Paradise or Oblivion

Thanks

That's right. Those things are all artifacts of a monetary economy. This will probably be the toughest thing for people to adjust to, but ask your self "Why do you own things". For most people it's to gain some security, for example your home or car, you know you can do with it what you please, and no one can take it. The same will be true in our economy. When you are given things, like a home, no one can take it, you can do with it what you want. One big difference though, there is no mortgage, no rent, no utility bills. There can't be because there is no money. If you choose to work, it's because it is something you love to do, not something you are forced to do in order to survive.

For some, they buy stuff so that they can gain control over others. That will not be possible. No one will be able to accumulate wealth or power, there are no leaders, no boss, no politicians.

Some doctors and scientists do what they do because they want to get rich. However the really good ones, do what they do because they find it rewarding being able to make a difference, being able to contribute to society and add value.

Trying to gain more material things is an artifact of a society of scarce resources. If you had to survive off of an intermittent food supply you might horde it when things get good, so you can make it through the lean times. But when your food supply is like an all you can eat buffet 24x7, then your not so eager to horde food. You can go back for more when ever you like. Apply that same thinking to all the things you use in life.

In other words Communism.

I remember being in school 30 years ago and when students were asked what they wanted to do for a living and why something like 90% of the kids replied doctor or lawyer because they wanted to be wealthy. It was very disturbing to me then and looking back it seems even more so knowing where society has gone. I have hoped and prayed for a day we could understand the corruption money has on our mentality and direction, and that humanity could finally start to learn the true nature of a human........being.

No, not even close. Communism was a monetary society, with scarce resources and relied on forced manual labor. It was a huge prison state. They had politicians, a dictator. Communism has more in common with Capitalism than it does what we are recommending. Communism was basically a state run version of Capitalism.

Under our proposal, there are no leaders, no one that can gain power over another person and tell them what to do.

There would be no required labor. You work if you want to, and do what ever makes you happy.

You would be free like you have never been in a capitalist system. You will not be a wage slave trying desperately to make enough to pay your bills; there would be no bill, no debt. If traveling the world is what pleases you, then no one will stop you. Spend every week of your life in a different city around the world, whatever you want.

Be an individual and creative. New personal automated manufacturing means that you can create a very custom and personal environment tailored to just you. Every piece of furniture in your home could be a sculpted piece of art.

Most of your food will be locally grown in hydroponics farms with the minimum possible use of chemicals and pesticides.

Medical care will be free, and their focus will always be on what is best for the patient, not the medical companies profits.

Who would not want to live that way.

That is so true.

no mother...no isms just a better way

It's like the communes. Some are still there but most have gone away as political divisions among people rendered them asunder.

Most of the communes started back in the 60's were just people looking to check out of society for awhile. They lacked a common pupose and direction. They also lacked technology, and therefore any effort was pure human labor. Lacking a common purpose though, is what led to their indecisiveness and eventual break down. Those that remain successful today are those that created a common vision that the members could unite behind.

Our effort will be different in that we have a very well defined vision and goals. Our original members, instead of being societies outcasts, they will be highly educated professional architecs, engineers, scientists and technitians. We will have contractors plumbers, agronimists and electricians in the ealy days also as fully automated construction and farming is still a few years away.

For your system to work as envisioned will man have to be inherently good?

Again thanks for getting me thinking today!

If you think about what drives most people to do things we would called anti social or criminal, the vast majoity can be traced back to a lack of money or the things that money buys. People raised under the stress of financial hardship, people who have given up on a system that already gave up on them, people who see others getting a break when all they get is broken. Those are the people who take out their frustration in ways we call criminal. I wonder how much of the bad will remain when we start treatinhg all people with dignity and respect.

Agreed money (or the lack thereof etc) causes people to behave improperly toward their fellow beings. If we remove money, will man become "inherently good" or will he still be both inherently good and inherently evil?

My personal beleif is that once all the motivations to be anti-social are removed people are inherently good. It depends on environment. If you are brought up in a disfunctional environment, then you have a higher likelyhood of being disfunctional. If you are brought up in a healthy environment then you run a good chance of finding a healthy place within society.

You are very welcome.

spot on. full agreement. yepper. I concur. that 2 cents evens the pot in my book. HUZZAH ! and +^d

Excellent comment, MSII!

agreed...this idea does address that some, but everyone's perspectives need to be added to the recipe also to work out the details. It is a good place to start though...more people would be on board than we think and together we can pull it off.

Agree 100%

not to mention all the subtle and intricate social and psychological differences between cultures. its unlikely everyone in the world would agree to one concept of paradise. after all we are more different than alike. heck some even believe the raod to paradise is to strap explosives to their bodies and murder innocent civilians

couldn't agree more

Yep, it is.

Well stated!

including those who would rather kill us than make peace?

if only the world were that simple

if we all take a good look in our heart it is

agreed but "all" has to include everyone in the world. unfortunately not all people of the world would be willing to be on board. just getting all americans on board is a tough challenge

And every journey begins with the first step.

until someone pollutes it

until someone steals your shoes

humanity does not want that and understands the consequences...it is the few that decide what is best and that needs to change...read the blog

saw them hanging on a telephone wire, but they can be replaced

lots of changes needed but its kind of subjective. what one man sees as a positive change may be negative to another. its a tough game

shoes?

"Personally - I think that if there were simply fewer of us, more widely separated, with more units of energy available for EACH individual, on an individual by individual basis,.....our odds of working together in a sane and sustainable,....cooperative even, manner would greatly increase."

I agree!

electromagnetics as well

Kelly: Your blog is impressive. Keep up the great work!

Thank you :)

While I can appreciate your optimism, it would take a Manhattan type project to get any of the currently available technologies to replace one of the sources of traditional energy. Geothermal is currently the most promising, but even that is years away from being easily accessible.

In our monetary economy your right. In order to be developed their must be an investor with the money. That money will not appear unless the investment can give a better return than alternative investments. In other words, it must compete with oil, gas and coal head to head. And development will only proceed to the extent that there are investors with money.

Our plan throws all of that out the window. When you have a resource based economy, you are no longer contrained by financing, finding investors or competeing with other sources like oil. All thats needed are the raw resources and energy to build the infrastructure. There is no budget, no cost, no financing or debt. You just have to decide to do it and then go do it. As much as you need. Recent breakthroughs in Geothermal access mean that the areas of availability are much broader. There are very few places on Earth were it cannot be done.

"All thats needed are the raw resources and energy to build the infrastructure."

In the new system, how will we mine for the raw materials? Who will manufacture the equipment necessary for resource extraction?

You got me thinking today. Thank you Kelly^^.

Initially we will rely on traditional methods of mining, except we will be more conscious of environmental impacts. However, we will strive to automate every process as soon as possible. The end goal is to have machines doing all labor. Were going that direction already costing a lot people their jobs. We would just accelerate that.

Manufacturing is the same story. Depending on when this starts, we will start with an eye on maximizing automation and fullly automate every process as soon as possible.

We will probably need to develop whats known as a mini steel mill within the first couple of years, and make all our steeel from recycled sources. We also then need to have all the fab equipment to make pipe and strctural members for construction. Most tools can be created with new 3D printers.

Next:

1. We have to change our country first.

This alone will take our lifetime, at least mine and probably my children.

I have my own ideas of what it would take to do this here without a bloody revolution but it takes a minimum of 24 years to get a good start, and another 24 to reach consensus by example and cultural, economic, and successful social engineering on an unprecedented scale. A bloody revolution would be a disaster, and fail for many reasons too many to enumerate here.

My end result here would be a transparent, guaranteed not to be corrupt government much larger than the one many now consider to be too big. The result would be real equality of opportunity and the decline of a measure / greed based culture, with the end goal of thriving to the benefit of all it's citizens, and changing the way we do business to a time implemented hybrid of capitalism that is socially responsible, followed by a resource based economy close to but not quite yours, as you clearly point out early in your statements the proposed endeavor requires the participation of all of us.

Thus it requires the next 2 inhibitors to be worked out before we can have the end result. Whatever variant emerges as the most rational one.

The wealthy and the government officials they control are not just going to say OK! We agree.

We have to develop a strategy that weakens the structure by concentrating on specific industries, and corporations. They are vulnerable without the need to cause an economic collapse in order to force them into acquiescence.

A partnership with the administration in power that goes unsaid, and is unbending in nature, trust has to exist with the administration in power, as it has to be a partner and champion of the constitutional changes that will be required to undo the rigged game it has become. If we succeed in fixing the constitution, we could cause a global domino effect that would greatly help the next 2 issues.

2. Convince all the other nations.

Given the state of the world this is a plausible but highly unlikely thing to happen without the use of the very same means we are seeking to eradicate. Economic sanctions. war, sabre rattling, money paid to individuals as bribes, and puppet governments ready to do the bidding of the new enlightened people movement.

The example of America would help sway the people, but it by no means would convince the powers in place to see reason and change paths. The powerful will resist, and fight change as if it were an attacking force.

We can discuss individual nations like China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, the European nations united or individually, etc. On another related discussion. I'm trying to summarize here.

Each nation is a major endeavor and has requirements specific to, it, it's cultural traditions, gubernatorial structure and ideological bent.

3. Convince the Religions.

If we look at them as 3 groups for any given religion the are

A) the Religious organization which is analogous to a government and or a criminal organization.

B) Vested and non vested Zealots. The Wealthy beneficiaries of strategic partnerships with religions.

C) The devout ranging from 0 to 100 percent adherent to their particular dogma.

Snip.... I have already said too much that is beyond much elaboration before we do one thing.

Clean our own house.

It starts here. We have to decide who we are. Are we war mongers, empire builders, rulers of the world, a democracy, a republic, a Libertarian nation, are we 300 million people in a hypnotic trance, are we patriots? are we prepared to bring about change in a way it will work but may only marginally increase our personal quality of existence? These are the questions that consume me, I know my answer, I vote for the future at all cost. What is yours?

As a spiritual person, and a scientist I have to root for enlightenment, help it with technology, and still back it up with a critical path that ensures any or at least most possible impediments have a contingency, or tactics based on a
strategy that can re-stabilize the system accordingly and set it back on course.

How to do that in the United States?

After many years of studying the constitution, politics, human nature, physics, mathematics, history, and economics, my conclusion is that we have to start by rationally disambiguating the constitution of the United States, educating
Americans on what it is, how it works, it's strengths and weaknesses, and remedies to such, this will not be easy and sure to be disputed by every ideology that disagrees.

So where do we start?

We have to identify the sources of the problems and address them directly.

What have we learned since 1776?

We have learned a lot. Too much to articulate here but let's just say we have seen a lot of screwing up and we know how it happened, most of it we know how to fix, some we don't but we need to

We have to integrate that knowledge into the constitution by amending it to reflect the passage of time, and the bastardization of concepts, along with the understanding of the parts of the constitution that are or may be in and of themselves unconstitutional. This is the task at hand. How to take the work of men limited by their culture, time, and experiences and integrate the wisdom of hindsight into the constitution. It will be the task of people more knowledgeable than us to right our mistakes, biases and misunderstandings.

We will have to address the caste system we have and embrace, the criminality that is a component of the cultural, economic, and gubernatorial structure, and last but of most importance the education of the people free of propaganda intended to benefit the finances, or ideology of miscreants and psychopaths that now are doing a great job of creating serfs for the benefit of the status quo.

Racism and bigotry...... Still here because we have not educated our people properly. You can't legislate love but you can sure as hell legislate away inequity of opportunity, and "some" free speech as trumped by it's abrogation of other rights.We have done this, and need more of it.

The Military industrial complex. Do you really think these people are going to just go away? We will have to keep them from using wars to stop their demise. They will try everything in their power. But we know who they are, and individually they can be defeated. It can't come to armed conflict here. The military is too powerful, they have weapons that dwarf anything any patriotic suicide mission could muster. History teaches us it has been done before and can be done again.

The relatively few that command resources that can do a lot to stifle the advance of progress, can take away the freedom of the majority of the people for the benefit of the few. This is the core of what has to change.

Let's engage in a conversation about what we can do to effect change here and now, that we may work our way to the future on as straight a line as possible, right now we are meandering blindly through a desert saying woe is me. I know what an oasis looks like but so far it's all a mirage.

Let's take control of our future the way it can be done in the most efficient, effective way that ensures the goal is not sidetracked by the inevitable issues it will face, and need to resolve.

The founding fathers admittedly crafted the constitution to protect only land owning white male people and appease some male white people. Women, slaves, non Christians, and most of the American "non land owning" people were simply ignored, and devalued, after already being undervalued.

The deck was stacked on day one, the electoral college was created to ensure the people don't make a wrong choice due to their ignorance, which is frankly still hard to dispute but hardly an egalitarian concept. True freedom of choice is a 2 way sword. The wrong choice is bad and has consequences. But that is infinitely better than no choice.

Anyone who wants to argue the point above. Stop reading, vote me down and go back to OZ.

The founding fathers mostly, were not stupid, or ignorant men, they were the cream of the crop. They were intelligent, sophisticated men of substance, who were deeply biased, and flawed. They were educated, and worldly men of stature. They understood only too well what the average American was, and what part they played in the big scheme. In fact the average American was an uneducated person primarily influenced by the specific conditions created by the particular geography and environment of their residence.

Americans were a creation of their environment. We were a colony, and many people sided with the Brits. The Brits were in charge, they were profiteers, we got pissed and the people in a position to do something about it got together and acted.

224 years later we are the most influential, richest, and most powerful nation in the world but we are screwed. Except of course the people that are wealthy, and connected, and those that have kept the status quo from the start whomever they are exactly.

So how do we change ourselves and our future? I doubt it's by following the instructions of a for profit corporation via a movie, some reading materials, some web saturation on social networks and political web sites.

Then again I could be completely off course and you and your project are the only way to go.

Let's let the people decide, but let's give ourselves a healthy dose of questions to ponder that you can answer before we give this particular concept a partially informed thumbs up.

If I have to pay a fee to read the details and full ideology, I'm going to deem it for myself as simply one more internet profiteering scheme.

Nothing personal, just my 2 cents

Ziggy

questions and discussion worth way more than 2 cents...thanks for the thoughts

Thanks CS!

I really tried to be fair. and can only give an opinion and some questions.

you very astutely identified many of the barriers in our way to a better tomorrow, but I believe we can step out of many of these restraints just by doing so. The few have shot themselves in the foot with their hoarding and control...they have all the means to direct the use of resources through the use of a false bartering system they created and force us to believe must be. Since they have all the false control and are devaluing that control daily shouldn't we just let them have their worthless paper and walk away in a better direction? Stop paying mortgages...the banks (the few) will immediately lose their largest source of gain. Stop paying taxes...the government would have to crawl back to the people it should have been serving all along. Stop participating in lives driven by their rules and create our own for the benefit of all. We wouldn't need many...love they neighbor, do unto others, all for one and one for all, and so on. As far as religion...education, a right for everyone, would help move us past this form of imposed control as you pointed out it would for racism and isms in general. We are creative, spiritual, creatures that come into this world through love and then are told that is not enough, having it beaten into us that this is the case for the rest of our lives. Love is enough if we can all find it again through the separation and boxes forced on us. Let's reinvent what it means to be humans being. Understandably it will not be a transition that will be easy, but the right path is often the most difficult. One community at a time would show the way unobtrusively to humanity and when implemented all thinking caring individuals would be able to see just what we've been kept from. I think the numbers of people that would jump on the bandwagon would increase very quickly once the ball started rolling.

I agree with all your goals as stated. Where we differ is in the how to do it.

The government should be "the people" if the government were shaped by and for the people then it is a manifestation of the will of the people.

We will always need a structure, we just have to come up with one that works. If we just stop the government by negating it, there will be chaos, further economic failure, and probably deal a fatal blow to the nation, if it becomes rule by force, we lose as our position presently is in a much weaker state than if we reshape our government to reflect the real nature of the spiritual beings we are.

The hardest road in this case is the most direct, affirmative action by the people. We have the power to do this as long as we do not allow ourselves to fall prey to the fear mongering of the expiring conservative powers in both parties.

We need to be firm, proactive, and productive. In the state we are in, we can't afford to make a move that can throw us beyond salvation. If it turns out that we can't collectively reverse the trend, and return, or bring integrity to the political system we choose we are toast. It will just repeat until we finally get it right, I'm not claiming I have "The" answer, just the origins of one that makes sense to me, and would appear to accomplish what we want which is freedom from oppression and deceit.

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I just believe the better way to gain control of the government is to co-opt it rather than radically dismantle it. There are a lot of details most of us never consider that are kept from us unless we have some need to know them. The global economy and it's fragility is one of these. We can leverage our relative position to return value, and integrity without resorting to acts that could push us into a needless bloodbath. Remember The fall of the Soviet Union, it was eroded from within and without, in the end all it took was a bloodless protest to bring down the regime occupying half of Europe.

The enemy is not the government, it's the people we have allowed to distort it into a tool of control.

The seed was planted when we rejected McCain/Palin. We should let it bloom before we pull the sapling out for fear that it's not growing fast enough, or because the sapling has not had the sunlight to spread it's leaves and catch the strength it needs to act the way we want it to.

Thank you

Ziggy

government, religion and economy as we know it are outdated and not to humanity's benefit. If we could all agree to lose entitlement and gluttony we would be in the starting blocks for a better tomorrow. There is no coincidence that the Native American, and other indigenous cultures, have been under attack. The way resides with them and when added to this idea creates a reform outside of the corruption of our current situation. Wrote this as STC and reposted, but if each person agreed to live life as such it would help the transition be less destructive perhaps.

http://current.com/community/93589656_sovereign-citizenship-of-earth.htm

I agree government, economics and religion are completely outdated, I would add that of the three only government seems to be needed because human beings disrupt harmony.

I again agree with you. In my ideal world nothing owns anything, all share, care and coexist in this bountiful world that has been given to us to care for and experience life in symbiosis with.

Entitlement is a made up concept, nobody is entitled to anything.

Gluttony and greed are antisocial traits / behaviors destructive to harmony,
These beget reactions that are also not desirable but nevertheless understandable.

When a young tribesman returning from a hunt is set upon by a greedy tribesman who attacks him to steal the food he is bringing for the nourishment of the tribe from the desire to satisfy gluttony, or the greed to have more, the hunter will defend himself. That is natural, and can be described as justification to defend himself.

Are we on the same page?

yes...when referring to the tribes I think more about the structure of society...wisdom begets decision making. They certainly had more than enough antagonism between groups so not in every way are they correct, but their oneness with the Earth and the structure of their society are lessons we should all incorporate into life...thanks for further conversation Ziggy, appreciated greatly.

Ziggy you obviously see some things about the human condition quite clearly.

One final note Ziggy. You are familiar with technology and exponential growth, so no need to belabor that. Would you agree that as we develop the means of automation and the cost comes down, that businesses everywhere will latch on to it as a way to become more efficient. After all, machines don't complain, or form unions, or ask for the day off. With the technology that you and I know is just over the next horizon, how do you see the actual implementation playing out. I'll give you my version:

Companies continue automating jobs out of existence at a record pace. Only now, the tradition bottom of the barrel jobs that people usually fall back on after being displaced are also disappearing. Unemployment not only stays chronically high but start increasing. Tax revenue from wages continues to decline even faster as even high paying professionals are being forced down the rung, pushing out the young and uneducated entirely. The federal deficit continues to spiral out of control. The US attempts austerity measures by cutting benefits to those hardest hit by the crisis. This of course has the same effect it did in Greece a few years before, and only make the problem worse and the people angry.

From this point you get the picture, I don't need to spell out the whole collapse, but it is coming. There is no solution available to a capitalist system short of pressing the reset button on all debt and starting over. I may have the time line wrong, but not the result. Sooner or later we are going to have to adjust to a world were machines do all the work. The question is, will they be working for us or against us.

As long as there are machines, there are jobs, something frequently overlooked in these equations. For a machine to exist there must be the designers and engineers, the collectors of raw materials, the production staff and maintnance staff... yes a lot of the menial stuff done in all of these positions will be automated but you can't automate out the human element entirely, or at least certainly not in the forseeable future.

yup, we still need folks to suck off of for all the takers. if the world were more like the movie logans run where once you turned 30 the gubmint sends you off to meet your maker then we could really cut back on ss

That is where we disagree. I work with technology as a Software Architect. I can see the technology that's just on the horizon. Perhaps not 100% of the jobs will be replaced, but how many do you think we need to see an unsustainable economy; 25%, 35%, 50%. Those are very realistic numbers in the next 10 years. How long can the economy bear a 50% unemployment rate. I think it will melt down long before then.

In addition, once there is no cost to conduct research, and no downside to automating jobs, the remaining work can rapidly be automated.

Check out some other examples here (the few people you will see here could also be automated):

http://thefuturist.co/technological-unemployment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MV-_12bRenw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp-D7aHzr6Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3SHKcKG4iM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmeoBBgEfwA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79KBGoZzH_0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6TWjSfPvEI

Good by service industry, good by manufacturing and good by construction. Are you starting to get the picture yet.

If you not convinced watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7e8GMfjgE58

I agree, population goes up, and technology continues to accelerate (almost exponentially) put these 2 together less and less work for people to do and more people looking for that work.

I disagree, more and more technology is more robust requires less hands-on. In the years to come you add nano-tech to this and you've got something that in theory basically doesn't wear out and/or repairs itself.

Thanks I have few clear thoughts every month or so:-)

Oh believe me I know what you mean, but I am a technophile by profression and by choice. The more complex our tech becomes, theoretically it will require less maintenance and repairs, however conversely the more complex it becomes the more people it will take to produce period. In 1980 two well known men were able to contruct a fully functional computer in a garage that still housed a car most of the time. Today, though still possible, the computer would be severely lacking in capacity and modernization. The number of fingers that touch your new computer before you do is astronomical when you get into the idea that most of the parts used were themselves produced thousands of miles apart...

In short, technology through it's advancement creates it's own jobs... I see the tipping point coming when technology has taken so much of the employee base that we no longer produce our true necessities such as healthy food and pure drinkable water. We are non-theless facing the same point of trial and tribulation in both of our scenarios.

No doubt very complex systems still have people involved...today. But a chip plant these days is very highly automated. Sure, there's a few people in there, but not many. Were not at 50% today, we still have a lot of people working, but think about the trend. Bank tellers, grocery clerks, customer service and call center folks. When auto driving cars go mainstream in the next few years say good by to taxi drivers, and eventually big rig drivers, airline pilots, you name it. I mean come on, do you really think companies will keep people around when a machine can do the job a lot cheaper.

Taxi's and their drivers are not going anywhere anytime soon. The "autodriving" car will still have limitations, and city dwellers will never give up the conveinience of taxis. The first automated vehicles causing accidents or traffic backups will cause uproars in our cities, a universal railway system posses more threat to that industry then automation. I know what you're saying, I just don't agree that automation and tech will take that much of the workforces' jobs. There are just simply too many jobs that are too complex for machines to handle. Even janitorial duties require cognitive reasoning, a robot dogwalker isn't going to cut it, customer service may become more and more automated but there will always be a human making the decisions and dealing with the irrate consumers, bank tellers and grocery clerks will not be as busy as ATM and autocheckouts increase but its still a possition that machinery will never replace the human touch. This isn't even touching on the artistic or artisnal crafts, industries that require critical problem solving and creativity are in no risk of being lost to our technology, coorporate/public relations...this list could go on for a long long time. Machines will cut back on the "labor" our workers must exert, not so much cut back on
the work available.

I see technology as a source for making entrepenuerial small businesses more viable and profitable. Small business owners will see an amazing boon in not having to hire as many employees to do menial and unskilled tasks, and this will lead to a boom in small businesses and therefor an overall increase in economic strength.

I do agree that the final outcome of our current trends end in the same chaos that you see, just I don't agree on the same triggers.

We will just have to agree to disagree then. It will not take long for the world to prove one of us right.

Agreed! Been waiting to see how this will pan out since I was old enough to really think things through.

I have had my eye on this project for sometime now... Have always hoped it achieves the goals before it can be derailed by a crazed idealogue. Additionally I hope you legal support, because the whole thing can be wiped out by our litigious society lickety split.

The best part of the project...no more attorneys.

Agreed to a major extent, no one single man has ever had all the answers right, just ask Einstien! ;-)

Thank you for that. Everything we do, is simply standing on the shoulders of those great people who came before us.

can you name me two?

Albert Einstein was definately one in his later years with his great work promoting peace.
R. Buckminster Fuller was clearly another.
I would add FDR, JFK, RFK, and MLK to the long list.
Who you got?

Well said :)

some pretty good names buddy but like all humans they had their flaws. how many of them believed in god? who i got? ronald reagan, mikhail gorbachev, gandy, buddah, jesus, but again humans with flaws like all of us.

Belief in God should not have anything to do with anything other than people's egos.
It should be a private matter according to none other than Jesus.
"Don't pray to be heard by men like the hypocrites."
I'm sure Einstein and Fuller and FDR and JFK and RFK and MLK made it to heaven.
But I seriously wonder about Ronal6 Wilso6 Reaga6......

wow i detect some hostility. but even jesus preached among his flock

Nice Jim absolutely the right direction to head...great addition

I was going to post this as a topic for conversation a few days ago, but I thought it would be better used to enforce a like minded conversation in the future. It didn't take long for that discussion to take place.

post it as well...more discussion needs to be pushed relevant to this change in how we assume life must be

I believe that :)

Yes, the more we talk about this, the sooner we will have the momentum to start.