Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

106 posts / 0 new
Last post
Vikingstar
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 52 sec ago
Joined: 01/04/2003 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

Alan:
My computer having eaten one response to you, I only have time for a briefer response. The founders did not draw merely from Locke, but were influenced by the whole concept of "natural law" which saw that rights do not come from government, but pre-exist any government--in other words, come from God. It is God Who prizes the individual, not to the total exclusion of the group, but as the basic building block of a functioning society. To have the view that you seem to, that the individual is subsumed by the group, is to me a recipe for disaster (one that America may be about to experience, unfortunately). And if it is God Who prizes the individual, then He is able to do so whithout cost to His soviegnity, which I also believe in. And I don't see the connection between so valuing the individual, as God and the Constitution do, and therefore having to believe in a "radical
individualism" that places itself above anything else; and just because we humans can distort any good thing out of true does not mean that the thing itself is therefore suspect.
As for abortion rights--if it is true that human life begins at conception, then (if we were going to be consistant with our own legal philosphy) it would mean that said life would enjoy the legal protections that all human life is meant to enjoy. My view would strengthen protection of innocent human life, not the opposite.
In summary: my view of the value of the individual is drawn from Scripture, not contary to it; individual human rights come from God and not government (which is why, again, socialism is so poisonous); and the Founders were smarter than both of us put together.

BTW, are you influenced by "Dominion theology"?

Mainelion
Online
Last seen: 5 min 14 sec ago
Joined: 08/11/2005 - 12:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

So this means that Olympia will be lining up support to build several dams on the Penobscot so we can have clean electric power right?

Right?

Right?

Ah right?

democrat
Offline
Last seen: 9 years 5 months ago
Joined: 11/15/2003 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

No, but the tribes are trying to form their own electric utility.

alantoth
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 2 months ago
Joined: 02/13/2006 - 1:48pm
OK, one more time

To Alan:
My computer having eaten one response to you, I only have time for a briefer response. The founders did not draw merely from Locke, but were influenced by the whole concept of "natural law" which saw that rights do not come from government, but pre-exist any government--in other words, come from God.

To Vikingstar:
With this I have less of a problem although natural law does presuppose a realm of nature wherein natural law resides and a sacred realm of grace reserved for God. In my view there are not two realms but one. When a person is in Christ ALL THINGS are new (sacred). The challenge then becomes to incarnate what God’s rule in Christ looks like in a world set against that rule. In a two realm theory where the natural/secular realm has already been accorded an independent life it is easier to dismiss the claims of the sacred on persons and the social order they inhabit.

To Alan:
It is God Who prizes the individual, not to the total exclusion of the group, but as the basic building block of a functioning society.

To Vikingstar:
We are actually close in our views, at least in terms of God’s valuing people and those who nurture them. My problem is with the loaded word “individual.”
In liberalism the individual is an abstraction connected to nothing but itself. As such it was used, historically, by the denizens of power and profit as a tool to pry traditional faith out of its place of authority. The individual was said to be primary, everything prior to the individual, namely God and traditions embracing him, was not. As a popular social theory what this effectively did was justify anyone who wanted to wipe out the past, good and bad, in order to create something more to their liking. The first example of this came with the French Revolution and its 1789 Reign of Terror. Individualism, in this way, was given carte blanche to act as a type of social plow to turn over and uproot everything that would not bow to its dictates.

I prefer the word person because it has none of the above baggage, is real (not an abstraction) and therefore always in the act of presupposing a connection to others. More fundamentally it’s true to the biblical narrative where God always calls someone by their name because he is always dealing with persons and a “people,” who belong to him. He never appeared, Himself, as an abstraction but as the Incarnate one. The Puritans, who predated the founders, were wrong in their theology about America as a New Israel but right to emphasize holiness and community for themselves. The scriptures, in their rejection of a sacred/secular division in life, saw social reality in more holistic terms. The words of Jesus encouraged this because his expectation was that this was to be worked out, by his people, communally, that is, as they rubbed shoulders to think it through and work it out.

not a collection of independent, autonomous individuals) but a people

To Alan:
To have the view that you seem to, that the individual is subsumed by the group, is to me a recipe for disaster (one that America may be about to experience, unfortunately). And if it is God Who prizes the individual, then He is able to do so whithout cost to His soviegnity, which I also believe in. And I don't see the connection between so valuing the individual, as God and the Constitution do, and therefore having to believe in a "radical
individualism" that places itself above anything else; and just because we humans can distort any good thing out of true does not mean that the thing itself is therefore suspect.

To Vikingstar:
God’s sovereignty, not to mention his power and compassion and the way he earned a right to our service means he can do whatever he pleases and address us as suits him. God is also faithful to his Word, the same yesterday, today and forever. He made the creation order to be stewarded by people with his word and Spirit in mind, that is to say wisely in the biblical sense because creation, itself, we are told was fashioned in wisdom.

To Vikingstar:
Persons, in the thinking of classic liberal individualism, were distorted right at the get go, not later, as you seem to suggest. That distortion has gradually worked its way into the life of our culture.

To Vikingstar:
I am struck by the willingness of people to accept the communal structures of worship but then (as with individualism) to be content with individual infiltration in the secularly driven communal structures of education, science & scholarship, party politics, labor unions etc. On Sunday we willingly partake in worship with fellow believers, a communal endeavor if ever there was one, and the rest of the week we are individuals somewhere in one of the hallowed sanctuaries of secularly defined endeavor. My point is, there is no sacred/secular split in Jesus Christ. All of life hangs together in him. If that is the case, if he even announces the means for our working at expressing his holistic rule (where two or three are gathered) and shows his heart for our being a people (calling us to be one as he and the Father are one) then I want to know where the rest of scripture casts this as an obliteration of anyone’s God-given uniqueness? Rather, it seems, this (being in community in a common task with like-minded people) is the best way for it to blossom and get expressed as actions of obedient service to God and others.

The disaster you are talking about possibly happening I would argue is, in part, the result of Christians acting individualistically instead of finding ways to be a people in every part of the life of our culture. Secular individualistic inroads into our thinking have compromised the integrity of our faith and split the Christian camp into countless little kingdoms. I am interested in seeing people of vision and insight get a chance to help build a Christian political consciousness and a Christian mind in the arts, sciences and scholarship. That has a chance if God’s people are willing to engage in open debate on behalf of the development of a holistic and compelling vision of renewal.

To Alan:
As for abortion rights--if it is true that human life begins at conception, then (if we were going to be consistant with our own legal philosphy) it would mean that said life would enjoy the legal protections that all human life is meant to enjoy. My view would strengthen protection of innocent human life, not the opposite.

To Vikingstar:
Your intention to strengthen innocent human life is shared by me. Unfortunately, the history of liberal democracy with its emphasis on individual rights means absolutely free individuals can take the rights argument in different directions. It all depends on what gets emphasized. As I tried to show in the case of Locke’s Second Treatise of Property the fact that his theory made the physicality of humanness a property right is something that has seeped down into the present as a woman’s right to control her own body. The whole notion of “rights” is part of the problem. Rights, stripped of limiting values ala individualism, end up standing alone without any humanizing qualities and then they gradually morph into the demands of the individual for whom rights were first articulated. In dealing with the issue of abortion I prefer to talk about it more in view of a state’s responsibility to do justice on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves. This assumes personhood, as opposed to the abstractions of rights and individuals, and a state’s interest in preserving human life. In view of the contamination of personhood by liberal notions of absolute individual autonomy I see it making more sense to develop and encourage a justice argument.

To Alan
In summary: my view of the value of the individual is drawn from Scripture, not contary to it; individual human rights come from God and not government (which is why, again, socialism is so poisonous); and the Founders were smarter than both of us put together.

To Vikingstar:
The founders were human and historically conditioned by their own times just like the two of us. They did not see the implications of having a limited government without another norm for defining what the internal task of government was, how that task was distinct from that of other social entities and what its proper relationship should be to other sectors of human functioning. Having no such worked out theory of social organization it had no parallel wisdom to show it how it was to use the limited power it had in its relationships with facets of the larger social network. So we have basically ended up with a two track system. One track houses the economic engine which looks to see the fewest impediments to its freedom as it moves forward. The other runs parallel picking up the mess and taking care of the problems the first train created.

I want to retain the idea of limited government but that concept needs an upgrade so that it can get free from the powerful interests that have corrupted the integrity of its unique task. Government needs some biblically informed theorizing so that it can start figuring out what it means to act justly and empower the freedom of its citizens and their institutions to act responsibly.

To Alan:
BTW, are you influenced by "Dominion theology"?

To Vikingstar:
Never heard of it.
I am influenced by the Kuyperian Reformation. Ran into it around the same time I was touched by the Charismatic Movement. Some combination, that. Some of the more recent neo-Kuyperians writing about Kuyper’s influence are using the term R.O. or Radical Orthodoxy. I have been RO since the mid 70s. There was plenty that spun off of his thinking: a national christian weekly called The Standard, three Christian political parties, the Christian labor movement, educational freedom for parents and their children, the Free University and a breaking away from the state's control of seminaries. The Christian Democratic movement he and others birthed in the late 19th century eventually controlled the Dutch parliament for several decades. To get the kernel of some of Kuyper’s thinking you can look up Stone Lectures on the net. Around the turn of the 19th into the 20th century he was invited to Princeton to give a series of lectures. Here are the titles of the six lectures.

Lecture 1: Calvinism as a Life System
Lecture 2: Calvinism and Religion
Lecture 3: Calvinism and Politics
Lecture 4: Calvinism and Science
Lecture 5: Calvinism and Art
Lecture 6: Calvinism and the Future

Freedom, Soar.
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 2 months ago
Joined: 01/02/2004 - 1:01am
Speaking of Global Warming

Speaking of Global Warming

The return of arctic conditions to much of the U.S. has many people sympathizing with Sam Ryskind:

"You don’t hear much about the ozone hole any more. Has it gone away? Nope. NOAA and NASA say in 2006 it was bigger and deeper than ever.
But wait, you say, we implemented the Montreal Protocols in 1989, eliminating ozone depleting CFCs. Kofi Annan called the Protocol, 'Perhaps the most successful international agreement to date.' CFC concentrations have been falling since 1995. How can the ozone hole be worse?

"It’s not worse, says NOAA, it’s better. It’s just that you can’t see how great the Protocol is working because colder than average temperatures in the Antarctic mask the benefit. Cold weather “result[s] in larger and deeper ozone holes, while warmer weather leads to smaller ones.”

Colder in Antarctica? Al Gore told me it was melting! Al Gore told me there was consensus. Consensus!

LMD
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

Christian Reconstructionism, also known as Dominion Theology.

alantoth
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 2 months ago
Joined: 02/13/2006 - 1:48pm
Just wondering

On the Dominion Theology, Christian Reconstructionism stuff. I know a little about Theonomy and Rushdooney. The other two seem to be similar. For the record I reject all three. I am curious, though. What is it about my thinking that makes some wonder if I might not fit in the above crowd.

Editor
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: 04/18/2009 - 3:43pm
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

China Tilts Green Climate Concerns Sway Beijing

BEIJING -- Beijing’s embracing carbon credits, the Kyoto Protocol program where rich nations invest to clean up greenhouse-gas emissions in poorer countries. Beijing also is seeking carbon exchange, matching Chinese sellers of carbon credits with foreign buyers.

China is the world's second-biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. Some scientists say it will soon surpass the U.S. in the top spot if it hasn't done so already. China's pollution could outstrip any gains made elsewhere in the world.

Source: [i]Wall Street Journal, February 13, 2007; Page A4[/i]

JIMV
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 03/22/2005 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

[quote="Vikingstar"]The very last thing we need to do is send the government (on any level) more tax money.[/quote]

You would see a lot more leadership from our politicians if they had to feed the squeaky wheels of their special interests from existing funds...

Imagine if politicians could not raise taxes....

Imagine if they had instead to set priorities....

Imagine all those flying pigs.....

zmogus
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 days ago
Joined: 03/20/2004 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

Imagine if our idiotic U.S. Senators (ALL of them, not just Snowe and Collins) were accountable to something other than their own stupidity and weirdness.

JIMV
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 03/22/2005 - 1:01am
Re: If there is deform then we need reform

[quote="alantoth"]JIMV

I do not buy Mark Twain's cynical views of government. Government is a legitimate, God ordained facet of human experience. It has its own distinct task to perform and norms for its rightful functioning. The task of public goverance is a high one and anyone called to it needs to learn to think deeply, struggle intensely and work to promote justice to every part of the public order. If many have failed to so act and you don't like this then you need to think about what can be done to create a system of representation that encourages principled, holistic thinking as opposed to interest group brokering.[/quote]

The problem with government is the sort of fellow atracted to it. For every Churchill, Roosevelt or Reagan there are thousands of babbling Bidens, Clintons, and Kerry's.

How is this for an idea for governance...Every decade hold a nationwide mandatory lottery where every legal, employed or retired citizen is on the list. We randomly choose all our politicians through this process and no citizen can ever serve again.

No one can opt out and no one can not serve.

Now I ask you, could they do worse?

JIMV
Offline
Last seen: 7 years 10 months ago
Joined: 03/22/2005 - 1:01am
Re: If there is deform then we need reform

[quote="MikeL"][quote="alantoth"]I do not buy Mark Twain's cynical views of government.[/quote]
How about Will Rogers?[list]There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you.[/list:u][list]This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.[/list:u][list]Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators.[/list:u][/quote]

or

"The government is like a baby's alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other" - Reagan

Roger Ek
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
Joined: 11/18/2002 - 1:01am
Global Warming Derangement Syndrome Explained

I said that recovery crew bored and melted down 400 feet to recover the P-38 in Greenland. It turns out that they went down 268 feet. The accurate quote and site about "Glacier Girl" is below.

- - -

"In the spring of 1992, a group of 40 people led by Middlesboro entrepreneur Roy Shoffner returned to Greenland and burrowed through 268 feet of ice to reach one of the Lockheed P-38s and brought it up piece by piece to the surface.

A decade later, on October 26th, 2002, after thousands of hours of work the P-38 they recovered, now dubbed "The Glacier Girl," took flight again."

http://www.thelostsquadron.com/p-38-pages/p-38-lightning-recovery.htm

alantoth
Offline
Last seen: 10 years 2 months ago
Joined: 02/13/2006 - 1:48pm
Reconstructionism, no. Radical Orthodoxy w/charismata, yes!

LMD

Christian Reconstructionism, also known as Dominion Theology.

Thanks LMD. Now for a few points of clarification.

Reconstructionism I know of, Rushdoony being one of its leading representatives. They remind me of the early Puritans who saw America as a New Israel. Rushdoony and company, like the Puritans, want to return us to the old testament covenant of law. The only problem is we are living in the covenant of grace inaugurated by the power and compassion of God in Jesus Christ, a God who sees fit to allow his rain and sun come to all people not just his elect.

You start to get an idea of how ideas driven by bad theology can influence future events when you realize how the part of Puritanism that blurred the lines between law and grace with its "New Israel, City on a Hill" vision led to a messianic self conception for America. That would be bad enough especially since God is no respecter of persons and will judge every nation. But in the post Revolutionary War period the messianic mind cropped up in more secular concepts like "manifest destiny" and later in Woodrow Wilson's social gospel mind-set wherein he saw WWI as a war to make the world safe for democracy. Some of the Bush adminstration's arguments for the war in Iraq have been in the Wilsonian mold as he has argued, with evangelical zeal, for the world historical mission of democratic freedom. One would think from the tone and scale of that message that democratic freedom and freedom in Jesus Christ were one and the same. The point being that ideas, bad as well as good ones, have legs. Puritanism’s dark side, now secularized in an unquestioned freedom ideal, haunts us to this day. We would do well to recover some of Puritanism’s focus on Christian community, its embrace of the holiness of God and consequent penchant for self-examination.

Reconstructionists like Rushdoony are right to argue for God to be honored in all things. They are wrong to want to do this by winning control of secular culture's institutions in the hopes of Christianizing them. The more biblical approach is to argue for justice to all, seek a leveling of the public playing field by seeing to it that government favors no view of life over any other and then argue for the reconfiguration of culture that reflects this. This means a variety of PUBLIC options would need to become available in schooling, political representation, labor, etc. After all, its clear that people groups live according to different commitments. Why pretend that with all our colorful differences we are at base, in essentials one as Americans. That would either be to equate the essentials of America with biblical Christianity and make outcasts of non-Christians or it would be to bastardize Christianity by making it the child of a well meaning but wrong-headed mission. Rushdoony's vision besides being the Christian version of liberal intolerance creates another problem for biblical Christians.

No nation stands outside God’s judgment and no nation, including old testament Israel, has ever lived up to his standards. So why not just argue that we Christians have just as much of a right to be right or wrong as anyone else, extend that principle to others like God does with his rain and sun and start making a case for a different kind of tolerance. Reconstructionists can’t do that because they are trapped in their own version of the dark side of Puritanism.

So…. Just in case its not clear…..I am not a Reconstructionist. I am more in the Radical Orthodoxy camp with a Charismatic twist. If that seems odd to folks then blame God because that’s how I’ve come out so far. Got a better vision for the renewal of church and state? Well then put it out there and so we can evaluate it because, right now, both seem unable to deliver what is needed.

Some think revival is what is needed. We've had two great awakenings in our national history and neither of them corrected the messianic self-conception of the early Puritans. Pollsters tell us a large percentage of Americans are in the Christian camp. So what’s wrong with this picture. It doesn’t appear to be that we need more people to come into the same convoluted Christianity that now dominates the landscape. What it looks like to me is that we need to come out of the kind of thinking that has been contaminating the biblical message of complete and total redemption situated in a patient, longsuffering God of saving as well as renewing/reforming and life sustaining grace. What’s been passing for Christianity inasmuch as it has left uncorrected some very old errors is, as far as I am concerned, part of the problem, one Reconstructionist Christianity has not solved but, instead, contributed to.

wv_republican
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 11/23/2004 - 1:01am
The REAL driving force behind

The REAL driving force behind "global warming".....

From being a marginal and even mocked issue, climate-change litigation is fast emerging as a new frontier of law where some believe hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake.

Compensation for losses inflicted by man-made global warming would be jaw-dropping, a payout that would make tobacco and asbestos damages look like pocket money.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jLQy3ze-D7N4ZQzyDjvLA...

Can hear the lawyers deeply panting.....

Pages

Log in to post comments