"Maybe I should say, I think most religious Protestants have believed a lie when it comes to family planning."
A thought is a momentary experience perceived by an individual person, at least in my case, and I can rely upon the honesty, and generosity, and moral conscience of other people to help me know how they manage these things called thoughts.
God says X and Y.
I was not present.
In between God and me are people.
If one says God says X and X is that people are not perfect, they have this sin thing going on...
OK, I say, common sense, thanks, it isn't just me seeing these things, you see them too, and so does God according to you.
I get that.
God says Y, according to someone, and Y is the truth, the whole truth, the absolute truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me Bible.
Bible? I say, or God?
OK, and the Bible has people involved, and those same people involved are imperfect, ungodly, and therefore not error free?
The Jury is still out? By the way my son was an alternate and now he is a Juror in a case, and he refuses to talk about the case. If I could I would impart all my experiences to my children in such a way as to give them all the knowledge and remove all the falsehood I have collected along the way, or, on second thought, that would dull their capacity to learn from their own mistakes, paying their own costs.
"Josf, you have such a good mind. I cannot remember much of what Gatto said."
I specialize in general political economy, so I'm tuned to that harmony. I am going to link and quote a new link to me, and we have discussed the history of this source in our discussions, but you were probably not tuned in, so the relevance of the history and the information may not resonate within your viewpoint as it does mine. The link and the quote are very important reports on reality concerning political economy in our time, which means it is information that is very relevant to you, your family, and mine, even if you don't understand it.
"First in the importance of its evil influence they considered the money monopoly, which consists of the privilege given by the government to certain individuals, or to individuals holding certain kinds of property, of issuing the circulating medium, a privilege which is now enforced in this country by a national tax of ten per cent., upon all other persons who attempt to furnish a circulating medium, and by State laws making it a criminal offense to issue notes as currency. It is claimed that the holders of this privilege control the rate of interest, the rate of rent of houses and buildings, and the prices of goods, – the first directly, and the second and third indirectly. For, say Proudhon and Warren, if the business of banking were made free to all, more and more persons would enter into it until the competition should become sharp enough to reduce the price of lending money to the labor cost, which statistics show to be less than three-fourths of once per cent. In that case the thousands of people who are now deterred from going into business by the ruinously high rates which they must pay for capital with which to start and carry on business will find their difficulties removed. If they have property which they do not desire to convert into money by sale, a bank will take it as collateral for a loan of a certain proportion of its market value at less than one per cent. discount. If they have no property, but are industrious, honest, and capable, they will generally be able to get their individual notes endorsed by a sufficient number of known and solvent parties; and on such business paper they will be able to get a loan at a bank on similarly favorable terms. Thus interest will fall at a blow. The banks will really not be lending capital at all, but will be doing business on the capital of their customers, the business consisting in an exchange of the known and widely available credits of the banks for the unknown and unavailable, but equality good, credits of the customers and a charge therefor of less than one per cent., not as interest for the use of capital, but as pay for the labor of running the banks. This facility of acquiring capital will give an unheard of impetus to business, and consequently create an unprecedented demand for labor, – a demand which will always be in excess of the supply, directly to the contrary of the present condition of the labor market. Then will be seen an exemplification of the words of Richard Cobden that, when two laborers are after one employer, wages fall, but when two employers are after one laborer, wages rise. Labor will then be in a position to dictate its wages, and will thus secure its natural wage, its entire product. Thus the same blow that strikes interest down will send wages up. But this is not all. Down will go profits also. For merchants, instead of buying at high prices on credit, will borrow money of the banks at less than one per cent., buy at low prices for cash, and correspondingly reduce the prices of their goods to their customers. And with the rest will go house-rent. For no one who can borrow capital at one per cent. with which to build a house of his own will consent to pay rent to a landlord at a higher rate than that. Such is the vast claim made by Proudhon and Warren as to the results of the simple abolition of the money monopoly."
I know that I've already splashed that infomercial all over this forum, and my own forum, and for what I consider to be good reason. The victims have to get a handle on these facts, and the criminals already know these facts intimately. In simple terms, there must be destruction of competition (genuine competition based upon cooperation, not counterfeit competition based upon antagonism) for there to be monopoly and monopoly can be accurately measured as a condition of life when the standards of living are declining while the costs of living are increasing.
Basic human nature is not bad, that is false, and if God told people that people are not Godly, then that ought to be understood instead of misunderstood, in my opinion, since human beings are created to find better instead of worse in measurable fact.
Some of the human beings deceive for fun and profit, and some are much better than others at that business.
"I think if you stop feeding the elephant it might stomp on you and then eat you."
Yes, and does that stop someone good from doing good? You still watch out for your fellow souls don't you?
How do you find out how better to be better if we are all so ungodly?
You, in my opinion, are not the exception, you are the rule, as far as choosing better for worse, and your exceptional abilities are specific to the path traveled in your shoes. In other words, if everyone works toward the goal of crime, to gain at the expense of everyone else, then the rate at which we all eat each other rapidly consumes everyone down to the last two, and since most of us are eating GMO foods, but most of us are not profiting from GMO foods, instead most of us are merely victims of GMO foods, paying the costs, then it is, obviously, measurably, a case of the few bad, really bad, evil ones, gaining power from the many ungodly, but basically free minded, liberty minding, non-criminals who just so happen to be good at making things worth stealing.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorse