Proposed Bill Intended to Define, and Condone Corporal Punishment of Children Dies in Commitee

http://www.kansascity.com/2014/02/19/4834744/kansas-spanking-bill-will-not.html As John Stewart mentioned on his show http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/21/jon-stewart-kansas-corporal-punishment_n_4830881.html , Kansas legislator, Gail Finney, proposed a bill to legally indicate what corporal punishment, as contrasted with supposed physical abuse, is about. Now some might wonder what's wrong with that. Well I assert that, in all fairness, no one of any age, sex, or position should ever be subject to acts of aggression. I mean strict fundamentalist Muslims might insist that they would never abuse their wives, merely correct them with corporal punishment, as a last resort. And they likewise have preconditions as to how one is to properly discipline wives, and children. http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=articles&id=158765 , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChnpaMK1oLQ , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIwdb3lFEUE.Incidentaly, when I told my mother of this, that according to Islamic principles, a man is not to beat his wife as he would a donkey http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/3683071/Lessons_in_how_to_beat_your_wife/ , and that the best of men are those whom behave best to their wives http://muslim-responses.com/Womens_Honarable_Position_/Womens_Honarable_Position_ , her response to me was /"oh thanks"/. So if a woman is not willing that even her husband have such authority over her, to inflict pain upon her, even in a most mild fashion, why should children, who are all the more so vulnerable, be treated any different, if not worse? If we are to permit children to be hurt in this manner, then in order to be consistent, we must also allow husbands the perogative to likewise strike his wife. I feel that a persons supposed freedom of religion, such as with the tradition of corporal punishment of delinquent subjects in a patriarch's family, must be countered by the recognized individual right to freedom from fear, in a modern, free, civil society. And anyway, even with Christianity, the scriptures counter balance the prescription of flogging http://www.openbible.info/topics/spanking_children, and even stoning http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+21%3A18-21&version=KJV, of children , are counteracted by these verses http://www.hiddenhurt.co.uk/bible_verses.html , http://www.holybible.com/resources/living_learning/fall_1999/provoke_not_children.htm. And God requires not only that we do justly, but also that we love mercy, and walk humbly with God. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah+6:8&version=KJV And one is not humble if one exalts oneself over another, and not loving mercy if one is brutal towards one's family. And not only is this the opinion of myself, but also that of learned rabbis http://www.unhinderedliving.com/discipline.html , http://www.reformjudaism.org/practice/ask-rabbi/does-judaism-advise-spanking-disobedient-child , http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/hammerman_ethics/sparing_rod. Plus, in addition, a number of christian figures have also come out to discourage the spanking of children http://www.christianpost.com/news/pcusa-passes-resolution-against-spanking-children-77776/ , http://childrenshealthcare.org/?page_id=146, http://www.stophitting.com/index.php?page=unitedmethodist And lastly, from a historical standpoint, through out history children have had possession of deadly weapons. http://www.lordsandladies.org/knighthood-training.htm , http://scriptamus.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/child-soldiers-are-unfortunately-nothing-new/. So the "rod of correction" was counterbalanced by the dagger of protection. A father could beat his son's butt, but the son could react by then spilling his father's guts.So the before referenced verse about not provoking children to wrath was not merely a nice piece of advice, but rather a fair warning. Now of days though, typically children only train with styrofoam versions of weapons, such as with Nerf products. So there is no longer a level ground between the capabilities of violence between adults and minors. And, being that my blog is written from the standpoint of philosophical anarchism, I contend that if a fully free society does not decide to intervene in cases of men striking their dependents, it should also not do anything against children whom fight back against such severe heavy handed oppression. And, in addition to seemingly authorizing the use of force against sons, the Book of Proverbs also authorizes it against anyone more generally, regardless of age. http://biblehub.com/parallel/proverbs/19-29.htm So all in all, I state that the only time one should ever use violence is in response to belligerence. And even then, only in proportionate amount of force. This is in accordance with both the nonaggression principle http://www.5stepstoanarchy.com/what-is-the-non-aggression-principle/ , and just war criteria http://www.iep.utm.edu/justwar/ .

Ohio State Sen. Capri Cafaro Proposes Official Oversight of Would Be Homeschoolers

http://www.tribtoday.com/page/content.detail/id/597010.html I'm not sure what to make of this proposed legislation. I have mixed feelings. On one hand home education should not be allowed to be used as a smoke screen for abuse, and/or other potential crimes. Besides this case, as well as this other even more notorious case http://www.thenation.com/article/nightmare-christianity#, there is also the perceived risk of some homeschoolers turning into terrorists. Case in point http://www.globaljihad.net/view_page.asp?id=226. But as Home Education Magazine points out, http://unschooling.com/homeeducationmagazine/child-abuse-under-the-magnifying-glass-is-there-room-for-growth-for-all-of-us/. And I do not think that homeschool families should be singled out for undue scrutiny. I tend to feel that this is more of an example of a government official wanting to at least seem as if she's trying to do something about this problem. But I rather doubt that in practice it can be all that effective. Especially with the Children's protective services being so overwhelmed and underfunded. Like, if they failed to be able to keep this teen boy safe, after concerns were reported, how does State Senator Cafaro expect that social workers will be able to keep up with all of the parents who request permission to homeschool? Also, a number of homeschooling parents have this sense of entitlement, in that they think of home education as being a divine right, rather than a priviledge granted by the state. So they will be liable to just not notify the state of their activities, and homeschool underground. But as I referred to above, there is a problem of various cults whom educate, more like indoctrinate really, their children at home. Incidently, not only Christians, but also Muslims are engaging in home education http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/21/muslim-families-turn-to-home-schooling/?page=all. And while I'd like to think that many, if not most of these families are peaceful, and law abiding, would it come as a surprise if the political powers that be might feel inclined to want to keep tabs on such people? But I am not convinced that this approach would be all that effective. Plus I feel that if the state, in the interest of child welfare, and public safety, were to thusly intrude upon homeschooler families, they should also conduct investigations into all other familes as well. Only some might think that would be an invasion of privacy. But my point is just that homeschoolers should not be singled out, and unduly impeded by bureaucracy. The problem is not so much that of home schools, but rather cult schools. Yet, in spite of what some people seem to think, homeschoolers are not by and large as socially isolated as Sen. Cafaro seems to think they might tend to be. I mean it's not likely that there will be a case altogether like the plot of "Thr3e", which is both a psychological thriller novel, and film, by Ted Dekker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thr3e_%28film%29 If state involvement is to be deemed to be necessary, I feel that it should simply consist of evaluation, and medical examination, such as it is in Pennsylvania. http://www.education.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/overview_of_homeschooling/20312 , http://home.comcast.net/~askpauline/hs/homeschoolmedical.html As both medical personel, and licensed teachers, as evaluators are required to be, are required by law to report indications of abuse, and/or neglect. And, this has actually worked to stop child abuse. For example, in this one case I know of, there was a Schwartzentruber Amish girl whom was severely mistreated by her family. And, a nurse whom examined her helped her to get away from her adverse circumstances, as related in the last story in this article http://legalaffairs.org/issues/January-February-2005/feature_labi_janfeb05.msp And I don't think you can get more social isolation than the Schwartzentruber Amish. So in my opinion, while the education, health, and well being of children is an important public concern, intrusive government involvement is not called for..

Proposed County Charter Would Create a Corporative State

So I just received in the mail, a copy of a proposed county charter, which you can read here, http://newashtabula.wordpress.com/ashctycharter/. I am personally opposed to this planned change in government. With it's administrator, and economic development commission, I feel that it will mean the rise of creeping, cryptic, social fascism. This would obliviate the difference between the public, and private sectors, and create a corporative state, with crony state capitalism. The tax payers will then have to foot the bill for business expenses, which would only serve to favor special interests, rather than simply the general welfare. I do not feel that economic development planning by itself can effectively better the standard of living, and/or bring about financial prosperity. After all neither Stalin, with his five year plans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-Year_Plans_for_the_National_Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union, or Mao, with his "great leap forward" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward, were able to completely,, and effectively manage the resources, and businesses, of the nation. So I feel that most ideally, the socio-economic system should be made up of co-operation between voluntary associations, instead of governmental regimentation, and patronage. Corporatism is most unamerican, and many persons fought, and died to combat it. But as many voters are ignorant of political science, I fear that this ballot proposal might very well pass. For the majority of the people would not recognize fascism if it bit them on their collective rear, and if it were to return under another name, they will tend to be taken in by such a social movement, and will come to support it. But, as for me, I favor a co-operative commonwealth libertarian munincipality, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_municipalism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-operative_Commonwealth_(society)#Co-operative_commonwealth. But, at any rate, it should by rights be the people as a whole whom shall be entrusted with determining the type of social system we all have. And we shall receive the regime we most deserve, for better or worse.

Americans Accross the Political Divide Oppose Military Action in Syria

And in case anyone reading my blog secretly feels I might be a kook, for having doubts as to the justification, and even the motivation, of the proposed air strikes against Syria, I'm not alone in this regard. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/proudly-patriotic-but-skeptical-on-syria-attack.html Plus, for what it's worth, and if anyone cares, Fmr. Gov. Mike Huckabee stated that he wondered if this might be like the film "Wag The Dog", in which an American president launches a war under false pretenses, in order to divert adverse attention from domestic problems. http://video.foxnews.com/v/2654379993001/syrian-conflict-threatening-the-us-economy/ I've heard it said, by those on the left, that Obama's administration is as if it were another term of George W. Bush. But I think that it's more like a remake of Clinton's, when we got embroiled in various military interventions, such as in Somalia, and Afghanistan. I remember, I was around back then. And I do not feel that it made America more secure from terrorist attacks, as evidenced by 9-11-01. I'm just glad that it's Democrat in office, as president, so that the Republicans, both elected officials, and registered rank and file members, will tend to more so have the strength of their convictions, in opposing government excesses, just as I remember it being when Clinton was in office, as opposed to Bush 2. But I also think that all those whom believe in the value of voting should come apart from the two major parties, which are disgraced by both incompetence, and injustice. I feel that all good charectered Democrats should join the Green Party, and that all well intentioned Republicans should go over to the Libertarian Party. Only then will I expect we will be able to enjoy a new birth of freedom, and peace.

Plot Allegedly Uncovered Concerning a False Flag Operation in Syria

It now appears that the Obama Administration has been implicated in a conspiracy, in cahoots with radical islamists, such as Al Qaeda, which largely make up the so called Free Syrian Army, to launch chemical weapons, and then blame it on the regime of Bashir Assad. If this account is true, then it would parralel the attack on Poland, commited by Germany, under the authority of Adolf Hitler. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Himmler As you should be able to see, from the link I provided, what is alleged has eery similarities with what the Obama administration supposedly is up to, in inciting the U.S. military to intervene in the ongoing civil war in Syria. I trust that in time the truth of the matter, whatever it might be, will be revealed. But at any rate, I do not feel that it is called for American forces to enter into this foreign military affair. Not only are none of the combatants altogether justified in their respective actions, with Assad acting as a sponsor of, and conduit for Iranian supplies to, Hezbollah, and the Free Syrian Army made up of radical islamists, who've commited attrocities themselves, but also Turkey, amongst other Middle Eastern nations, have already sided with the FSA rebels, and France plans on following suit. The only side within Syria that I feel support for is the National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coordination_Committee_for_Democratic_Change. I've never felt more ashamed of my country.

Right-wing Terrorist Groups Threaten to Take Over Rural Villages

Yesterday I saw this on tv.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_uAPO9vv2Y As I've mentioned before, I was born in PA. And spent part of my life growing up there. There tends to not be all that much of a local police force. So mostly the residents just provide for their own self defense. But this situation is not simply a gun club formed with the intention of hunting wild game, and protecting one another. The group in question constitutes a paramilitary political gang. It's starting to resemble the social situation that existed in Weimar Republic Germany. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_paramilitary_groups And worse than Jamel, Germany, of today http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/10065697/Little-welcome-for-strangers-in-Germanys-neo-Nazi-village.html. So I feel that if the state has it's hands tied, and/or is unwilling to confront the problem, then the left should form it's own armed partisan group to counter the aggressive hostile threat. Sort of like the "Reichsbanner" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsbanner_Schwarz-Rot-Gold Only I fear that the center-left liberal establishment might prove to be lilly livered. So what might come to be would be a far-left militia, reminiscent of the "Red Front" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotfrontk%C3%A4mpferbund What I find to be frustrating, and foolish though is that it seems that the powers that be, and the public at large, are more alarmed by the militant left than the fanatical right. I mean if someone were to publicly have displayed a Vietcong flag, such as this ,like how certain people on the right display a Confederate battle flag, and then go out into their back yard, and practice shooting with an automatic rifle, and.or handgun, I imagine that a sizable number of residents would become concerned, and inform the police, or perhaps even form a vigilance commitee to take matters into their own hands, rather than to feel compelled to have to simply put up with it, until the stuff hits the fan, so to speak. In answer to Thom Hartmann's question, about what I'd do if beset by such a scene, if I myself were to have a gun in my vehicle,I likely would have openned fire upon his "constitutional security force". Certainly, if there would ever be a time for pre-emptive attack, it would be then, in facing an imminent threat to the safety, and order, of the public. And this is also why I've largely lost confidence in this government's competance in securing our homeland from attacks. They can not seem to even get a handle on the various street gangs, much less private militias. And then when they do attempt to investigate reports of shots fired, they wind up hassling the likes of me. Presumabley because the authorities have become aware of my philosophical anarchist sentiments. I mean, in a way I get it. After all it was a self described anarchist whom assassinated Pres. William McKinley. But that was an example of a fanatical ideologue. Most left-libertarians, including your's truely, only justify using violence in countering aggression, in order to protect ourselves. And the state should only be cracking down on people who are overt threats to the public, not simply for the point of view they might hold. And, just as I'm not like the Weather Underground http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground ,in all fairness, not all conservatives, even the old right, are like this right-wing paramilitary outfit. So we should all be held to account due to our actions, rather than our opinions.

Bill Is Introduced To End Exemptions For Closed Workshops

http://harper.house.gov/press-release/harper-authors-bill-provide-fair-wages-disabled This is a rare occasion when I actually have praise for the actions of a Republican office holder. :) I have long been a foe of Goodwill Industries, stemming from my own experience having been sent there for evaluation, by the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation. I actually consider them to be an example of modern day indentured servitude. And besides not paying much, if anything, they also lock the workers inside, while they're in operation. This is not only confining, but also potentionally dangerous, given what happened in this one case http://history1900s.about.com/od/1910s/p/trianglefire.htm, and also this http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/factory-workers-locked-flames-spread/story?id=17832077. So I feel that under equal protection of the law, such enterprises should not be permitted to be exempt any longer. America is supposed to guarantee liberty, and justice for all, regardless of social status, and/or special needs. I first read of the public awareness being raised about this issue in this article. http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/21/19062348-disabled-workers-paid-just-pennies-an-hour-and-its-legal?lite I wanted to address some of the comments made by some of the persons interviewed, First off, there are a number of people, not simply those whom are regarded as being disabled in some way, which is actually a broad category which would include neurodiverse persons such as myself, who have such conditions of a PDD http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/development-disorder, whom would be willing to work for free, in return for sustainance. However, as of yet, we do not live with a gift economy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy , where in there is no cost for anything, and Goodwill certainly is making substantial profits off of the products they sell, and the labor they exploit. If however you feel that a job well done should be it's own reward, then you are what's known as an anarcho-communist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-communism. Now I have no quarrel with such people, but I think that Goodwill might take issue with it, and deny them the so called opportunity of fulfilling work, given this one case. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2002/07/can_your_boss_fire_you_for_your_political_beliefs.html Now some people might be thinking, even with all of this being said, that those with various special needs might be in need of vocational rehabilitation, in order to prepare them for the workforce. But who gets to decide who is qualified to be given gainful employment? I'd suppose that such businesses as Goodwill, who utilise such bond laborers will want to keep them for as long as they can get away with it. Unless the "client", as they call their wage slaves/indentured servants, happen to be older. Then they give them credits right off the bat. And furthermore, if such a program were required of every person, before they may seek employment in the job market, the people would regard it as being state sponsored bondage, like something out of Mao Zedong's China. And in response to such a policy, there would be a popular revolt, like perhaps with guns, and the like. So why expect others to do what you yourself would find to be intolerable? I do not feel that it's elitist to have self respect, and to demand to be treated fairly. Oh yeah, by the way, already in certain places those on welfare are being forced into unpaid labor, as my one British counterpart blogger posted about. http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com/2012/08/is-workfare-slavery-tory.html, http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com.es/2012/08/letter-fans-workfare-slavery-tory.html So these are all of the points I can think to make at this time. So I will close by expressing thanks to Rep. Gregg Harper, of Miss. I consider his action on this to be worthy of the historic political party of Abraham Lincoln. I just hope that it shall pass, and subsequently be signed by Pres. Obama. But I suppose that it will receive not only bipartisan support, but also bipartisan opposition. But at least it's a worthwhile try.