Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "MeidasTouch"
channel.
-
23
-
14
-
11
-
8
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@phillee2814 a. "Yes, it needs updating,..."
I agree. Either do away with men having to register for the draft at 18 years of age, OR add that American citizens that are women have to register for the draft at 18 years of age.
b. "...and while it is fine to say that women should have equal opportunity, there is also the matter of a varying range of physical ability."
Some women are mentally and physically superior to some men.
c. "So the more physically demanding combat roles should also be volunteer only for women, as there will be a higher proportion of women that simply can't run cross country carrying a 60lb pack and an assault rifle, and be able to engage the enemy after a brisk 5 miles."
Some men cannot do this also. Should they then have a choice to not do so?
d. "I know some of the women will do it even faster or carrying more, but we are talking averages not exceptions."
So, ONLY 'exceptional' men and women who volunteer for front line combat should be allowed to go?
e. "It is rather, that selection for roles when drafted needs to take individual physical ability into account."
ie: Bone spur Trump? He wasn't fit to serve in the US military in some fashion? Even in jobs only normally reserved for women? Not even a desk job?
f. "I would hope that those qualifying would be selected for officer training on pure ability as well - you don't want anyone with a commission who is not smart of either gender, and what is true of mental acuity is equally true of physical ability."
Some women make fine officers. I have served under many in the US Navy.
g. "So everyone gets drafted and everyone is then selected into roles that suit them physically and mentally, regardless of gender, quotas, preferences, or anything else."
Except of course if for example a person has a bone spur on their foot.
h. "Heck, there are people with some disabilities who could perform some roles in modern militaries."
I agree. And their are also things like military intelligence for those able enough to.
i. "I think there is adequate precedent for the draft itself being constitutional - the US has used conscription in the past and if the need arose, could do so again."
I know that the history of the US has had the draft, but please show me in the US Constitution whereby it is constitutional to do so. (Side note: I am a US Navy veteran who volunteered for service during the Vietnam era. So I know from personal experience that there are those who would serve even if not ordered to do so.)
j. "But I think it is important to focus on choosing the right commander-in-chief for now."
Which raises other questions too:
1. Should the 'commander-in-chief' have served in the US military? How could a person rule from the top who has never served?
2. A US President swears an oath to the US Constitution. "IF" a US President passes a law that is proven to be un-Constitutional, should that President be impeached for breach of oath of office? How could they not? If people do not like what the US Constitution says (the highest law here in America), then Amend the US Constitution. Until then, the US Constitution is the US Constitution, the highest law here in America (or at least it's supposed to be.)
2
-
1
-
QUESTIONS:
Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much?
* God did not make man in God's image, man made God in man's image.
Additionally:
a. Modern science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence energy is eternally existent.
b. An absolute somethingness cannot come from an absolute nothingness, so an absolute somethingness always existed, most probably being energy itself.
c. Universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning, No Creator Needed.
'a' is true, is it not? 'b' is true, is it not? If 'a' and 'b' are true, then no creator is needed in 'c'.
* Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
GOD DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST EXCEPT FOR AS A CONCEPT:
For those who claim God actually exists (besides as a concept), consider the following:
a. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness truly existing.
b. An actual eternally existent absolute somethingness that has consciousness, memories and thoughts truly existing.
People who claim God actually and eternally exists basically are claiming that 'b' above is correct but yet simultaneously seem to be saying that 'a' is impossible to occur.
'a' above can exist without 'b' existing but 'b' cannot exist unless 'a' exists. Even per the scientific principal of Occam's razor, 'a' is more probable of being really true rather than 'b'.
I am one step away from proving God's existence, but am unable to find any actual evidence to do so. And nobody I've talked to seems to have any actual evidence of God's actual existence either. All humans appear to have are 'Theories of God'. Some humans appear to go their whole life basing their life upon their specific theory of God. Many give their God human characteristics and cannot even prove the existence of their God much less the characteristics given to their God. Some have circumstantial arguments for a God's existence, but others have circumstantial arguments for no God existing. Not one has any actual factual evidence that their God actually factually even exists. Hence, at this time in the analysis, God does not actually exist except for as a concept created by humans for humans. Humans have personified Nature and called that personification "God". Instead of what is claimed "God created man in God's image", it's more likely that "Man created God in Man's image".
Further consider that if the emotional parts of the brain override the logic and reasoning parts of the brain, people can be made to believe basically anything at all as being really true. It has also been scientifically proven that the brain makes up stuff to 'fill in the blanks' of it's perceived reality. Technology is often needed to perceive items that are outside of the human senses' capabilities. Plus modern science has already proven that humans can have visual and audio hallucinations that are very real to that individual. All the more reason for critical thinking being needed and to follow the facts wherever those facts might lead. Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) even believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
In addition, while modern science does not know what consciousness actually is yet, memories and thoughts appear to require a physical correctly functioning brain to have those items occur. Where is God's brain? Where are God's memories stored at? How are God's memories stored and retrieved? How does God think even a single coherent thought?
If inside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where?
If outside of this space time dimension we appear are existing in, then where is the interface between that dimension and this dimension? No such interface has been discovered as of yet as far as I am currently aware of.
* Note: Since this is a search for the real absolute truth concerning God, Intelligent Designer, Pre-existent Consciousness, etc, feel free to copy and paste this elsewhere to further the analysis and discussion.
* For those who claim God actually exists besides just as a concept, please prove that 'b' above is really true and that 'a' is not really true.
1
-
1
-
@chaplainsoffice6907
QUESTIONS:
Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much?
* God did not make man in God's image, man made God in man's image.
Additionally:
a. Modern science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence energy is eternally existent.
b. An absolute somethingness cannot come from an absolute nothingness, so an absolute somethingness always existed, most probably being energy itself.
c. Universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning, No Creator Needed.
'a' is true, is it not? 'b' is true, is it not? If 'a' and 'b' are true, then no creator is needed in 'c'.
* Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
1
-
QUESTIONS:
Okay, it's claimed that a sub-set of humanity, in only a certain time in human history, out of all the other humans in existence on this Earth throughout time, as well as all the other species on this Earth throughout time, as well as any other life that might exist in this galaxy, as well as all the life in other galaxies, is the only chosen people of God. Really? They truly believe this? Ego centric much?
* God did not make man in God's image, man made God in man's image.
Additionally:
a. Modern science claims energy cannot be created nor destroyed, hence energy is eternally existent.
b. An absolute somethingness cannot come from an absolute nothingness, so an absolute somethingness always existed, most probably being energy itself.
c. Universe ALWAYS existed in some form and NEVER had a beginning, No Creator Needed.
'a' is true, is it not? 'b' is true, is it not? If 'a' and 'b' are true, then no creator is needed in 'c'.
* Some people for some reason (social conditioning/brainwashing/wishful thinking) believe in future eternity without end but do not accept eternity past with no beginning.
1
-
QUESTIONS: US President acting within being President:
a. A terrorist is in a foreign city, and there are even American citizens in that foreign city, and the US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist, BUT many American citizens and Foreign citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? And sure, the foreign nation would most probably want to retaliate. But okay from the US President's perspective?
b. Now another hypothetical: A terrorist is in a domestic US city filled with many American citizens, no other foreign citizens are in that city. The US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist but many American citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay?
Is there a magic number as to how many American citizens can be taken out so as to take out even a single terrorist? And even if there is, would it matter to a US President who was just 'acting within their job description' of taking out terrorists?
* So, what path do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to go down? Only 1 single path is allowed. Not choosing and one is automatically chosen for us, whatever system we have is the system we have. If we choose, what path do we choose? How exactly do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to exist while we do exist? We do have choices especially in a system of 'self governance'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
QUESTIONS: US President acting within being President:
a. A terrorist is in a foreign city, and there are even American citizens in that foreign city, and the US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist, BUT many American citizens and Foreign citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay? And sure, the foreign nation would most probably want to retaliate. But okay from the US President's perspective?
b. Now another hypothetical: A terrorist is in a domestic US city filled with many American citizens, no other foreign citizens are in that city. The US President bombs that city to take out the terrorist but many American citizens are no longer with the living. That would be okay?
Is there a magic number as to how many American citizens can be taken out so as to take out even a single terrorist? And even if there is, would it matter to a US President who was just 'acting within their job description' of taking out terrorists?
* So, what path do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to go down? Only 1 single path is allowed. Not choosing and one is automatically chosen for us, whatever system we have is the system we have. If we choose, what path do we choose? How exactly do we, individually and as a society of individuals, want to exist while we do exist? We do have choices especially in a system of 'self governance'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1