While researching if this article's title was widely used on the internet, I decided to try it. The point is that the words "Freedom of Hate Speech" have been used but not "Freedom of Hate". I wish to define the difference and how it effects us. We all know what the Christian conservative view is on Gay Marriage. The hate speech used is monotonously redundant and socially designed to cause the world to mistrust or at least empathize with haters.
The Supreme Court ruled that a Kansas church whose members travel the country to protest at military funerals, holding signs that say "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God blew up the troops," has a right to continue such demonstrations.
The case was brought by Albert Snyder, whose 20-year-old son, Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, was killed in Iraq in 2006. The family-dominated Westboro Baptist Church, run by Fred Phelps, protested at Matthew Snyder's funeral to spread their opinion that American deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are God's punishment for U.S. immorality and tolerance of homosexuality and abortion.
I must ask all of you, if my life ever degenerates to the point that all I ever do is sit around hating other people and trying to find an opportunity to tell everyone else about it, please someone slap me real hard. I am a Buddhist first (my guiding humanistic principles), an experienced, intelligent, college educated, non-game playing, sober, somewhat enlightened human being. For some reason the idea that I wish to see the world as it is and change the things wrong with it, progress towards a better future, and work to be the change I want in the world makes me somewhat of a liberal. Sorry, I can't help myself.
This doesn't take much for some one else to see things the way I do, just learn what I know. I will warn you right now, if you are afraid of the truth, you better close your eyes and quit reading this immediately. It may change your life.
First, let's ask ourselves the first big question about the meaning of life.
Q: Who are we and why are we here?
A: You can decide this for yourself but if you have ever, even for a minute, seen people who were helpless to fend for themselves, elderly, sick, poor, and dying people are something that we must make a decision about. Are we responsible for helping? The age old question has been given many chapters, volumes, editions, libraries, and whole wings in spiritual societies with the answer that religious and philosophers have decided. Some used the words "My Brethren" or "the less fortunate" or something like "...am I my brother's keeper?" and the answer is, NO ONE is going to make a difference for you. You have to decide to take the matter into your own hands. WE must be responsible for trying to help others because, 1) it makes YOU feel better, 2) it helps ease the suffering of others, and 3) every spiritual leader from the beginning of time has used this as a purpose in life. If we all worried about how WE, as a world, are affected by the business of the world cessation of suffering, instead of how it effects only ME, myself, then we get the big picture. Do we have time to worry about race, social status, occupation, national origin, education level, or sexual preferences when we are hungry and/or feel like we are at the end of our ability to keep striving towards our immediate goals. If someone's ability to help and sincerity about giving is real, when we need it, not one person with a true need complains about who the giver is. The example given in the bible is in Mark 10:17-25 and it reads "...17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
Isn't it harder for a man who has all he could ever want in material things to look down his nose at gifts that other men would give anything to have, since the idea that he might someday need help - never occurs to him. To get rich and become wealthy in my opinion are two different things that we must consider.
To get back to the subject, the bible condones slavery. The entire chapter of