Sunshine patriotism

Recently I received the following in an email:

We have a little less than one month and counting to get the word out all across this great land and into every community in the United States of America .

If you forward this email to least 11 people and each of those people do the same ... you get the idea.

THE PROGRAM:

On Friday, September 11th, 2009, an American flag should be displayed outside every home, apartment, office, and store in the United States . Every individual should make it their duty to display an American flag on this eighth anniversary of one of our country's worst tragedies. We do this to honor those who lost their lives on 9/11, their families, friends and loved ones who continue to endure the pain, and those who today are fighting at home and abroad to preserve our cherished freedoms.

In the days, weeks and months following 9/11, our country was bathed in American flags as citizens mourned the incredible losses and stood shoulder-to-shoulder against terrorism. Sadly, those flags have all but disappeared. Our patriotism pulled us through some tough times and it shouldn't take another attack to galvanize us in solidarity.. Our American flag is the fabric of our country and together we can prevail over terrorism of all kinds

So, here's what we need you to do .

(1) Forward this email to everyone you know (at least 11 people). Please don't be the one to break this chain. Take a moment to think back to how you felt on 9/11 and let those sentiments guide you.

(2) Fly an American flag of any size on 9/11. Honestly, Americans should fly the flag year-round, but if you don't, then at least make it a priority on this day.

Thank you for your participation.

To which I replied:

I'm really not much of a patriot. This country did not treat the soldiers of the Vietnam Era well at all. And now everybody is waving flags and saying "thank you for your service" and "God Bless America" and "support our troops" and... well you get the idea. Perhaps I am bitter and jaded, but it looks to be too little too late. Yeah, I am thankful for the kids who put their asses on the line in Afghanistan to combat the Taliban (which we invented and armed), and I stand for the flag as it passes instead of texting friends on my cell phone like all the kids do today. And while I wouldn't call it love, I like my country. But I have recently discovered something about myself... I'm not really a blindly loyal kind of guy. I will not "go once more into the breech" nor will I "go quietly into the night". I pick my battles and will choose the hill that I want to die on. And it won't have anything to do with 9-11 or flying my flag.

Now I don’t mind people feeling patriotic and flying flags as long as they don’t poke me in the eye with them. I won’t be sending the email to 11 people and I won’t be flying my flag (yes I own one) on Sept. 11^th. I will not be bullied into pretending I am a patriot when I am not.

But the question stands, at least in my mind: If all those people who flew flags after 9-11 were patriots, are they no longer patriots now because they aren’t flying flags? And if so, what value is a sunshine patriot?

Get the lead out!

As a public service I am posting this list of vitamin products that contain lead according to a lawsuit filed by the Santa Cruz County (CA) district attorney's office.

DEFENDANTS NAMED IN THE LAWSUIT

21st Century Healthcare, Inc.;

Apex Fitness Group, A division of 24 Hour Fitness USA;

Biosan Laboratories;

Bluebonnet Nutrition Corporation;

Bronson Nutritionals;

Buried Treasure, a division of Life Line Food Inc.;

Clinician's Choice;

D&E Pharmaceuticals;

Davinci Laboratories of Vermont;

Delaware Natrol;

Designs For Health;

Douglas Laboratories

Dynamic Health Laboratories;

Enzymatic Therapy;

Esteem Products; Fairhaven Health;

Foodscience Corporation;

Foodscience of Vermont;

Futurebiotics; Genspec Labs

Health Authority Dba Doctor's Trust Vitamins;

Hxn Corporation Dba Health Xpress;

Integrative Therapeutics;

Irwin Naturals;

J.R. Carlson Laboratories;

Kirkman; Kordial Nutrients;

Maximum International;

Metabolic Maintenance Products;

Metagenics;

Mountain Naturals of Vermont;

Natural Organics;

Nature's Secret;

Nature's Way Products;

Nbty;

New Chapter;

Nexgen Pharma;

Nf Formulas;

Now Foods;

Nutribiotic;

Nutritional Specialties;

Nutri-west;

Olympian Labs;

Only Natural;

Optimal Nutrients, USA, a division of Pegasus Plus;

Pioneer Nutritional Formulas;

Pure Essence Laboratories;

Rainbow Light Nutritional Systems;

Solgar;

Spring Valley Herbs & Natural Foods;

Supernutrition Life-extension Research;

The Daily Wellness Company;

The Vitamin Shoppe Industries;

Threshold Enterprises, the Parent Company Of Source Naturals;

True Fit Vitamins;

Universal Nutrition;

Wyeth Laboratories.

Proof of the existence of God

The ontological argument for the existence of God was proposed by (Saint) Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109). It was considered to be logical proof of the existence of God. Anselm′s argument for the existence of God is as follows:

1. God is something of which nothing greater can be thought.

2. God may exist in the understanding.

3. It is greater to exist in reality and in the understanding than just in understanding.

4. Therefore, God exists in reality.

This "proof" stood until Emmanuel Kant refuted it in his Critique of Pure Reason in 1781. Kant disputed the very concept of an absolutely necessary being (i.e. God) and pointed out the logical inconsistency of using existence as a proof for existence. (Points 3 and 4 above.) It is the same old circular reasoning and tautology that people rely on today to prop up their flimsy theories.

Now I'm a real sucker for proofs of the existence of God. If you have one send it to me. I love them. But all proofs so far have been.... ah... disproven. Typically if you ask someone for proof of the existence of God they will say "just look out the window... where do you think all that came from?" Ironically, though not any proof, this stands as a pretty good argument for the existence of God... or the Flying Spaghetti Monster... and that's the problem with this proof. Most people will give you the conditional proof (which is Descartes invention) of the 4 states of being.

1) You believe in God and God exists.

2) You believe in God and God doesn't exist.

3) You don't believe in God and God exists.

4) You don't believe in God and God doesn't exist.

In cases 2 and 4 it doesn't matter what you believe. In the case of 3 you are in trouble. Therefore to maximize your chances you should believe in God and if in case 1 you will be rewarded. Though I have doubts that a God will welcome you into heaven just because you checked the odds chart.

Other philosophers like Kierkegaard talk of the leap of faith that you must make and Buber talks about the necessity of a personal relationship with God in his I-thou (Ich und du) work. But aside from the ontological argument, these are not proofs.

Cruising through my local public library the other day I came across a book by Dean L. Overman called "A Case for the Existence of God" where he maintains that Kant (and David Hume) were wrong. Overman states on page 33:

In recent thought philosophers have noted that David Hume misunderstood the term necessary to mean a "logical necessity" as opposed to a "conditional necessity"; A "conditional necessity is the result of valid deductions from premises and conditions. Hume's objection does not stand when applied to a conditional necessary being who is without beginning or end and is independent of anything else.

Then on page 36 he states:

Kant followed Hume's error so that his objection to the cosmological argument does not stand.

A couple of problems here. First Kant did not follow Hume. Hume was an empiricist and denied the possibility of knowledge through reason. Kant was arguing from pure reasoning. Second Overman talks about Kant's erroneous refutation of the cosmological argument. Kant does not address the cosmological argument, rather he addresses the ontological argument which is a different thing altogether. Overman insists that Kant thought the cosmological argument was based on the ontological argument. I have yet to find where Kant talks about the cosmological argument. At this point I tossed Overman's book across the bedroom, cursed him roundly and told my wife I was going to sleep. She said "thank God" under her breath... which is the best argument for the existence of God that I have heard to date.

The next day I was thinking about Overman's book and I picked it back up and glanced through the table of contents. And skimmed a couple of chapters before deciding what this guy was up to. Like the Republican's and Rush Limbaugh (my current favorite villains) he is inventing new terminology to support his position. Example: Sarah Palin is said to have criticize Obama's health care plan on the basis that it contains a "death board" making eugenic type decisions for the medical care of the elderly and terminally ill. Or Limbaugh saying that Obama's appointee to set the salaries of CEOs of corporation that took bail out money are analogous to Robert Ley of the Nazi German Labor Front (DAF) and thus implied that the current administration is a bunch of Nazis. Apparently calling people Commies is out of vogue and they had to revert to calling them Nazis and fascists.

Although I can't "prove" that.

Is it education or a capitalist plot?

I decided to take down this blog entry as it was causing me too much grief in my personal life.

As Maxwell Smart would say - sorry about that chief.