Our Lady of The Rockies

This is about an article celebrating the 25th anniversary of Butte's glaring religious icon on top of a mountain over looking the city.

http://helenair.com/news/state-and-regional/article_259bb8b0-0cd3-11e0-b338-001cc4c002e0.html

The author states that its a beacon to all travelers on the interstate. I say a blight. I feel almost embarrassed by it. It announces to the world, look we worship the virgin Mary, still. It gives me that third world creepy feeling.

The first sentence pointed out that Mary was the mother of Jesus. Really?  I always laugh when I see her portrayed as a very pretty, blue eyed white girl. True idol worship at its best.

I found it amusing how the author of this article kept using the word "everyone" throughout making it sound like "everyone" loves the Lady. NOT!

It was a sickening sweet piece of Christian propaganda. I wanted so badly to comment on the newspaper article, but felt I should blog about it instead. I would really like to share my feelings on this, but of course that would make me a very bad person for dissing God’s mom, or her statue, or the wonderful people who slaved over her.

It was put up because some guy’s wife recovered from a serious illness. I am sure it was only because he prayed hard enough and must have made a promise to god and felt this was what he could do in gratitude. This is an example of how powerful prayer really is. Desperate people trained by “the church” actually believe god interferes with their life. What kind of person really thinks like that. It’s mind boggling to me.

What really got my goat, was they were able to get the National Guard to spend a small fortune on this statue by using one of our helicopters to top it off. How in the hell do they get away with just a blatant misuse of government property.


The worst part is, she can't be ignored, her presence glorifies their ignorance and even more depressing is that this statue will be there forever unless an earthquake brings it down. I don’t find the Lady comforting whatsoever, she is a huge reminder of how superstitious beliefs will be around for a very long time to come.

tough-mindedness

Definition of TOUGH-MINDED

: realistic or unsentimental in temper or outlook

— tough–mind·ed·ness noun

First Known Use of TOUGH-MINDED

1907

MT Navy Reserve Xmas Party

I am preparing myself for another Navy Reserve xmas party. It should be a very quiet one, since the Seabees are in Afghanistan. My hubby is home only because he is supposed to retire any day. This will be one of only two xmas parties I will be subjected to this year. I will miss my company party, since I will be on vacation. At least the party for MT Commerce is secular and attending is voluntary and if you want you are asked to bring something to eat.
My husband's new boss and other business partners had a xmas party last weekend and there was a lot of alcohol and food. To my dismay, there was a huge poster of the nativity on the wall. But, then with no real surprise, under the nativity scene was a group of dudes gambling. Rolling dice for cash.

Tonight will be very similar. Most attending will eat and drink too much right after the Chaplin stands up and prays to Jesus. A few years back, I was happy to see one of the sailors roll his eyes during the annual party prayer.

Being a veteran myself I find it intolerable to listen to the God talk of my fellow sailors. They all assume being a true American and a patriot means having a belief in God. I do not get involved with supporting our troops, because the religious have taken it over. Hyper patriotism gives me the creeps. Yes, I love my country and I served my country, but that does not make me that special. People act like veterans walk on water and are practically worshipped. Most veterans have never seen combat, those who have should be given the respect they deserve, most are just like everyone else.

Anyway, I have to sit there tonight, listening to conservative white boys go on and on about whatever…. As usual they assume everyone else in attendance  agrees with them and if not should. I will switch to Vodka tonight.
It might be my last Navy Reserve Xmas Party. Thank God!

My daughters friend on meth

I am made to feel bad for being concerned a friend of my daughter growing up has turned to meth, and I saw it coming... I am the one crazy for saying so. I sit here tonight, wondering how this can happen. I guess I need not care? it is strange my kids act like I am over reacting. They don't remember the time my daughters best friends parents went to jail for stealing for meth. We took in the eldest girl, while the parents were in prison so she could finish the school year out and her little sister was young enough to stay with her grandparents.

I am in tears tonight because they have not a clue how serious this is, I guess I am not supposed to care about a little girl named Allison.

Am I crazy?

Grandma's Begonia

I saw a very interesting talk on TED about living things and how long some can live. Most were plants. I was amazed to learn our Montana birch trees can live a hundreds of years. That grove in the gulch up the mountain side is one plant that has been there a very long time. It is the root system that makes it's long life possible.
Then I remembered Grandma's Begonia. I wish I knew were she got it, but she had one, then gave a cutting to her daughters who then gave one to their daughters, and I plan on giving a cutting to my daughter. Therefore this one plant will out live generations of my family. This Begonia is invincible, it is a hardy plant that grows like a weed. It can sit in the same pot of soil for a decade and still prosper. It is up to myself and my sister to ensure this plant continues on through the next generation and hopefully beyond. Is that not amazing!

The Funeral

It was much worse than I expected, especially because it was my Granma. It was a horrible experience.

Because my Grandmother was not a church goer, the ceremony was at the local senior center. But, my uncle, a born again christian, just had to ask a retired "preacher" to speak at his mother's funeral. It was awful. Why , Why does everyone put up with this crap! I would say half of the people at Grandma's funeral were Catholics and not practicing Catholics at that. And the rest of us are not "religous". OMG it was bad, the invited preacher, did exaclty what he was supposed to do. Promote Protestant Christianty. Booooooo
It was very difficult to sit there and listen to this guy. Of course to my horror, the first song was...guess, The song I dislike the very most. Noone I mean Noone really understands what is going on. It kills me. After the funeral, my mother and brother commented about those "born agains" So, if they really feel like that, then why do they put up with it? This funeral was not for my Grandmother, my mom or her sister, but their fundamentalist brother. They did all the work, visited her at the nursing home, it was he who lived far away and pulled the strings. BS

Granma Alice

It has finally happened, Granma Alice died. She would have been 100 on the 14th. My mom said she wanted to live to 100. I don't think anyone should wish for something like that. One should say, "I hope to live a long and happy life". My poor Granma has been in a nursing home for about 15 years, most of them not unpleasant, but not so pleasant either. She was artificially kept alive even after her mind shut down long ago. Please people let your loved ones know what you do or do not want done when the day comes you can no longer communicate. Write it down

I have told my family not to extend my life if there is no quality of life. I am not afraid of death and going to hell. We all go back to where we came from. Whatever that means....and please cremate my body and don't bury the ashes in a cemetery. Toss them into the Clancy Creek. Traditional funerals are so morbid, no thanks

I joke with my sister about her belief in ghosts. I tell her she had better come and haunt me if she dies before me and me her if I do. It was Granma that got her into the silly supernatural stuff. She read taro cards, had a money pyramid in her bedroom, books about haunting. Granma said her last husband visited her after he died. My sister said her father in-law appeared to her and her husband after he died. I am still waiting for such an experience. It will be interesting to see if my sister experienced anything this time. She hasn't called and admitted anything to me yet.

My Granma was very new age way before everyone else. She practiced Yoga and through mail order bought all kinds of herbal remedies and cures. My sister says she probably thinks that is why she grew to be so old. Maybe, but it didn’t help her brain cells survive. She was very concerned about her appearance, liked nice clothes and dyed her hair red until she couldn’t ask for it any longer. I remember telling her years ago when she first was in the nursing home, how nice her hair looked and liked the color. She looked at me, and said “I don’t color my hair?” I guess she forgot or thought it was something not to admit to. Funny.. I also remember her always commenting on everyone’s weight. I was the lucky one, I was always asked if I had lost weight. Everyone else and all of my siblings were told they looked they have put on a few pounds. Funny again.

It was strange, last Saturday when cleaning out my garage while listening to my ipod, I stopped twice, pulled out an ear-bud thinking I heard voices. It was later that evening I found out about Granma having died. It is funny how even someone like me can seem to think of unexplained sensations after the fact. I am sure it was nothing. Actually I hope not, to me it would be terrible if there were really ghosts hanging out and apparently for murdered folks some for hundreds of years. A real nightmare

Now I am sort of dreading the funeral this weekend. Most of my family are not religious, except my uncle who is very religious, or at least his wife is. They belong to a very conservative church and home schooled all four of their kids and I think both the girls are actively trying to "save souls" one in San Diego hanging out with the homeless and one even went to Africa.

Well anyway, at least the funeral will be at the senior center not a church. Yeah! It will be very hard for me not to roll my eyes every time someone will say “she is now in a better place“. Whatever... Or that she is in heaven, even though everyone who knows her can't honestly claim to know that. I don't think she was a Christian, but she did believe in an afterlife of some sort. Because of my uncle, there will probably be a preacher and prayer. The worst part during a traditional funeral is when the preacher stands up there and uses the opportunity to warn everyone they had better remember they too will die and had better get straight with Jesus now, because you don't know when that will happen. It could be any minute and if you don't get good with god right now, you could very well end up in hell before you know it. Pisses me off. And if someone sings Amazing Grace it will be very hard on me. I hate, I mean hate that song. Why would anyone think its a great song, who calls themselves a wretch? Its sickening, especially at a funeral.

I sit here this morning wondering if my uncle tried to “save” his mother. Was he successful? Was it too late, can one be “saved” while your mind is shutting down? I wouldn’t think it would be nice to try and convert an old lady trapped in a wheel chair would it? Maybe she did let Jesus into her heart just in time. Maybe she pretended, so as to make her son happy. Maybe she did it for real. We will never know. If she is in Heaven, is she 100? Forever? Is she there now, like so many people seem to say in obits, or will she have to wait till Judgment day? More questions than answers from the clergy.

Her mind began fail when I was pregnant with my son 16 years ago. I remember it because my mom had moved her into her house because they felt she could no longer live alone. She was not taking her meds and forgetting to eat. I remember Granma asking me the same question over and over again. She would ask me if I had morning sickness, then not even 10 minutes later she would ask it again. It was hard dealing with that. Her short term memory was so bad, I had an uncle who after awhile played games with her because what else can one do. He would every day he visited her, tell her one day he was the President, then a Navy Pilot or some other outlandish thing just to make it interesting. She did not even seem to notice or care. Sad but funny. Looking back now, I remember getting a post card from her while I will still in the Navy and overseas. I would send her cards from every country I visited. Her last postcard to me was signed “Your Great Aunt” That was when I first realized she was losing it. I was her first Grand Daughter. Over the years her memory receded by generations. No memory of my husband, my children, then me, then her children, then she thought my mom, her eldest daughter was her mother. She did resemble her, then finally only moments of recollection until the stroke. She loved her coffee 24/7. After the stroke she could no longer swallow and that was her last earthly enjoyment taken away.

The best part of the funeral will be seeing a whole bunch of relatives we have not seen in a long time, and will meet people who knew Granma I have never met.
We had planned on celebrating her 100th this weekend and had prepared a slideshow of old family pictures and play an old record made by her family. They all used to play an instrument and enjoyed evenings together making music. She loved Polka. So I am sure we will still do that. She was the oldest of three and the last one to die.
Her life started out in Minnesota, she was born in 1910 a Nelson, a full blood Norwegian. She almost died of the Spanish Flu when she was a little girl in Eastern Montana. She was a one room school teacher for a short while. Somehow she ended up in Seattle during the 2nd World War, where she met my grandfather Ray. Ray (full blood Finish) was in the Army. My Mom remembers living in Texas along side rattlesnakes and then taking a long boat ride to live in Japan during the American occupation post WWII. They ended up in California during the Vietnam war where Grandpa was a recruiter. It destroyed him. It kind of gets blurry for me at this junction. My family was not comfortable talking about this time period so it’s sketchy. Somehow after my dad met my mom in Montana and followed her to California, then got married in Montana…. nine months later, a week after I was born in Montana , grandpa took his own life. I know next to nothing about him, other than that he was wounded in combat during a ski patrol in Italy during WWII. It was logged they thought he was killed until he managed to drag himself back to camp later.

Grandma spent the rest of her long life an Army widow. She lived the rest of her life in the same old house built in 1935. Really an old shack with a few rooms added on. Her family had moved onto the Flathead Reservation after the “white man” decided the land was too valuable not to settle.

Granma later meet a man named Bill and they lived together until he died in 1980 (I think) They lived together and never married because if they did, she would lose her Army widow benefits. She lived out the rest of her rational life in St. Ignatius and lead a very quiet, uneventful life. She had three children by Ray, two girls and a boy very late. She was in her forties when she had him, and I heard she is in the medical records for having an unusually long pregnancy of 14 months? Hard to believe, I will have to verify that.

I know my version of her life is probably way wrong, and very different than I thought it was. So, at the funeral, I hope to get a few facts straight and to get to really know her better. It’s sad this seems to happen way too often, we wait till after someone dies before we try and understand the dead. For me she has been gone for a really long time, and the body that was in the nursing home was not her. The funeral will be a more of a celebration of her life rather than a tearful goodbye. I said goodbye to her long ago. Its sad I really didn’t know her, and I think I was one of her closest grandchildren. It’s really not my fault. She didn’t have much to say about anything. I don’t remember ever really having a conversation with her, or her with anyone else. Most of our time growing up was spent with the other grandparents. My other grandma is still alive and also in the same nursing home as Granma L was. Granma M is in her mid 90’s, still mentally here and doing ok for her age.
I told my kids last night, funerals and cemeteries are for the living not the dead. I think it will be their first funeral. We have been very lucky that way.

My sister just called, the obit is in the paper. I was surprised how accurate I was about her life in general. Thank goodness, it was a well written obit, a heavenly father was not mentioned.
I learned today, she did not want cremation and she will be buried at the Pleasant View Cemetery.
Next to her first husband or her companion? Another uncomfortable question for the clergy

I will let you know how it all goes down.

Survivor Fav

I know the topic seems different from most of the posts on this blog, but I was excited to see a Survivor contestant who has the word humanist in her profile. I will be cheering her on every Wednesday night. It will be an interesting show with her in it. Kelly is an amputee.
When she was asked who was inspiration in her life she said

"My father who was recently killed in the earthquake in Haiti. He was there with Food for the Poor to bring hope and aid to people less fortunate. My dad was a doctor, a teacher and a humanist. I most admired him and looked up to him for his willingness to help others. He lived his life to the fullest every single day. His legacy will be carried on by all of the lives he touched during his life. "

This brought tears to my eyes tonight. We humanists have heros out there too.

The Republican Platform

In our local paper, there is a letter to the editor saying the Republican platform is bigoted towards gays.

Historically, that is always been the case. Remember, the party is still a WASP male majority. They do have token women, and other minorities who support "traditional values" found in the bible. If you don't know what WASP means, it is White Anglo Saxon Protestants. The party's goal is to conserve, to keep things the way they are, to fight tooth and nail against extending rights to anyone who is not deemed to fit their ideal version of what an American is supposed to be. They impede progress whenever and however possible.

Here is my comment to the letter

The common complaint found on both sides of the issue is that each accuse the other that they are forcing their views on them. No one is forcing anyone to accept the views of anyone else. Everyone has the right to believe what they want, it is when a person or a group act on those beliefs trouble begins. No one can make you gay and no one can make you a theist. Theist’s continue to try and use the government to enforce their religious laws on all American’s. The homosexual so call agenda, is only asking for equal treatment under our secular laws. American history shows that over time, we as a nation have extended equal rights to more and more Americans, and in my humble opinion that is a good thing.

Bad News

Christopher Hitchens, my favorite anti-theist has cancer. Bummer

It will be very difficult to find anyone else with his skill and whit debating theists. Of course the theists are thrilled and are having a heyday over this. I hope he has the strength to stomp on them a few more times.

The worst part of his illness is, it appears self inflicted. Now we will loose this treasure a decade or so earlier than necessary. That is so sad.

The doctors try and try to warn us of the dangers of drinking and smoking, and I do see more and more people are trying to quit and the death rates have been slowly dropping, but it maybe too late for some who took the gamble and ignored the warnings for 20 or more years.

I would think us nonbelievers would take better care of ourselves, but alas it seems quite a few "party" like there is no tomorrow.
If you have not read his book "God is not Great" you should, it is a must read.

Guest Speakers & God

I went to a business conference for women and was irritated over the amount of woo. Why, why do people insist in flaunting their life style choice. I just wanted to raise my hand and say, "that's nice, but I would like to know more about the topic and not hear about your religious moral superiority over the rest of us. Because, in a sense it is implied their success couldn't have come about without God. It was God this and God that, if I wanted to hear about God, I would have gone to church. Don't they realize that at least 1 of 10 people at the conference are not religious and therefore, of lets say 100 women, 10 to (20 if of a different religion) did not appreciate the speaker(s) that pontificated at the conference.

This is my first all female conference (I am more comfortable around men), so I don't know if this is normal or not, and I won't know until I go to another one next year. The worst part of the day and a half conference was having to sit and listen to this type of "inspirational" speaking for an hour and a half several times, I really didn't learn anything new. Both speakers just talked about themselves, and it was incredibly boring (and I’m not easily bored) and made me mad. One speaker became a success off the coat tails of her family and the other woman gave her story of how she moved from one job to another and the only thing I learned from her is she went to college and was offered good jobs as she went along. Both made millions for their companies.

So, lesson learned? as usual it’s not what you know it’s who you know AND you have to have money to make money. I already knew that.

I am a worker bee and I think I am growing to accept it and actually appreciate my life as it is more and more every day. I don't really want that promotion do I?

Sex in the City

Wow,

The Helena school district office is in chaos this week. There are over 80 comments on the local paper article about sex education policy. The response is heavy on both sides for and against. Of course those against it are freaked about it and how it promotes homosexuality, blah blah blah.

Here is my comment.

Moral outrage? I find the old testament attitude towards sex outrageous and immoral.

Ask yourself why virginity was so important women were to be stoned to death for not being one on her wedding night.
It was the only way to ensure paternity of the first born.
It was not to protect the woman's virtue, but to satisfy the husband that his wife’s first born is really his. This is about property rights.
Of course the 2nd most important biblical decree after the fact, is to make lots of babies. Which to me seems very irresponsible in today's world.
So sex is for procreation only not recreation, therefore all sex not resulting in conception is bad.
This is the absolute morality a few think we need to return too. No thank you very much.

Politics & Co-Workers

Yes god thanx for Fox

During a few beers on the town with my new co-workers, politics popped up. We all should have not gone there. Let's just say one of them ended up calling us all effing idiots and that is when I announced very loudly the discussion was over. I am glad I do not have to work directly with these co-workers on a daily basis, but it will feel different working with the one who repeatly said they "didn't give a shit" about "them" (poor, minorities living on welfare) This person just proved to me that I am not over reacting to the right. They are negative, mean, and uncaring not compassionate, understanding nor happy. How can anyone with such anger and frustration really be happy. I must admit it is harder to be an optimist, but some of us need to be.  I guess I would rather be an effing idiot than a minion from the Dark Side

Gawd Awful

It s so sad to have someone in the family who even though means well pushes loved ones away. And I am not talking about myself. Their grandchildren are now old enough to notice the little comments slipped in occasionally are meant to make already painfully obvious points not welcome in my house. It's sad because they are missing out getting to know the kids. Their grandchildren can not talk openly with them without being judged. The kids were taken into town to buy them clothes, anything they wanted..... they picked out shirts and shorts, only to be insulted by loving grandparents on what they picked out. My daughter was almost in tears, how cruel.

They are oblivious to how they constantly hum and ha about every little thing going on around them. I struggle every day not to "go off on them"

Lucky for us, we only have to endure this once a year or so, they do not live nearby and only bless us with their holy presence occasionally. Another reason I don't complain, is grandma may not be around much longer, and that is why it is even sadder she has alienated herself with my 2 kids. They will not have fond memories of her. She is the perfect example of a person that has chosen the church over her own flesh and blood. Like it has been said before, they will be very lonely in heaven.

Comments uttered this time around -
"Nice girl (on t.v.) that is how christians behave" - in other words, grandma thinks you have to be a christian to be a good person.

"Should have disqualified those Koreans, after only one false start" grandma just dinged on Korean's even thought she knows our son's best friend is Korean.  I could go on but its time to go back to work.

Movie Review

"LORD, SAVE US FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS" by Dan Merchant

What a bummer, another Christian documentary which started out pretending to be balanced, but halfway thru it bombs.

So Sad

By the way Dan, peeps are NOT CHRISTIAN you idiot. The Christians should be "offended", peeps are pagan. Spring, sex, frig like bunnies.....get it now

Instead, would Dan prefer a display in the state capital of a mounted, full size, life like Jesus on the Cross, 3-D dripping blood-the works- and see how well that goes over.

Then Dan goes off on people trying to change the name of St. Paul, it was a blatant attempt to equate American atheists to Soviet communists..... so old school, give me a break. What a clueless ass

Sin

Wiki
Atheist views of sin

Atheism often draws a distinction between sin and an ethical code of conduct. Sin is a term generally associated with a theological belief system (which is antithetical to atheism), and is separate from the concept of "right or wrong." Atheists typically do not use the term "sinful" to refer to actions that violate their particular moral system (particularly if "sinful" is taken to mean "acting against the wishes or commands of a deity"), preferring terms such as "wrong" or "unethical," which do not carry religious connotations. Most atheists hold that moral codes derive from societal mores or innate human characteristics, rather than religious authority. Atheists may still adhere to a strong ethical code, even if they do not use the concept of sin.

John Adams was wrong

We can be moral without religion and good without God


John Adams
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.


Simple: Our Government is not, even with power, able to work without morals and religion. Going against morals and religion would break them. The Constitution of the United States is for religious people. It is not for any others.

"Let the human mind loose. It must be loose. It will be loose. Superstition and dogmatism cannot confine it."

State Representatives Republican and Religious

There is a fellow who is running for the Montana House. He has a wonderful wife, home schooled kids and lives off the land in Western Montana. Of course they are a good Christian family.


Good for them.

But, does anyone really expect the rest of us live like that. Even if we wanted to, we could not. Most of us don't have a hobby farm and most of us do not home school our children, most of us have very little in common with this lifestyle. So, he is not representative of most Montanans and is only running for office to represent himself, his family and his minority view of Christianity.

National Day of Prayer

It was just the other day our local politicians and clergy decided to jump on the band wagon and plan to hold their first ever prayer breakfast on the National Day of Prayer. A bad news day. I was sick about it, I left a comment saying "there was a reason why it was never done before, because ITS A BAD IDEA. Now, a judge has pronounced that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional. Yep! Of course, it will be impossible to repeal it, its too popular, and the religious right really don't care if it is or not. The only part of the constitution they defend is the right to bear arms. True Christian soldiers one and all. And of course the evil atheists are in the news and are trying to destroy America as usual. Boohoo. I find it so frustrating that the theists do not understand that the 1st amendment was added not so much to protect the nonbeliever but the believers from each other.

The worst part is, those who support public prayer, ignore Jesus’ teachings about prayer in Matthew. I bet most either have not read the bible or ignore this particular teaching, because it's politically inconvenient.



Mat 6:1Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.

Mat 6:2 Therefore when thou doest [thine] alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Mat 6:3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

Mat 6:4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Mat 6:5 ¶ And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

Mat 6:6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they sh

all be heard for their much speaking.

Mat 6:8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

Montana Freethinkers

I am thrilled to see so much activity out there. There are two active atheist groups who are making waves. Missoula and Bozeman. Both active online and in the flesh. Yeah! Of course it really helps have a University in town.

Good luck and have fun

Militia Uprising

"Militia members sought to spark uprising"


A few words came to mind

Maniacs most scary

Anti-social misfits

Moronic white trash

Christian men

Make believe

Cowards all

Asking for trouble

A lost cause

Survival training

Self destructive

Who else, which church?

Losers

Malcontents


It is very sad, how many people out there, who are neighbors who hold similar views. Depresses the hell out of me. Get a Life!

Keeping Grandma Alive

Both grandmothers are still alive. I am in my late 40’s and they are 95 and 99. How is it possible? Genetics? Modern Medicine? Both being non-believers, prayer has not kept them alive well beyond their natural life spans. The eldest of the two is a body in a wheelchair. She seems o.k. on the outside. No tears, no complaints, that’s because she can’t speak, she feels nothing, remembers no one. The other grandma who has been pulled from her death bed several times, today plays pinochle with her family and puts puzzles together. Undeniably an accomplishment. But at a high cost.

Both live in the same nursing home. By the way, it is the same nursing home my father’s grandmother was kept till she died. My 99 year old grandma has been unable to care for herself for over 15 years. My fathers’ mother who is a young 95 has been there at least 5. I visit them both with dread, I can only see my possible future there. Is this where I am going to end up? What are we going to do with my Mom when the time comes? It seems strange the men in our family have managed to avoid a stay St. Johns.

You and I can only hope to die fairly quickly and at home. But, in reality that is rare. My mom, and maybe I will both end up in the same nursing home eventually thanks to modern medicine. Should we be thankful? Sometimes I don’t think so.

My mother in law is very ill and today is in the hospital for the third time in as many years. A grandmother of 6. She is now recovering from surgery again to remove “cancer” even though I have yet to hear the word spoken out loud. She, like both my grandmothers do not have health insurance. Who is paying for their health care? My in-laws are conservative, religious fundamentalists and anti-government so therefore were convinced they could pay for their own health care. Damn it. But, now while they are still paying cash for the first course of treatment and thought their prayers were answered the first time. It was not over. Did they really think it was over, and did not plan for more trips to the hospital? They will never be able to pay for all of the medical bills in their life time and grandma may still die sooner than later anyway. I saw it coming. Not one of my grandmothers held a decent paying job their whole lives, so their social security payment is not enough to pay for rent and utilities. That is why my in-laws “chose” to live in an old camper trailer next to the ruined brown Blue River in Nebraska. God have mercy.

My own mother, a grandma of 7 has type 2 diabetes. Who will take care of her. Me? You? She and Dad can’t afford it much longer even though they both worked hard their whole lives.

Both my Grandmothers have been widows for decades, both are and were always dirt poor. I am not saying pull the plug on grandmas, I ask for universal health care for all, for the young and old. If not, then what about the four Grandmas’ living children, what about them, should they be responsible for their care? Not one of them are paying a dime towards their mothers care. You and I are already, so why not try and reign in the cost. Otherwise, the baby boomers will break the bank.

This situation is we have those who say every life at every moment of existence should be kept alive no matter what but at what cost? Then they do not want to have to pay taxes in order to accomplish that. Who is supposed to take care of these priceless souls?

Doctors are asked to play God when they extend our lives beyond our natural life span, but it is not ok to shorten a life for one who is suffering a painful inevitable death. We spend a million dollars on a preemie born three months early and will spend a million to extend a life 3 years. I am not saying each life is not worth 2 million, but where is that 2 million coming from. If I could pay 2 million for a longer life that would be great. That is impossible, unless we share the cost of care and bring down the inflated price for life.

Editorial cartoon disrespectful to God

The cartoon on the editorial page of today’s (March 2) paper was of major disrespect to my God. In Scripture, He taught us how to pray to honor Him. He did not give us an example of prayer to disrespect Him. We are not allowed to display any sign concerning Him in our schools, on public property or where someone might be offended, but the newspaper can take His words, scramble them to make a “joke” of Scripture and this is OK? Maybe we should pray to Him in honor and ask for Him to guide us in our troubled times and to bless us because we respect Him. I know turning our backs on Him and disrespecting Him is nothing but mockery. We all need to rebuild the temple.

Bruce N

My Comment in response to Bruce's letter. I swear this guy is either 8 years old or 80 without a high school education.


“We are not allowed to display any sign concerning Him in our schools, on public property or where someone might be offended.” Bruce, this is a half truth.

If only I had a dime every time I heard this. It's the same unoriginal party line parroted over and over by the clergy to the flock.

Our children, yours and mine can bring their bibles to school, pray over their lunch and discuss religion with their classmates. It's the teachers in our schools, the judges in our courts, the clerks at city hall who are not allowed to push their version of God on you or I.

The newspaper on the other hand is a private company whose freedom of speech is protected under the 1st amendment. You do not have to read it ever again if it offends you so. But, when I go to the county clerk and recorders office, not your church to register my car. It is unprofessional nor appropriate to display overt religious icons. It's rude to assume everyone believes as you do or should.


Other comments left by other Helena IR readers
marencolleen said on: March 19, 2010, 2:46 pm maybe bruce is right and his god doesn't laugh.

Inland Umpire said on: March 19, 2010, 12:19 pm Technically, didn't God make the cartoon?

member said on: March 19, 2010, 7:25 am You know Bruce, I think God can handle it.

ascaris75 said on: March 18, 2010, 4:42 pm Way to add something to the conversation, AnimalLover.

AnimalLover said on: March 18, 2010, 6:39 am Holy nut job batman..... This is the same crap Muqtada al-Sadr spews... If you need a "god" to make life worth living, more power to you. But not everyone is so weak... We don’t need to rebuild temples, or chant, or whatever else you think makes your "god" happy. Perhaps you should find something more intelligent then a 2000 year old novel to read... (Granted, it is a best seller)

dietz1963 said on: March 18, 2010, 2:11 am Bruce,

No disrespect intended but your God, not our God? And He taught us? The Word was written, sure. Constantly changed throughout history for centuries based on what we as humans "think" He said or meant. And He? Could also be "She". God as we understand it is an omnipontent Being with ultimate power. Do you honestly think back in the day the Word was written we had a clue what the message was or could interpret it?
I also wonder, we turning our backs? What about the Power turning His/Her back? A power without limit, creater of the universe, stands idly by while good honest people and children die every day or suffer through no fault of their own?
Build a temple? How many temples (churches) do we already have? And if your believe is so strong, you will know Jesus was a simple Being with power. Used it for the greater good and not for destruction. Lived with the people and actually died at the hands of people. Hardly one that wants a temple or wishes/wants destruction. And I think that was the lesson. Have respect, do the right thing, but do not abuse power. Nor worship in such a way where false ideas are created.
My understanding is simple. God gave us all what we need to survive with the added Word to make decisions. The bible is a guide and in many cases makes sense. We either learn from it or we don't. While many people in reading the Bible (especially in Revelations) simply "give up the ship" and prepare for the worse. I look at it as a guide i.e. IF we continue on a certain path, certain things will happen. Does not mean it will happen, why else are the things written? Yea, could mean "prepare for the day" in having a "look" into the future as the Bible is written...also gives us an opportunity to change that path.
But its just basic for me. If a Power said to me tomorrow I will walk into a path and die, with no other information would I walk in that path or chose another path?
We really don't know what awaits us in the afterlife but we do know what awaits us here. We have the power to change and quite frankly, have been given all the tools and guidance to do so. If we chose to destroy ourselves, I truthfully believe God has nothing to do with it.

The 1,000 Buddhas in Arlee

MISSOULA (AP) — The Dalai Lama has accepted an invitation to come to Montana to consecrate the Garden of 1,000 Buddhas in Arlee.

Officials with Ewam Montana say the Dalai Lama is expected to come to the state next year. Details of the visit will be announced at a news conference Friday in Missoula.

The Dalai Lama is both the head of state and spiritual leader of the Tibetan people.

I hafta check this out. My sister has vistited this place and my friend Justin is a Secular Buddist. I tried it out myself for a short time, but it is not for your average American. Takes way too much time and concentration. That is why Buddism is not taking over the USA. Going to church once a week on Sunday is WAY so much easier.

 
I have relatives in Arlee and my parents are close by in St. Ignatius. I plan to be there.

dying with dignity continued

The truth behind dying with dignity

(20) Comments

Inland Umpire said on: March 8, 2010, 7:24 pm Posts on all sides of this debate should recognize the great diversity of belief and practice among Christians regarding this issue. To allocate bipolar perspectives on the basis of whether or not someone is Christian is fallacious. Thoughtful people (cf. dogmatists) of all religious persuasions do not believe something because of a sectarian label; they associate with a particular faith tradition because it aligns with their personal spirituality. The same is true regarding whether and how people choose to express their sectarian or secular faith, including through end-of-life decisions. People's right to life and/or death comes from wherever they want it to.

Curmudgeon said on: March 6, 2010, 12:50 pm Since I'm not a Judaeo-Christian, please don't try to lay your religious scruples off on me BY LAW. The answer is simple: if your church doesn't agree with "death with dignity", don't ask for it.

yanakis said on: March 5, 2010, 10:27 pm You tossed out the concepts of secular humanism and Judeo-Christianity loosely. Somehow you typified this as a contest of world views with your belief as the best one for all of us to uphold. I read Keener’s letter which was full of examples from his personal memory. He didn’t make it about his beliefs.
Wow, I see you on a sacred crusade using the words of your belief system to bully others into submission. Your rant includes the Christian version of the how the US was developed along with the New Testament slant on how the Constitution was framed. The original framers were Deists who recently escaped from monotheistic despots, you know political bullies. So they were not seeking a reoccurrence but a means of defining personal dignity as the clash between freedom and responsibility with human sovereignty as a reasonable construct for debate. It is very difficult to accomplish so they gave us a guide, the Constitution. They did not give us infallibility. If you are implying the church fathers framed the Constitution then you are very wrong. Certain contentious renegades, philosophical reprobates and European religious outlaws with the assist of The Seven Tribes of The Iroquois Nation framed the unique document. Rebellion against authority was a feature but not primary.
You say Judeo-Christianity is necessary in order to keep us from a deprived and messy nature. What you are presenting is a solution to depravity; adherence to Christian principles. This suggests humans are indeed depraved as well as Christians. Not all humans are Christians. Maybe it would be better to suggest Christians who are depraved will find solace in the comfort of Christian guidance. Jews, Muslims and Hindus suggest their beliefs are also hedges against the multi-spectrum of human behaviors. First as a confirmed human my god is not a jealous god, nor vengeful or even almighty. After reading your form of legalism I prefer Deism as a constitutional forbearance, separation of church and ..., oh hell, I’m using reason against a belief.
Annie you also imply that dying with dignity is not a constitutionally supported event. Say what you will, but say it because you are a citizen of the US with civilian rights. You personally raise yourself on a scaffold of Christian elitism as you decry “dying with dignity” as an elitist answer from secular humans. This is so traditionally condescending I am perplexed. What was John Doran, the IR publisher, thinking? If an American family supported the “intrinsic value of every human being” then universal health care would be a no brainer. I might expect love, support and having my wishes met from age of reason to death. As an infant I could expect to be safe. As a senior citizen I might expect compassion. Might I choose to die with dignity, be protected by the laws, have all who love me, all who stand by me be safeguarded by laws? Not your law Annie, not one based on a vengeful, angry, elitist god of your projection, but one defined on civil rights.

Jack-Ruby said on: March 5, 2010, 4:19 pm The fallacious logic of the 'slippery slope' argument. We cant grant someone the freedom to make this choice because we will then inevitably open the door to something 'even worse' to come down the road.

Sisyphus said on: March 5, 2010, 3:57 pm Crush - What I hear here is most people saying --Get government out of my personal decisions, especially my end of life decisions. --
Government never had the right to step between me and my doctor or between me and my God.
Therefore, I'm not asking Government to intervene, I'm asking they get out of where they NEVER should have been.
Each individual has the Constitutional right to decide his own journey. It is up to them and their God to decide when that journey is over; not the Government, not the Church, not their family or neighbors, and certainly not Ms. Annie unless she is invited.

AnimalLover said on: March 5, 2010, 3:48 pm I completely agree crush728, we should keep people alive via any means available. I bet that we can spend $50,000 a week to keep my Grandma alive for those last few precious days. I am certain there are enough government programs available to cover those costs. If the cost of keeping her alive exceeds the benefits available to her, then the government can take a significant portion of her estate to make up the difference. I'm sure we can sell her crappy trailer in middle of nowhere South Dakota for about $10,000. (Yes, this is our financial reality) I have no problem if a person wants to live by any means; it's a fundamental part of being human. FYI, our country is going broke for this very reason. We can't do everything for everyone, I'm sorry. I know it's cold and heartless, but reality is a M'er F'er. Sorry to digress... Death is only something each person can face alone; I would think it would be better faced in a hospital with professionals trained to deal with it. It's much better than the OTC method suggested by the dear Dr. From past research, I have found that OTC forms of death will most likely leave a body that can be bloated, severe discoloration, vomiting, bleeding from various orifices... Just the thing for a loved one to see...

FrankD said on: March 5, 2010, 3:36 pm I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If my mother can choose to end my life with her feet up in the stirups, then I should be able to choose to end my life as I see fit as well. NUFF SAID!

crush728 said on: March 5, 2010, 1:36 pm I think a lot of the posters are missing the real point of this article which is stated (unfortunately) after all the religious talk.
Basically, Dr. Bukacek is right to say that there are already methods to ease the passing of a suffering individual. And she is right to say legislation will only lead to mis-use of 'dying with dignity' legislation.
I agree with her in these last paragraphs. Keep the government out, and err on the side of caution.
Think of it this way, are you against the death penalty? Why? Most people state that it's better to let a killer go lose than to kill an innocent man. Well, then, using that logic, it's better to keep someone alive a little longer then kill someone too early.
And for anyone who is going to shoot back, "just wait till you witness suffering" I worked at St. Jude Children's Research hospital for 5 years. I saw.

Darkness said on: March 5, 2010, 1:08 pm The truth about dying is everyone dies alone. You may have others there around you when you go, but in the end it is you that is dying. Death is a decidedly personal experience.
If you can't accept that you really haven't come to terms with life

HakonMontag said on: March 5, 2010, 11:15 am "Where in Declaration of Independence does it assert that our life comes from God and that life and right to life do not come from government, but from God?
Now that's about the scariest thing I've ever read...
My right to life comes from the government? Eech!

Bojangles said on: March 5, 2010, 10:52 am Bubabootie you're pretty funny. who's rational again?
Tell me why giving a person the right to make decisions about one of the most fundamental individual rights is so threatening to you crazy christians. All of Christianity is based on a leap of faith. Nothing about Christianity is 'rational'... walking on water, burning bushes, rising from the dead.. What's rational about those hoccus-poccus stories?! You might want to consider that the next time you espouse your greatness.
By the way.. "I hate liberals" isn't exactly what Jesus would do....
Christians have the right to fear death and live through the means of human built machines - Fine. You pay for it.. you can suffer a good christian's death. But if you have that right, I should have the right to go when called to. You have your god. I have mine, and everyone else has theirs.
The Christian religion has been about control from its inception. 'If you don't believe as I do, you will burn in hell.' This is no different.
Do unto others, folks! trust that others have their own relationships with God and let them follow the path laid before them.

checolbar said on: March 5, 2010, 9:40 am Very well said Dr. Bukacek!
I couldn't agree more!

Rambler01 said on: March 5, 2010, 9:22 am I have a whole lot of questions for Dr. Bukacek:
Where do you get the idea “secular humanists believe there is a group of elites capable of deciding whose life is worth living?”
Don’t priest (elites) interpret God’s word for Judo-Christians?
Where does your idea that our founding fathers built our country on a Judo-Christian world view? Have you heard the word Deist? Have you heard Jefferson and Adams and other founding fathers referred to as Deists?
Where in Declaration of Independence does it assert that our life comes from God and that life and right to life do not come from government, but from God?
By the way, our constitution starts with “We the people”. We were first country whose government derived its authority from the people, not from God. Might that have been purposeful?
Why do you believe we “need laws to impose morality?”
If you believe God is omnipotent why does he need mere humans to enforce His laws?
Can’t he do that all by himself?

dolphind3 said on: March 5, 2010, 9:21 am Dr., I hope that you don't have to watch someone you love die a painfull and long drawn out death. I have done it twice and it sucks. Some physicians think that they are god, maybe you should read factorfictions comment. Well said.

captbob said on: March 5, 2010, 9:18 am Interesting argument, but not particularly convincing. First, bring out the straw dog: "Secular humanists think so highly of our species that they believe there is a group of elites capable of deciding whose life is worth living." I know lots of secular humanists. Not one believes this. In fact, this argument is antithetical to the humanist belief that the individual is sovereign, not the other.
The coded appeal to "Judeo-Christian values" similarly does not ring true. Christians also share values with Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Bahai, Wiccans, and Taoists, but that would alter the message that somehow people who believe in "Judeo-Christian" values are somehow separate, other, and better, than people who have different religious beliefs. Besides, "Judeo-Christian -Islamic-Hindu-Buddhist-Zoroastrian-Bahai-Wiccan-Taoist values" is just asking for trouble from your spell-checker.
The leap from a sovereign Creator to the distinctly Calvinist "While humans have this intrinsic dignity, they are also depraved, in need of a redeemer and the rule of law" was difficult to swallow.
This is not a Judeo-Christian value, this is a Protestant/Calvinist value. The Reformation was fought to argue this point. Good Catholics don't need rule of law, they have rule of the church. Jews have mitzvot (their own law), handed directly from God to Moses, and cannot be determined by legislatures. Why bring these theological distinctions into this argument unless it's meant to be some sort of code to intimate that this particular perspective on "the right to die" stems from a divine source? A perspective which the author wants to impose on the rest of her fellow citizens.
The idea that "Our country’s founding documents and the writings of our founding fathers reveal the Judeo-Christian world view is the one on which this country was built" couldn't be further from the truth.
Our constitution was designed specifically to prevent the rancorous and frequently corrosive influence of organized religion on political life. The authors of the Declaration and the Constitution were men of many faiths, (many of them personal faiths), and all could bear witness to the tyranny of religion in the realm of earthly politics. The separation of State from religion is explicit in many cases, and implicit in the pluralistic structure of the tripartite governing structure of our nation.
Finally, I'm puzzled by the insistence that we don't want "elites" making final decisions, but it's ok for medical professionals to ease pain and suffering to the point of death? Since when is it ok for medical professionals to interfere with the will of God? If God chooses to grant pain, isn't it a little presumptuous for medical professionals to ease that pain up to and until the point of death? Doesn't being drugged-up with morphine (or some derivative) interfere with that conversation with God that "Judeo-Christian" religions argue is the meaning of "natural" death?
I don't follow the thread here, and I'm trying very hard. I'm guessing that this boils down to, "Don't commit suicide because life and death should be in Gods hands."
What this argument doesn't address, and is at the core of of the right to die with dignity, is that sometimes, God has particularly cruel methods of inflicting human suffering and removing hope. Further, as human beings, with the ability to make our own decisions, it is perfectly ok to talk back to God, and redeem our own dignity in those areas we can control.
One could make the argument that this conversation is the essence of the conversation with God, and is one that enriches life. On the other hand, that conversation isn't particularly illuminating when one party is suffering dementia, or is in such pain that other thought is not possible.
to deny an individual's right to choice over their life, is to subsume the individual to external authority, be it another individual or a committee. This, by definitions, makes people in those positions, elites.
And surely the author doesn't suggest that elites should somehow determine who lives and who dies?

Sisyphus said on: March 5, 2010, 9:05 am Ms Annie purports to enlighten us with truth (she put that word in her title), while showering us solely with opinion.
The founding fathers were mostly Diests. The concept of Judeo-Christian didn't even surface until the end of the 19th Century, so to assign it to the Founding Fathers is anything but truth.
For an avowed Pro-Life Christian to declare she has cornered the heart, soul, and motivations of secular humanists to the point as to speak for all of them is too ignorant for words.
But, the real essence of this subject as it pertains to Ms. Annie is simple
If her suffering, terminally ill patients would rather she pray with them rather than put meds in their IV, that is their right. They have that choice and no one should insert themselves between her and her patient.
She shows her true colors when she refuses to extend that same right to other doctors and patients who make different choices.
No one is forcing people to end their lives, they are simply giving them that option to say goodbye to their loved ones and slip away with their wishes honored and their dignity intact.
The truth is, Ms Annie is not privy to conversations between dying patients and their God, so she can't know what is the best end of life choices for them to make.

FactorFiction said on: March 5, 2010, 8:46 am This editorial is simply preposterious. Patients are in charge of their treatment and medical care, not physicians. Patients seek out doctors for their care and not the other way around. If someone is experiencing debilitating pain or suffering it is up to them how they want to continue on, and not their physician.

HakonMontag said on: March 5, 2010, 8:28 am Your truth is not everyones truth.

Bojangles said on: March 5, 2010, 8:04 am Talk about elitist! You think that your beliefs about God are the only one's that count, that somehow you have a divine connection to interpret God's will. You and the rest of your christian pals are so self righteous and judgemental that you feel you have all the answers for the rest of us. You're sick if you think God's intention was for a bunch of doctors and crazy priests to hook every declining life to a machine! If you can so appreciate God's love, why are you all so afraid of dying?! And why is it that you think this life is so important that we must cling to it for every last artificial second when God comes calling.
No one is playing God more than you and your cronies!

bubabootie said on: March 5, 2010, 12:51 am Well done Dr. Bukacek.
Secular Humanists (read "liberals") always play to the emotional argument, rather than the rational one. Another failure of the initial article is that it doesn't take into account that still a majority of Montanans are of the Judeo-Christian faith (if not by actual faith, by upbringing). Yet again, laws that inacted by our representatives are supposed to reflect the majority of the constituents.
Why can't liberals just figure out this whole "constitution" thing and how government is supposed to work? It's not hard, we all had American Government in school.

The truth behind dying with dignity (secular humanism)

This opinion piece in the Helena IR made my blood boil.  I spent most of Sunday doing research in order to respond to this nonsence. I have yet to write it up, and will post it soon. I plan to list what secular humanism really means and what it does not mean.

A doctor, wrote a guest editorial in the Jan. 28 Independent Record. The title, “People have right to die with dignity,” and his text illustrate the ideological difference in the clash of world views involved in the issue of physician-assisted suicide. Most believe people have a right to die with dignity. The ideological difference lies in how “dignity” is defined and where it comes from.

The secular humanist view is that each human being is sovereign, answerable only to themselves. Human autonomy and personal freedom are at the peak of the hierarchy of values and are what give humans dignity. Secular humanists think so highly of our species that they believe there is a group of elites capable of deciding whose life is worth living — who should be allowed to live or die. These elites are so smart, if they create the right environment, humans will naturally do the right thing.



The Judeo-Christian world view states that God is sovereign. We are answerable to him, and our life and rights come from him. Every human life is sacred and of utmost value because God made it so. Human dignity has its basis in the sanctity God has given it, irrespective of intelligence, level of education, physical abilities, etc. While humans have this intrinsic dignity, they are also depraved, in need of a redeemer and the rule of law.



Our country’s founding documents and the writings of our founding fathers reveal the Judeo-Christian world view is the one on which this country was built. Our Founding Fathers knew from history and their own personal experience the reality of human depravity and our tendencies that require rule of law. No matter the lofty claims of the large variety of ideologies promoted throughout history, humans have managed to make a mess of them.



Suicide has been illegal in this country from its beginning. Laws against suicide are based on our nation’s founding principle that life comes from God, as the Declaration of Independence asserts. Life and the right to life do not come from government and not from us, but from God. Autonomy and freedom do not include the right to do harm to other humans, including to ourselves.



Dr. K promotes physician-assisted suicide and apparently euthanasia so that a person doesn’t die alone. Whether or not a person dies alone depends more on the value of life a culture promotes than on the willingness of a physician to stand by their side while they give a lethal injection. It is reasonable to conclude that the elderly and the sick are less likely to die alone if their families live in a culture that promotes the intrinsic value of every human being.



Dr. K builds the case for physician-assisted suicide by tugging at our emotions with details of human suffering in the dying process. What he doesn’t tell you is that current medical technology is capable of controlling pain to a great extent and that giving high doses of pain medications is legal and moral. They can be given in progressive doses if that is required to control pain, even if those high doses contribute to death. That is not considered assisted suicide. Furthermore, a bottle of a certain over-the counter medication will more assuredly bring death than any combination of pills a suicide-assisting physician prescribes. Since Dr. Keener knows that over-the-counter medication is all that’s needed to kill oneself, it follows that promotion of secular humanism and getting the medical field on board with it are his true agenda rather than death with dignity.



The sacred trust between physician and patient will be severely eroded if euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are legalized. Death is a much easier and cheaper option than lovingly caring for the dying individual, and legalization opens the door to coercion and even forced euthanasia for those individuals deemed unworthy of life.



Through the vehicle of government-run media and schools, this culture has shifted to the secular humanist ideology. It is imposed on our population. We need to shift back to our foundational principles. Laws help advance and protect what a society values. Since we need laws and laws inevitably impose morality, it seems prudent to promote laws that are based on uncompromised reverence for the dignity and worth of each human person no matter what their physical state. Laws and judicial opinions that support physician-assisted suicide devalue human life and need to be emphatically opposed.



Annie Bukacek is a physician in Kalispell and president of Montana ProLife Coalition

The Bible says we should be vegatarian

Another interesting letter to the editor today about lent and vegetarianism. The author says in so many words that it is a sin to eat meat per the bible.

Most of the comments posted about this letter were from meat eaters who did not take the suggestion seriously, and accused the writer of "telling them what to do/not to do" and how dare he. (Isn't that what religion is all about?)

My comment/response to the comments and the letter

Clancy Coot

Nowhere in the letter did the writer say you have to do anything. He said we have choices.

I find it telling how people quote the bible chapter and verse, cherry pick sections, and come up with interpretations to justify their beliefs and actions even if it seems contrary to what most others believe. Then they don't even post the bible verse? (A Catholic can't?)

Genesis
1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

He left out 1:30, to me they seemed a matched pair
1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

I would bet the meat eaters would protest that in Genesis veganism may have been the status quo, but after Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden......... we then were allowed to eat meat? Meat is ok only if its Kosher, except pork, and did Jesus eat meat? He ate bread and drank wine obviously. Did he partake of the fish he created out of thin air? hmmmm a vegan Jesus, we all know he was a liberal.

Medical Myths on the Internet

This is a comment I left on the Helena IR Readers Alley

An urban medical myth.

Virtually all the information found on the net about aspartame is anecdotal, from anonymous sources and unscientfic. With the internet, it seems everyone is an expert and no one is an expert. This is the dark side of the internet. False claims and misinformation is propogated and promoted by the gullable.

 

What Christians See (we must all suffer)

In his Jan. 28 opinion piece CK says he was “comforted” by the recent Montana Supreme Court ruling regarding right to die. I took little comfort in it.

The ruling deals with a person asking for medication to administer to him/herself, not euthanasia, which is when a person uses medicine to end the life of another.

K wonders how this decision “could be a violation of Christian principles.” It violates, I believe, two basic principles.

First, Christians see life as a divine gift, an act of radical grace from God. This suggests that we need to treat all aspects of human life with care. It is a right to life, not a right to die.

Also, many commonly suppose the dignity lies in our ability to control our circumstances. In truth, we control little. Christians see human dignity in relationship to God and others. What if we could view suffering as a call to deepen relationship, rather than side-step it?

Two questions remain: When we seek to end life, whose suffering are we dealing with, ours or the sufferer’s? And, do not the stories chronicled point to a failure of medicine, not a call to administer death?

The Rev. FB

Comments:

ClancyCoot (me)
To simplify what tfhe Christian prinicple the Reverand is trying to tell us is that we all must suffer as God sees fit. We wretched sinners to not deserve to end our pain and suffering on our own terms.

Curmudgeon said on: February 26, 2010, 3:31 pm

In her mid 70s, my 1st cousin Margy, a Helena native, died a horrendous, lingering death from pancreatic cancer. The only thing that gave her any relief from both the pain, and the ravages of chemo, was marijuana, which was illegal in her state of CA at that time. So her sister, a respectable grandmother, had to comb the mean streets of San Fran for dealers, so she could help her suffering sister. So what do you think, Rev, she should just have "offered up" her excruciating torment for the greater glory of Sky Daddy ("God")? I don't need that kind of "God", Rev. We're all better off without such a monster.

HakonMontag said on: February 21, 2010, 8:58 am

Say Crush - care to share where you come up with all those other sorts of people who may benefit from this ruling?
Suicidal teens? Despondent divorcees?
Oh please...
..
crush728 said on: February 20, 2010, 8:14 pm
Sorry Reverend, but your views have nothing to do with the right to life or right to death legislation. Separation of church and state right?
I appreciate your views and, mostly, share in them.
But, let's have this discussion as its meant to be, i.e. a political one. I for one refuse to have the government have any decision on my life. I truly hope that people can realize how dangerous it is to have legislation allowing, without major and sever limits, death rights. That means that anyone proving they could count for your medical decisions could decide that you should have the right to die. Whether you are actually ready to die or not.
This is not about some very struggling and few individuals. If you'll actually look into the history of litigation, most, if not all of these cases have been thrown out. Meaning, those who are suffering and on the verge of death do have the courts, the people behind them.
On the whole, the legislation with the right to die does not discern between an unhappy suicidal teen, a recovering alcoholic, a depressed newly divorcée, and a terminal patient in the last months of life. Nor does it distinguish between a terminal patient who is a young mother just striving for a few more months with her child and one who is ready to let go. At that stage you are giving up all rights to the government to decide whether you are worth a little more time or not.

Cheers Reverend, but this is not about religion. This is about the most basic right of human beings, the right to life.
..
a_thought said on: February 20, 2010, 2:25 pm
I agree with what the Rev. says and I also admire him in taking a stand probably knowing he would meet this kind of resistance. Nice work and tahnk you.
..
marquis said on: February 20, 2010, 9:39 am
Haven't Christian martyrs then violated these principles?
..
Bojangles said on: February 19, 2010, 8:48 pm
You are welcome to choose for yourself Rev., but you must put aside your own personal fear (I think you call it faith) and respect that my relationship with God is all I need to know the choices for my own personal path.
I pray to God, that your church won't be in charge of my end of life. That would be a truly heartbreaking way to go for anyone. Suffering as directed by the hand of the Church. Such a sadly familiar pattern, No? Oh.. how we miss the good old days of the Crusades, right Preach?
When God calls me, I plan to answer, and you best get your Dogma the heck out of my way, thank you!
..

PT said on: February 19, 2010, 1:52 pm

With all due respect to the Rev. Brookhart and his theological viewpoints, I have to disagree with his suggestion that faith is strengthened through suffering. It may or may not be. The Bible says suffering is redemptive IF it is done for the sake of the gospel. Rom.5:3-5, Rom:8-17ff, 1 Cor. 12:26, and 2 Cor. speak about suffering but they are all in the context of followers in a young, persecuted church willingly sacrificing themselves to spread the word. Surely the Reverend does not suggest that Jesus, who spent his life relieving physical pain, would find a person to be morally lacking if they chose to alleviate their own suffering in the face of a horrendous dying process. As a caregiver, I dismiss entirely the premise that there are medical means to relieve all suffering at the end of life. There is not. Anyone who says there is, has not sat at the bedsides, I have sat by. It is true that suffering brings some people closer to God. But others feel distanced and distracted. It is not for anyone but the person to decide how to approach the transition from life to death. And it is certainly not Christian to imply that a person who suffers for suffering’s sake is in some way more Christian than one who does not.

..
dietz1963 said on: February 18, 2010, 7:43 pm

I always love this one. When it serves the religious purpose, then all things that happen is the will of God. When it doesn't serve religious purpose, then it has to be something else.
Reverend, who are you to say as a human being what is God's will or not or even against it? Do you have "chats" with God? And by that I mean a two way dialog? It always amazes me the arrogance of some that seem to "know" what is Gods will. News flash, there are several contradictory things within the Bible and why? How about cause it was written by human beings.
..
Tiger Woops said on: February 18, 2010, 6:20 pm
As much ad it pains me to agree with purple, I applaud the comment. It is no business of and bible-thumper of and sect of religion to dictate what is right for me. Having watched several of my family die painful deaths, it should be the decision of each individual when they are ready to go. To HELL with the bible bangers and their concerns. THEY are not the ones suffering. !
..
JR said on: February 18, 2010, 4:13 pm
Frankly, I dont care if you claim it violates Christian principles. So what?

..
4061111 said on: February 18, 2010, 3:18 pm
Reverend, sorry, you are making a huge error in "assuming" that everyone believes as you do and as such, your interpretation that people with incurable diseases should suffer to the fullest extent until they actually die, simply so they can fulfill your vision of getting closer to God is, well, goofy.
Sir, if you should be so misfortunate as to suffer from pancreatic cancer, Lou Gehrig's Disease (ALS), or some other horrific and painful, and INCURABLE disease, then you are perfectly free to either partake or not of current medical treatment. You are also free to suffer to the fullest extent of the disease so you may commune with God until your passing.
However, that is your right and your choice. But do you have the right to enforce your belief system on another? No, you do not. Any more than somebody has the right to force their belief system on you, one that you don't advocate.
Nowhere in this ruling does it say that euthanasia will be delivered as a convenience because somebody is no longer an economical asset (THERIGHTCHANGE).
The Reverend's pontificating merely supports the belief that one person (him) or one entity (the church) has more importantance in dictating the life of an individual than that individual themselves.
..
checolbar said on: February 18, 2010, 10:28 am

Amen Reverend!
..
mc said on: February 18, 2010, 10:03 am
rev. as a member of the helena episcopal church, and having sat in front of you during your sermon last night I have to say that you do not embody my beliefs. You may see end of life suffering as a way to be closer to god, but i see it as physical, mental, and emotional anguish that is not so easily relieved by intermittent thoughts of god waiting for you after death. medicine cannot cure death and it's wrong to force someone to suffer on the off chance that they might feel closer to god.
..
HakonMontag said on: February 18, 2010, 9:20 am

Rev. - while I respect your views, your basic premisses are flawed.
Your two ending points are basically flawed as follows.
1) The law does not allow euthenasia. It allows for one to end ones own suffering. So your question as to whose suffering is being ended is flawed.
2) Your supposition that medicine is flawed is inherently opposed to your stance that all things are from God. If all things are from God as you state then we should not rely on medicine or doctors at all, since they then are interfering with the devine wisdom of God. Anyone who seeks medical attention for anything...and I mean anything...is interfering with the will of God, given your views.
You can't have it both ways.

..
Purple said on: February 18, 2010, 9:04 am

May you never be afflicted with a disease for which there is no cure, a disease which leaves you in perpetual pain until death ends that pain.
When a person is diagnosed with that type of disease, their healthcare should be done "pro bono" so that the person and their family will cease having to pay for that care. Many physicians only continue courses of treatment for financial reasons - they rake in the money while the patient and their family are going bankrupt.
Wanna bet that you would be comforted by the idea of being able to end the misery you would be suffering via physician assisted suicide!
..
Sisyphus said on: February 18, 2010, 8:54 am
Who has the most rights to me?
When I was a child, my parents made nearly all my decisions for me.
After I got a draft notice, the US Military had nearly complete control of "Me" for a few years.
The US Constitution:
We the People of the United States, ... secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and ...
Bishop implies that even though the Creator gave us a free will, we don't have much wiggle room when it comes to our lives, so the Church owns us.
I declare "I own me." I reject the notion ANYONE has more right to my life than I.
Not my family. Not my Government. Not my doctor. Not my neighbor. Not any church or their leaders.
it's between myself and my God. I don't need an interpreter or a lawyer to intercede.
If my God and I determine that my life is over, the rest of the world should just butt out.
Forcing any human to stick around when they and their God have decided to depart is a slap in the face to both them and their God.
..

dollerholler said on: February 18, 2010, 5:53 am

The one point you are forgetting sir is.....not everyone in Montana is a christian. So if the state says you can't take your own life, based on "christian ideals" it is in violation of the bill of rights. Now I am a christian. I do happen to believe that god will call me up when he sees fit. And so it is not my place to do it for him. However, I do not think it is the governments place to tell me I have to believe that. Besides if a person conforms to christian ideas becuase he is forced to by the state, and not by his own will. Then is he really following christian beliefs?
..
Therightchange said on: February 18, 2010, 2:22 am

One small step for the liberal State Supreme Court which will bring on one giant step for death panels to decide which of us it is economical to treat and which of us should die from lack of medical attention.