This article is several years old but exlpains the connection of Earth day and May Day.
EARTH DAY, MAY DAY AND WATERMELONS
By Betty Freauf
April 26, 2003
NewsWithViews.com
Some may wonder what Earth Day and May Day have to do with watermelons. Well, aren't watermelons green on the outside and red on the inside?
Earth Day, the religion of ecology, came and went with lots of ink in my home town paper. I'm sure it was the same in yours. And the next important watermelon day that the communists observe will be May Day -- May 1st.
The first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970 with the blessing of Republican President Nixon and other world leaders. Another Republican, President George W. Bush, Sr., signed an Earth Day Proclamation in 1990. The 1991 Oregon Republican-controlled legislature passed a resolution dedicating April 22nd as an annual Earth Day observance.
April 22, 1970 was the 100th anniversary of Lenin's birth and doubtless a kind of signal to the comrades that they could safely participate in a movement not normally associated with communism. Now its called environmentalism.
The symbol of the first Earth Day was a circle with a broken cross, the bars pointing downward. It is a New Age symbol meaning the rejection of Christianity which, of course, aligns with the communist philosophy. It is seen often on bumper stickers today and we saw many of them in recent "anti-war" demonstrations.
Once Christ was no longer allowed in the schools, the spiritual vacuum was filled with the New Age "Gaia" religion. The very ones that yell about "separation of church and state" when it comes to Christianity are the ones that want this Gaia religion in the schools so that the children may be indoctrinated at an early age.
The Earth Day movement began with propagandizing the young. Hundreds of thousands of children and high school students were encouraged by their teachers and national leaders to demonstrate on the streets on the first Earth Day which subsequently became a kind of annual holiday before official recognition.
On Earth Day, students from coast to coast celebrate their spiritual connection to Mother Earth. The aim is to persuade students to reject Western culture and become advocates for new global beliefs and values which includes selective population reduction using abortion, homosexuality and a plethora of medical diseases.
The "separation of church and state" is in the U.S.S.R. constitution, not the U.S. constitution which simply says there shall be no designated state religion.
Our local 4/21/2003 paper offered tips for Earth Day. Yours probably published them too. This "celebration" is well orchestrated as are all communist functions. Locally, the school kids were given free city bus passes to encourage them to leave their cars at home. These watermelons want us to give up our cars and use tax-subsidized mass transit even though mass transit cannot always get us to our destinations.
Some of these groups include Earth First. According to Inside Edition (T.V.) on 7/27/1990, a former U.S. Forest Service Employee was its founder. Others like the radical Earth Liberation Front are credited for burning down ski resorts and torching an automobile distributorship in Oregon. They sit in trees. These environmentalists sabotage expensive timber equipment. Logging companies have filed lawsuits against members; however, most of the defendants purposely have no jobs and could not possibly pay the damage awards but they have the cost of $100 to attend an Boot Camps where the tree huggers learn their tactics. Is it reasonable to believe they get paid by someone but it doesn't show up in their income tax? They've literally devastated our timber and salmon industries with the "Endangered Species Act". Then we have "Friends of the Earth" and I'm sure your state has some "Friends of Something" as we do in Oregon. With friends like these, Oregon doesn't need enemies because our state has the highest unemployment rate of all states.
These environmental groups tie up land owners in court who wish to develop their land costing untold court costs and attorney fees wearing the land owner down until he/she is willing to sell at a sacrificed price to get out from under the pressure. Now that they have much of the land in Western United States tied up, I've noticed they are beginning to focus on water quality.
The Nature Conservancy makes a practice of buying private land and then selling it to the federal government at substantial mark up.
© 2003 Betty Freauf - All Rights Reserved
http://www.newswithviews.com/Betty/Freauf22.htm
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Earth Day or May Day?
We aren't traveling today, still planning this years adventure to begin on May 23rd.
I am not celebrating earth day. I consider it he replacement for the communist may day. I also consider it anti human as described in this article.
On April 22, Celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day
13 April 2010 Craig Biddle
Because Earth Day is intended to further the cause of environmentalism--and because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology--on April 22, those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.
Because Earth Day is intended to further the cause of environmentalism—and because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology—on April 22, those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.
Exploiting the Earth—using the raw materials of nature for one’s life-serving purposes—is a basic requirement of human life. Either man takes the Earth’s raw materials—such as trees, petroleum, aluminum, and atoms—and transforms them into the requirements of his life, or he dies. To live, man must produce the goods on which his life depends; he must produce homes, automobiles, computers, electricity, and the like; he must seize nature and use it to his advantage. There is no escaping this fact. Even the allegedly “noble” savage must pick or perish. Indeed, even if a person produces nothing, insofar as he remains alive he indirectly exploits the Earth by parasitically surviving off the exploitative efforts of others.
According to environmentalism, however, man should not use nature for his needs; he should keep his hands off “the goods”; he should leave nature alone, come what may. Environmentalism is not concerned with human health and wellbeing—neither ours nor that of generations to come. If it were, it would advocate the one social system that ensures that the Earth and its elements are used in the most productive, life-serving manner possible: capitalism.
Capitalism is the only social system that recognizes and protects each individual’s right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Under capitalism, if a person (or corporation) spews toxins onto someone’s land, or poisons his water supply, or in any other way violates his property rights, the offender is held accountable in a court of law. But so long as a person does not violate anyone’s rights, he is free to act in accordance with his basic means of living: the judgment of his mind.
Environmentalism, of course, does not and cannot advocate capitalism, because if people are free to act on their judgment, they will strive to produce and prosper; they will transform the raw materials of nature into the requirements of human life; they will exploit the Earth and live.
Environmentalism rejects the basic moral premise of capitalism—the idea that people should be free to act on their judgment—because it rejects a more fundamental idea on which capitalism rests: the idea that the requirements of human life constitute the standard of moral value. While the standard of value underlying capitalism is human life (meaning, that which is necessary for human beings to live and prosper), the standard of value underlying environmentalism is nature untouched by man.
The basic principle of environmentalism is that nature (i.e., “the environment”) has intrinsic value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of the requirements of human life—and that this value must be protected from its only adversary: man. Rivers must be left free to flow unimpeded by human dams, which divert natural flows, alter natural landscapes, and disrupt wildlife habitats. Glaciers must be left free to grow or shrink according to natural causes, but any human activity that might affect their size must be prohibited. Naturally generated carbon dioxide (such as that emitted by oceans and volcanoes) and naturally generated methane (such as that emitted by swamps and termites) may contribute to the greenhouse effect, but such gasses must not be produced by man. The globe may warm or cool naturally (e.g., via increases or decreases in sunspot activity), but man must not do anything to affect its temperature. And so on.
In short, according to environmentalism, if nature affects nature, the effect is good; if man affects nature, the effect is evil.
Stating the essence of environmentalism in such stark terms raises some illuminating questions: If the good is nature untouched by man, how is man to live? What is he to eat? What is he to wear? Where is he to reside? How can man do anything his life requires without altering, harming, or destroying some aspect of nature? In order to nourish himself, man must consume meats, fruits, and vegetables. In order to make clothing, he must skin animals, pick cotton, manufacture polyester, and the like. In order to build a house—or even a hut—he must cut down trees, dig up clay, make fires, bake bricks, and so forth. Each and every action man takes to support or sustain his life entails the exploitation of nature. Thus, on the premise of environmentalism, man has no right to exist.
It comes down to this: Each of us has a choice to make. Will I recognize that man’s life is the standard of moral value—that the good is that which sustains and furthers human life—and thus that people have a moral right to use the Earth and its elements for their life-serving needs? Or will I accept that nature has “intrinsic” value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of human needs—and thus that people have no right to exist?
There is no middle ground here. Either human life is the standard of moral value, or it is not. Either nature has intrinsic value, or it does not.
On April 22, make clear where you stand. Don’t celebrate Earth Day; celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day—and let your friends, family, and associates know why.
I am not celebrating earth day. I consider it he replacement for the communist may day. I also consider it anti human as described in this article.
On April 22, Celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day
13 April 2010 Craig Biddle
Because Earth Day is intended to further the cause of environmentalism--and because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology--on April 22, those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.
Because Earth Day is intended to further the cause of environmentalism—and because environmentalism is an anti-human ideology—on April 22, those who care about human life should not celebrate Earth Day; they should celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day.
Exploiting the Earth—using the raw materials of nature for one’s life-serving purposes—is a basic requirement of human life. Either man takes the Earth’s raw materials—such as trees, petroleum, aluminum, and atoms—and transforms them into the requirements of his life, or he dies. To live, man must produce the goods on which his life depends; he must produce homes, automobiles, computers, electricity, and the like; he must seize nature and use it to his advantage. There is no escaping this fact. Even the allegedly “noble” savage must pick or perish. Indeed, even if a person produces nothing, insofar as he remains alive he indirectly exploits the Earth by parasitically surviving off the exploitative efforts of others.
According to environmentalism, however, man should not use nature for his needs; he should keep his hands off “the goods”; he should leave nature alone, come what may. Environmentalism is not concerned with human health and wellbeing—neither ours nor that of generations to come. If it were, it would advocate the one social system that ensures that the Earth and its elements are used in the most productive, life-serving manner possible: capitalism.
Capitalism is the only social system that recognizes and protects each individual’s right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Under capitalism, if a person (or corporation) spews toxins onto someone’s land, or poisons his water supply, or in any other way violates his property rights, the offender is held accountable in a court of law. But so long as a person does not violate anyone’s rights, he is free to act in accordance with his basic means of living: the judgment of his mind.
Environmentalism, of course, does not and cannot advocate capitalism, because if people are free to act on their judgment, they will strive to produce and prosper; they will transform the raw materials of nature into the requirements of human life; they will exploit the Earth and live.
Environmentalism rejects the basic moral premise of capitalism—the idea that people should be free to act on their judgment—because it rejects a more fundamental idea on which capitalism rests: the idea that the requirements of human life constitute the standard of moral value. While the standard of value underlying capitalism is human life (meaning, that which is necessary for human beings to live and prosper), the standard of value underlying environmentalism is nature untouched by man.
The basic principle of environmentalism is that nature (i.e., “the environment”) has intrinsic value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of the requirements of human life—and that this value must be protected from its only adversary: man. Rivers must be left free to flow unimpeded by human dams, which divert natural flows, alter natural landscapes, and disrupt wildlife habitats. Glaciers must be left free to grow or shrink according to natural causes, but any human activity that might affect their size must be prohibited. Naturally generated carbon dioxide (such as that emitted by oceans and volcanoes) and naturally generated methane (such as that emitted by swamps and termites) may contribute to the greenhouse effect, but such gasses must not be produced by man. The globe may warm or cool naturally (e.g., via increases or decreases in sunspot activity), but man must not do anything to affect its temperature. And so on.
In short, according to environmentalism, if nature affects nature, the effect is good; if man affects nature, the effect is evil.
Stating the essence of environmentalism in such stark terms raises some illuminating questions: If the good is nature untouched by man, how is man to live? What is he to eat? What is he to wear? Where is he to reside? How can man do anything his life requires without altering, harming, or destroying some aspect of nature? In order to nourish himself, man must consume meats, fruits, and vegetables. In order to make clothing, he must skin animals, pick cotton, manufacture polyester, and the like. In order to build a house—or even a hut—he must cut down trees, dig up clay, make fires, bake bricks, and so forth. Each and every action man takes to support or sustain his life entails the exploitation of nature. Thus, on the premise of environmentalism, man has no right to exist.
It comes down to this: Each of us has a choice to make. Will I recognize that man’s life is the standard of moral value—that the good is that which sustains and furthers human life—and thus that people have a moral right to use the Earth and its elements for their life-serving needs? Or will I accept that nature has “intrinsic” value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of human needs—and thus that people have no right to exist?
There is no middle ground here. Either human life is the standard of moral value, or it is not. Either nature has intrinsic value, or it does not.
On April 22, make clear where you stand. Don’t celebrate Earth Day; celebrate Exploit-the-Earth Day—and let your friends, family, and associates know why.
Friday, April 16, 2010
From Las Vegas, NV, 4/16/2010.
My last posting was on January 12, 2010. When I left off I was still awaiting the scheduling of a prostate biopsy. I went in on the 15th and had the catheter removed but by that evening was in pain again. My biopsy was schedules on Monday morning, the 18. So, I endured the pain until then. No biopsy, the catheter went back in and I got more medicine to take. Pain relieved.
On the 26th I saw my kidney specialist, finally some good news. My numbers were better and my Prednisone dosage was reduced to 10mg.
On the 28th it was time for more slicing and dicing. I had some skin cancer removed from my left cheek. Basal cells were all removed by the surgeon using Moh’s Procedure. I only had to have two layers removed. Of course this required some follow up visits, stitches out etc. A later visit to the dermatologist resulted in freezing many more spots and doing two more biopsies of spots on my face. And yes, I now wear a hat and long sleeved shirt, but it’s 30 years too late.
I finally had the prostate biopsy on 2/1/2010. The results came back no cancer but some abnormal cells present. As explained by the doctor my choices were surgery or keep my old friend the catheter. Not much discussion here, the operation was scheduled for Monday the 15th of Feb. but because of some other tests my primary physician wanted before he would clear me for surgery it happened on the 19th. I am glad to report that all went well, the recovery was painless. Of course I had my catheter during recovery. No matter how routine the doctor make it sound it still shocked me to see so much blood in my urine. This is probably TMI but I passed blood for four weeks, one after the catheter was out.
We had to cancel RV trips to Quartzsite and San Clemente because of surgery and recovery. But I was cleared on the 12 for a trip to Cabo San Lucas, BCS, Mexico.
I enjoy Mexico but never look forward to flight there. I would rather drive a 1000 miles than go through the airport hassle and then turn my fate over to the pilot of a metal tube. Unfortunately the reality is it’s about 1300 miles from Las Vegas to Cabo and driving across the border and through the large border city of Tijuana is froth with danger. Of course I try not to drive through Chicago or Detroit for the same reasons.
Our first week in Cabo was at the Club Regina which is actually closer to San Jose del Cabo than to Cabo San Lucas. This condo/hotel complex is in a desert setting. Well, most of the Baja peninsula is a desert setting. Many of the other resort complexes have plusher landscaping. The Club Regina also has an adult pool area. As G’s we love kids, but it’s sometimes nice to be away from them. Our trips to Mexico wouldn’t be exciting to a lot of people, we don’t do clubs and nightspots. We play some of the games the hotel activities people sponsor and read a lot. As evidenced by my waist line we do enjoy dining out. Over the years we have been going to Los Cabos we have done most of the outdoor adventures and the tours.
We were at the Club Regina from 3/15 to 3/22 and then moved south to the Hacienda del Mar about six miles north of Cabo San Lucas. This is one of the plush landscaped resorts I wrote about. It also has a lot more usable beach area. I was never a big fan of the beach and will seldom go in the ocean, but it is a joy to sit and watch. It reminds me of the eternal God and his gifts to us. This trip we decided not to rent a car. Renting a car in Cabo is like buying one and leaving it there. We did rent one to pick up Curtis and his family at the airport on the 29th but only for two days. Other times when we needed to go shopping or to a restaurant we took a taxi. Per trip the taxi’s seem expensive but when compared to car rental they are cheap. $36 round trip compared to $75-140 a day depending on the size. And yes that is American dollars. Nothing is cheap in Cabo.
Like I said we did rent a car to pick up our youngest son, his wife, three year old and 18 month old at the airport. We also did some groceries shopping while we had the car. It was a Chevy Suburban, what a boat not many parking spots at the hotel were large enough. But it did haul us all and used nearly $400 pesos worth of gasoline.
In spite of any impression you may have gotten from my remarks about the adult pool at the Club Regina, we had a ball with the grandkids. I even played in the sand on the beach, but only near the ocean. Easter Sunday the resort had an Easter Egg hunt and bunnies passing out chocolate.
The flight home on April 5th was unremarkable except for the 7 hour layover in the airport in Mexico City.
More doctor’s appointments this month and preparation for our RV trip starting on June 4.
I am going to try to do updates more often and will try to do daily blogs during our caravan to Alaska. Of course that may depend on internet access.
Pictures of our Cabo trip are on Gerri's Facebook pages; http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?v=wall&story_fbid=425396163992&id=755083992#!/gerri.barker More pictures are posted on Dana Smith-Barker's Facebook page;http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000214358463&ref=pymk#!/album.php?aid=164986&id=636923757
My last posting was on January 12, 2010. When I left off I was still awaiting the scheduling of a prostate biopsy. I went in on the 15th and had the catheter removed but by that evening was in pain again. My biopsy was schedules on Monday morning, the 18. So, I endured the pain until then. No biopsy, the catheter went back in and I got more medicine to take. Pain relieved.
On the 26th I saw my kidney specialist, finally some good news. My numbers were better and my Prednisone dosage was reduced to 10mg.
On the 28th it was time for more slicing and dicing. I had some skin cancer removed from my left cheek. Basal cells were all removed by the surgeon using Moh’s Procedure. I only had to have two layers removed. Of course this required some follow up visits, stitches out etc. A later visit to the dermatologist resulted in freezing many more spots and doing two more biopsies of spots on my face. And yes, I now wear a hat and long sleeved shirt, but it’s 30 years too late.
I finally had the prostate biopsy on 2/1/2010. The results came back no cancer but some abnormal cells present. As explained by the doctor my choices were surgery or keep my old friend the catheter. Not much discussion here, the operation was scheduled for Monday the 15th of Feb. but because of some other tests my primary physician wanted before he would clear me for surgery it happened on the 19th. I am glad to report that all went well, the recovery was painless. Of course I had my catheter during recovery. No matter how routine the doctor make it sound it still shocked me to see so much blood in my urine. This is probably TMI but I passed blood for four weeks, one after the catheter was out.
We had to cancel RV trips to Quartzsite and San Clemente because of surgery and recovery. But I was cleared on the 12 for a trip to Cabo San Lucas, BCS, Mexico.
I enjoy Mexico but never look forward to flight there. I would rather drive a 1000 miles than go through the airport hassle and then turn my fate over to the pilot of a metal tube. Unfortunately the reality is it’s about 1300 miles from Las Vegas to Cabo and driving across the border and through the large border city of Tijuana is froth with danger. Of course I try not to drive through Chicago or Detroit for the same reasons.
Our first week in Cabo was at the Club Regina which is actually closer to San Jose del Cabo than to Cabo San Lucas. This condo/hotel complex is in a desert setting. Well, most of the Baja peninsula is a desert setting. Many of the other resort complexes have plusher landscaping. The Club Regina also has an adult pool area. As G’s we love kids, but it’s sometimes nice to be away from them. Our trips to Mexico wouldn’t be exciting to a lot of people, we don’t do clubs and nightspots. We play some of the games the hotel activities people sponsor and read a lot. As evidenced by my waist line we do enjoy dining out. Over the years we have been going to Los Cabos we have done most of the outdoor adventures and the tours.
We were at the Club Regina from 3/15 to 3/22 and then moved south to the Hacienda del Mar about six miles north of Cabo San Lucas. This is one of the plush landscaped resorts I wrote about. It also has a lot more usable beach area. I was never a big fan of the beach and will seldom go in the ocean, but it is a joy to sit and watch. It reminds me of the eternal God and his gifts to us. This trip we decided not to rent a car. Renting a car in Cabo is like buying one and leaving it there. We did rent one to pick up Curtis and his family at the airport on the 29th but only for two days. Other times when we needed to go shopping or to a restaurant we took a taxi. Per trip the taxi’s seem expensive but when compared to car rental they are cheap. $36 round trip compared to $75-140 a day depending on the size. And yes that is American dollars. Nothing is cheap in Cabo.
Like I said we did rent a car to pick up our youngest son, his wife, three year old and 18 month old at the airport. We also did some groceries shopping while we had the car. It was a Chevy Suburban, what a boat not many parking spots at the hotel were large enough. But it did haul us all and used nearly $400 pesos worth of gasoline.
In spite of any impression you may have gotten from my remarks about the adult pool at the Club Regina, we had a ball with the grandkids. I even played in the sand on the beach, but only near the ocean. Easter Sunday the resort had an Easter Egg hunt and bunnies passing out chocolate.
The flight home on April 5th was unremarkable except for the 7 hour layover in the airport in Mexico City.
More doctor’s appointments this month and preparation for our RV trip starting on June 4.
I am going to try to do updates more often and will try to do daily blogs during our caravan to Alaska. Of course that may depend on internet access.
Pictures of our Cabo trip are on Gerri's Facebook pages; http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?v=wall&story_fbid=425396163992&id=755083992#!/gerri.barker More pictures are posted on Dana Smith-Barker's Facebook page;http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000214358463&ref=pymk#!/album.php?aid=164986&id=636923757
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
