Just as there is no single social Darwinian unifier, other than the term itself, there need be no one particular spirituality or group of them geared to peaceful eternal progress.

I see through the Bible that I may adequately express my concurrence with God through advocating “Ethical Culture”, a movement dedicated to the ethical improvement of both societies and individuals, founded in 1876 by Felix Adler and a group of Jewish supporters. He was son of Rabbi Samuel Adler of NYC Temple Emanu-el; his movement consisted of devoted belief in the inviolability and power of the moral law and the duty to apply it to problems of industrialization, urbanization, and the working poor. He trained even Christians to start Ethical Culture societies in large USA cities…it spread worldwide, and became the International Ethical Union; in 1952, humanists joined their groups to it and became the International Humanist and Ethical Union.

No symbols or rituals are required, although leaders officiate at life cycle events like marriages and funerals; they come from a variety of social and intellectual backgrounds and may have previous religious affiliations. No established Ethical Culture ideology exists, other than motto “Not the creed, but the deed”. Members may believe what they want on all issues, including religion, but must accept the ideals: each human life has an intrinsic worth, seeking ethical principles as a guide to all aspects of life is of prime importance, and there is always need for social ethics to work for the material and spiritual betterment of society and humanity.

As a believer in the Old and New Testaments and the gist of things God breathed through them, I ceaselessly practice Ethical Culturalism to my best ability as my Christian reaction to Divine causation; this ranges from professional political and commerce group participation to human rights work to disaster relief participation or even helping up and getting aid for a child others would walk past, or edifying others…all never with an eye to one’s gender, beliefs, ethnicity, race, or origin, or ability to “pay me back”…only logical best lawful aid possible.

Some say Ethical Culturalism no longer is the powerhouse it used to be, but my faith in Almighty God is far greater than it could ever be in anyone asking me to look the other way (upon pain or for profit, or worse…by being baited into gossip or by being manipulated) just because one should do what advances one in the absence of an unseen God. After all, if just appearing unseen is all it took to not exist, how could anyone even be scammed by phishers or traditional con rings or even a lousy roofer  if schemers don’t exist around you because you haven’t seen them…yet?

For such reasoning, I continue to press on in pursuit of any proofs where social Darwinians claim any society at all can evolve without need of even a Linnaeus-like physically observable and recordable set of necessaries beyond echo-chamber opinion.  

One understands the social Darwinian position is that religion is but a common innate self-projection in all humanity, with any religion being but an excuse for enabling one collective to suppress or conquer another(s) through singular action or in combination with allies…in the social and intellectual/martial pursuit of mere survival of the fittest, with one system or religion easily cast off as long as a replacement of any nature exists. To such Darwinists Christianity is “expendable” as they portray it no longer suits the European and Americas’ geopolitical interests to be perceived Christian, due to Christianity simply having been Europe’s and the entire Western Hemisphere’s way of advancing their own genetic competitions against the rest of the world.

Where Christianity expressed through the New Testament is religiously responded to in the nature of emulating earliest Christians, is practiced by diverse nationalities and ethnicities together such that ALL humanity is important (including LBGT, believers, and non-believers), and logical prudence leads simply to a common dignity-respecting ethics toward and between all humans regardless of faith or absence thereof, obviously such Christian response is neither epigenetic nor antagonistic against interests of atheists, different beliefs, or racial and national diversity. Throughout all relevant history and into today, many Christians worldwide have always held and currently do hold such ethics are the crux of the New Testament, on spiritual concept practicing it increases one’s odds of an eternal life of progress, while refusing to practice it or warping it for one’s own interests increases odds of an eternity in none too enjoyable environs.

Simply put, for many Christians, the only “epigenetic” interest there has ever been is detached from the world described by Darwin (whether or not humans are held subjects of ethology)and applies wholly to post-mortem eternity…a complete reaction to the Divine, not to any human collective of any singular or combined earthly “competition”.

When this is pointed out, many Darwinists ignore it and latch on to historically atypical errata to support claims Christianity is nonetheless a very cunning façade for multi-ethnic geopolitics, claiming: Latin Americans, assorted Caucasians, African-Americans, and other racial people band together in traditional religions under the banner of being Christ’s “royal priesthood”; this eclectic royal laity engages in such acts as putting New Testament verse numbers on military rifles to “remind” Muslims, atheists, or anyone at all not part of their number who’s boss; such laity pushes around their own kind(s) or shuns them when in need, as somehow being more sinful and experiencing God’s disdain, and only  wayward Americans ever need help; such laity fear LBGT rights on ground their children will fail to be maximized offspring for catching “lifestyles” from any LBGT allowed to openly be part of society; and such laity will play to instinctive charity yet stand against even more of their own ethnic immigrants coming into their economy for no better purpose than keeping more for themselves and offspring.

Thus Darwinists cling to such examples, and submerge the ethics-intensive Christians in favor of faith-funded or outright government-regulated traditional Christian clergy willing to render the faith epiphenomenal (good-sounding but casually ineffective, in need of re-thinking so expressions become “more globally idea-inclusive”), with claim the faith bringing them to their ordinations is absolute hogwash and thus superstition at best(as ALL faiths were always claimed to be by governments regulating them)…ethics then being certainly no form of expression or belief manifestation worthy of ANY nation’s ear or protection, as anything any Christian on earth says is at best psychology plied to upgrade one’s own or one’s offspring’s earthly holdings.

What seems worth pointing out is that social Darwinists (and clergy offering to accept money for opining in support of Darwinists) are actually arguing for the enforced epigenetic demands of foreign faith regulators…be they British Crown, Canadian Provincial, Pakistani or Afghani government, Russian or Chinese government, or otherwise…with Darwinists being the elite necessary to shepherd the superstitious or pugnacious West into a culture less worried about themselves than accommodating the leaders of “more evolved” faith leadership concepts (made to stabilize their own cultures on such leaders’ epigenetic terms and not necessarily involving ethics, and without relevant Western Darwinist concern reciprocal global statisms continually show no true evolution of any society).  

Social Darwinians certainly are entitled to their opinions. But in the United States of America, and under various international declarations, I and those similarly interested may hold to our belief and expression that the ethics-driven peaceful Christianity we live is a metaphysically viable religious belief, and USA social Darwinians would be exercising undue setting of orthodoxy by requiring any such Christian (or any religious or secular analogous other person) to confess their faith is purely epigenetic, or contrary to social progresses, or both.

Some Christian religious have a penchant for swaggering in the name of Jesus without concern for the feelings or rights of others (or for prudence), and without regard for how it makes their own or all religious look...sometimes such religious are part of a dualistic philosophy so they can remain clergy but appease public policies requiring Christianity to be portrayed as a mere epigenetic, anthropomorphized Darwinian projection. 

John Money as a psychologist criticized the view that categories of mental disorder are only a codification of social morals; his research appears to have indicated that paraphilia occurs among both straight and LBGT people, a paraphilia being some thing (e.g., one type of clothing) or some other issue (e.g., rape) which must be present for straight or LBGT satisfaction; see “Lovemaps” (1986) or “Gay, Straight, and In-Between: The Sexology of Erotic Orientation” (1988), Oxford University Press, both by Money. 

Early this afternoon in downtown Salem, Oregon, on foot I literally was bowled over by a group alleging to be “La Raza”; they were not advertised or blocked off by official notice of permit holder activity as police and officials do for those with permits; they had the usual group identification banner at the head of their quarter-block long/six deep marchers; in English only, a man with a bullhorn would shout “What do we want?” to which the crowd refrained “Change!”, the man then shouting “When do we want it?” with the chorus refrain responding “Now!”; this repeated constantly until the impromptu (?) crowd rushing on sidewalks vanished from my sight.

Curiously, most banners and placards were in Spanish, all representing that there need to be more income and other opportunities for Hispanics only, which local whites and other people have plenty of and need to give up or share with current and more-to-come Hispanics; a few placards even linked the demonstration to Haitians as members of Hispaniola. Salem was once a predominantly white town with some African-Americans and Hispanics, and today has a very large first-generation Latin New Urban culture mostly on its Northwest quarter…pretty much in the nature of the schema of most big towns today. Like everywhere else, in my own face-to-face experiences with such Hispanics I have found their concerns to be for themselves yet with respect and equal concern for everybody else. Notably, I observed no faces known to me in the march.

Now, if we lived in other than a society run by officials constantly “deferring” to psychologists and other social Darwinians insisting all mankind is epigenetic (meaning each race wants to do away with all others for gene survival and has NO natural purpose or intent beyond that in every facet of their societies, ids, and egos) so a borderless global government should act as one with officials alone defining ’good’, we’d see police or at least Salem’s Compliance Department cite La Raza for an unauthorized, non-public liability bonded, hate speech against whites, African-Americans, and all non-Hispanics…all trivialized by the marchers through pushing them aside, together with specific exclusion from their demands and by insistence only Latin-born people could march with them (yep, I asked…thus this post). 

But we DO live in a society where contrived epigenetic mindsets ARE used as “facts” by media and officials; this is because such media and officials can use such “facts” in epiphenomenal fashion to keep all status quos alive. It’s nothing new in American history.

Around and following the USA Civil War, of course many whites and others opposed slavery; yet a certain group with white hoods, baggy getups, and big gloves (made it hard to tell WHO was in them for sure) called itself typical of all the white race (implying slavery opponents at best gave lip service while artfully using social comments to protect their genes and offspring) and did many heinous crimes against African-Americans…just to teach EVERYBODY non-whites better stay or forever act like slaves if everybody wants freedom from secret society terrorism. Obviously, in convergent ways, African-Americans, whites, and others persevere well against such hooey from a tiny percentage of people.

Then there’s “Bin Laden Equals All Muslims”; in media/government speak, all Muslims are chomping at the bit to stomp the brains in of anything that moves and isn’t Muslim; so naturally, the European Union and to a smaller extent the USA HAVE to do what it takes to pull in as many Muslims into lackluster New Urbanism as they can, to make Laden and Islamic totalist governments look silly. Of course, what else can the EU or other EU (Estados Unidos) do than ban any religion but Islam, keep tent cities/soup kitchens/public ways clear as “off-page breeding grounds”, and toss the Constitution out so the “Hispanic” and “Muslim” problems, not to mention “Nationals” and “Other Immigrants” problems, can be both “accommodated” and kept on tight chains given ALL foreign-born peoples’ allegiance to foreign despots somewhere? All foreigners in the EU or USA thus are there to maximize their own offspring, and in survival of the fittest gosh dang it sometimes anybody else in a country just has to understand society needs more Darwin than law or fact to survive to the comfort of officials and mentalists best able to engineer how. Of course, what can a Laden or foreign despot do themselves except rule hard to keep out begging philosophies of losers…they are just demanding their own people MUST toe the line for gene pool purity and race maximization. This surely wouldn’t bode well for foreigners or Muslims, because it limits or attritions their opportunities at home and abroad, and in any case makes them all look like hitmen or pirates ready to shed your blood if you simply aren’t Arabic (although Pakistan says as Hindus apportioned out of India, like Hindus IN India you also could be racist against them for Pakistan’s State Islam as all faith is epigenetic façade over raw nationalism). The people largely say hooey, but in our age Laden and his ilk get whatever they want from other governments…on belief those saying hooey are just jealous for their own gene maximization interests. 

Finally, let’s reprise today’s Salem demonstrators. Like those folks in sheets opposing Abolition, the alleged La Raza outburst can be perceived by some as genetic race competition simple against all non-Hispanics…with the intent ONLY Hispanics better be helped or one “never knows when a terrifying slam will be made”. This would leave Hispanics looking like they want more houses and New Urban no-tax handouts, and can overcome minimum wage issues by squeezing out all non-Hispanics from the realm (scene missing on how then ever-more Hispanic immigrants require less than the same or smaller amount of ‘otras’ already present and needing quashing). This would leave Hispanics looking like a bunch of religion-playing fakers just out to conquer all other races for their own sons and daughters; some might say let’s deplete those Latin despots of more soldiers by bringing them here and treating them like Muslims, other foreigners, and nationals who don’t understand social evolution (why, this is why DHS HAS to watch EVERYBODY!). The people largely say hooey on all this, but again in our age most officials and media deem La Raza types the true voice of every Hispanic, and treat everyday Hispanics as racist hate suspects themselves being given “protection money” until the day some cavalry arrives…which doesn’t exactly result in much more than the status quo, but it does when so effectuated “prove” epigenetic operation of all non-Hispanics against all Hispanics “because they don’t share” (?).

Fortunately, a good number of people from all walks continue to abide by non-epigenetic principles and retain a capacity for prudent rational logic…chief among such logic, again, is:” So if we have no jobs or opportunities or self-trades with us plus merely incidental X, if we subtract X, how do WE have more, and doubly so if we then add Y to infinity after X on the same chalkboard, constantly increase debt, or both?”.  

On the down side, governments and bailed-out media continue to only encourage epiphenomenal touting of assorted race/genetic issues just so they can save us from ourselves in whatever standards-free, promise-breaking, draconian-seeming ways a society of hominids ruled by more evolved illuminati requires…no political party or official yet seeming immune to such easy and lazy temptation.

In the early 20^th Century, John Broadus Watson (“Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It”, ‘Psychological Review’, 1913, 20:158-177; “Behavior: an Introduction to Comparative Psychology”, 1914) declared all behavior is environmentally derived and can’t be explained by appeals to heredity, instincts, the unconscious, human nature, or internal predispositions. Such position seems in opposition to any Absolute or even humanly Stoic philosophy of ethics or morality. 

Apparently Burrhus Frederic Skinner thought so; in his work “Walden Two” (1948) Skinner viewed human dignity as vested in behaviors that cultivate the positive reinforcement of praise or credit from others for behaving well…dignity is just something had when others tell us we deserve it. Skinner also thought most humans are worth epiphenomenal (casually ineffective or “appearance-only”) freedom, choice, or self-control, and thus important life or cultural decisions should be made only by psychological experts of his mindset. Sure not much belief for an Absolute or secular generalized ethology there. 

Many scholars said Skinner’s program starts out on bad circular logic (it purports to eliminate purposes and prescriptive norms yet can only be advanced purposively as a prescriptive norm) and goes downhill from there. Many philosophers (John Stuart Mills, Henry Sidgwick, William James, Hastings Rashdell, ad infinitum) said Watson’s metaphysics are correct as ethics have no point in a world devoid of conscious behavior…but that Watson forgot earth teems with consciousness. 

Just when things got better for ontological metaphysics, enter a new social Darwinian attack on the public’s ability to assess “what is the meaning of good?”, and in support of the eternal quest to ensure only “the right people” may muse “what IS good?”. 

In 1982, Carol Gilligan produced “In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development” (Harvard University Press). Ms. Gilligan was at the forefront of a perception that males and females have different ethological bases. She claimed females see moral problems in terms of relationships and make their choices in problem solving as issues of care and duty to those relationships.  

By contrast, she says, males tend to see moral problems in terms of rules and principles with choices being logical adjudications. 

Gilligan denied there are precise genetic types for moral experience but did attack the “male” (God, Goddess, or in fact anything of order-giving supernatural status?) model as insufficient. Her research tosses out any Absolute code or even Hippocratic Oath, and recommends a notion of beneficence grounded in complex, relational understandings of the self (in such way as to create a “democracy” where EVERY view is given epiphenomenal dignity)…with the “good” of each complexity appearing a re-hash of Skinner’s schema, again each personal complexity to be assessed only by right-thinking intellectuals. It appears the New Waves have mustered no greater philosophy ‘striking out’ any Absolute or secular ethology than could their many, many predecessors. 

It’s fair to say little, if any, metaphysical philosophy could interrupt mass humanity from debating what is good, or which good results should be sought, in relation to prudent and peaceful eternal progression of all humanity. That’s also true religious freedom which respects science and psychology where same operate with ethics and true scientific method.

“…an unmistakable likeness to universal acid: it eats through just about every traditional concept, and leaves in its wake a revolutionized  worldview, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable, but transformed in fundamental ways.”- Daniel C. Dennett, ‘Darwin’s Dangerous Idea’, 1995, p.63

A fairly accurate description of social Darwinism, not being mine or anyone known to me, can presently be read at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism ).

When I was a child, teen, and young adult (I’m now a codger of 50), there was something known as “investigative reporting”, “journalistic integrity”, and “man (or woman) in the street” passerby commentary obtained randomly by news crews. Back then, media used to scramble over each other to press officials…even in the City of Chicago under “Boss” Richard Daley the senior…for specifics on anything they said; often, you’d hear a question media had bothered to discern from the seeming unpopularity of corporate or governmental “press kit” releases…and officials were shown either giving answers or many times grunting “no comment!” as they turned to rush away. Oh, and back then, this applied to LOCAL and STATE officials, not just Federal or foreign ones.

That changed at least a decade ago. Nowadays  just about everything media report upon comes from a “media kit” of one or another contents, issued by whatever corporate, sports, entertainment, or governmental entity has supplied it; these include mere press releases over which media then send a “journalist” to let the issuer speak for broadcast without questions or true gainsay; at best, the “journalists” cast themselves as sympathetic to most viewers only with overtones such that it’s always going to be difficult for the “good guy” to do something for the relevant strapped, and always that “joyful” things the “good guy” or someone else’s media kit has said concurrently exist per se diminish need for those with more to do anything about those with less (whatever “more and less” are in any case) …and with scientifically correct online faceless viewer comments alleged, what reporter needs to creep neighborhoods asking residents face-to-face for their random answers? Or names/places/specifics of alleged “progressions”?

Fair, Balanced, Accurate…today that means in nature: “We don’t probe officials or anything else above the everyday people for specifics, nor do we usually probe people in the street for how they get by, so that’s fair, isn’t it; we present both media kit materials from officials/organizations that take one side of an issue, then from officials/organizations with their own contradictory opinions, and leave it to viewers to figure out if anything said IS true or debate from our “reports” as they sit true or not, so that’s not biased to anyone and thus balanced; and hey, how often do we issue retractions or clarifications, proving that we are very accurate in presenting media kits (including reports of alleged criminal conducts) as proper presenters thereof have given us…which may include “he’s right, do you know that?” salted viewer comments or those of people dependent on presenters for income, licensure, or both.

This brings us to social Darwinism. The reason things seem to go on without input of “the masses” is that evolution alone has randomly placed those able to be reported upon or to issue media kits in control of more money; naturally, money should be as limited as possible so as to avoid “inferior genes” getting ideas about children, culture, whatever; naturally, those evolution favored should select only from the ones most willing to do/say anything as their necessary orthodoxies or even fellow residents; naturally neither media nor anyone else should waste their time doing anything but acknowledging most people aren’t favored by evolution, aren’t physically or mentally strong, and aren’t worth caring about; and naturally the only thing UN-natural in this life is actually caring about the unfit, their opportunities and ends…all best determined by government on behalf of ensuring “superior specimens” will carry on public and private sector status quos .

This could explain a lot of surliness and social phobias out there today, but one can only ask: do things REALLY work more in the nature that evolutionary selection alone determines your lot, or in the nature that first one must be selected by “nature’s noblemen” as an issue or to even participate in dreams? Will any of us then have status quo or more if we embrace quietism and quiescence, or should we risk “media cooties” and seek more answers as yet another level of “next” possibly already on the outside looking in? Remember, most of us are still media and political audiences…not colleagues, and not “favored enough by evolution” to snap our own fingers and get bailed-out or have media kits mass-marketed to get whatever we want.  

Let’s also recall that when government is the direct financial “my hand to yours” without “middle men” like jobs or your own enterprise, despite no tax thereon it’s super-easy to shut off funds from any nationals or immigrants or refugees and re-distribute it to any officials, government/corporate staffers and projects, or next causes government in its sole wisdom determines “more fit” to survive…until the stars burn out. Gosh, even bin Laden can be deemed “socially Darwinian more fit” if last year’s no-strings minimum $290 billion USA government aid to Pakistan is any indication.

[Writer’s Notes: “We can hope to decide more judiciously which of the elements of human nature to cultivate and which to subvert, which to take open pleasure with…when our descendents may learn to change the genes themselves” – Edward O. Wilson, “On Human Nature”, Harvard University Press, 1978, p.96-97.

To learn more about how social Darwinians feel about “the masses” and what they call hypertrophic tribal remnants like information sharing/education, traditions, families, altruism, and everything else they are “more practiced at” than the rest of us talking monkeys, and need to change so as not to have “primitive” ethics/laws and goals around them or their own maximized offspring, here a few recommendations of current titles making the USA collegiate circuits:

“Evolutionary Psychology, Public Policy, and Personal Decisions” (electronic resource, usually available only to college students/staff), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004

“Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea”, Carl Zimmer, 2006

“Crisis in Sociology: The Need for Darwin”, Joseph Lopreato, 1999

I hope such sociologists share the Obaman legendary panache for transparency on civic issues; indeed, as Mr. Wilson pointed out in his 1978 book, many Nobel Prize winners were open social Darwinians. ]

Transculturation of religions: could that be what last month's Pew Institute report meant when it said mostly Christians were going from one Christian denomination's Church to one or more other Christian denomination's Church(es)? Nah, transculturation is taking something from this particular faith and mixing it with one or more other particular different faiths...like the Mary and other non-Christian iconics Obama once said he carried "for luck". Could it be a sneaking suspicion their Christian denomination is changing traditions so much as to be seeming to re-write the entire value of Christianity?

As a number of Christian groups gear up for the annual January 22 walk against abortion, specifically protesting the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision almost 40 years old, there are some interesting ephemera emerging about what adopting the current USA Catholic clergy’s notions on the soul could mean for religion and psychology. As the Vatican pushes ecumenism between Christian groups and sees itself as THE protean Christianity, let’s look at what USA Catholic clergy are doing behind the scenes of asking even Protestants and agnostics to march with and otherwise “show up” for them.

Well, a formerly super-huge Doctor Angelus of the Roman Catholic Church was early 13^th century Dominican Thomas Aquinas. Part of his “medievalism” was articulated in the “Summa Theologica” he alone wrote: on what the soul IS, he said it was the intellect (or subsistence thereof); on WHEN the soul enters a person, he said union of male and female cells didn’t transmit it, and that God issues each one not less than forty days after conception as until things are in a form to receive their lot they cannot be in finished Divine design.

In other words, Aquinas represented way back in the Dark Ages that humans do not create souls or bind God to issue them; further, that any fetus reacting without need of an intellect had not yet any soul. This of course followed Vatican dogma that God is not of our physical limitations, created the universe ab initio in transcendence of our physical laws, and creates souls to be in His image which meant we too exist to eternity with or without our physical body. This general sort of RC ideology survived until recent times.

Enter a mere cloy which should be admitted to as ‘Vatican III’: today, Catholic media such as EWTN, and Catholic clergy such as Father Frank Pavone (Priests For Life, findable even on YouTube), compose whole programs, DVDs, and more ranting against abortion. It IS odd that not even they suggest a Constitutional amendment “correcting” the 1973 S. Ct. decision be made and passed, so when one contributes to such anti-abortion interests it appears they really volunteer only in support of efforts for getting the government to not fund (and public to not obtain) abortions…while volunteer organizers otherwise preach even Roe V. Wade is a law handed down by leaders God appointed and thus cannot be criticized or corrected. Sort of another “Robert the Bruce” doff of Catholic ecumenical hats to concurrent Protestant quietisms notwithstanding ecumenical endorsements of “The Manhattan Declaration” .

Pay very careful attention to EWTN anti-abortion programs and Father Pavone (at whatever media outlets you find him). Both of these Catholic oracles use abortion doctors-turned-Christian activists, together with assortments of PhD types and scientists, to specifically identify even a two-celled human zygote as being no different than you my readers, or me at now age 50…point blank, these Catholic media presences say that even a zygote has the same humanity we do, sometimes couched in apologetic terms like “well, what else can a zygote grow into?”, rebuking Aquinas through Fulton Sheen. 

It was bad enough for religious freedoms when Benedict XVI recently opined that God is NOT bound by His Word (including, thus, Jesus); toss in Pavonespeak, and one could mistake that Benedict is being amplified in “example” that the mere fertilization by a man and woman exerts human binding power over God to do or not do ANYTHING…which would be bad enough for religions claiming not to be raw psychology , but the metaphysics actually plied actually mean God is bound by punier things than He, including humans, and that indeed we need keepers BECAUSE a zygote is EXACTLY the same as you and me…a purely light-sensitive biomass at worst, instinctively acting piece of mere animal life without a soul at best, which some say we only get after end-of-days Resurrection plus a “second chance Rapture” to see if as finally bodies with souls we’ll want to follow Jesus or be thrown into a lake of fire.

God bound by mankind, no souls now, second chance post- death/pre-eternity chances…perhaps followers of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. might have heard, in the not too distant past, about whole races which certain other races enslaved and dangled by ropes on grounds “some people have no souls”.

And, since ecumenical Benedict XVI declares this the Year Of The Priest with exhortation support of ANY Christian clergy=carte blanche assent to ALL things known or unknown they do, it might not be a bad idea to stop funding via donations or Government(s) ANY Christian or other organization which insists not all (nor any) people have souls. To do sets up an orthodoxy of pan-religious demand that in this life humans are capable of no more than responding to emotional and physical stimuli in one global stereotype, have no worth greater than a slug or rat, and thus must be led, programmed and tended by psychologists and office-holders obviously of higher evolutionary grade…not to mention the Lord’s Worthy Of Faith-Funds Or License, who discern for secular power.

In the meanwhile, I for one will stick to my “tradition” of being a Thomist and in general agreement with Dominican Order theology…we ALL have souls at live birth for sure, and on to natural end of lives, and for me the New Testament is for such life guidance. That many Roman Catholic clergy in Africa, Hispaniola, and elsewhere contradict me on this (q.v., e.g., http://www.amazingfacts.org/FreeStuff/OnlineLibrary/tabid/106/ctl/ViewMedia/mid/447/IID/31/LNG/en/SC/R/Default.aspx?7=Spirits-of-the-Dead-Do-They-Speak-and-Hear? ) is of no moment for me, as they vary too greatly from the New Testament even in the literal, figurative, parabolic, and metaphysical senses…but they have a right to their beliefs.

For these reasons, to me abortion, euthanasia, enslavement, prison culturing, concentration camping, ethnic or cultural cleansing, and whatever other “sins crying out to Heaven” one could allege in all time must be alleged only re victims where with sober clinical examination it’s revealed a soul has been imparted as a fetus , or where with such examination it’s revealed at any age since birth a soul has not yet stopped animating a body…that is, pre-soul pre-natal stage abortion seems no sin per se, neither does legal euthanasia where a soul exits and leaves behind a body in permanent vegetative state.

Per an Amnesty International post (a separate AI email asks recipients to thank Obama for this), currently viewable at http://blog.amnestyusa.org/iar/re-president-obama-extends-tps-to-haitians/ , USA Dept. Of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has given "temporary" protected status to 100, 000 on grounds they WILL get jobs in the USA, WILL get immediate homelessness preventing houses, and WILL thus rebuild Haiti through their own effort(?).

One asumes this really means "Haitians can come to the USA, expect the same deal Latinos got during Bush and which Obama "took care, of, heh-heh!" with mortgage bank bailouts, and cry when they see their Haitian dictator get no-strings funds from the USA inter alia without requirement HE allow Haitians to do or be anything".

I know we live in an age where "what will OTHER nations think of the USA, that's all that matters to global jobs/trade" is the mantra, but come on...why must it ALWAYS be flashpoints of human evolution cursed with ten thumbs having the best of intentions but chronic inability to expand the status quo, for nationals, immigrants, and almost everyone on the globe?

Oregon’s own State and elitest educational, philosophical, and intellectual community have said (and continue to say) that the economy is on mighty big rocks re Oregon. For example, Oregon State government says it has all these great ideas but needs money (http://www.worksourceoregon.org/index.php?Itemid=58&id=148&option=com_content&task=view )…with the only “solution” so far being a proposed $472 million tax on hundreds of thousands of Oregonians making $125,000 a year or more (and obviously don’t exist) while cutting at least $26 million in State tax on unemployment benefits; the Oregon Center For Public Policy, the motto of which is “Because facts matter”, says Oregon is in the deepest downturn since the 1930’s Great depression (http://www.ocpp.org/cgi-bin/display.cgi?page=cp0908UIExtensio ).

As today’s Salem Statesman-Journal attests (http://www.statesmanjournal.com/article/20100116/NEWS/1160335/1001/news ), it indeed DOES keep getting worse and worse in Oregon every year, despite ever-increasing calls for more New Urban commercial conversions to housing and more snap-together New Urban communities (as if none presently cluttered the entire Coast and Valley).

However, according to, inter alia, Oregon State Senator Doug Whitsett (Dist. 28), Oregon State officials are rather comfortable in their albeit frozen compensation levels and reduced accessibility to the public without pay/perk cuts (http://urindependent.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2483:oregon-state-employee-compensation&catid=21:general-news&Itemid=66 ).

Maybe somebody could ask Haitians if they’d like to come here and live this way or with less, or be restored to dignity in their own nation…instead of act like neither Haitians, Oregonians, nor really anybody else matters all that much to global governments.     

Hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, all natural disasters and acts of war or insurrection…in the USA, all are primary or concurrent jurisdiction of the Federal Executive branch; in the modern world, there are a number of laws and treaties which automatically involve the IMF and similar apportion-based contributions of money, manpower, or both for countries affected by aforesaid negatives ; Haiti being a rather tiny place in terms of the entire IMF/UN/EU Treaty world, it really won’t help for private people to inundate it with all sorts of things world governments may already be providing…and who even in Haiti would then say “no, please keep giving ME whatever I ask for although already provided, since who cares if anybody else in my nature of position somewhere has not what I have or if I’m as set as reasonably can be for now”? Of course, there’s also concern for how “dumping” on Haiti would ease chaotic conditions, or uphold dignity of Haitians some might “permanently invite” far away then not allow them to participate in their own government, re-building, or comforting of their friends and families. Then there’s the issue of less reputable folks who might solicit to “hold on to money and things” for Haitians pending “government failure to provide”…or longer. 

Even Oregon Attorney General John Kroger (D) early yesterday jumped on the email circuit to warn alert subscribers that likely many types of fake or unnecessary “Haiti Aid” solicitations will be forthcoming, doubtless due to media hype, and that citizens should be slow to respond to such calls. 

One also would hope some Bilderberg Group-type “re-assignment” of Haitians to nations already unable to provide progress to their own diverse residents isn’t afoot through what media downplay, hype, or both. In the broadest sense of their myth, since 1954 the Bilderberg vision of life is simply that earth should have one elite “hotel operator set” per nation who decide where and with what “room service” the immense “sea of transients” will live pending needs of “the hotel”; a clearer definition of what ANY such philosophy would involve currently can be read at (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_Group ).

That said, let’s see, what do high-wage elected officials have to work with this election cycle?

Hmm…got to pitch in for Haiti (albeit a tiny place); USA dollar has been kept world monetary standard yet the Euro is worth about three times as much; gold is over $1,000 an ounce; leaving out the array of able-bodied non-income conditions not considered states of unemployment, the government benefit-receiving unemployed haven’t fallen below 10% in rate; States like Oregon face budget gaps; last month the Bank of China said China can’t buy more USA Treasuries nor can any other country; and the USA currency portion of the now tiered-defined money supply remains very tight per capita, as does credit availability.

Well, if I were a Federal official, I’d say my bailouts of banks, auto makers, Hollywood, and media are not contributing to ongoing job and opportunity losses…hey, what spin machine living off me would want to bite its only feeding hand? Further, I could get spin support for national health care on spin the trillions my predecessor and I have spent on immigration enforcement will instead pay for health…even if by history literally nothing HAS been expended on border issues, and thus nationals and all immigrants will get “care” from no more money than former border concerns truly got (nada)…with almost no need for taxes (stupid Tea Baggers!). This being the totality of my concern re my economy, I would fend against man-caused disasters re terrorists or simply the idled via inveighing spin and false media cloys/weather forecasts, leaving economic issues to States, Counties, and Towns…earning myself accolades from foreign leaders doing no more for their own economies nor caring that few in the USA COULD buy much from ANYBODY abroad.

If I were next a State or local official satisfied with such Federal position, I would either say “amen, my Savior!” or “Dang! Tisn’t fair, good friends, but shucks…let’s make do for now as best’n we kin! We’re Americans together first and all else after”. Then, I would freestyle spin like a top in whatever seemed plausible for my bailiwick.

For example, in Oregon…amongst the least influential in the Congress and Electoral College…as a State official I would posit I need $472 million for things which will entice FUTURE commerce (roads, walking paths, even more unused constructed spaces) at no cost to little guys, but without Federal funds or foreign investments I must tax SOMEBODY for my progressive agenda. 

I’d ask my local franchisees of bailed-out media to make light of economic worries, and suddenly suggest on public ballot that hundreds of thousands of folks earning $125,000 OR MORE per year lived in my low-density per square mile, 36 County State; I’d stick on up to a $123 per person unemployment insurance tax break to obfuscate what voters REALLY believe their State’s income earners to be when it passes; afterwards, I would be able to fib “um, X-amount of big wage earners fled the State; um, Obama’s economy is excellent, and high-rollers closed down and moved just to hurt him and allegedly lose out on millions and costs of moving/re-tooling rather than pay $2240 per head to me”, and reserve to myself ability to phase in ANY cuts and diminutions I felt like, on ability to grow “gaps” created by “mean-spirited” big income earners “reducing tax take and therefore agency budgets”. Best of all, I could elicit pity later if found out, on grounds: “Hey, voters’ will! YOU knew what you were risking when you cut UI tax in favor of fat-cat taxing; I just followed orders and did the best I could!”.

Of course, for my within aforesaid theoretical responses, I’d first require a stony detachment from humanity other than my own, as if I were a prime believer in and causer of social phobias and dissociative reactions; that’s not the real me, just me playing devil’s advocate for the worst case scenario any “machine” could concoct in these times.

Surely, houses of worship aren’t urging quietism because they’re afraid of congregational economic losses, eminent domain, or audits from some totalist machine…they know such machines use clergy to “stun” congregational deer in front of machine headlights, but today’s clergy join with celebrities in saying our leaders are flashpoints of evolution truly intending to deliver as promised or inferred (office of faith-funded initiatives merely as coincidental as Hollywood/media bail-outs).

So let’s give all officials a chance to deliver exactly as promised. And if any react instead in nature of: “Hey, I was obstructed; Haiti; Iraq; global warming; USA and MOST nations telling their own people to know their place …you know it’s not PC to publicly oppose a brother/sister official or question even private/employment social betters…what COULD I do besides remove the hapless audiences of obstructionists rather than words/conditions of the obstructer(s)?”, at the next election, perhaps vote them out no matter what they “promise” next…regardless of political affiliations.

This morning I was concerned not only for the nation of Haiti, but for the much larger rest of its land area known as the Dominican Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominican_Republic ); one presumes that if a tiny island is experiencing such tectonic trauma, surely at least some of its same-mass neighbors must have a degree of disruption or perhaps loss of lives, dislocation, and such.

But this morning, no USA television or print media in my locality mentioned more than Haiti…not even the Weather Channel.

Since nobody is further suggesting something in the nature of riots or insurrection or foreign terrorism actually occurred, neither has anyone in media said a state of hostility exists between Haiti and the Dominican Republic, it’s still a wonder why not much is being said about the bigger country…not even a blurb like “oh, they’re okay”. As if Haiti were to be presumed a free-standing water-locked isle in a vast ocean.

Besides the type of damage alleged, USA media I viewed represented that Haiti is a very continually poor country, and up to now has eternally depended on foreign aid for its subsistence; the Dominican Republic by contrast is known to me as growing in New Urbanism, and in past during Bush II it was said many dislocated people thereof had been brought into the USA under compassionate conservatism. It surely would be odd to perceive that the fate of anyone in New Urban digs has a life of lesser value or interest than somebody else.

That’s the measure of true compassion versus false compassion (the latter being a form of expediency). In real compassion, one doesn’t focus on just one type of suffering, set-back, need, then pooh-pooh any other kinds…for example, many around the globe may lose a job through no fault of their own, equally be unable to secure another one even with sterling due diligence, then find themselves foreclosed upon and at best wind up with a stipend of food stamps…permanently. If one says “hey, you think YOU have troubles? How would you like to be an earthquake victim and not know any better than yourself where your new life will be?”, one starts a purposeful polemic within which some might speculate tinges of racism or other favoritism(s). This would exemplify false compassion.

Historically, a number of such false compassions have been used as cloys to “prove” this or these nations aren’t as isolationist or aggressive as that or those nations claim. In past, some calamity breaks out in a financially remote place, and all perceived-prosperous or perceived-well-militarized nations scramble to be the “bestes buddy” of the fallen pending the duration…then on to other fish to fry.

Now, since such “compassion” rarely results in elevating long-term personal prospects within the place having had a bad break, it seems untrue to say this or that assortment of global officials have had an epiphany of heart, where through operation of aid all that results is the provision of funds to a place’s government under assorted international laws, compacts, and treaties to such inclusive effect.

Thus, “true compassion” would seem to best fit in this instant case where any nation’s officials call upon the Haitian government to more effectively utilize aid in ways mutually enhancing to their people, rather than just leaving their people “loiterers” or idled “of interest” social phobiacs without cash aid trickle-down past whatever, if any, housing restoration…since even the USA government and pals HAVE to provide a certain degree of such help.

Let’s hope Obama for once will preach to Haiti’s leaders instead of listen or ask them to export their people without their cut of aid to nations which can’t support many of their own residents, and that world leaders aren’t trying to focus all attention on teeny-tiny Haiti so no other people on earth…perhaps even the Dominican Republic or some Katrina survivors…can get a word in edgewise.

There is a Presidential Office of Faith-Funded Initiatives requiring no public or congregational knowledge of receipts, and USA Roman Catholic Churches and groups do solicit other or further funds from the public at-large without much disclosure or donor votes/input. This seems minimally general jurisdiction of the IRS in re protecting against embezzlement, misuse, or other deception with public money, whether or not any Church or organization appears “political”; these seems alternatively or conjunctively cause to propose ALL religious organizations be non-exempt from State Attorney General reporting requirements, to create Federal reporting open to the public’s inspection, or both.

I agree with the IRS that “hey, we do sacerdotals and services, nuff said?” is insufficient to trigger religious exemptions, where no particular ontological metaphysics exists or is “effectuated” by little more than perhaps an office/Church, website art, and print ephemera. As Pew Institute recently pointed out, the high percentage of “Gnostic soup makers” leaves many chance-takers…not sure of what another traditional group’s actual ephemera should be…at risk of being seen as little more than “money, pretty money!” amid a hard economy and dwindling number of seminaries and Churches. 

For the past few years now, I’ve had opportunity to observe Roman Catholic and Protestant Church affairs in northeastern Illinois and the central Oregon valley area (Salem area to Eugene area); they haven’t dissuaded my relevant pro-IRS opinion.

In Illinois, re Roman Catholicism there were Pope pictures somewhere on each property, and clergy talked that EWTN/Vatican talk from the pulpit; but anyone could come in at any Mass point, be as boisterous as they wanted, in fact unruly, with those complaining warned they or the Church might be “of interest” for violating “religious expressions” of others or sounding in “fundamentalist/purist Christianity…like Laden does with Islam!”; in a few cases, Church bulletins and Pastors called for attendance at on-site Rosary recitals with Knights of Columbus in attendance…when held, NO clergy appeared, and often police cars with cameras scanned attendance as if Rosary services self-identified “fundamentalists” (clergy allowed Eucharist and general absolutions with expression Confession and Rosaries are ‘medieval’); while clergy begged at Masses for volunteers for a litany of programs, whenever one inquired they were “full” even as potential receivers of program purposes were told “not enough help to get to you”. As for Illinois Protestants observed, it was simple in-your-face quietism being preached from the perspective you’ll be spared hardship in life if you keep your eyes and mouth shut no matter what goes on around you…maybe IRS cause if faith lucre is given them, but anybody just donating should be told “caveat emptor” like when Mike Murdock says he got into preaching to get houses and suits (dubious, but lawfully transparent).

After six months observation in Oregon, exactly ditto Roman Catholics and most Protestants (especially ELCA Lutheran)…there are a few more mono-site “no-name” establishments here than in most States.

Where the Protestants preach obvious quietism, the Roman Catholic clergy here conduct themselves in what I would call “Robert the Bruce-ism”: condemn something here, applaud it there. 

But one example: last evening in Salem, for the umpteenth time at a Catholic service, a bunch of screaming babies constantly drowned out a trained-voice female cantor with microphone; a number of attendees sat chatting on cell phones; some children romped the aisles; a full fifteen minutes into the Mass, an able-bodied Caucasian couple in 30’s whisked in, walked past empty or non-crowded pews, and without (for RC’s) stoup holy water, respect to the Crucifix, or delay at pre-Mass Confession actually tried to PUSH me down a pew as they wanted MY spot! This has become typical and you guessed it: I was informed by staff it was ME who would stifle another’s “expressions” and “God’s love” for even saying “pardon?”

Now, how hard would it be to post (in as many languages as one likes) a simple notice such as: “Welcome to St. Blowhard’s! Your beliefs are your own and all are welcome at God’s house, but to preserve fair civility we require all attendees to abide by Robert’s Rules of Order (see display)…variation from which will result in ejectment”? But no, all entrants with green in pockets are allowed to freestyle as they deem fit…despite the uber-Vatican surface appearances of the premises; why the heck are they charging immigrants and others for RCIA “discernments” and catechism before they dare have a Eucharist, if clergy otherwise hold just a cracker and “Jesus Juice” alone fixes you with God, nothing else really needed in your life? Either the Gnostic attendees or the RCIA catechumens are being ripped off in such example.

Lastly, these USA Roman Catholic websites and handout slicks are all boffo about it seeming unemployment resolution, job growing, this and that secular concern, and faith service volunteer programs exist to be participated in…as funds for same are constantly solicited and accepted…yet very little fruit seems produced, very little fleshing out of program operation is evident, and when one calls for help it’s “not enough help to go around”; call to volunteer, or work for any wage, and everything is “full”…in permanent vicious circle fashion. What are any general public funds benefitting?

I am one of the most tenacious defenders of religious expression and freedom; I have also been a Roman Catholic in the faith expression nature of Bing Crosby, William F. Buckley Jr., and William P. Clark; I have admired people such as Billy Graham, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Fulton J. Sheen. I constructively criticize any officials where warranted, and lucidly support/participate in many Amnesty International, Christians United for Israel, and similar human rights organizations. If calls to have the IRS audit USA Catholic groups had the slightest whiff of political expediency, I would speak against it.

However, I am personally aware of the within aforesaid circumstances within the USA Roman Catholic edifice, know they can easily be tested by anyone for plausibility, and perceive such circumstances as having large gaps between what clergy claim and relevant realities…wherefore, I would not oppose auditing Roman Catholic units via the IRS or competently otherwise, nor would I oppose Federal or State requirements that ALL religious units simply permanently be required to submit reports as charitable organizations with such reports available for public inspection.