rhetoric loud and often

Spain's lower house of parliament has approved the right of homosexual couples to marry and adopt children. Justice Minister Juan Fernando Lopez Aguilar argued that the bill overcomes "the barriers of discrimination, many of them with deep historical or primitive roots, which affect rights and freedoms and, in a specific way, the extension of free choice in the search for happiness, an unwritten basic right".
A civil contract in France called the Pacs already gives some rights to cohabiting couples, regardless of their sex, but not the full rights of marriage, notably over taxes, inheritance and adoption.

Once again the rhetoric. Once again the majority is over ruled. Why not call the heterosexual union of two people marriage and that of homosexual people myopiascod since all that they are after is the rights? Right? What ever happened to “The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment” called discrimination? Those of us who are heterosexual and married and want to keep the distinction and are in the majority are bad? Does 'marriage' mean something which they want badly enough - and can not have - that they will do anything by any means to 'acquire' it? Funny we can not use Mrs. because it will make a distinction But if we are in authority, as the president or in parliament we want our name and picture very strongly distinguished every where and every when, Even when the rest of us do not want it. We have the right to make the distinction when we want to and not when we want to, and to with the majority. And what is this “primitive” innuendo? Oh yes, evolution is not a religion, it is a scientific fact. Well then the French guys got it all wrong, those rights “free choice in the search for happiness” are inaliable, France can’t give them away. Or can they? (I just decided to spell that word differently, so the dictionary can’t find it, oh well… ‘That cannot be transferred to another or others’ – inalien…)

No doubt, we are our own gods. Each of us. We will exert our rights even if we have to drag heaven down out of the sky to do it. Legally, pseudo democratically, or how ever else. And If we can use all the other illegal pseudo democratic people and things that people have done in the world to justify our right so be it.

Spring Watch

Spring has sprung. I have seen deer quite often recently and a few cyote. The bird list is getting longer, Hawks, falcon, geese, ducks, blue bird, heard robins though not yet seen them, never can tell what is geese and what cranes when they go flying over, gopher. Dandilion blossem, green grass. Also my spelling is getting ... well is still bad. It is spring!
So what is it that brings on class distinctions in societies? According to some internet articles it is only in the past short while that society has become class oriented, of course they consider human history to be Very long. Funny, it seems that there are some of the strongest class distinctions among societies that according to their religion and other factors one would think would not have such a thing as class distinction.

Cage Match

Musically speaking;

On CBC radio two in the morning on Music and Company the host, Tom, has a feature every week that seems to be quite popular. The idea is to compare two pieces of music and let the audience decided which one should “be left in the cage” and which one should be “let free”. Who wins? This week was the “Halleluiah match”; the Halleluiah chorus led by Sir G vrs the chorus led by Sir B. Sir G won by four votes. Tom said that the four people working on the program would each have voted for Sir B so it would have been a tie if they could have voted.
My vote would have gone to Sir B, because to me although musically speaking, the performance by Sir G was more impressive and technically better the performers seemed to be most impressed with their own performance and my attention was drawn to that performance whereas musically speaking, in listening to the performance led by Sir B I could think of the subject of the music rather than concentrating on the music itself. “Lord God Almighty”.
Is the purpose of music objective or subjective? Or both or either? I suppose that sometimes music is for subjective purposes, therapeutic, and sometimes the purpose of the music should be to draw attention to some one of some thing and not to itself. The question comes in how to do that. How best to draw attention to the subject at hand?
Thinking especially of the Halleluiah chorus how do we best glorify the Lord? Should we perform the biggest, best most technically accurate music or should we just let it rip so to speak? I do find it amusing when someone tries to find something wrong with the offering that Cain brought to the Lord. It was not the offering that was wrong, it was the person. God stipulated the when where what why and how of the offerings that Israel brought to Him, but even if someone got all those things right they still could be wrong. There will be people in heaven who never were baptized. Do we celebrate the Lord’s Supper or the death, resurrection and second coming of the Lord when we eat and drink? I have said before that Dale C’s book “How to…Influence People” is dangerous because it works! Even though Dale reiterates time and again throughout the book that you must be sincere in following the precepts of the book, the principles work without the sincerity. There are a lot of different kinds of music and ways to perform music, is sincerity all that counts?
It takes a special blend of adherence to the rules, sincerity, spontaneity and faith in the work of the Lord Jesus Christ to Glorify the Lord, “And He shall reign for ever and ever”! !