You misquoted me. I did not say that I know what the outcome will be. I posed the question about individuals of conscience following their own local more's or dealing with the diversity of the whole nation. Hugh Carey an Irish Catholic was governor of New York State for all of the people. We've had Italian governors who have been denied communion because they were governors to all of the people and not just their church.
As for six of anything, I think that's too much. The question rides on the back of basically two Catholics, one liberal and one mixed. Everyone else is pretty solid in the Opus Dei camp. Roberts and Alito speak about their mother's wishes, anti-Rowe v Wade, and Scalia and Thomas are both followers of Opus Dei from the same church as was the CIA turncoat Hanson. I don't know how they will all vote but we could have a "Man for all Seasons" thing happening here but out of the context of resisting a Tyrant. I am at present composing a letter to my family about this and suspect I will be drummed out because I believe a woman doesn't have to choose to have an abortion because of Rowe V. Wade and I don't think that over population or poorly capitalized and poorly educated children represent a moral choice for the well being of society. With the diversity in America I believe we need legal representatives of all groups or at least people sensitive to the traditions and cultures of all groups. Intelligence is necessary as is skill but both in the hands of a narrow minded despot could give us another genocide. Think Andrew Jackson who most Americans still revere. I've given up visiting our sacred lands because of the praise for instruments of genocide by the local populations, educational establishments and governments of those states. Funny you should ask about Indians. My white conservative cousin senator and the lawyer senator from my university both refused to place an accomplished Indian legal scholar on a lower federal court because Obama recommended him. Of course, what does Oklahoma have to recommend its uniqueness other than Indian people? Instead of it being about business they would rather be drab hicks with poor healthcare. I know you didn't mean to misquote me but that was your inference and not my opinion. REH From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 3:07 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? Ray, I wonder what you would have said if there were 6 native Indians on the court and someone had said, well I know what the outcome will be with 6 native Indians on the Court. Best to keep religion, and ethnicity out of it. Arthur From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray Harrell Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 12:49 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? Not stereotyping but context. Why do you think birth control is now back on the table? Who knows who will be true to church doctrine and react provincially from their own personal beliefs? It calls into question whether a court is possible at all when the blind folded bare breasted lady has her boobs covered by the current fashion and the scales she holds are ignored because she can't see she's being conned. I'm just watching. The word is agagasesdi. REH From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 12:39 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? I meant it was the supreme court of the us. Wasn't getting into ethnicity or religion of justices. Interesting that you have done so. arthur From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray Harrell Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 11:52 AM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? Nope, that was the Warren Court. The Warren court was the only liberal court we've had since the Marshall court that found for the Cherokees against Andrew Jackson in the 1830s. After that it was conservative all the way to Warren who fooled them having been appointed by Eisenhower as a conservative. Same institution but this court with six Roman Catholics is going to be an interesting ride. REH From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 10:16 AM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? Same one that decided "Brown v The Board of Education" From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray Harrell Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 9:59 PM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tribes? Ah yes, the Supreme "Court" the same one that believed in "separate but equal" and that declared the "American Indian Crimes Codes" legal that banned Indian Religions because they were land based and would not submit to having their "Jerusalem's" sold to the local "gold merchants." We were forbidden to teach our religion or pray in public until 1978 by U.S. law. Once the land was gone we were free to pray again but without our "Israel." That same Supreme Court that struck down a part of our religions even as late as 1994. What was it Whitehead said: the paradox is now fully established that utmost abstractions are the true weapons with which to control our thought of concrete fact. As for Ed's comments? What about your comments Ed about the Indian people in Canada and how it's sad but necessary that "history is passing them by" when David Bohm said that they spoke Quantum speech? (F. David Peat: "Lighting The Seventh Fire" Birch Lane Press, 1994, pg. 238) I remember a conversation with a Jewish scientist studying voice with me. We were talking Castaneda and how he believed Castaneda's books just couldn't be true. (Of course they aren't) I asked him why and he had the guts to say that "if it was true, what does that make us?" Since 1978 I have discovered much more radical and civilized workings by my ancestors than Castaneda even imagined with his fanciful stories. Like Goldhagen said, it's easy to create abstractions about something you don't know anything about. You've told me your background but do you speak those languages or did you draw your conclusions about them and their history from their descriptions in English? It wasn't until the Brazilian anthropologists began to speak the language of the Chingu people that they believed the huge cultures that had been lost and the science of Terra Preta. Surprisingly the gutting of the jungle that has been bad for global warming has revealed vast civilizations, great cultures lost as well as terrible assumptions by the conquerors descendants that are unscientific, illogical and downright murderous. At the same time, the new dam to feed the energy beast, promises to lose those cultures and their ways to the world forever. (How sad?) The problem is to unravel the mystery of atrocity by telling the truth. One side is never enough and one way to check yourself is to write a novel, a play or an opera about it and see if it makes sense. It took many books before the magnificent history titled "Conquest" by Hugh Thomas could give us a reasonable picture of Tenochtitlan. For twenty years our Keetoowah library had bought every book on that, published and most of it was half-baked and either romantic or scientific trash with incredible pictures to make up for the dearth of genuine knowledge. Then Thomas put them all together along with more research and came up with something that smacked of real human beings who did amazing things as well as bad things. Just like everyone else. And what it said about Cortes? Well, he was like the my scientist voice student. He worried about what it said about him, and he should as his tactics were the same as Genghis at Samarkand and both sides at the world treasure of Hue in 1968. The general critical reviews of Conquest which read like all of the other typical stories of the fall of Tenochtitlan convinces me that they didn't finish the book or their prejudice was so complete that they couldn't "get it." I won't quote it but I would recommend escaping the typical provinciality by beginning with the end of the book from chapter 33 to the end. Beginning at the first is like an urban renewal justification for the fire of London in reverse. Better still one should remember Pissarro and the loss of the incredible stone technologies that his "Cortes like" choices brought for simple Gold. He was gold standard kind of guy. But where does that bring us to the Holocaust? I would suggest that along with Ben Kiernan's "Blood and Soil" we end up at Hannah Arendt's meeting with Eichmann in 1968 and how disappointed she was with his ordinariness. Science and Economics both strive for scale and generic production for the purpose of profit of some sort. Arent's comment was to call Eichmann's sense of scale: "banal." But what is the abstract principle beneath the banality? It too is banal and believed both by millions of people of faith in both of the offspring religions of Judaism. Snip, snip, snip 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4790 - Release Date: 02/05/12 _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4792 - Release Date: 02/06/12 _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4792 - Release Date: 02/06/12 _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4792 - Release Date: 02/06/12
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
