Close to home

Taken by Art

2nd Bluebonnet watercolor

Bluebonnets

My pet

Anne Rice's new book and other thoughts

I started to read Anne Rice when I was in middle school. Since then I have read most of her Vampire Chronicles and some of her Mayfair Witch books. As a result, I did have a slight obsession with vampires through high school. When I heard about her newest book Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt I had to read it. It took me awhile to get through it, though it is a short book. I think the main reason is because I read it during a time in my life of constant change. Art and I got married, moved out of Texas and then I went through the process of finding a new job while staying at my inlaws. But I was happy when I finally was able to spend an afternoon to read through it.

Like all of her work, it was easy and quick read. I get pulled into her work very easily. What I find amazing about this particular work is how she pulls you into the life of the Jewish community in Nazareth during the time of Jesus' childhood. You can tell she did her research. There are details of how the people reacted to each other in day to day life, how they practiced religious life and the political situations from the time of Herod's life. I found it all together amazing reading the details of how Jews lived at the time of Jesus. I know that it is fiction, but there appears to be truths to the everyday actions of those different characters in the book. In fact in the last of the book she wrote about how much research she did for the book.

The main part of the book which I found quite amazing is when his older brother goes to the temple goes to give a sacrifice. I'm sure that most of you have no idea of what I am talking about, but it was a description of this ceremony of the Jews where they went to Jerusalem to give sacrifice for their sins. The way she described it (I believe, I read it a couple of weeks ago and I don't have it in front of me) is that they brought two animals to be sacrificed. One was killed and the other was wet free into the woods. It was a way of God releasing one's sins. To me it seemed that there was a direct relation to this ceremony and the idea of the purpose of Jesus' life. Jesus was born of God to sacrifice his life for us all. He was born as a sacrifice. He was the one who released us from our sin. Not saying that he was born strictly for the sacrifice. He was also an example for us all. Jesus lived his life as a human and had the same feelings of a human. He was the human part of God.

Later on I talked with Art on a subject that made me think more of the book. He asked since Jesus received the Holy Spirit as all of us did, how is he really that different from us? Why is it that we do not have the same capability as him? When I was thinking about it I realized that there really was a stronger relation between us and Jesus than I had really thought of before. The main difference is that he was directly from God as His son. Though he was still born of Mary. Mary was human and was a good woman, but was a woman. She created the human part of Jesus. She is the reason that we have so much in common with Jesus. So in a sense we are not that different from him. We have the guidance of the Holy Spirit just as Jesus did. Am I wrong in this assumption? That is not something that came from Anne Rice's book, but just something on my mind as a result of reading her work.

I think of Jesus as the most important figure in history. From the religious position that he maintains it seems to escape most that he was still human. I really loved that Anne Rice decided to write a book on Jesus, and from what I read it seems that she is going to write an entire series of books on his life. I think that it is quite a character to take on to write about and she did it well. I'm also glad to see that she came back to the faith of her childhood and using her talent in such a way.

The Best Spiritual Book of the Year

Part 2: Nazis and Republicans do not mix

I was listening to the radio on the way home from work the other day. It is an hour drive so I either listen to comedy or the news so I don't start nodding off. I love satellite radio! Anyway, I heard something about how there was a group that was trying to pass through a fat tax. It would be a tax to encourage good health and to discourage the consumption of fatty foods. I don't remember what exactly they are wanting to tax, but the point is to enforce health standards for the community. To have the state in charge of the promotion of healthy living. This made me think of my last post on Nazis and Republicans. The point that I was getting at was that there are more comparisons between the Democratic party and the Nazis than the Republican party. The main reason is because that the Nazis were socialists. In that earlier post I put up some of the 25 points that Hitler went by. One of them reminded me of the fat tax....

The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young.

It is not exactly same thing as the fat tax, but the basis of the ideas are the same. Hitler believed greatly in the promotion of physical health. It is also a known fact that he was avidly against smoking. He made it the state's responsibility to keep people in physical health. The idea behind the fat tax is the same thing. The idea is to find a way to keep people on a national level from consuming fatty foods. I found an article that said the main reason that Bush was against this fat tax was because it went against personal responsibility. In this article it said that this was something that the WHO (World Health Organization) was promoting, for the state to regulate people's health in that way. The point is that this is a socialist idea, and not something that conservatives encourage.

I'll continue with another point that I put up....

We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility.

This one was the main one that I wished to discuss. I was reading about the Anglicans and their dispute with homosexuality. Art told me how there seemed to be so much contraversy over this that it seemed that there might be a split into a American Anglican Church. We were talking about how it seemed that there was a trend of churches splitting in American society. I know that there were problems in the American Catholic community with giving communion to politicians that are known to be pro-choice. There is a trend of people trying to force homosexuality and women priests on the Catholic Church, and I know it is happening with others as well. Positive Christianity has its similarities. It was a promotion of how Jesus as an "Aryan". Also, according to Wikipedia...

They attempted to separate Nazi officials from church affiliations, banning nativity plays and calling for an end to daily prayers in schools.

This was only after the Positive Christianity movement seemed to not catch on. It ended in 1945. Now how many times have you heard reference to Jesus being gay or think of how the ideas of women leadership in the Catholic Church are promoted with either Mary Magdalene or Mother Mary. The point is the distortion of the ideas of Christianity to the personal goals of the state. When they do not conform there is this eradication of the church. United States was referred to as a Christian Nation at one point, but it seems to be widely accepted today that we are secular. In a socialist country it is difficult to keep with the ideas of Chistianity because it promotes the importance of the individual within the community. It does not promote the supreme importance of the state. I was taught at one point about the points of government structure in the Old Testament. Even within that structure there were levels of checks and balances that made sure that God was being followed. I think it should be noticeable how the Democratic party goes along with this. There seems to be a movement in this country to both eradicate Christianity from public view and to change the church to go along with other's political agenda.

Well, I wouldn't say that the Democratic party is the same as the Nazis, but the point is that they are socialist. One thing that I was taught from my first political science class in high school is that the difference between the main two countries in our country is one believes in more control of the state and the later the control of the individual. It is known that the Republican party is for reducing taxes and not for promoting more and more social programs. The democrats are for the central power of the state. They inherently do not trust people to take responsibility for what they do. With that comes welfare programs and the regulation of the day to day things of society. The main difference is that the Democrats are anti-military. Is there a situation which the liberals would be for military action? That is good question that is for another post at another time.

Well, I'm just finishing up on what I started a week ago. I can't stand the remarks of conservatives being Nazis. Maybe you guys can give me a better idea of how the Republicans could be seen as Nazis. Of course that means proposing an argument, not calling me a dumbass... So let me know. I'll actually comment back this time.

Part 1: Nazis and Republicans do not mix

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the Nazis? I'll give a few that come to my mind: Hitler, World War II, The Holocaust, The Third Reich, The SS, and ethnic cleansing. There are a couple that I read recently that are new to me: The Nationalist Socialist Program and Positive Christianity. The only reason that I have come across these sites is because of my curiosity in why there are constant references between the Republic Party and The Nazis. I'll give examples here and here:



If you look it up online or just go to various liberal political blogs you will find plenty of remarks of comparing Bush and other republicans to Nazis. The reasons I see for these comparisons so far are because republicans are accused of being fascists, racists (homophobes as well), militaristic and nationalists. The reasons for using the comparison between Hitler and Bush seems to be solely on the shear hatred that people on the left have for him and there are references to his grandfather being connected to Nazi Germany. That is also including the other reasons above that are associated with all republicans or conservatives. The only one I will not respond to is the referece to his family connection. Do you take on the burden of your grandfather or even your father's sins? Why should he?

So to start off. What are the Nazis? They were the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party. According to Wikipedia (which I love to use if you cannot already tell):

"The National Socialist program also contained a number of points that supported democracy and even called for wider democratic rights. These, like much of the program, lost their importance as the Party evolved, and were ignored by the Nazis after they rose to power".

I'll give an idea of what some of the 25 points were. All know that the party believed in the superiority of thier race and were not a fan of foriegners. Here are others...

"All citizens must have equal rights and obligations".

"Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-slavery".

"In consideration of the monstrous sacrifice in property and blood that each war demands of the people personal enrichment through a war must be designated as a crime against the people. Therefore we demand the total confiscation of all war profits".

"We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries". "We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age welfare".

"The state is to be responsible for a fundamental reconstruction of our whole national education program, to enable every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education and subsequently introduction into leading positions. The plans of instruction of all educational institutions are to conform with the experiences of practical life. The comprehension of the concept of the State must be striven for by the school [Staatsbuergerkunde] as early as the beginning of understanding. We demand the education at the expense of the State of outstanding intellectually gifted children of poor parents without consideration of position or profession".

"The State is to care for the elevating national health by protecting the mother and child, by outlawing child-labor, by the encouragement of physical fitness, by means of the legal establishment of a gymnastic and sport obligation, by the utmost support of all organizations concerned with the physical instruction of the young".

"We demand freedom of religion for all religious denominations within the state so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race. The Party as such advocates the standpoint of a positive Christianity without binding itself confessionally to any one denomination. It combats the Jewish-materialistic spirit within and around us, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our nation can only succeed from within on the framework: common utility precedes individual utility".

Basically, you could take these points from any socialist platform. Germany was a democracy that optionally gave over to a socialist party. I like this explanation of the Nazis. Hitler was avidly against the use of tobacco and rose to power in support of the working class. He was for nationalization. In what way is this possibly conservative?

I'll split this one up into more than one post. I'm big on research and I couldn't in good conscience continue with any argument without some sort of backing. The next post I will continue on how some of the ideas of Nazi party are still alive today, but it is not with the conservative or religious right population. The reason... moral relativism. I'll update soon.

Watercolor from wedding photos

Its that time again....

Yes, I know that hurricane season started a few days ago and I don't know if the rest of the country is receiving the predictions like we are down here. I assume you are based on the cartoon, but we had a special program on it the other night on the weather. There is no doubt that it is time to prepare. I've decided from my last experience with Katrina that what I want more than anything else is a battery powered fan. I'm not sure where I can get one, but I believe that is essential to surviving the Miami heat when the electricity is out. It gets very very hot, and they take days to turn back on the electricity. I just think it is kind of funny that everyone thinks that this season will be devastating. I personally think things should be good if you take history as a guide. Before last season the last time there was a major hurricane to hit south Florida was Andrew. I'm not too worried... But I'm still getting the fan. We will also be as prepared as anyone else. I think. If you are interested at all in what will happen this hurricane season, even if you are not, then you should read this article. It is Carl Hiaasan and it is about a guy who does quite well in predicting hurricanes, but has a real unconventional way of doing it. And if you do live near the coast it is always good to be prepared for such events, but you know already that it is just part of the normal life of your home.

Seby

Napoleon