Dear friends and colleagues around the nation and around the world,
We are about to embark on a journey towards the creation of a universal access to healthcare plan. It will not be perfect right out the gate but it will be a work-in-progress.
Hopefully the US Plan will be built on the premise that there it a basic human right to pursue one's highst level of attainable wellness in all five realms of health; bio-psycho-social-spiritual and economic health; and that health achievement is a responsibility as well as a right.
President Obama said the other night that our teens don't have the right to drop out of highschool because they are cheating the nation as well as themselves. I contend that the same thing is true of health. We each have an obligation to keep away from harmful and deletarious things (why do girl scout's sell cookies during Lent?) and to keep ourselves moving in healthy directions. When I eat the box of thin mints (I didn't, really!) I hurt not only my figure but the health of my nation. I have the responsibility to stay healthy as a mother, a Professor, a partner, and a citizen.
I believe we also have the obligation to protect our health and our neighbors pocketbooks by living insured. If my children's father, and my late husband, had not responsibly protected our family by buying life insurance in sufficient quantity we would have not been secure and they may not have finished college. If we live without health insurance because that's the only way we can own a car, or a house, or go on vacation then we are living above our means. Uninsured people go to the hospital; in fact they go more frequently than insured folks and they are sicker when they go. What happens then is that they recieve care and everyone else has to pay for it.
We need 100% of our population to pay something for healthcare; putting some "skin in the game" makes us work harder to stay healthy. Even if it's 1% of the earnings of a minimum wage worker or a few dollars a month paid by a non working student it must be a paid item. I don't Coach for free because noone values free. if our senior citizens can pay for Medicare out of SS why can't every 26 year old pay for health insurance?
So....what do you want to see included in a US National Health Care Plan?
My list starts out with universal access to affordable health coaching and I hope for the day when every American has a primary Certified Health Coach. Then physical fitness programs, open access to care for moms by Certified Nurse Midwives or Certified Professional Midwives and homebirths or birthcenter births as the normal, the expected and the standard for low risk moms.
And finally, on my list is support for people with serious health-issues so they can become entrepreneurs, leading solid companies and hiring others with health challenges. For this I am serving as a Coach and Developer for a new non-profit.
Check it out at www.corporatehearts.org and please refer people who meet the criteria for this program to the site.
Your list? Blogg on my good people, blogg on! Then send this link to 10 of your closest people and ask them to do the same.
Happy writing and reading,
Walli
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thomas Deth's Response---
Dear Michael,
Since you asked, I am a confirmed Agnostic. I believe that this is the only life we live and that there is no God and no afterlife.
I do not recognize human life until it is born and then believe it is entitled to the same legal protections that you and I enjoy. This may seem cold and uncaring to you but as I work with adult mentally retarded citizens with a wide range of disabilities I see the life they are locked into and I would not legally try to prevent a woman who decided to terminate a pregnancy when conclusive evidence shows that the child will be born with so many disabilities as to make their life one of pain and confusion. This is, as I see it, is a judgement based on my values.
You appear to have a faith based basis for your position . I respect your views but will work hard to support the right of a woman to terminate or not terminate a pregnency. Until a child is born it is my belief that it is a medical status in which the government has no right to interfere. I might add that I know my sister does not agree with me on this subject.
As far as homosexuality I believe that the type of abnormal behavior thesis you promote was long ago dicarded by Psychiatrists when they eliminated same sex orientation from the DSM. Medical Professionals the world over believe that the orientation is a human condition that only becomes a problem when people catogorize it as such because of religious teachings and dogmas. These beliefs, no matter if they are preached in a loving and caring way are frequently the cause of widesale irrational acts of hate and violence against gay people. I submit as example one the brutal slaying of a innocent young man named Mathew Sheppard in Wyoming by two young men who had been imbued by a cruel and pathelogical hatred of "fags". I believe that if one witnesses the rantings of Rev. Ted Haggard against homosexuality only see him repeatedly have to admit that he has engaged in frequent homosexual activities with male prositutes one has evidence that no matter how much a gay person denies their orientation religious beliefs do not and can not make them straight.
The Catholic Church has been a horrible example of the covering up of the pedophia of hundreds, perhaps thousands of sexually confused clerics that the Church has a long history of transferring from parish to parish. Instead of notifing the legal authorities, as you or I would surely do if we became aware of a horrid crime. These crimes were perpetrated against children by people your faith has taught are to be teachers of the word of your Christ and Lord and his Father, God Himself. The Catholic Church has a lot of pentence to pay to society before its credibility is ever restored on this issue.
The President is who he is and he has made no denial of what he belives on both of these issues. I will support his attempts to bring the freedom of choice to all women and the equality under the law to all people regardless of sexual orientation. While I respect your faith based position I reject it. As I said elections have consequences and we Democats won this election at every level of government and will use the authority granted by the voters to pass laws that refect the President's and the Democratic Party's convenent with the American people. I expect your party's opposition and respect it, but will not be bound by it.
Sincerely,
Thomas Deth
Since you asked, I am a confirmed Agnostic. I believe that this is the only life we live and that there is no God and no afterlife.
I do not recognize human life until it is born and then believe it is entitled to the same legal protections that you and I enjoy. This may seem cold and uncaring to you but as I work with adult mentally retarded citizens with a wide range of disabilities I see the life they are locked into and I would not legally try to prevent a woman who decided to terminate a pregnancy when conclusive evidence shows that the child will be born with so many disabilities as to make their life one of pain and confusion. This is, as I see it, is a judgement based on my values.
You appear to have a faith based basis for your position . I respect your views but will work hard to support the right of a woman to terminate or not terminate a pregnency. Until a child is born it is my belief that it is a medical status in which the government has no right to interfere. I might add that I know my sister does not agree with me on this subject.
As far as homosexuality I believe that the type of abnormal behavior thesis you promote was long ago dicarded by Psychiatrists when they eliminated same sex orientation from the DSM. Medical Professionals the world over believe that the orientation is a human condition that only becomes a problem when people catogorize it as such because of religious teachings and dogmas. These beliefs, no matter if they are preached in a loving and caring way are frequently the cause of widesale irrational acts of hate and violence against gay people. I submit as example one the brutal slaying of a innocent young man named Mathew Sheppard in Wyoming by two young men who had been imbued by a cruel and pathelogical hatred of "fags". I believe that if one witnesses the rantings of Rev. Ted Haggard against homosexuality only see him repeatedly have to admit that he has engaged in frequent homosexual activities with male prositutes one has evidence that no matter how much a gay person denies their orientation religious beliefs do not and can not make them straight.
The Catholic Church has been a horrible example of the covering up of the pedophia of hundreds, perhaps thousands of sexually confused clerics that the Church has a long history of transferring from parish to parish. Instead of notifing the legal authorities, as you or I would surely do if we became aware of a horrid crime. These crimes were perpetrated against children by people your faith has taught are to be teachers of the word of your Christ and Lord and his Father, God Himself. The Catholic Church has a lot of pentence to pay to society before its credibility is ever restored on this issue.
The President is who he is and he has made no denial of what he belives on both of these issues. I will support his attempts to bring the freedom of choice to all women and the equality under the law to all people regardless of sexual orientation. While I respect your faith based position I reject it. As I said elections have consequences and we Democats won this election at every level of government and will use the authority granted by the voters to pass laws that refect the President's and the Democratic Party's convenent with the American people. I expect your party's opposition and respect it, but will not be bound by it.
Sincerely,
Thomas Deth
Michael's response to Thomas...
Bogger's note: Not since the days of Jefferson and Adams have Americans had such quality discourse. I believe it reflects the conversations people all around the country want to have; and if we are to grow closer to decisions, they are discussions we must have; but most don't have the words or the courage needed.
I suppose I have to get their permission to publish these in book form ....but they are worthy of print.
Neither my brother, Thomas, nor Michael are men who take things lightly. Each lives what he believes and each is a great man. Please read both men's writings with this is mind.
I disagree with each, about some fundementals, but the issues they are bold enough to discuss are too important to put away now that the election is over. We put away our divisions. We have one President; one Commander and Chief ; but not one view. I know that Michael is leading his family in actively lifting up President and Mrs. Obama in prayer daily; that he will offer his service to a government led by President Obama and that he will train his children to respect the process by which a solid majority of American's chose the man who will lead this administration.
Please read with this vantage point:
Walli Carranza, PhD
__________
From an email received 1-24-09 from Michael Stolle/Texas
Dear Tom,
Walli has spoken well of you many times as I remember. You are much loved by her.
You are right that Barack Obama was very clear on his position regarding these issues. But I disagree that the majority American endorse his views. I think that many of those who voted for him didn't believe he would go as far as he has or will.
I did not vote him because I believed he would. I'm simply pointing out to those who may be in denial that the hen has come to roost. That those who believed his rhetoric about his being "Prolife" are already being proven wrong.
You say no one is "Pro Abortion". I guess it depends on what you mean by Pro-abortion. Who I call Pro-abortion is anyone who supports the right to abort a human unborn baby is pro-abortion. This would not (of course) include the case of a tubal pregnancy, where the baby can't live and the mothers life is physically in danger because of the abnormal pregnancy. On the contrary current poles show that the majority of Americans do not believe abortion is OK. Even if it were true that the majority believed that murder is OK does that mean that we should legalize murder? Of course not. Since a baby's life begins at conception then since abortion ends that life, it is by definition murder. My point is, the number of people who support abortion has nothing to do with whether abortion should be legal or not. Since it is murder it should not be legal regardless of how many people agree with it.
Regarding Bush's refusal to use embryonic stem cells, it was both moral and ethical and based not on science or politics but based on the premise that no good can come from evil, the evil of using the stem cells from embryoes resulting in the death of the unborn baby. This is basic Catholic tenet, evil can not be done to bring about good. No matter how much good it might bring.
Even if one of my children had some disease that could be healed by the results of these stem cells I could not be for it. President Bush chose the higher road, the higher good. I commend him for his fortitude to make such a tough decision.
Regarding Obama's not being governor of Illinois, good catch. I stand corrected, however, he was senator to Illinois and he did never the less vote against a bill that would have given aid to those fortunate to survive an abortion. what you appear to be saying is because that baby was intended to die by abortion, it MUST NOT live. Since it is now legally born, leaving it to die, is infanticide. Have you ever heard the cry of a baby who is hungry or hurting? How can any refuse the care of that baby. This is why I say he must have a cold heart.
The US Constitution does NOT support Roe v. Wade. That supreme court decision was a travesty of justice of which many legal experts today agree was a bad decision poorly arrived at.
You talk about the separation of church and state. This phrase is found no where in the constiitution. It is found, I believe in the writings of Thomas Jefferson. If you read what he said you would see that the present day understanding of the concept of separation of church and state is no where near what he was talking about. Basically he was saying that the government should not be setting up its own denomination that it has control over. In fact the constitution guarantees the right to practice our faith anywhere. It does not guarantee freedom from religion which is what those who say separation of church and state would have us believe. Prayer and faith based decisions are found throughout the writings of the founding fathers and the wisdom of the Holy Spirit was sought after at the beginning of all the proceedings conducted during the architecture of our form of government.
As for the gay agenda to indoctrinate our children being offensive to you, I apologize, though I'm not sure what it was that offended you. I was stating a fact about their agenda. You can go to their website and find it there yourself. I didn't say they plan to make all the children gay, I said they want teach the children that the gay lifestyle is good and OK and natural. I understand and acknowledge that some people have a disordered tendency for same sex attraction. The fact there are many people who have these tendencies does not make the acting out of these tendencies (ie. lifestyle) OK. It is grave sin, pure and simple. I sympathize with those who struggle daily with all disordered tendencies, but they need to be encouraged to stay in the battle daily rather than given free reign to there fleshly desires. Jesus Christ made it clear that inordinate sexual desires need to be brought under control. It is God's word that says that the practice of homosexual acts is sin just as promiscuity is sin. This is born out both in the old testament and the new. If you would like the passages, I will give them to you. Just let me know.
I don't know if you are Catholic and if you are a practicing Catholic, but you must know that the church has consistently held that the practice of homosexuality is a grave sin. Notice, I emphasize the practice of homosexuality. It is not sin to have the tendency. There are many who have been freed from this tendency. Many have participated in a program called "Courage" and I would invite you anyone who suffers from this tendency to check it out. Again even if the majority of American were active in the gay lifestyle, it doesn't change the fact that it is a grave sin. There are times when Christ calls each of us to suffer in reparation for sins of the world, to die to self and so doing bring souls out of purgatory. Each of these issues regards a suffering party. Christ is calling us to transform suffering to bring forth saints. This is the only explanation that makes any sense for the suffering of good people (and not so good too).
Tom, I wish all the best for you and I will keep you in my prayers,
Take care,
Michael
I suppose I have to get their permission to publish these in book form ....but they are worthy of print.
Neither my brother, Thomas, nor Michael are men who take things lightly. Each lives what he believes and each is a great man. Please read both men's writings with this is mind.
I disagree with each, about some fundementals, but the issues they are bold enough to discuss are too important to put away now that the election is over. We put away our divisions. We have one President; one Commander and Chief ; but not one view. I know that Michael is leading his family in actively lifting up President and Mrs. Obama in prayer daily; that he will offer his service to a government led by President Obama and that he will train his children to respect the process by which a solid majority of American's chose the man who will lead this administration.
Please read with this vantage point:
Walli Carranza, PhD
__________
From an email received 1-24-09 from Michael Stolle/Texas
Dear Tom,
Walli has spoken well of you many times as I remember. You are much loved by her.
You are right that Barack Obama was very clear on his position regarding these issues. But I disagree that the majority American endorse his views. I think that many of those who voted for him didn't believe he would go as far as he has or will.
I did not vote him because I believed he would. I'm simply pointing out to those who may be in denial that the hen has come to roost. That those who believed his rhetoric about his being "Prolife" are already being proven wrong.
You say no one is "Pro Abortion". I guess it depends on what you mean by Pro-abortion. Who I call Pro-abortion is anyone who supports the right to abort a human unborn baby is pro-abortion. This would not (of course) include the case of a tubal pregnancy, where the baby can't live and the mothers life is physically in danger because of the abnormal pregnancy. On the contrary current poles show that the majority of Americans do not believe abortion is OK. Even if it were true that the majority believed that murder is OK does that mean that we should legalize murder? Of course not. Since a baby's life begins at conception then since abortion ends that life, it is by definition murder. My point is, the number of people who support abortion has nothing to do with whether abortion should be legal or not. Since it is murder it should not be legal regardless of how many people agree with it.
Regarding Bush's refusal to use embryonic stem cells, it was both moral and ethical and based not on science or politics but based on the premise that no good can come from evil, the evil of using the stem cells from embryoes resulting in the death of the unborn baby. This is basic Catholic tenet, evil can not be done to bring about good. No matter how much good it might bring.
Even if one of my children had some disease that could be healed by the results of these stem cells I could not be for it. President Bush chose the higher road, the higher good. I commend him for his fortitude to make such a tough decision.
Regarding Obama's not being governor of Illinois, good catch. I stand corrected, however, he was senator to Illinois and he did never the less vote against a bill that would have given aid to those fortunate to survive an abortion. what you appear to be saying is because that baby was intended to die by abortion, it MUST NOT live. Since it is now legally born, leaving it to die, is infanticide. Have you ever heard the cry of a baby who is hungry or hurting? How can any refuse the care of that baby. This is why I say he must have a cold heart.
The US Constitution does NOT support Roe v. Wade. That supreme court decision was a travesty of justice of which many legal experts today agree was a bad decision poorly arrived at.
You talk about the separation of church and state. This phrase is found no where in the constiitution. It is found, I believe in the writings of Thomas Jefferson. If you read what he said you would see that the present day understanding of the concept of separation of church and state is no where near what he was talking about. Basically he was saying that the government should not be setting up its own denomination that it has control over. In fact the constitution guarantees the right to practice our faith anywhere. It does not guarantee freedom from religion which is what those who say separation of church and state would have us believe. Prayer and faith based decisions are found throughout the writings of the founding fathers and the wisdom of the Holy Spirit was sought after at the beginning of all the proceedings conducted during the architecture of our form of government.
As for the gay agenda to indoctrinate our children being offensive to you, I apologize, though I'm not sure what it was that offended you. I was stating a fact about their agenda. You can go to their website and find it there yourself. I didn't say they plan to make all the children gay, I said they want teach the children that the gay lifestyle is good and OK and natural. I understand and acknowledge that some people have a disordered tendency for same sex attraction. The fact there are many people who have these tendencies does not make the acting out of these tendencies (ie. lifestyle) OK. It is grave sin, pure and simple. I sympathize with those who struggle daily with all disordered tendencies, but they need to be encouraged to stay in the battle daily rather than given free reign to there fleshly desires. Jesus Christ made it clear that inordinate sexual desires need to be brought under control. It is God's word that says that the practice of homosexual acts is sin just as promiscuity is sin. This is born out both in the old testament and the new. If you would like the passages, I will give them to you. Just let me know.
I don't know if you are Catholic and if you are a practicing Catholic, but you must know that the church has consistently held that the practice of homosexuality is a grave sin. Notice, I emphasize the practice of homosexuality. It is not sin to have the tendency. There are many who have been freed from this tendency. Many have participated in a program called "Courage" and I would invite you anyone who suffers from this tendency to check it out. Again even if the majority of American were active in the gay lifestyle, it doesn't change the fact that it is a grave sin. There are times when Christ calls each of us to suffer in reparation for sins of the world, to die to self and so doing bring souls out of purgatory. Each of these issues regards a suffering party. Christ is calling us to transform suffering to bring forth saints. This is the only explanation that makes any sense for the suffering of good people (and not so good too).
Tom, I wish all the best for you and I will keep you in my prayers,
Take care,
Michael
My brother's response to Michael
Bogger's Note: Does no one use my blog???? I want to post these because the exchange is much more valuable than any of the debates.
My brother, Thomas is one of the wisest men I know. He is also one of the most servant-hearted people on the planet. His work brining quality mental healthcare to those men and women with severe cognitive impairments is exemplary of why every human being deserves the highest level of healthcare and he demonstrates that this is possible. He makes me very, very proud.
Now if only he'd blog!
______________
Dear Michael and Amy Stolle-
My name is Thomas Deth. I am Dr. Carranza's brother and I actively supported President Obama in the last campaign.
I recognize the concerns you seem to have concerning the President but elections do have consequences and the President made it quite clear his position on both reproductive rights and stem cell research and the equality of gay, lesbian and transgender people during the campaign and his views are endorsed by a large majority of Americans.
No one is "Pro-Abortion". It will be a wonderful day when no woman has to make that choice but to allow a minority who uses their religious beliefs to dictate to the majority is simply not the American way.
Personally, I believe life begins at birth. The Executive Order by former President Bush to refuse to use the Federally controlled unfertalized eggs to develop stem cells to create new organs and repair damaged nerve cells was a morally and ethically undefensible position that was dicated by politics more then science. It made me wonder just whose life the former President was "Pro-Life" for.
I have to correct you factually, President Obama was never Governor of Illinois. As State Senator and as US Senator his position has been consistant with Roe v. Wade. This is because he was sworn to uphold the Consitution and Roe V. Wade has been upheld many times as a Consitutional Right. I respect your opinion but I also respect the US Costitution. I also believe in the Seperation of Church and State and do not believe we should allow those who have found some religious objection to the lawful termination of a unwanted pregnency to use those beliefs to impose a legal burden on women who do not share those beliefs.
As far as your concerns about our children being indoctrinated into the "Gay lifestyle" I have to say I find that extremely offensive. Gay people are born gay. They may try to "pass" as hetrosexual but from family experience with a former Father-in- law who "passed" until late in his 60's before leaving his wife to take up a relationship with another man I can tell you that a person living a lie causes far more damage to the family unit then a person who represents their true self. I might add my former Father in Law was a leader in the Southern Baptist Church who shares your views.
My Sister has as friends a lesbian couple who are the best parents and have contributed more to their community then anyone I have ever met. One was a Policewoman who saved a life by stopping a bullet. If this couple's sexual orientation is a threat to anyone it is only a threat to people who hold irrational beliefs that would shame the Christ to whom they have given their lives. I humbly request you both reexamine your beliefs on this subject.
I hope in the coming months and years your lives will be enriched by the efforts of our most remarkable new President.
Sincerely. Thomas Deth
My brother, Thomas is one of the wisest men I know. He is also one of the most servant-hearted people on the planet. His work brining quality mental healthcare to those men and women with severe cognitive impairments is exemplary of why every human being deserves the highest level of healthcare and he demonstrates that this is possible. He makes me very, very proud.
Now if only he'd blog!
______________
Dear Michael and Amy Stolle-
My name is Thomas Deth. I am Dr. Carranza's brother and I actively supported President Obama in the last campaign.
I recognize the concerns you seem to have concerning the President but elections do have consequences and the President made it quite clear his position on both reproductive rights and stem cell research and the equality of gay, lesbian and transgender people during the campaign and his views are endorsed by a large majority of Americans.
No one is "Pro-Abortion". It will be a wonderful day when no woman has to make that choice but to allow a minority who uses their religious beliefs to dictate to the majority is simply not the American way.
Personally, I believe life begins at birth. The Executive Order by former President Bush to refuse to use the Federally controlled unfertalized eggs to develop stem cells to create new organs and repair damaged nerve cells was a morally and ethically undefensible position that was dicated by politics more then science. It made me wonder just whose life the former President was "Pro-Life" for.
I have to correct you factually, President Obama was never Governor of Illinois. As State Senator and as US Senator his position has been consistant with Roe v. Wade. This is because he was sworn to uphold the Consitution and Roe V. Wade has been upheld many times as a Consitutional Right. I respect your opinion but I also respect the US Costitution. I also believe in the Seperation of Church and State and do not believe we should allow those who have found some religious objection to the lawful termination of a unwanted pregnency to use those beliefs to impose a legal burden on women who do not share those beliefs.
As far as your concerns about our children being indoctrinated into the "Gay lifestyle" I have to say I find that extremely offensive. Gay people are born gay. They may try to "pass" as hetrosexual but from family experience with a former Father-in- law who "passed" until late in his 60's before leaving his wife to take up a relationship with another man I can tell you that a person living a lie causes far more damage to the family unit then a person who represents their true self. I might add my former Father in Law was a leader in the Southern Baptist Church who shares your views.
My Sister has as friends a lesbian couple who are the best parents and have contributed more to their community then anyone I have ever met. One was a Policewoman who saved a life by stopping a bullet. If this couple's sexual orientation is a threat to anyone it is only a threat to people who hold irrational beliefs that would shame the Christ to whom they have given their lives. I humbly request you both reexamine your beliefs on this subject.
I hope in the coming months and years your lives will be enriched by the efforts of our most remarkable new President.
Sincerely. Thomas Deth
From Michael Stolle..
Blogger's Note: Michael and I have known each other for over 28 years. He is my children's godfather and a brilliant scientist. His email demonstrates that people of good will can and in fact, in a healthy open society, must disagree. I know from this man's whole life; one of service to our nation through his work in the space industry and his family life as a husband and father that he writes not casually but with thought and calrity of intent. We can agree to disagree.
.......Walli Carranza, PhD
From Michael Stolle (email of 1-23-09)
Dear Walli,
I'm sorry I can not join in your jubilation. While I think it is a great and wonderful thing that an African american has been elected to the highest office in this nation, his position on the most important issues do not bode well for this nation. It is my deepest hope that he was elected not because he is black which really should not matter in the first place but on the merits of his qualifications.
I know some people believe Barack Obama is pro-life but I believe he is far from it. As governor of Illinois and later as US senator he vetoed/voted against bills at both the state level and the federal level that would have required medical aid to infants who survived an abortion. How can any one have such a cold heart? Barack Obama promised he would lift the ban on US funded abortions abroad and today, not a week into office he has signed the executive order doing so (see attached article). You say Barack will help the needy, how can we even hope to effectively serve those needy in our country when we murder the most helpless and needy? There is a bill currently being fashioned by congress which is euphemistically called "Freedom of Choice Act". Do not be fooled by it's nice sounding words. If passed it will remove all restrictions to abortion. It will remove the requirement that parents of minors be notified of their childs abortion. It will force faith based hospitals to perform abortions against their moral stance against abortion thereby causing their closure. Barack Obama stated in no uncertain terms that if the bill is delivered to his desk that he will sign it into law.
Regarding healthcare, it is true everyone should have access to medical care. A federally mandated insurance program however, will crowd out employer funded insurance. My medical insurance has served me well. There is no reason I should have to pay for federally mandated insurance. The Massachusetts insurance plan is the model which is being brought forward as the model to copy (see attached article). It makes use of group diagnosis, which makes no use of the touch of a physician to help sense what's going on inside. My physician uses touch to sense medical signs, he can't do that in a group. What ever happened to patient-physician privacy? This plan is a step back in medical care. It will incur high costs and long waits for treatment as is already the case where socialized medicine already exists. It will encourage euthanasia because ending someones life is cheaper.
Barack Obama has bought completely into the gay agenda. Their agenda includes the indoctrination of all school age children. This indoctrinaton teaches children as early as kindergaten that there is nothing wrong with the gay life style and that a gay couples sexual relationship is as normal as that of a married husband and wife. There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama will sign bills into law which support this agenda. Legislation such as the euphemistically called "the Hate Crimes Act" classifies anyone who lovingly speaks out against this life style as a hate crime. "Black is white and white is black"., something done out of love for a soul is called hatred.
Finally, and I put it last because it is least among these concerns but big in my view none the less is Baracks view of wealth. He believes it is the governments responsibility to redistribute wealth. This became apparent with his comments to "Joe the plumber". He is a socialist. While I believe the poor need to be helped to obtain the necessities of life, I don't beleive it is the responsibility of the government. It is the responsibility of local people through charitable giving. This is the kind of giving the Christ spoke about, the giving out of love with the warmth of person, not the forced giving by government taxation, cold and inefficient.
Michael
.......Walli Carranza, PhD
From Michael Stolle (email of 1-23-09)
Dear Walli,
I'm sorry I can not join in your jubilation. While I think it is a great and wonderful thing that an African american has been elected to the highest office in this nation, his position on the most important issues do not bode well for this nation. It is my deepest hope that he was elected not because he is black which really should not matter in the first place but on the merits of his qualifications.
I know some people believe Barack Obama is pro-life but I believe he is far from it. As governor of Illinois and later as US senator he vetoed/voted against bills at both the state level and the federal level that would have required medical aid to infants who survived an abortion. How can any one have such a cold heart? Barack Obama promised he would lift the ban on US funded abortions abroad and today, not a week into office he has signed the executive order doing so (see attached article). You say Barack will help the needy, how can we even hope to effectively serve those needy in our country when we murder the most helpless and needy? There is a bill currently being fashioned by congress which is euphemistically called "Freedom of Choice Act". Do not be fooled by it's nice sounding words. If passed it will remove all restrictions to abortion. It will remove the requirement that parents of minors be notified of their childs abortion. It will force faith based hospitals to perform abortions against their moral stance against abortion thereby causing their closure. Barack Obama stated in no uncertain terms that if the bill is delivered to his desk that he will sign it into law.
Regarding healthcare, it is true everyone should have access to medical care. A federally mandated insurance program however, will crowd out employer funded insurance. My medical insurance has served me well. There is no reason I should have to pay for federally mandated insurance. The Massachusetts insurance plan is the model which is being brought forward as the model to copy (see attached article). It makes use of group diagnosis, which makes no use of the touch of a physician to help sense what's going on inside. My physician uses touch to sense medical signs, he can't do that in a group. What ever happened to patient-physician privacy? This plan is a step back in medical care. It will incur high costs and long waits for treatment as is already the case where socialized medicine already exists. It will encourage euthanasia because ending someones life is cheaper.
Barack Obama has bought completely into the gay agenda. Their agenda includes the indoctrination of all school age children. This indoctrinaton teaches children as early as kindergaten that there is nothing wrong with the gay life style and that a gay couples sexual relationship is as normal as that of a married husband and wife. There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama will sign bills into law which support this agenda. Legislation such as the euphemistically called "the Hate Crimes Act" classifies anyone who lovingly speaks out against this life style as a hate crime. "Black is white and white is black"., something done out of love for a soul is called hatred.
Finally, and I put it last because it is least among these concerns but big in my view none the less is Baracks view of wealth. He believes it is the governments responsibility to redistribute wealth. This became apparent with his comments to "Joe the plumber". He is a socialist. While I believe the poor need to be helped to obtain the necessities of life, I don't beleive it is the responsibility of the government. It is the responsibility of local people through charitable giving. This is the kind of giving the Christ spoke about, the giving out of love with the warmth of person, not the forced giving by government taxation, cold and inefficient.
Michael
Another view....
I believe that the Obama election will have the effect of throwing kerosene on a burning fire.
I believe that the change he promised has already been denigrated by the selection to his cabinet of the same Washington insiders/lobbyists that have participated in accelerating the moral, economic and political slide we have been experiencing.
Our country was founded and made great by people of ambition, creativity, diligence and the embodiment of rugged individualism. The dilution of those qualities have weakened our society immensely. The behaviors that are rewarded are those will proliferate. Heaven help us if the rewarded behaviors are those lacking in the above virtues.
The administration's stances on unionization, trade, fiscal policy, tax policy, entitlements and health care will be disastrous in the long term.
The social policies will weaken our character and the foreign affairs policies including over reliance of the corrupt U.N. will leave us in an extremely weakened state with regard to our enemies; and we do have enemies. In a world of shrinking resources, those enemies will be ever more aggressive in acquiring those resources.
While I wish him success as our president, I have great difficulty in having any optimism. I believe he is a gifted politician, but I do not believe he understands the true qualities that result in greatness. He preaches the warm syrupy sap of equality of outcome. That is truly the road to serfdom for all. I realize that the average human longs for security and unearned equality, however they do not realize that the quest for achievement and the competitive fire that results in true achievement results in the economic betterment of all in society.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill:
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
I believe that the change he promised has already been denigrated by the selection to his cabinet of the same Washington insiders/lobbyists that have participated in accelerating the moral, economic and political slide we have been experiencing.
Our country was founded and made great by people of ambition, creativity, diligence and the embodiment of rugged individualism. The dilution of those qualities have weakened our society immensely. The behaviors that are rewarded are those will proliferate. Heaven help us if the rewarded behaviors are those lacking in the above virtues.
The administration's stances on unionization, trade, fiscal policy, tax policy, entitlements and health care will be disastrous in the long term.
The social policies will weaken our character and the foreign affairs policies including over reliance of the corrupt U.N. will leave us in an extremely weakened state with regard to our enemies; and we do have enemies. In a world of shrinking resources, those enemies will be ever more aggressive in acquiring those resources.
While I wish him success as our president, I have great difficulty in having any optimism. I believe he is a gifted politician, but I do not believe he understands the true qualities that result in greatness. He preaches the warm syrupy sap of equality of outcome. That is truly the road to serfdom for all. I realize that the average human longs for security and unearned equality, however they do not realize that the quest for achievement and the competitive fire that results in true achievement results in the economic betterment of all in society.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill:
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Personal Responsibility and Corporate Concern
Greetings friends!
Today our nation charted a new course. The innauguration of President Obama was the summit of a mountain and now that we've seen the view imagined by Dr. King we realize there are many more to climb. "To a nation to whom much is given is much expected" rings true. We are expected to act with honour and with respect to international law. We are expected to respect the life of every person as a gift from God; Iraqui and Sudanese, American, Israeli and Palestinian.
But we are also called to create our own highest level of wellness and productivity. If we're going to have universal access to healthcare in the US this will be absolutely necessary. Every healthcare dollar not needed to rescue me from the effects of my own habits (eating too much, exercising too little) can be used to care for others. So I am called to rethink my actions and improve. If we're going to prevent financial collapse our own finances have to be strong. So I'm called to take my Yoga to the edge but not my bank account. It was easy for me (and many of you) to fit in public service in 2008----we called that the Obama Campaign! But what about 2009? What am I called to do now? How about you?
How about you?
That's the point of this blog.
How have you decided to take greater personal responsibility? How will you serve to rebuild America?
At Summit Coaching Solutions we have the honour to journey with people facing a great life/health/professional challenge as they strive to create a new chapter in their story, and their work always starts with a carefully discerned intention.
Tonight our nation celebrates a new chapter; a new story begins.
Tonight, what's your intention? I or another SUMMIT Coach can be of help realizing this intention give me a call at (719) 201-4805. It would be our great privledge.
So tonight friends, what is your intention?
Walli
Walli Carranza, PhD
Certified Life Coach
Today our nation charted a new course. The innauguration of President Obama was the summit of a mountain and now that we've seen the view imagined by Dr. King we realize there are many more to climb. "To a nation to whom much is given is much expected" rings true. We are expected to act with honour and with respect to international law. We are expected to respect the life of every person as a gift from God; Iraqui and Sudanese, American, Israeli and Palestinian.
But we are also called to create our own highest level of wellness and productivity. If we're going to have universal access to healthcare in the US this will be absolutely necessary. Every healthcare dollar not needed to rescue me from the effects of my own habits (eating too much, exercising too little) can be used to care for others. So I am called to rethink my actions and improve. If we're going to prevent financial collapse our own finances have to be strong. So I'm called to take my Yoga to the edge but not my bank account. It was easy for me (and many of you) to fit in public service in 2008----we called that the Obama Campaign! But what about 2009? What am I called to do now? How about you?
How about you?
That's the point of this blog.
How have you decided to take greater personal responsibility? How will you serve to rebuild America?
At Summit Coaching Solutions we have the honour to journey with people facing a great life/health/professional challenge as they strive to create a new chapter in their story, and their work always starts with a carefully discerned intention.
Tonight our nation celebrates a new chapter; a new story begins.
Tonight, what's your intention? I or another SUMMIT Coach can be of help realizing this intention give me a call at (719) 201-4805. It would be our great privledge.
So tonight friends, what is your intention?
Walli
Walli Carranza, PhD
Certified Life Coach
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
