The Global Conversation

Blog

  • Should the death penalty include abject suffering?

    Headlines are being made about the suffering possibly endured by convicted murderer Dennis McGuire, who was put to death with a new and previously untried method by the state of Ohio on Jan. 16 as punishment for his killing of a pregnant woman years earlier. The state used a chemical injection never before utilized to put someone to death, despite warnings from some medical experts who said that the process might produce what was called “air starvation.”

    NBC News quoted an Associated Press reporter who witnessed the execution who wrote that McGuire, 53, “appeared to gasp several times and made several loud snorting or snoring sounds during a ‘prolonged’ execution,” which several news agencies said took nearly 26 minutes from start to finish. Other witnesses said that Mr. McGuire also clenched his fists repeatedly, and tried in vain to raise himself up from the table to which he was strapped, apparently gasping for air.

    In short, it did not appear to be a peaceful death — leaving many to ask: Is paying with his life enough of a punishment for someone sentenced to death for a killing…or is it acceptable for that punishment to include abject end-of-life suffering and agony for nearly a half hour?

    Yet the main question has been avoided through all the news stories and commentaries on this particular event: Is the death penalty itself appropriate in an enlighted society?

    Our answer is no. To paraphrase Albert Einstein, we are not going to solve society’s problems using the same energy that created them. We will not put an end to violence by using violence, an end to anger with anger, and an end to killing with more killing.

    All we as a people are saying is that killing is perfectly okay when we believe that “right’ is on our side. But of course — with exceptions for those who are mentally incapacitated — all people and all governments thinks “right” is on their side when they kill, or they wouldn’t and couldn’t do it.

    The central question then becomes: Is it ever “right” to kill people if one’s own life (or the life of others) is not in immediate danger?

    A man in Florida, a former police captain, pulled out a gun and killed another man with whom he was having an argument over texting in a movie theatre because the other man threw a bag of popcorn at him, and the former police officer said he thought the other man was going to attack him. (Why he didn’t simply pull out the gun and say, “Not one step further….”, rather than shoot the man point blank in the chest from four feet away is not clear.) So now, once again in Florida, we are going to have a chance to see if that state’s Stand Your Ground law is going to be applied to justify killing someone.

    Yet the question in this quarter is not, “What does the law say?” And not even, “What does our culture in general say?” But rather, “What does the Soul say?”

    What does your Soul say? What do you believe is justification for killing someone? And if you agree that the State should have the right to kill someone because that person killed another — should the State’s execution include abject suffering?

  • When opposites attract

    The grand announcement: “I am quitting drinking once and for all!” How many times are you allowed to say “once and for all”?  I know I’ve said it a bunch of times for a variety of different obsessions, compulsions, and addictions, not to mention bad relationships and the occasional snooze-button triathlon! Quitting, for me and many others, just doesn’t seem to work.

    One of the most difficult aspects of making drastic changes in our thinking and doing is getting past the pre-wired thinking in our heads.  We can’t simply state we are not going to keep doing a behavior that we have engrained in our pattern for many years by saying we are not going to do it anymore.  No, it takes much more than that.  What needs to happen for a successful transition is a deep commitment, a plan, and support of those who love us.

    “Conversations with God” states, “The moment you declare anything, everything unlike it will come into the space.” This is known as the law of opposites. It is the universe, or our soul, or our patterned brain, saying “how bad do you really want this?”  This process becomes a huge stumbling block in the life of an addicted or compulsive person. We crave the reward of the object of our obsession and the question from the unknown sets off an internal belief that we need the thing to survive.

    This warped survival instinct causes the addicted to fall into the trap time and time again. But the power and glory that is derived from answering the universe with a resounding “yes, I am sure” cannot be understated. The law of opposites is in place for a very good reason.  This law is the springboard to our physical, emotional, and spiritual evolution. We could not make that leap without it.

    The law of opposites presents the perfect opportunity for us to take full responsibility for our choices. All too often we choose the smaller choice, the painful yet comfortable choice, instead of pushing back on our craving.

    So what is this law of opposites and why does it appear to conflict with the law of attraction, you may ask?  The law of opposites is simply providing a contextual field for our true desires to be experienced. We cannot know the joy and the power of stepping into a new creation without the resistance that this law provides.  Life is meant to be experienced, and the only way to do so is for the opposite of our desires to be present to show us the way.

    For more on the law of opposites and the law of attraction, I suggest reading the book Happier than God. 

    The application of this knowledge is crucial in overcoming addiction, obsessions, and compulsions. Why? It requires that one put faith in something outside of themselves. We must first believe that what is working for others can work for us. Then we have to put trust in something that is unseen.  When we experience the reward of this blind faith, we begin to build upon it.

    Surrendering our destructive ways for the promise of better days and better ways is truly a difficult task in the human experience.  Many do not understand the plight of the addicted. All of life’s maladies call to us to face the law of opposites. Addiction is merely another hardship that we face so that we may fully experience the darkness so that we can eventually know that we are so much more than that.

    I would like to extend the invitation to those who are inspired to write a blog on addiction and recovery to contact me with your vision. The column must reflect the messages of new spirituality.

    (Kevin McCormack, C.A.d ,is a certified addictions professional and auriculotherapist.  He is a recovering addict with 26 years of sobriety. Kevin is a practicing auriculotherapist, life coach, and interventionist specializing in individual and family recovery and also co-facilitates spiritual recovery retreats for the CWG foundation.  You can visit his website Life After Addicton for more information. To connect with Kevin, please email him at Kevin@TheGlobalConversation.com)

  • How can I heal the pain of my uncle’s death?

    How can I heal the pain of my uncle’s death?

    My name is Michael. I am a 37 year old man and nine days ago my very beloved uncle died. He was like a father to me. He always supported me, advised me, and was always so kind to me. When I was in trouble he always helped me. Now, after nine days since he left, I feel worse and worse. The pain I have in my heart is so terrible. How can I heal this pain, that I feel is killing me?

    Dear Michael… First of all, please allow me to offer my condolences. I’m sure it must be terribly painful, losing the man who was like a father to you, who was so kind and loving to you. Any time we lose someone in our lives who we were very very close to, it leaves a huge hole in our hearts.

    I would encourage you to allow yourself to fully feel all of the emotions that are naturally coming up for you, yet know that they won’t kill you. You see, even though it may feel terrible, grief is actually a blessing to us. It’s that emotion that lets us know that we have loved deeply. There is an age-old question that asks, “Is it better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all?” I think for me the answer is, it is better to have loved and lost. Imagine how different your life would have been had you not been blessed by your and your uncle’s mutual love for each other. I’m sure your life would be very different if he hadn’t been in your life, so yes, by all means, grieve for your loss. Allow yourself to cry or scream or whatever wants to be released in you as you are releasing him from your physical presence.

    Please know, though, that just because your uncle is no longer with you physically doesn’t mean he isn’t with you spiritually. Neale’s wonderful book, Home With God: In A Life That Never Ends says that the moment we think of a dearly departed one, their soul flies to us in an instant! And although we can’t see them with our eyes, it doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. Sometimes, if we are highly attuned we can sense their presence.

    Please also know that your uncle is your angel in heaven now. I promise you, he still loves you with all his heart, and is watching over you, blessing you and sending you his love. He may even try to find a way to let you know, by sending you a sign of some kind. If this happens and the thought crosses your mind that this could be him, please don’t disregard or disbelieve it. Allow yourself to entertain the possibility that he has reached out to you!

    Trite as it may sound, time heals all wounds, dear Michael. Of course, time will never cause you to stop loving your uncle, but it can help you stop missing him so much. After you have allowed yourself to grieve fully, gradually start getting back into your normal routine of life. This will help assuage the acute feeling of loss you are experiencing now. And this is good, because I know your uncle wouldn’t want you to grieve forever. He wants what any father figure wants for their child (or nephew): for you to be happy.

    Please buy a copy of Home With God and read it right away. It contains “18 Remembrances” that may change your understanding about the whole process of this thing we call “life and death”. When we understand what is really happening, we can be much more at peace about it.

    If, after reading the book, you are still grieving very deeply, please reach out to one of the Conversations With God Life Coaches or one of the Spiritual Helpers at CWG Helping Outreach. I’ve included a link to the website below.

    I send you much love, dear Michael, as, I’m sure, does your uncle. Blesséd be.

    (Annie Sims is the Global Director of CWG Advanced Programs, is a Conversations With God Life Coach and author/instructor of the CWG Online School. To connect with Annie, please email her at Annie@TheGlobalConversation.com.

    (If you would like a question considered for publication, please submit your request to:  Advice@TheGlobalConversation.com where our team is waiting to hear from you.)

    An additional resource:  The CWG Helping Outreach offers spiritual assistance from a team of non-professional/volunteer Spiritual Helpers responding to every post from readers within 24 hours or less. Nothing on the CCN site should be construed or is intended to take the place of or be in any way similar to professional therapeutic or counseling services.  The site functions with the gracious willing assistance of lay persons without credentials or experience in the helping professions.  What these volunteers possess is an awareness of the theology of Conversations with God.  It is from this context that they offer insight, suggestions, and spiritual support during moments of unbidden, unexpected, or unwelcome change on the journey of life.

     

     

  • The explosion in extreme wealth hurts us all

    An explosion in extreme wealth and income is exacerbating inequality and hindering the world’s ability to tackle poverty, Oxfam — a British humanitarian organization — has warned in a briefing published ahead of the World Economic Forum in Davos next week.

    News of the report has been posted on the Internet at Oxfam.org, and may be found here.

    The $240 billion net income in 2012 of the richest 100 billionaires would be enough to make extreme poverty history four times over, according Oxfam’s report, titled: ‘The cost of inequality: how wealth and income extremes hurt us all.’ It is calling on world leaders to curb today’s income extremes and commit to reducing inequality to at least 1990 levels.

    “The richest one per cent has increased its income by 60 per cent in the last 20 years with the financial crisis accelerating rather than slowing the process,” the posting on the Oxfam website said.

    Oxfam warned that extreme wealth and income is not only unethical, it is also economically inefficient, politically corrosive, socially divisive and environmentally destructive.

    In the Oxfam website article Jeremy Hobbs, Executive Director, Oxfam International, said: “We can no longer pretend that the creation of wealth for a few will inevitably benefit the many – too often the reverse is true.

    “Concentration of resources in the hands of the top one per cent depresses economic activity and makes life harder for everyone else – particularly those at the bottom of the economic ladder.

    “In a world where even basic resources such as land and water are increasingly scarce, we cannot afford to concentrate assets in the hands of a few and leave the many to struggle over what’s left.”

    Members of the richest one per cent are estimated to use as much as 10,000 times more carbon than the average US citizen.

    Oxfam International is a confederation of 17 organizations working together to find lasting solutions to poverty and injustice. Its Internet posting said that world leaders should learn from the present-day success of countries such as Brazil, which has grown rapidly while reducing inequality – as well as the historical success such as the United States in the 1930s, when President Roosevelt’s New Deal helped bring down inequality and tackle vested interests.

    “Roosevelt famously warned that the ‘political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality’,” the Oxfam website report said.

    New global deal needed

    Mr. Hobbs added: “We need a global new deal to reverse decades of increasing inequality. As a first step world leaders should formally commit themselves to reducing inequality to the levels seen in 1990.

    “From tax havens to weak employment laws, the richest benefit from a global economic system which is rigged in their favour. It is time our leaders reformed the system so that it works in the interests of the whole of humanity rather than a global elite.”

    What can be done? The Oxfam website article said that “closing tax havens – which hold as much as $32 trillion or a third of all global wealth – could yield an additional $189bn in additional tax revenues.” In addition to a tax haven crackdown, the article said, elements of a global new deal could include:

    • a reversal of the trend towards more regressive forms of taxation;
    • a global minimum corporation tax rate;
    • measures to boost wages compared with returns available to capital;
    • increased investment in free public services and safety nets.

  • First Amendment Right to Discriminate?

    It’s not a new phenomenon. It’s probably been going on since the beginning of time. People have used religion to justify their discrimination for time out of mind. Even the Bible seems to support it: the last plague God visited on the Egyptians (according to the Bible but not according to God 😉 ) was the killing of every firstborn child or animal who resided in a home that was not marked with blood on the the doorpost.

    The very reason that the Puritans came to the “New World” was to avoid the persecution they were suffering because of their faith. (Of course, once they got here, they turned around and revisited that prosecution on other faiths, but that’s another story….)

    So pervasive was discrimination based on faith that the founding fathers of the newly formed United States of America wrote an amendment to the US Constitution that expressly forbids the government from creating laws that are based on faith. This wall of separation between church and state is hotly contested by religious fundamentalists, but it is clear that it was intended to exist and to prevent religious persecution.

    It has not always been successful.

    • In many states, beer stores cannot remain open on Sunday because of the Christian faith.
    • Until relatively recently, school prayer was allowed to be led by school officials.
    • We still have “In God We Trust” on our money (how ironic!) and the phrase “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance (in direct opposition to the desire of the Pledge’s author, Francis Bellamy, a socialist pastor who was so disgusted with the infighting and discrimination of the Christian faiths that he intentionally left any mention of God out of the Pledge)
    • The only faith to have a holy day as a national holiday (two holy days, actually) is Christianity.
    • Laws banning abortion are based on religious beliefs.
    • Laws banning gay marriage are based on religious beliefs.

    But the separation of church and state is an ideal to strive for that will, when we finally reach it, insure that everyone is free to follow their conscience.

    The religious fundamentalist movement has seen the writing on the wall: the courts are overturning laws based on religion and are allowing to stand those that protect freedom of religion. So those in the fundamentalist movement have started using a new tactic: conscientious objector, but with a twist.

    The basic scenario goes like this: new laws are passed that give everyone equal rights, triggering fundamentlists to declare they are no obliged to follow the new laws because of their faith. The twist is, that in NOT following the law, they are not only following their faith but forcing thousands if not millions of others to also follow their faith.

    Let me give you a few examples.

    • Hazelmary and Peter Bull ran the Chymorvah Hotel, Marazion, Cornwall, England. Their Christian faith dictated that only married couples be allowed to rent their rooms. But in 2007, the British Parliament passed the Equalities Act, which prohibited discrimination based on orientation. At the time, it was illegal for gays to marry in England, but they could obtain a civil union, which was supposed to be the “legal equivalent” of a marriage. But this couple refused to acknowledge their civil union as the valid equivalent of a marriage and refused to rent a room to a gay couple.
    • Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, refused to provide a wedding cake to a gay couple, stating he had nothing against gays, but gay marriage violated his religious beliefs.
    • Baronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers, refused to provide the floral arrangements for a gay wedding because of her religious beliefs.
    • Recently, the state of Utah began issuing gay marriage licenses after a federal judge overturned the law banning gay marriage. Yet there are still some clerks who refuse to issue the licenses based on their personal religious beliefs.
    • Similarly, the Catholic Church is behind a push for a “religious exclusion” to the required coverage of birth control under the Affordable Care Act. They claim that being forced to provide birth control to the employees of Catholic business owners violates their religious liberty.
    • There are pharmacists who refuse to dispense legal prescriptions for the “morning after pill”, stating religious objection to abortion as their reason.  Now that the morning after pill can be obtained without a prescription, there are still pharmacists who refuse to dispense it based on their personal religious views.

    These are just the tip of the iceberg. (Google “refused services for gay wedding” and you get more than 4 million hits alone!) These are the ones that make the news. But this goes on daily on a smaller scale all across the United States.

    Where do the religious exemptions end? Can a Muslim employer request that he not have to provide health care coverage for someone who gets food poisoning from eating pork? Can a Quaker employer ask for an exemption for someone who seeks health care from injuries suffered in a war? Can an Amish employer request a religious exemption for any injury obtained by the use of “modern equipment”?

    Yes, individuals have the right to live their life according to their religious beliefs. But they do NOT have the right to force even one other person to live according to their religious beliefs. An employer who denies employees coverage for birth control because his religion believes it is wrong is forcing his employees to abide by his religions dictates as well. That is why, time after time, these cases of “religious liberty” are being thrown out of court.

    Such cases used to anger me and I’d jump on the bandwagon condemning the business owners. But now,  knowing that all change is for the better and understanding that everything happens in the perfect time-space sequence, I now see that these cases are pushing the cause of social change along faster than any demonstration by pro-change forces could ever hope to have achieved.

    These “conscientious objectors” have forced the courts to be very clear about any “loopholes” that some might try to use to avoid following the law. They also bring to light the utter lack of logic in the reasoning that is used by those in fundamentalist organizations as well as they hypocrisy and fear-mongering in which they engage. It brings otherwise “taboo” topics to the forefront for discussion and for open communication. They expose individuals to topics they might otherwise never be exposed to and force them to think about it and to consider where they stand on the issues.

    Given that we are all One, that we are all created by Love, from Love and with Love and that Love is the very essence of our being, many (most?) people are coming down on “the right side of history”. Not only in the the push for equality for all human beings but in other areas that concern all creation as well, such as the stewardship of the planet earth, access to clean water, access to decent housing and access to life-saving medication. The groups that have always supported these causes are obtaining new allies at a rate heretofore unheard of.

    All because of a bunch of people who want to claim a first amendment right to discriminate.

     

     

     

     

  • Getting going with getting involved

    Did you know that there is a new book that identifies the 25 most important messages of the 9-installment Conversations with God series? It then offers practical suggestions on how to apply each message in every day life. Powerful and inspirational reading.  To see the first seven chapters and hear a one chapter sample of the audio book, click here.
    ================================================

    (This is Part VII of an extended series on being part of the change, rather than simply observing the change, that is occurring on our planet right now.)

    We said in our last installment here that the first step in becoming a spiritual helper is to:

    1.   ANNOUNCE OURSELVES TO EACH OTHER

    This means that you have to declare yourself, publicly.

    This means taking a risk. It is about being a bit uncomfortable. It is about being willing to “look bad” or to “fail.” It is about knowing that “failure”, in fact, does not exist, that it is an illusion, a figment of our imagination.

    It is about forgetting the self  and putting the highest good of the largest number at the top of our priorities. It is about being able to be counted on. It is about forging ahead, pushing on, even when the bramble covers the path.

    Especially when it does.

    It is about understandingWho andWhat You Really Are, and determining to express and experience that.

    It is about knowing why you are here, and what life is really all about.

    And then it is about announcing that.

    Hellen Keller famously said, “Do what you can do.” That last ten per cent is about doing what you can do. Nothing more, but absolutely nothing less.

    Some practical ways to take Step One

    Taking this first step in becoming a spiritual helper is as simple as A-B-C.

    A. Get clear on what is true for you . This is the beginning of everything. Clarity precedes action, and sustains it. Indeed, clarity produces  action where confusion stalls it. You must, therefore, commit to getting clear about what is true for you…

    *  AboutWho You Are

    *  AboutWhat You Choose

    *  About How YouWill Demonstrate That

    B. Find out what is already being done, and by whom.  There is more going on in the world than most people are aware of. Causes and movements with which you agree need your support. These days, with Internet search engines such as Google.com  and Ask Jeeves , you can find just about anything and anyone you are looking for—including groups of people who a goal in common with you.

    C. Create what you cannot find.  If you really can’t find anything out there that speaks to the issue of your concern or that is doing what you want to see get done, create it. Stop waiting for some other group to form or some other person to stand up. Form a group or organization of your own. Call a meeting. Hold a rally. Raise your flag and see if anyone salutes.

    Now let’s take a look at how you can do this.

    This series of articles here assumes that you have already read one or more of the Conversations with God  books. If you have not, one of the fastest ways to get clear aboutWho You Really Are, and about your right relationship to the universe, is to read Conversations with God-Book 1 (PutnamPublishing)

    Indeed, the entire opening Trilogy in the CwG series is highly recommended.

    (The 25 Core Messages of the Conversations with God  9-book series are summarized and expanded upon under one cover in the 2013 book What God Said. This is the first time that such commentaries and observations, spiritual-principle-by-spiritual-principle, have been offered on these remarkable books. Each chapter in What God Said concludes with a list of practical suggestions on how to apply in one’s life the key principle being discussed.)

    Everything in the current writing is based on the messages in those books and in the dialogue books that have followed, including:

    * Friendship with God
    * Communion withGod
    * The New Revelations
    * Tomorrow’sGod

    This booklet is also heavily foundationed in thematerial found inmy 2005 book, What God Wants.

    Getting clear on who you are and what you want is not as difficult as it may seem. I have created a program designed to help you do exactly that. It is an intensive (and highly enjoyable and exciting) retreat called ReCreating Yourself.

    The intent of the retreat is to provide a space within which you may recreate yourself anew in the next grandest version of the greatest vision ever you held aboutWho You Are. It is offered in a five-day format several times each year.

    Many people who have participated in these programs have told us that they have reached a level of personal clarity about themselves, their relationship to God and to Life, and their life purpose, that they never thought they would ever achieve.

    You may receive more information about these retreats by clicking on the Neale Donald Walsch circular icon at www.CWGPortal.com, then looking in the Calendar of Events.

    It is important to understand that you must be in-the-moment clear about Who You Are and about your true relationship to the universe, to all of life, and to each other, before you can become maximally effective as a spiritual helper.

    There are many programs and opportunities in theworld opening up the space for you to do this.

    Ours is only one of them. Find a personal growth and spiritual development program or activity that you feel best suits you, that resonates with your current sense of self, and undertake that activity with commitment and deep caring.

    If you do, you should be able, in relatively short order, to know and to declare:

    * Who you are.
    * What you choose.
    * How you will demonstrate that.

    Embark on a reading program as well. At the conclusion of this series will be  an opening list of Recommended Reading for persons seeking a greater awareness of themselves and the world around them. Check this list out when that list comes out, and decide to read at least one book a month for the rest of your life that supports your personal growth and spiritual development.

    Remember that the New Spirituality that is talked about in the CwG books is based upon the following assumption:

    There is somethingwe do not now fully understand aboutGod and about Life, the understanding of which can change everything.

  • Worldwide Discussion:
    HOW LONG WILL PEOPLE STAND FOR
    ‘STAND YOUR GROUND’?

    Many citizens of the United States — and many people watching them from around the world — are shaking their head in disbelief and dismay in the aftermath of the shooting to death of a 43-year-old man in a Florida movie theatre by a former police captain who says he fired the shot because he was afraid he was going to be attacked.

    The story of this sad episode has made headlines across the globe and received thousands upon thousands of ‘opens’ on the Internet as people search their hearts to try to figure out why a person trained in the disciplines of law enforcement would fire a gun at another man’s chest at point-blank range after the first man threw a bag of popcorn in his face.

    The incident occurred on Jan. 13 at a moviehouse in Pasco County, Florida where, according to various news reports, 71-year-old retired Tampa Bay police captain Curtis Reeves became annoyed when a man in the row of seats in front of him, Chad Oulson, began using his cellphone to tap out a text message with his 2-year-old daughter’s babysitter while the previews were playing before the movie started.

    Mr. Reeves asked Mr. Oulson to stop texting, but Mr. Oulson ignored him. According to witnesses quoted in news reports and in the police report filed by the Pasco County Sheriff’s Dept., the two began arguing. Mr. Reeves then left the theatre, apparently to find a management employee.

    According to the sheriff’s report, the manager was busy with another customer, and Mr. Reeves returned to his seat.

    When Mr. Reeves returned, Mr. Oulson is said to have stood up and asked him if he had gone to management to tell on him. The two exchanged angry words again, and Mr. Oulson threw a bag of popcorn he was holding at Mr. Reeves, the bag apparently hitting Mr. Reeves in the face.

    At this point, Mr. Reeves is alleged to have reached into his pants pocket, taken out a .380-caliber pistol, and shot Mr. Oulson point-blank in the chest, the bullet passing through the hand of Mr. Oulson’s wife, Nichole, who was trying to pull her husband away.

    Mrs. Oulson’s injury was not life threatening, but her husband was severely injured, stumbled across the movie theatre aisle, fell into the lap of a moviegoer and his grown son, and died after being taken to the hospital. His last words were, “I can’t believe I got shot.”

    In court the following day, the attorney for Mr. Reeves, Richard Escobar, portrayed Mr. Reeves as the victim in the incident, saying that Mr. Oulson was the “aggressor.” He said Mr. Reeves, after being hit in the face “with some object” that he could not identify, was afraid he was going to be attacked by Mr. Oulson, and so he pulled his gun — which he had a license to carry — and shot in self-defense, fearing for his safety.

    Circuit Court Judge Lynn Tepper did not agree that the evidence gathered by the sheriff’s department and the testimony of witnesses showed Mr. Oulson to be the clear aggressor, and ordered Mr. Reeves not to be released on his own recognizance, as his attorney had requested, but remanded into custody on a charge of second-degree murder.

    The whole case has brought to public discussion once again the question of gun violence in America, and in particular has given the country and the world another look at the State of Florida’s now famous Stand Your Ground law, which states that in the case of a reasonable presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm, a person is not required to retreat, but may stand their ground, and use deadly force, if necessary, to do so.

    It is not clear if Mr. Reeves and his attorney will seek to use the law as a defense in this case. Law enforcement officers on the scene after the shooting have said to the media that the facts they have gathered do not appear to support its use in this instance.

    Witnesses say that no punches were thrown, nor attempted to be thrown, by either of the men, and that their exchange was limited to raised voices, with both men standing up, and then the throwing of the popcorn — until Mr. Reeves allegedly pulled out his pistol and shot Mr. Oulson in the chest from a few feet away.

    Many are asking, if Mr. Reeves is a retired police captain, whether he would not have been trained in recognizing when the shooting of another person was absolutely necessary. Observers also wonder why, if he really felt Mr. Oulson was about to climb over the row of seats between them and launch a physical attack, Mr. Reeves did not simply take out his gun and tell Mr. Oulson, “not a step further.”

    But the larger question before the American public is, how long will citizens of the United States continue to put up with lax gun laws, easy availability of weapons (including rapid-fire assault weapons), and laws that threaten to turn the country back into a Wild West version of itself, where most men openly pack a side-shooter and where the motto of the day is: “Smile when you say that, brother.”

    People across the U.S. are beginning to ask: Is this what civilization is all about?

  • Are some groups of people superior to others?

    According to Amy Chua, a Chinese American law professor at Yale and author of the soon-to-be-released book “The Triple Package: Why Groups Rise and Fall in America,” the answer to this question is yes.

    According to Chua and her husband, Jed Rubenfeld, co-author of “The Triple Package,” there are eight cultural and religious groups that are inherently more likely to succeed because of three specific traits.  Not surprisingly, the daring duo happens to belong to two of the groups who made it onto their exclusive list:

    • Jewish (Rubenfeld’s background)
    • Indian
    • Chinese (Chua’s background)
    • Iranian
    • Lebanese-Americans
    • Nigerians
    • Cuban exiles
    • Mormons

    The underlying message in this book that some groups of people are “just superior to others and everyone else is contributing to the downfall of America” has already sparked a firestorm of controversy and has become a hot topic of discussion in the social media world.

    Chua and Rubenfeld explain that these eight “cultural groups” — carefully avoiding the words “racial” or “ethnic” — have three traits in common, the so-called “triple package”: a superiority complex, insecurity, and impulse control. The sense of superiority allegedly generates a belief in deserving the best, while the underlying inferiority complex fuels the need to compensate for feelings of worthlessness. Impulse control is seen as not only the ability to delay gratification, but also the strength to persevere in the completion of difficult tasks.

    As a follow-up to her previous highly controversial book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” where she boldly declared Chinese mothers to be superior, Chua and Rubenfeld are asking their readers to adopt a thought process which is eerily reminiscent of the type of thinking which fueled some of history’s most horrific events, such as slavery and the Holocaust, and which encourages belief systems that, to this day, continue to empower radical groups like the KKK and Westboro Baptist Church, by suggesting that one entire group of people is better than another simply based on race or religion or some other aspect of diversity.

    According to the New York Post, “As for why African-Americans don’t make the list, the authors believe that the Civil Rights Movement took away any hope for a superiority narrative, and so the black community is screwed — even as they cite Mitt Romney’s loss to Barack Obama as evidence of Mormon ascendancy.  ‘In this paradoxical sense, equality isn’t fair to African-Americans,’ they write. ‘Superiority is the one narrative that America has relentlessly denied or ground out of its black population.’”

    “That certain groups do much better in America than others — as measured by income, occupational status, test scores and so on — is difficult to talk about,” Chua and Rubenfeld write. “In large part, this is because the topic feels so racially charged.”

    Is it a racial issue?  Is it a religious issue?  Does Chua make a fair argument here?  Are some of us predisposed to live a “successful life” and some of us not?  What defines “success” for you?  If you happened to have drawn the short straw and were placed into this world within a cultural group other than the elite eight, such as myself, are we truly at a disadvantage and better luck next time?

    Believing in the illusion of superiority could be one of the most damaging choices one can make to the well-being of humanity as a whole, not only because it perpetuates the disparity between the haves and the have-nots and fosters a “them” and “us” mentality, but it suggests that if God did not create you as one of the chosen few – or eight, as Chua opines – or if you do not select to associate yourself with the appropriate religion, that, well, you are doomed.

    Your thoughts?  Your opinions?  Your insights?

    (Lisa McCormack is a Feature Editor at The Global Conversation and lives in Orlando, Florida.  To connect with Lisa, please e-mail her at Lisa@TheGlobalConversation.com.)

  • An educational pep talk

    What specific word will spur a child to a life of discovery? What influence, person or otherwise, will cement the ideas by which a child will formulate his or her worldview? What subject in school will lead a child to be a “success?” By what standard do we measure success?

    The meanings of questions change as we become more aware of our individual spiritual purpose, our reason for Being. Conversations with God encourages us to embrace a new way of measuring success. In the Old Cultural Story, success was measured by how much stuff you accumulated, often at the expense of another. Scarcity was used as a motivational factor and competition was encouraged.

    In the New Spirituality, we learn that Our purpose is to recreate ourselves anew every day in the next grandest version of the greatest vision we ever held about ourselves. Instead of glorifying the scarcity and “do anything to get ahead” mentality, we come to understand that There is enough, Human beings do not have to struggle with each other to get what they want, and The wonderful ways to be are truthful, aware and responsible. In fact, Conversations with God even says that No human being is superior to another. And this is just a retelling of just a few of the core concepts from the CwG body of work.

    I recently watched an enlightened young man, Logan LaPlante’s, TEDx University Talk about his ideas about home school education. You can watch it here: http://youtu.be/h11u3vtcpaY

    Logan’s parents have allowed him, to a certain degree, to direct his own education based on his interests. When asked what he wants to be when he grows up, his answer is simple: He wants to be happy.

    He says adults ask the wrong questions. He is unsure what career he will pursue, although he is leaning toward designing outdoors sports and recreation equipment. He thinks focusing on what to be or do in the future is a mistake. He is, instead, choosing to focus on what to be and do now.  He believes that the only way to have a fulfilled life is to start by having a happy and fulfilled childhood. So he pursues his interests now, focusing on being happy and learning the things that are interesting. He calls this “hacking” his education.

    While I watched, I couldn’t help but see similarities between his ideas about growing up, his education, and his ideas about the future and people on a spiritual path. (That’s not to say that I assume he has read CwG or would agree with its messages.) It shows that children, when allowed to have some self-direction will flourish; that once we remove the walls and restrictions their own ideas and creativity can flourish. This, contrary to old ideas, will not lead to uncontrolled hedonism, it actually leads to growth.

    After watching Logan and really listening to what he had to say, I reevaluated my own approach to my daughter’s homeschooling. I noticed that I had gotten into a rut, and honestly, taken some of the fun out of our schooling because I felt pressure to get through and finish tasks. Logan’s enthusiasm, courage and innovative ideas inspired me. I have rededicated myself to giving her more control in directing her education because I know that she will enjoy, and thereby learn, more. It will also, allow her to Be Happy now, rather than waiting for her to become something in the future.

    Children like Logan know the answers to the questions above about success, inspiration and discovery can be answered in many ways. They don’t have to be tied to how many good grades a child gets, if they get into certain colleges, or how much money they make. They can be about enjoyment, finding inspiration and value in things that make them happy, lead them to think, and give them a reason to feel passionate about a subject.

    Thank you for the pep talk, Logan!

    (Emily A. Filmore is the Creative Co-Director of www.cwgforparents.com. She is also the author/illustrator of the “With My Child” Series of books about bonding with your child through everyday activities.  Her books are available at www.withmychildseries.com. To contact Emily, please email her at Emily@cwgforparents.com.)

  • Worldwide Discussion:
    WHAT HUMAN BEINGS DON’T
    UNDERSTAND ABOUT GOD

    Might this be a fine stretch of eternity during which to declare that there is clearly something we don’t fully understand about God, the understanding of which would change everything?

    To put it more dramatically, is it possible that unless we enlarge and expand our primitive ideas about God and about Life in the decades just ahead, we may find that we have backed ourselves into a corner, from which there is no escape?

    Conversations with God told us that humanity nearly rendered itself extinct once before. Barely enough of us survived to regenerate the species and start over. Are we at this same turning point again? Have we arrived once more at the intersection where theology meets cosmology meets sociology meets pathology?

    Right now we are still embracing a Separation Theology. That is, a way of looking at God that insists that we are “over here” and God is “over there.”

    The problem with a Separation Theology is that it produces a Separation Cosmology. That is, a way of looking at all of life that says that everything is separate from everything else.

    And a Separation Cosmology produces a Separation Psychology. That is, a psychological viewpoint that says that I am over here and you are over there.

    And a Separation Psychology produces a Separation Sociology. That is, a way of socializing with each other that encourages the entire human society to act as separate entities serving their own separate interests.

    And a Separation Sociology produces a Separation Pathology. That is, pathological behaviors of self-destruction, engaged in individually and collectively, and producing suffering, conflict, violence, and death by our own hands—as evidenced everywhere on our planet throughout human history.

    Only when our Separation Theology is replaced by a Oneness Theology will our pathology be healed. We have been differentiated from God, but not separated from God, even as your fingers are differentiated but not separated from your hand. We must come to understand that all of life is One. This is the first step. It is the jumping-off point. It is the beginning of the end of how things now are. It is the start of a new creation, of a new tomorrow. It is the New Cultural Story of Humanity.

    Oneness is not a characteristic of life. Life is a characteristic of Oneness. This is what we have not understood about our existence on the Earth, the understanding of which would change everything.

    Life is the expression of Oneness Itself. God is the expression of Life Itself. God and Life are One. You are a part of Life. You do not and cannot stand outside of it. Therefore you are a part of God. It is a circle.

    It cannot be broken.