lobbied for a method comparable to the way Japan, Canada and Western Europe count their unemployed. The truth is that even the broader measure of unemployment doesn't fully capture how difficult the job market is for U.S. workers. It doesn't include self-employed workers whose incomes have shriveled. It doesn't look at former full-time employees who have accepted short-term contracts, without benefits, and at a fraction of their former salaries. And it doesn't count the many would-be workers who are going back to school, taking on more debt, in hopes that advanced degrees will improve their chances of landing jobs. That broader unemployment rate, or U-6, is up from 16.4% a year ago and from 9.7% in May 2008. It was 7.1% in May 2000. "It has gone up a lot because a lot of people have been put on short hours," said economist Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit public policy organization. "And there are a lot of discouraged workers." Jobs data analysis Shortened work hours are, in fact, one of the ways this recession is different from the ones in the early 1980s and early 1990s, Burtless said. Another difference is the huge number of people who have been permanently laid off. "Some people have lost their income altogether, and others have seen a drop in hours even if they remain employed," Burtless said. "It was a double whammy for labor income." The two trends are especially apparent in California, where the official unemployment rate is 12.6%. Severe layoffs in early 2009 wiped out 100,000 jobs a month, according to Michael S. Bernick, a research fellow at the Milken Institute and a former head of California's labor department. And the number of people working less than 35 hours a week has exploded. The recession has left 1.5 million Californians involuntarily working part time, though they are classified as employed. Factor in these involuntarily underemployed workers plus the burgeoning number of discouraged job seekers, and California's real unemployment rate is 20%. Another difference in this recession -- and a likely reason for the high number of discouraged job seekers -- is the number of people who have been unemployed for more than 27 weeks. The Wall Street Journal reports that 7 million Americans have been looking for work for 27 weeks or more, and the majority of them -- 4.7 million -- have been out of work for a year or more. (See "Chronic joblessness cuts deep.") In California, the number out of work more than 27 weeks is almost 900,000, more than the population of San Francis. "That largely reflects how more severe this recession has been than of 1982 and of the 1990s," said Bernick, who has worked in the job-training field since the late 1970s. Now, although severe layoffs are no longer occurring, hiring has not picked up significantly. "The labor market is still very, very slow," Bernick said. "Each job (opening) brings tens, usually hundreds, of applicants." Mary Engel is a freelance writer from Portland, Ore., who has written for the Los Angeles Times, Anchorage Daily News and Albuquerque Journal. More from MSN

Others here feel it was senseless.

Have you heard about this guy, Richard Blumenthal, a Democratic candidate for Senate in Connecticut? It turns out he actually lied about serving in Vietnam. Not good. In fact today, he said this was the most scared he's been since he became the first man to walk on the moon.

[quote} However, the right wing extremists hate the government, hate public schools, hate public school teachers and would never say anything supportive of them so IMO they have zero credibility. This kind of talk is sooooo like you, Cleo's. The fact is WE don't HATE anybody. We just don't like their actions sometimes. Two different things. You must be the kind of person who literally hates people when they don't act or abide by your standards, cause you often say that others are hateful when they don't like the actions of people. Maybe you hate people for how they are, but most people don't. I don't anyway. Now, I don't hate public schools or teachers. I sent 2 of my oldest boys all through the public school system, and the other 5 children went up to middle school grades in the public school. I thought most of the teachers were good teachers and they treated my kids respectfully and kindly. I have much to say in support of my kids public school teachers. I was talking generally when I said teachers suck. I was mostly angry with the teachers in CT who refused to forgo their raise when they are making more money than any teachers in this whole Nation! Also, I don't hate the government. I hate the tremendous growth of it! I have always stated that every country is in need of governing, and ours is no different. I just don't think that the government should be soooo BIG. When it gets to a point where the government jobs far exceed the number of private sector jobs to pay for them, then there is a BIG problem. When the government is spending more money than it has and the interest alone has become unsustainable, then we have BIG problems. I would like to see our government CUT, yes CUT, most of it's wasteful spending and give aways as well as reduce it's size of employment drastically. I would like to see the corruptness disapear, like when Obama had Clinton offer that guy a job to get out of the race. That kind of Chicago crap. Government is a necessity and I am thankful for it, just not lately now that it is getting too into everything with regulations and laws and interference in business and the lives of people, like Health Care and education, etc. November will be a wake up call for all those democrats who think this is how Americans want to live and have things run. We don't. Obama's progressive, socialistic, welfare, style is gonna go!

You need to vote into office those who will DO something about this. Obama is NOT that person. He is doing NOTHING to stop this unfairness.

I don't hate you loserbob. I actually like you alot. I come on rants and raves because it's fun. If everyone agreed with you, who could you rant and rave with? It wouldn't be enjoyable to share your thoughts on controversial issues with people if everyone said, "yeah, I agree with that." To be honest, I take NO offense with anyone on these threads in this section. (even you, Cleo'smom) And if there's anyone I should take offense to, it's you! But I truly don't. I think that after conversing with folks here for quite some time, they have gotten to know who I am and what I believe and they are accepting of it, just as I am accepting of them and who they are and what they believe. (even if it is wrong and stupid :tongue2:)

"FREE" Health care in Canada, one of the models for Obamacare, is going broke. It consumes 40% of provincial budgets, and the cost is projected to rise to 70% by 2022. This has provinces mulling drastic measures, including new taxes, patient copays, means testing and reduced reimbursements to doctors, hospitals and drug companies, to spread the cost around. Rationing of care isn't on the table because Canada has de facto rationing through policies that require the government to pay only for "medically necessary care", as defined by government bean counters. President Obama says Obamacare would improve care and bend the cost curve down. Canada's experience puts the lie to that claim and unless Obamacare is repealed before it begins paying out benefits, America will add to its nearly $110 TRILLION in unfunded entitlement liabilities, which already are threatening to bankrupt the nation!

Can you brag about yourself some more? Pleeeeaaase?

How sweet of you to blame the lack of work at home! NOT! Put the blame where it belongs. On our teachers. They suck! Yet they want more money!

I work in a home that specializes in alzheimers care. There are 30 patients to each wing, and they have a large dining area and hallway where they are sitting or stationed during each day. Their rooms are off the hall way. At any given time they are wandering from room to room, and sitting in the halls and all over the place. Yes, I have to keep my eye on all 30 of them. How STUPID to suggest that a teachers pay is not enough cause she should get paid per child. How about a school bus driver? They have sometimes 30 -60 kids on one bus. According to you, they are underpaid!:cursing::ciappa:

You put sooo much faith in mankinds studies and philosophies. This is why I have determined that MAN is your God. I have done my own study. I raised 10 children and ocassionally one of them would get a spanking if they needed it. NONE of them are aggressive now as adults.

The only way the government touches my life is in the areas that I had NO CHOICE for it to be there in.

yes, they are.

Trust a born again conservative to confuse discipline with corporal punishment (spanking). There is a recent study that shows spanking kids causes aggression when they get to be about 5-6. A good disciplinarian doesn't need to resort to physical punishment for it to be effective. Who am I to believe: God or YOU and your studies? Let me think... God! Yup. God. He made us and I think he knows the right way to discipline children. Ever notice how incorigible, disrespectful and crazy kids have become since the Dr. Spock books came out? Teachers can't even handle them anymore. Times have changed as far as kids attitudes and respect for others ever since the government took away a parents right to spank their children. (for the record, I do not advocate beating children in any way, shape or form, I believe in disciplineing with love and respect.) Spanking a child when he is fresh is a good thing. You use that form of discipline when they are toddlers and youngsters and you will never have to spank them for anything when they are preteens or older.

Education does not just take place between 9:00 AM and 3:00 PM. There needs to be some reinforcement at home. Kids forget so quickly. Plus it gives the parents (the ones who are interested) a chance to see what the child is doing. There were not enough hours in the school day for me to cover everything. The children needed time at home to learn spelling words or practice new reading words. Or research for a report or a science project, etc.. And the list goes on but I would be wasting my time telling a know it all like you. You work a 40 hour week at your job and when you go home, is there someone there piling on more work for you to do? No. You get to spend time with your family, relax, eat together, have some fun. It's your time off. Children deserve that as well. What makes you think that children need to work at educational things for more hours in a day than you work at your job? Kids may forget so easy, as you say, but not overnight. Get real! You would be wasting my time telling me about how much you couldn't cover with your students in 7 hours each day! You must have been a terrible teacher.

Next time she says anything to you at work, pull out this scripture and hand it to her. Matthew 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.