Abigail

""spiritually minded" are for just anyone and any set of beliefs, then you misunderstood the intent of this thread." No, I didn't mis the intent - that being that anyone who is not Christian must not be spiritually minded. I simply chose to participate anyway. If you don't like it - too bad.

"And then, if I'm the political candidate...who happens to embrace a particular form of spiritiuality...should I cite that spirituality as my justification for my beliefs...or should I just embrace the views as my views...leaving their origins as an "unstated"" Personally, I would be inclined to vote for a candidate that was willing to represent the views of his constituency, regardless of his personal beliefs, because that is what a REPRESENTATIVE is supposed to do. Unfortunately, it isn't what they do, in actuality.

"BTW, one thing I neglected to mention above was the practice of insurers -- as well as large corporations -- to settle out of court rather than to mount an extensive defense. What will happen is that a plaintiff's attorney will approach a defendant, file a lawsuit, massive press coverage, flurries of motions, and then the defendant will settle. Because even to win costs a HUGE amount of money. It is cheaper on them if they settle a claim for 100-200 thousand -- even if the claim is baseless -- rather than to spend a million in legal fees to win the case in court. " The laws vary from state to state, so I can only speak to what I see in Michigan. Most med mal cases here do not get press coverage. The ones that do usually involve something unusual, or particularly horrifying. Michigan mal practice cases go through a case evaluation process. All parties present their side to a panel of 3 attorneys (who generally get paid $50 - $75 for sitting on the panel). The panel then places a value on the case (what they think a jury would award). The parties can accept or reject the panel's decision. If it is rejected the case proceeds to trial. IF you rejected the award and then lose at trial (be it the Plaintiff or the Defendant), you are subject to sanctions and fees. This is done to help prevent frivolous cases and to encourage a reasonable settlement. It is my experience thus far (2 years in med mal defense) that we will rarely settle a case for more than $50,000 unless we feel very strongly that we will lose at trial. If we feel very strongly that we will win, we will try the case. Of course, ultimately that decision is up to the insurance company, but I can think of only one case where we have disagreed with the insurance company and in that case, we think we should settle and the insurance company wants us to try the case. You have to remember what you see in the press is what they want you to see - it is often not the full story. Also, in my two years in this field, I have only seen 2 cases that were, in my opinion, totally frivolous. In the rest of the cases, there was at least a reasonable question as to whether or not malpractice was committed. "We are not supposed to agree on what is, essentially, a political topic" HA! Actually, I think we agree on principals far more often than not - it is the "how to" part that we disagree on - lol ;)

"..... and can you imagine this kind of exclusive attitude being touted as a part of the 'Christian values and principles' as the basis for American politics? And this same kind of attitude being integrated into governmental functions as a result? Can you say ... 'Discrimination'? " Well, actually, yes I can. Despite the notion of freedom this government was founded on - we still had slaves and women couldn't vote and were in many ways treated like property. So, I am thankful for the notion of separation of church and state and I am thankful for the "fluidness" that our government was designed to have. Otherwise, there could very well still be slavery and women could very well still be "property". But then, perhaps those are the very Christian values some would like to see put back into our government system, who knows.

"Malpractice insurance is the one I hear about more. I understand the average malpractice premium is almost $200,000 now (for a doctor...I have no idea what the liability insurance costs are for facilities). There are a number of OB/GYN's who have simply quit practicing in my state due to the costs involved...and my state isn't hardly unique. I also understand that the number of Emergency Rooms is decreasing...because of, again, the liability issues involved." Now you are barking up my tree! I agree tort reform is necessary. You could start by capping "expert witness fees". I always find it amusing when people blame the attorneys for the high cost of medical care. Your average doctor who testifies as an "expert witness" will make anywhere between $20,000 - $40,000 for a case that goes to trial. Most trials have AT LEAST 4 expert witnesses (2 for Plaintiff and 2 for defense), so right there you are talking about $80,000 - $160,000 and that doesn't even include attorney fees, court costs, etc. Add to that, the defending liability insurance company has to pay for the depositions of Plaintiff's experts (and vise verse for the Defendant's experts). So, for example, if the Plaintiff has a case against a doctor and a hospital the insurance company has to pay to depose an average of 4 experts at an average of $2,000 per expert (for an average of a 2 hour deposition - these experts are making $1000 an HOUR!). THEN the "contingency fee" system for Plaintiff attorneys needs to be reformed. I'm not sure exactly how, but it should be - they get an average of 1/3 of the award AFTER costs. Granted, they gamble and lose money if they don't win the case, but then again, perhaps that is good incentive not to take on frivolous cases. Insurance Companies should be reimbursed all of the money they paid out in a malpractice case that wins. While this is already in place to some degree, in that they have a right to be reimbursed, they often do not exercise this right and when they do, they usually settle for an amount that is less than what they paid. So, how is that for a start? "Then you have the law I cited above: while in the case of your client, it is appropriate, it is also misused by people who treat the ER as their primary care provider" Agreed. However, one of the reasons this happens is because people can't afford to go to a primary care provider (i.e. don't have affordable access). If you can't pay up front before the office visit, and have no insurance, the primary care provider can turn you away. However, the emergency room cannot. Perhaps another solution would be to require or somehow strongly encourage doctors to put in a certain amount of "pro bono" hours every year or month at a free clinic (or reduced cost clinic) - not so very different from the way our legal system is set up. In Michigan, members of the Bar are not "required" but are "strongly encouraged" to do a certain amount of pro bono work. Then, awards and recognition is also given to those who do high volume pro bono.

Mark, the woman in question is not a friend, I've never met her, though it is amazing how much you can get to know about someone simply from reading their medical records. This is already a lawsuit - a case the firm I work for is defending. However, the case is not about being denied care from an Emergency Room. The woman never went to the emergency room because they could not afford the bill that would come from such a visit. You are correct that an emergency room cannot turn you away. However, where I come from you are looking at a MINIMUM of $500 for a visit to one and unless you are indigent, you will be expected to pay that bill. My point wasn't to say everyone should have free healthcare - my point was to say everyone should have access to AFFORDABLE healthcare. Hell Mark, I have a two income family, WITH insurance, and I cannot afford to get a needed root canal. Now, I take great care of my teeth and have very few dental problems. However, I do have one tooth that has been problematic - have had it filled 3 times now. Dentist says its either a root canal or an extraction. My insurance only covers the first grand and most of that was used up with the cleaning, x-rays, and temporary filling. I have yet to find a local dentist who will "finance" a root canal and crown. Thanfully there is a university about an hour away from here that will have students fix me up for a smaller fee - though it still won't be cheap. Healthcare is not only becoming difficult for the poor to have access to, but even the middle class are finding it more and more difficult to afford. If trends continue they way they are now, one day only the rich will be able to afford it.

"I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before. Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him..." Such a shame you already know all lthere is to know about Christ. Myself, I was amazed at how much more I understood about Jesus and what he taught after I learned more about Judaism. But, being that you have no interest in an interfaith dialogue, I'm sure you wouldn't be interested. And speaking of which- if you aren't intereseted in an interfaith dialogue, why post on a thread about interfaith dialogue at all?

"No offence, but Jesus can hardly be called an "infamous kid from Galilee." If that's all you think of Him, then you should exclude yourself from further discussion of this topic." So, I guess as a non-Christian, my comments are not welcome?

Once again CK proves he lacks the ability to comprehend what he reads.

"ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care. " I am currently working on a case where a 25 year old woman died, needlessly. She was a new mom, married, her husband employed. No health insurance. She went to a clinic that did not have the proper equipment to diagnose her. They could not afford an emergency room fee, so they didn't go to one. Now she is dead and her new baby is left without a mother. Heartbreaking. A simple trip to an ER would have saved her life. "You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful." take advantage of opportunities for education and vocational training? Do you have any idea how expensive that is these days? Do you have any idea how hard it is to get a job that pays enough to allow you to pay your bills with only a high school education? "This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from!" I suspect most immigrants would gladly learn English if given the time and opportunity - but both of those are key elements. However, learning English should NOT mean they have to give up their native language either. "This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!" No, our country was founded on the belief in freedom and equality, and yet despite that blacks were slaves and women were not allowed to vote. Thank GOD, our constitution was made in such a way that our government had the ability to grow and change as our society grew and changed, otherwise I would still be unable to vote. And, being a Jew, finding housing outside a jewish community, would be difficult at best.

Don't let him goad ya Mark, which is all he is trying to do. Oh wait, I forgot, he considers himself our savior - he is here to save us from those who would lead us astray from God. Nevermind that he worships the teachings of a man who raped women and oppressed even more . . . :blink:

Guilty as charged. I spoke up for a time, but as things became more and more controlled in TWI, by leadership, it became more and more apparently that not only was speaking up NOT causing anything to change, it was putting my family in jeapordy. The cost of speaking up was to have my children witness angry and sometimes violent arguments between their parents, the cost of speaking up would have been to have their family ripped apart. So for a number of years, I was guilty of remaining silent, even when someone I loved was being wrongfully reproved. Even when it mean selling myself out to a cause I was struggling to believe in. Eventually, though, the cost of staying silent also became too much, so I left. The result was more violence and eventually a divorce. However, the rewards have also been plentiful. My children now have a step-father who is wonderful. I now have a husband who is great beyond words. I now have the freedom to be myself and to speak up without paying a heavy price. Yeah, I take responsibility for my actions. I am also aware of WHY I made the decisions I made - the motives. My motives were not wrong, even if my decisions at times may have been. I wonder if VPW, LCM, Rosalee and some of the others can say the same thing about their motives.

You can't have the best job in the world, because I do! lol I am a paralegal for a small medical malpractice defense firm. Two attorneys, me and a receptionist. We all get along great, and though the attorneys are the owners and bosses and get the respect due their position, most days it is like we are all equals, a team working towards the same goal. I work during school hours so I can take my kids to school and pick them up. My job is challenging and rarely dull. We talk about a lot of things - work related and family related. Rarely do we get too deep into politics or religion, but it has come up from time to time.

Well, I for one will take the "wordly counterfiet" over Wayworld any day!

Oh my, Chas! Thank you for reminding me of exactly why it is Sushi and I opted to forgo the big wedding. All the planning and hassel sucks the joy and purpose right out of the event. We opted for small and simple, My sister, her boyfriend, our kids and a JP. Afterwards we went out and had a wonderful lunch at a nice restaraunt. It was absolutely perfect. I wish the couple you described all the luck in the world. If the brides temperment for the wedding is a true picture of her personality, the groom is going to need all the luck he can get!

I think those are great questions, I wonder those things as well. Sometimes I think yes, God was there and god led me. Other times I think it is all in my head. What I do know is that despite the bad, I also experienced a lot of good in TWI. I grew up, I made some wonderful friends, and I do have some good memories. There was plenty of bad too - but even from that I learned and I would not be who I am today if it were not for all of those experiences, good and bad. So, yeah, most days, I think He was there too - as He is everywhere with us.

Roy, you are very kind, but believe me, I do wrong all the time. Not intentionally, but hey, that is life. CK - I never said I didn't see any firey darts, I simply pointed out that what one perceives as a fiery dart will vary from person to person. However, based on your reaction, I guess I struck a nerve. As for "If a formal apology were made by TWI" Well, I am not interested in going back - so it wouldn't bring me back. I would be interested in knowing if the apology were genuine, which would require change. If that occured, I would be happy for those still in.

Actually, Oakspear, you will find many Jewish traditions and tales that contradict each other. As you will find many Jews who disagree on the life after death issue. A big part of Judaism is debate. We are encouraged to debate the meaning of the scriptures. Likewise many, perhaps even most, Jews believe there are many layers of meanings within the scriptures. There are certain traditions that are held sacred - such as the lighting of the sabbath candles, but even there, there is a lot of variance in terms of the ritual. But the idea is that we are all lighting the candles nonetheless. We are all united, connected, regardless of our differences.

"The crux of the matter is that if you come to GSC with preconceived notions of what GSC is or should be you are sure to be disappointed. But then, IMO, preconceived notions is what caused much of the problems within TWI--no room for independent observation or thought. Far better to see what GSC has to offer without filtering it through the glasses of "All TWI is good" "All TWI is bad" etc etc. Learning not to filter everything with preconceived notions is one of the first lessons, IMO , that you need to learn after exiting TWI." The individual filters are there. They will always be there to some degree or another. We perceive things, process things, according to our experiences, knowledge, and understanding. There just isn't any getting around that. The same goes for preconceived notions - we all have them. I have a "notion" regarding the Hollocaust, for example, based on the information I have received to date. Someone else may have different notion based on the information they have received to date. As we converse and exchange information, either one of us may change our notion, or not. It isn't the preconceived notions that do us in - its either a) the unwillingness to consider other notions/information or b) personal attacks that shut us down and prevent us from having an exchange of information. THAT is what caused so many problems in TWI - we were taught NOT to consider any information from outside of TWI and we were personally attacked if we did.

The crux of the matter - polarized? There is obviously at least a small number of people who feel "It seems to me that one is welcome here as long as they have negative, bitter, snide, demeaning things to say and as long as they say nothing regarding God or the Bible. " Now, we can sit back and say "well that is just not true", but it doesn't change the fact that there are people who very much feel it is true. and there are those who feel "God gave me many things by TWI and/but TWI also gave me a lot of junk" who feel that expressing the Godly things they received from TWI is not accepted here at the cafe. Again, we can sit back and say that isn't true, but ti doesn't change the fact that there are people who very much feel it is true. At the same time, there are many who find descriptive terms like "negative, bitter, snide, demeaning" as disrespectful, hurtful, and also untrue. Again, you can say those terms are true, but it doesn't change the fact that there are those who feel otherwise. And so, we are polarized and the minority voice is usually (though certainly not always) the one that is silenced, or at least the one that gets the majority of the negative responses. Then, Goey said: "As far as saying things regarding God and the Bible, I do it often and have never been called down for it. My dieas have been challenged at times, but what's wrong with that? We can learn from others if we don't take the challenging of our ideas as a personal "attack". " Which, in my opinion, is very true and ultimately the heart of the matter. I think we can all discuss almost any topic AND disagree respectfully, if we pay attention to the words we chose to use. THAT, is what I think the "throwing stones" stuff was really about. It wasn't about promoting the positives of TWI, it wasn't about foregoing discussions, debates or disagreements about TWI, the Bible, or anything else. It was about paying attention to the words we chose to use. We're never going to get it perfect. Most of is will at least occassional chose a word or phrase that is offensive to someone. But, if we can at least TRY to be more consious of what we are saying and how it may be recieved/perceived - it might help make this place more welcoming to some. Likewise, I found Goey's response to the use of terms he disagreed with to be very appropriate. He expressed his point of view and asked some thought provoking questions without "lobbing any stones" back. Just my thoughts for what they are worth.

"Abi, was this the recent Luther film/motion picture of 3 or so years ago? " I don't think it was particularly recent no. It was an old black and white film, if I recall correctly. Well, it must be older because I left TWI nearly 6 years ago.

Well, I hadn't seen the video, but I had heard the song. Hey, it's not dedicated to me, so what do I care ;)

thanks for bringing this back up, Kit, I missed it the first time around. Belle, You mentioned this: "So how DID Noah get penguins, polar bears, kangaroos and Tasmanian devils into the ark? Interesting question, no?" I learned in a World Civ class many years ago that the region that is believed to be where Noah lived did once flood. So, maybe the flood story isn't literally "the whole world" but simply the world Noah knew? I especially liked this quote: I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. Stephen Roberts To me, it sums up how I feel about the "us" v "them" mentality that seems to permeate a great many religions. and this one I found especially funny: "Why should we take advice on sex from the pope? If he knows anything about it, he shouldn't! George Bernard Shaw" You will also notice I have added a new tag line from your quotes. :D

Yes, I made the assumption you were angry, just as you have made the assumption that I DELIBERATELY twisted your words, as opposed to simply telling you how I understood them - there is a difference.

FWIW "When you post; knowing that your words are hurtful, knowingly push buttons, knowingly casting aspersions on the character of other posters; then run crying to the moderators and post virulent character assassinations that leave your responders close to tears--that is the time , in my book--that you should be told if you don't like the heat in the kitchen you shouldn't have started the fire in the first place. " I agree with you on this statement, though I think in comparison to the number of people who post here, those who knowingly cast aspersions on someone else's character (at least on a regular and intentional basis) are relatively few. "And for those of you, you know who you are, who figure you'll garner points by being smarmy "peacemakers" who twist and turn to whichever way seems to garner the most posts, stabbing friends in the back just to appear to be better tha you really are" And likewise here, I think those who are simply trying to garner points are few. Though, again, the contradictory nature of being human may make it appear that this occurs more frequently. Sometimes people simply change their minds after getting more information or considering other perspectives - that is one of the great things about websites like this. "Everyone here knows what buttons to push, everyone here knows what the mores of our society are." And here I would only add that while some buttons are obvious, others are not. We may have certain buttons in common, but then there are those that are unique to the individual (for example the phrase "damaged goods" being one of mine). Likewise, there are certain "mores of our society" that are generally accepted and known, and others that are more regional and may not be known by someone living in a different region.