marriage defined

Posted on February 23, 2009 by cfonseca160

In an ever increasingly secular society, I think that the values and traditions passed down for our benefit should not be disparaged. I had a talk with a gay counterpart recently about definition. He said that marriage is not defined as between man and woman only, rather any individuals who seek secular validation as a couple. I find this an interesting definition, but I find it incorrect as a strict interpreter of language. One has to objectively ask, where does the definition of a word matter? First, the opinion on which people of the same language communicate plays significance; but, more importantly, definitions’ origin. Marriage is the word for the sacrament as defined by churches that practice the tradition as willed by the people engaging with one another and God. In summation, as a civil libertarian, I support no law that gives justification for criminal activity against such individuals. Those who hate you have no understanding of the faith that I practice through my church which has rights to the word and definition of marriage. The state and country must respect this word if we are to ever live in a free society that does not seek to dilute all that is true, to leave nothing for all.

Posted in Organizations, Religion and reverence | Comments Off on marriage defined

chastising free voters?

Posted on February 22, 2009 by cfonseca160

One doesn’t have to respond to people’s comments from those one disrespect, so I’d like to encourage Mr. S. Penn to do the same, in light of recent comments regarding gay life. Mr. Sean Penn, my grandchildren, children, or those children of mine in spirit, will never live in shame no matter their sexual preference though perhaps for other reasons they might. As I’d like to remind you also, Mr. Cheney probably does love his daughter very much, so to attack his commitment to his view in that regard is not right. As for those who hate their own or even their brothers and sisters, I say to you Sean, their loss. [By the way, good job on “I am Sam”. You are a fine actor, as your supporting actor Michelle Pfeifer… and I did enjoy that film.]

Posted in Entertainment, Religion and reverence, US Politics | Comments Off on chastising free voters?

How to vote?

Posted on January 20, 2008 by cfonseca160

I am currently a registered “Libertarian”. While “Peace and Freedom” and other third-party positions are competitive and attractive choices at the polls, I will join a growing number of individuals voting for the “Libertarian” party in the primary election. I recently came across a candidate, a woman, who in the party is most definitely capable and ready to be the United States’ first woman president. I am honored to have received a phone message from her in response to my sharing information with her of party ideal and issue topic.
I am excited about this move toward a stronger, a more free America, that is a shared ideal among the party. My hope is that among Dems, Mr. Edwards pick the right VP in defeat of the former first lady. I would hope the same out of the other men running. And the Republicans have at least one good option for leadership perhaps also. But I repeat, there is only one that is the best for a particular juncture, and that is something that I can only hope I know from this view. May God help us in this very crucial political race.

Posted in News and politics, Organizations, US Politics | Comments Off on How to vote?

123 mil worth sold to Arabia-endorse Edwards

Posted on January 15, 2008 by cfonseca160

Now just months ago we nixed a plan to sell US eastern seaport ownership to a private Saudi Arabian company. That was struck down in the interest of caution, not to mention jurisdictional control- that was wise. I believe Ms. Rice was prepared to formally broker that bad idea. But now, the line was crossed it appears. Just yesterday we sold 123mil worth of precision guided bomb technology to Saudi Arabia? Hmm- why change of “strategy” from our leadership? Where is that darned decision compass? I wonder where those bombs will fall, and just who will be blamed or credited, for dropping them. The concern is that we’re not only selling weapons, but that we’re not being told why. I really cannot think of anyone Saudi Arabia really has publicly stated they want to use this technology against. I really don’t think this sale is worth a slightly better oil barrel price, or any other arguable, perhaps ancillary benefit. There are other providers around the world for our oil partnerships and I don’t believe the myths portrayed here that there is no other source of oil. I believe Mr. Edwards knows this also and will pave us a path out… effectively un-marrying us from Iraq and others. I’m not even broaching any topic about alliance or hatred between and among Arab nations within. If there’s ever a time to boost our working class interests in our country and neglect other nation’s disputes, it’s now. Ms. Clinton, a women’s rights advocate, would be sadly more concerned about women’s rights there, than about their capacity to fire weaponry. So it appears. Sadly, I see that Europeans to arm Saudi Arabia. I’ll be watching to see what she says about the issue remembering that she was pro war. I’d be very surprised if nothing is said about this by the contenders running against her in US elections. I’m voting for the one who most credibly appears in his heart of hearts, to advocate and to have advocated long ago, this opinion I’ve come to share with Mr. John Edwards, the only man to boldly put into personal practice an initiated fight against illegal campaign contribution. The other contenders should rally around him and the American citizen should actuate his nomination.

Posted in News and politics, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on 123 mil worth sold to Arabia-endorse Edwards

Media Kudos

Posted on October 26, 2007 by cfonseca160
I would like to thank the media in majority for fantastic reporting and responsible journalism. I have felt it largely trustworthy since commencement of the War in particular.
Posted in News and politics | Comments Off on Media Kudos

Peace

Posted on October 25, 2007 by cfonseca160

Vote for peace. It’s time to bring our nation together and stop the flow of war. ASAP. 

Posted in Health and wellness, Religion and reverence, US Politics | Comments Off on Peace

Philosphy

Posted on October 25, 2007 by cfonseca160

If the war against something gives one purpose, would one ever choose to succeed in winning it to end? That depends upon how we feel about peace. Is winnable peace better than being left in peace? To be left in peace, we have to leave in peace. To win our peace, we have to make war. Is it possible to win a war against war? So, that we can lose and be left in peace? Make love not war. Make war not love. Is it all the same to her or him? And after your war, remember to make love so you can go right on and make war again. Equal are those who war as those who peace, blessed are those who’ve found their mother’s and wives. In the end, we have all warred and peaced. Embrace peace.

Posted in Health and wellness, Religion and reverence, US Politics | Comments Off on Philosphy

Southern CA leadership

Posted on October 25, 2007 by cfonseca160
I would like to commend our firefighting efforts and thank our leaders all the way up to and including the national level, for providing support to our State of CA.
Posted in Health and wellness | Comments Off on Southern CA leadership

No to divestment

Posted on August 21, 2007 by cfonseca160

Recently I sent a letter of concern to our government, in response to news of proposed fund divestment to a region in the middle-east.
Just say no to divestment fellow citizens! We have many expenses, and we should not continue to support sides that are oppositional.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, World News | Comments Off on No to divestment

Pentagon scrapping anti war database?

Posted on August 21, 2007 by cfonseca160

Psychologists have publicly stated that they have recently lifted a ban. Apparently they used to self censure by keeping themselves separated from the interrogation process conducted by government officials. This self-censure may have amounted to thoroughness comparable to the self-censure of deviant priests in the Catholic Church. I don’t know. I assume there were for a long time now, “exempted” psychologists, hired as government employees for various government contracts. I find this lifted ban interesting in light of what was nearly simultaneously announced. The Pentagon is “scrapping” a database. I hope that the ACLU has made the correct assumptions [not that the ACLU is necessarily our champion] and checked the facts about the Pentagon program closure, which states that it (the Pentagon) has decided to scrap its database on individuals who are anti-war. The database may contain info on foot demonstrators as well as anyone who has petitioned various government bureaus over various citizen concerns, and those who place phone calls outside of the country; right… many of us. It is difficult to know the extent of classified data compilation on this. And further, does this “closure” mean that the information will be simply transferred to the federal bureau of investigation (whom the files are reportedly being sent to according to CNN), to be utilized further under a different umbrella? The ACLU seems to be convinced that the data will not be maintained and used, for example, in one possible scenario: in cooperation with the psychologists who recently have announced that they are lifting their ban against its own (now un-instated) policy of working with local law enforcement and/or state and federal government officials in the interrogation process of individuals.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Organizations, US Politics | Comments Off on Pentagon scrapping anti war database?