Saturday, December 20, 2008

The Subtleties of Human Sacrifice, Not So Subtle

Here's the latest LA Times front page full of irony.

Three major stories here, at least considered major by the Times judgment. The biggest is the one about the California attorney general, Jerry Brown, formally arguing the case that Proposition 8, an initiative that put into the state constitution the words "Marriage is only between a man and a woman"--is a violation of basic human rights.

I wonder if he'd just as easily proclaim that prohibitions against rape or child molestation are a violation of basic human rights. Nah, I didn't think so. I guess I just wonder where he gets the idea that sodomy is okay.

The answer is nowhere.

The only place where it is acceptable and from which come all sorts of strident sophistry in favor of it is the minds of "progressives," and because there are enough of them, not a lot really, but enough, then it is pronounced a human right. Seems quite democratic, that's for sure--it must be good.

Because so many of those supporters hold the most powerful megaphones in the media, that sophistry gets uttered the loudest. But it has little to do with democracy in action. It has everything to do with powerful people capturing as many souls as they can for as much human sacrifice as they can get.

Very few people can make the most cogent argument against sodomy that there is, because they too are tied to the World System that gives its pontificators the highest platform. All you get are the most destructive salvos in the culture war.

Followers of Christ do not argue against sodomy because they have any self-interest at all, as if they are harmed by what another does sexually. They are in in His hands, their selves wholly given up to Him. It can't be about them.

They argue against it because homosexual activity destroys souls, just as much as heterosexual adultery destroys souls. The follower of Christ actually loves the one who is the victim of sodomy no matter how much that individual is hammered with the idea that it is who he is and that he must be true to himself and that he must not betray the great liberating cause of sexual autonomy.

The follower of Christ merely wants the seduced homosexually-minded individual to understand how much he is a walking, talking human sacrifice for a powerful liar somewhere.

This is precisely what makes the other two stories on that front page there so full of irony. The stuff happening in Mexico is ghastly, and it would seem few would disagree. The problem is the whole culture is wrapped up in retribution. Entire mausoleums are built to the warrior victims of the drug-war carnage, and their images are painted or carved with the most ethereally belligerent depictions you could imagine. The virulent culture of death that reigns there is only symptomatic of the insatiable need of World inhabitants from the grandest palaces to the filthiest slums for

Human sacrifice.

Then there is that third story, about the 10% pay cut. So what is it? Are these people worth x amount of wages or not? Are they or aren't they? What's the story?

The story is that the only way you can be truly wealthy is by Christ. He already did the sacrifice. The end. Without Christ, you and everyone else will be spinning, getting dizzy flailing about trying to get just how much you are worth. As it is here, 10% is being hacked off by Caesar. Could have just as easily been that for some time the workers were being overpaid and they were doing the hacking, making human sacrifice of taxpayers. But yeah, by the world's measure, who'd know?...

Just so you do know, Jesus said (and I kind of trust what He says, since He kind of made the universe and probably knows how it works), that your value would be 100 times what you think is so great. Not just in heaven but right now. The only thing is that He put two conditions on that bounty.

1. Gotta give up all that stuff you thought was so great--give it up, all of it. And
2. Expect to be reviled for it.

Wow. That's too high a price for many, I know. But, here's the thing, though...

That Times front page.

Look at it. That's what you're left with. And if you rationalize it away like so many do, then you're just as much into doing human sacrifice as anyone else.

Or, yeah-- again,

You can be free from the body of death.

There is only One Way.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

The Industry Standard for Usury Deception

It's kind of interesting, the two big financial stories of the day, placed side-by-side on all the newspapers and newssites.

The two stories: The assessment of the fallout from major investment player Bernard Madoff's elaborate Ponzi operation, and the Federal Reserve's slashing the federal funds rate to a quarter of a percent-- which is, for all intents and purposes, zero.

For those who dare to look at these items through the eyes of Christ, they may actually see the insidious ways imaginative deception is used as the chief tool of World operatives sworn to sustain expansive levels of human sacrifice.

It is funny to think how many people bought into Madoff's promise of 13% return on their investment--I'd even heard that those hit the hardest were residents of West Palm Beach in Florida, I mean, wasn't this the same bunch ridiculed for their inability to cast a ballot in 2000? Hey, gotta make sure my retirement is really secure.

In its simplest terms, Madoff got as many people in the plan as he could, and for those who actually looked at what was happening and those to whom others would ask probing questions, he just paid them a nice cut. Presto, chango-- it's magic: Something of value! Never mind that it was nothingness, as long as we all think it has value, then it's okay.

It was a grand lie, however, and a lot of people sure seemed to be steamed about it, except for one thing: Making people believe something has value when it doesn't is the sworn duty of World operatives.

Just look at the Federal Reserve, selling money now at rock bottom prices. In fact, effectively, at no price at all. Now, this makes me wonder...

Why were interest rates higher than that earlier? Could it be that the Federal Reserve was lying to us just as much as Bernard Madoff did? Is it possible that these powerful individuals and institutions (of course it does sound better when attached to a name like Long-Term Capital Management) are simply providing a service exploitees require?

You see, interest in the eyes of God is usury, a moral crime. It is such because it reflects a way one person (or group of people no matter how large) makes a claim on the productive value of another, in essence making him a slave.

Now yes, legitimate interest is by definition the opportunity cost of present consumption. In other words, if I lend you money now I must forego something nice I could have now for that thing later, and your interest payment is the incentive for me to forego that opportunity.

The problem is that interest in World practice is not based on that cost but rather on how much the borrower is willing to be exploited. It is all about demand, and lying. If I can convince a borrower he must have something (like a boffo house) and I can further convince him that the interest payment I'm charging is reasonable (particularly when part of the promise is the return--"Yeah! Housing prices always go up!") when it is truly a modern form of a detestable thing in the eyes of God, then I am merely extracting value from the borrower.

I am doing nothing less than human sacrifice.

The frightening thing is that there is very high demand for that service.

There must be that demand for all who have not appropriated Christ's final sacrifice for them. For you see, it is only by His blood that one can live outside of the World Financial's virulent body of death.

Sure Bernard Madoff will go on trial and have some penalty assessed against him, after which all the spectators in the the World Media Showcase coliseum will boo and hiss. Sure Ben Bernanke will again mess around with the price of money, and do it again and again and again, and each time it'll tick off someone but just as surely embolden some famished liar who'll take Madoff's place. There are so many of them out there-- Madoff is just someone playing the fool who tried juggling too many fishbowls.

Every banker, investor, bureaucrat, and priest who yanks themselves through the World System is ready to go on the stage, each one well-practiced at juggling something novel and fearing for their lives should they drop something.

Want out of this? Want out of the stench of World sewage? If you do, if you really want to live by love, by giving it up and letting go so others may actually love, by investing so others bountifully benefit and not just so you can shank off a piece of someone else's soul...

I don't know. I know there are just too damn many who would respond to the truths God speaks in His word with "That's not really what He meant" and continue their exploitation without blinking. "These are very complicated matters," they'll blither. "Don't go moralizing about these things, I don't want to be preached to," yet with their next breath it's "Aagh! Bernard Madoff! What a fiend! Aagh!"

But...

If you want life, actual real true vibrant Life, I'd love to meet you. Maybe even chat for a minute. I humbly confess I long to engage those who actually want 100 times what the World offers, just as Jesus said. I long to interact with those who have a desire to move mountains, just as Jesus said. My website is davidbeck.info. My email is in there. Send me a note.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Perfectly Fine Value Extraction

Happened to come across a story in my morning LA Times about a charitable group formed from the Service Employees International Union. In two of the charity's four years it raised $165,000 to be used to help members get low-income housing. Well, as you can imagine, none of that money went to the recipients, all of it went for expenses and overhead.

A couple of problems arise from this "travesty of justice." One is that every institutionalized charity must cover its operating expenses or you have no recipient benefits. Don't have a building and laborers to process things? The money can't get places to begin with. It is almost as if a charity must declare, "We must have x amount of money before we can actually make other monies available." This is just plain business reality.

The second problem comes from an inherent condition of "charity." In looking all around I don't see much about this condition addressed.

For context I came across another story having to do with charitable activity, one which dwarfs the SEIU problem. That story is here on the web if you want to peek at it.

Some big-shot rich guy pledging millions to charities has been found to be less than truthful about his financial situation. I'd imagine most would react in a similar manner as they would with the SEIU story: Rawwr! I'm really angry with these people! How on earth could they shaft those poor poor poor poor poor people?

This will happen when you rely on liars for your sustenance. The liar in the Washington Post story was particularly insidious, because he felt that as long as he wrapped himself in love and kindness and generosity, his method of value extraction was perfectly fine. We can excoriate him for his loathsome conduct, but really now...

How many of us can claim to be above that kind of thing?

In the end, only two answers to this question may be offered. One, "Why yes, I am above that kind of thing." Two, "No, I confess, I am just the same, only in my own way of doing it."

From that first claim, an individual will most likely continue to lie to themselves about their abject misconception, eventually destroying their souls and, sadly, those who enter into relationship with them. Furthermore they will enter into contractual arrangements with other liars because all know how likely they are to exploit one another. When charities are involved this requires onerous regulations such as 501c3 contracts and turgidly written laws and bylaws so there can be elaborate pretense of trustworthiness.

From that second claim, one can resign himself to wallowing about in the pity that must foment from such a realization, and this in turn can calcify into a pronounced victimhood sustaining huge demand for those charitable services. Yes, indeed, it is a racket.

The other option to the second claim is one I just don't think is authentically chosen as much as you'd think. You'd think it would be, seeing how many "Christians" there are, but the sobering fact is most Christian churches are just as much caught up in the codependent charity merry-go-round as any other. Churchianity is all over making sure there is some pitiful victim somewhere they can rescue and get a warm feeling about.

The fact of the entire matter is that if people actually did one thing then all this charity crap would go away. What is that one thing?

Put your faith in Jesus Christ and actually do what He says.

Whoa-ho-ho-ho there. Didn't Christ say to do charity?

Of course He did. But he also said that when people actually use their gifts and encourage others to use their gifts and people actually loved one another and didn't worry so much about getting something someone else has then guess what...

There would be no need for charity.

There would just be everyone doing their part to make everyone abundantly wealthy.

Yes, I know, I'm a Pollyanna. I just have this crazy idea that everyone would come to Christ and there would be His Kingdom on earth. Sorry. It does seem that people will still arrogantly claim they're above it all and that Cain's agency must continue to stomp on the liars to check their ugly behavior.

But whatever the case, I still just write because maybe someone will come across these words, which is only to get him to see His words. The upshot is that someone may see what's really going on, and then see how much Jesus would love to blow us away with His provision of all good things, not the piddle a really good liar offers.

Wednesday, December 03, 2008

"It's a Bird, It's a Plane, It's SUPER Hillary!"

My family and I recently spent a week in Walt Disney World, and there is enough Catholicist Nation fodder there for a writing episode at another time. I will admit much of it is quite fun, and after we returned from a six-day binge we had to detox.

I popped in a wonderful film, The Incredibles, something my children have seen a half-a-dozen times but I’d only seen once, back when it was in the theaters. As I watched it I was intrigued by its similarity to Watchmen, which I’d webzined on last month. I have to believe Brad Bird, the guy who put The Incredibles together, had to have been very familiar with Watchmen, because the Pixar film is a virtual children’s version of the classic graphic novel.

At one point in The Incredibles the superheroes are outlawed because they are saving people who don’t want to be saved. What do you think about this idea? I ask my Government students this discussion question: “We all have a right not to be beat up for no reason. But what do you think if the people who are fighting want to fight?”

I mean, really, what if some guy leaping to his death wants to commit suicide and his rescue by Mr. Incredible violates his firm desires? Can Mr. Incredible be sued? Should Mr. Incredible be censured or restrained in some way?

This brings up that profound puzzle regarding what people really want. It is said all the time, “He doesn’t know what’s best for him!” The question is, what is best for him? How does one know what that is?

The superhero conundrum comes up in another interesting place, this from one of president-elect Barack Obama’s latest cabinet nominations. Hillary Clinton has been slated for the Secretary of State job, one for which she is constitutionally ineligible.

Yes, Barack and Hillary are plainly violating the U.S. Constitution the minute she takes the oath of office at Foggy Bottom. Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2 plainly states that any sitting member of the Senate may not hold a cabinet position if the salary of that position was increased during her legislative service. The reason is simply to prevent the buying and selling of cushy government positions.

As it is anyone who brings this up is just one of those rabidly conservative kooks to be dismissed without a glance. I’m actually not even addressing here whether or not it is really an issue—the government has routinely violated the Constitution for eons no matter how many have screeched about it. Eh.

What I do want to point out is that potentates do anything they must—constitutional or not—if it is indeed perceived it is in the best interests of the nation. Do you really think agents of Cain don’t regularly lie and murder? The real question is how deftly they do it.

Just like really super strong Mr. Incredible, Barack, Hillary, and all the rest of the "transition" players are being handed seven-fold power over anyone who challenges their authority, even those who’d wave the Constitution in their faces. Hillary is indeed then a superhero, enthusiastically urged to take on the charge of gallantly zipping off to other belligerents and smiling at them so magnificently that they’ll either be nice to us or slink away so our stomping-about won’t be too expensive.

What is more remarkable is that what these "real" superheroes do is really not a whole lot different from what the fictional ones do: Putting on a damn good show. It's best to prominently bound about rescuing wailing victims somewhere somehow. Their most rigorous challenge is not the rescuing but making it look good in light of the reprobate behavior that must accompany it.

Just today some bipartison investigative committee on looking-at-bad-things-all-around released a very official sounding report that stated there is a high probability of a terrorist attack before 2013, most likely involving biological weaponry. How is this any different from "Emperor Ming, drat your nefarious schemes!"

But lo! There she is! Ta-da! SUPER HILLARY! Hooray! Thaaank you for saving us from the dreaded anthrax threat! It's a good thing you were there right there, right where you needed to be to dutifully defend truth, justice, and the American way! And thank goodness those cursed constitutional nitpickers couldn't deter you from your appointed rounds!

It does have nice ring to it. Perhaps it may be added to the show:

Hillary--hooray! Hillary--hooray! HILLARY--HOORAY!

For a bit more on the modern superhero saga, I've devoted my webzine home page this month to it. It is here.