RELIGIOUS SATIRICAL POETRY: Bill Moyers / “The Poetry of Philip Appleman” / VIDEO

Bill talks with and invites readings by renowned poet, novelist, and editor Philip Appleman, whose creativity spans a long life filled with verse, fiction, philosophy, and religion. The author of nine books of poetry, three novels, and six volumes of non-fiction, Appleman’s most acclaimed work includes explorations of the life and theories of Charles Darwin. A scholar of Darwin, Appleman edited the critical anthology Darwin, and wrote the poetry books Darwin’s Ark and Darwin’s Bestiary, earning him praise for illuminating the “overwhelming sanity” of Darwin’s thought with clarity and wit. Appleman’s latest poetry collection is Perfidious Proverbs.

Watch video here . . .

MUSIC – PROGRESSIVE ROCK: Rush / “The Trees” / 1978


There is unrest in the forest
There is trouble with the trees
For the Maples want more sunlight
And the Oaks ignore their pleas

The trouble with the maples
And they’re quite convinced they’re right
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light
But the oaks can’t help their feelings
If they like the way they’re made
And they wonder why the maples
Can’t be happy in their shade

There is trouble in the forest
And the creatures all have fled
As the maples scream ‘Oppression!’
And the oaks, just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights
‘The oaks are just too greedy
We will make them give us light’
Now there’s no more oak oppression
For they passed a noble law
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet,
Axe,
And saw

CHRISTIAN BIGOTRY: Lawrence M. Krauss / Does Religious Liberty Equal Freedom to Discriminate?

[…]

. . . [T]he right to marry, . . . is a secular legal issue. Even if the state were to recognize same-sex marriages, churches, mosques or synagogues or other places of worship would not be required to hold wedding ceremonies within them or sanction such marriages because the no legal standing is attributed to such ceremonies or sanctions. Where is the attack on liberty?

[…]

. . . [T]he banner of ‘religious liberty’ is effectively more akin to the ‘right to discriminate.’ For the state to treat organized religious groups differently than it does other organizations implies special rights for these groups to behave differently than others. But this requires such religious groups to determine who is in the “in’ group, and who is in the ‘out’ group, and because religious doctrine guides moral behavior, it provides an opportunity for members of the group to condemn the behavior of those not in the group.

[…]

. . . [W]hen organized religious groups gain power of any form, power over the state, power over women, or power over children, the results inevitably lead to restrictions on liberty based on discrimination [bigotry].

Read more . . .

HEALTH CARE: Socialized Medicine: Why Everyone Should Share the Costs / Al Stefanelli

“A society will be judged by how it cares for it’s weakest members.”

Understand, I do not begrudge anyone from earning a profit, nor do I have anything personally against the entrepreneurial spirit. We should all do what we can to better ourselves. However, I am of the position that health care is not a privilege, but a right. As well, I reason that we are all morally obligated to ensure that each of us has access to it. That the United States does not have a national health care program is a major moral failure, and what we have in place is little more than a venue for unethical profiteers within the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.

[…]

The United States needs a tax-payer funded (single-payer) national health care system. Totally and completely socialized and incurring no costs to anyone beyond what their taxes pay. Those who cannot pay due to disability, unemployment or other circumstances beyond their control should have the same access as those who do.

In my opinion, putting a dollar ahead of the health and welfare of a human being is immoral. National or Socialized medicine should be a no-brainer.

[…]

There should never be any individual who’s life is less important than a number on a profit and loss ledger.

Read more . . .