“She called pregnancy in cases of rape and incest‘God’s plan.’” (Following comment/reply banned three times by HuffPost.) For people like Sharron Angle, a clarification, or reminder: in scriptural and spiritual terms, there are two polar sides in the overall conflict. True, the Light has (and makes) plans. However, (assuming corresponding belief in good vs. evil/the original cast out) there is another side (dark) which also does the same. Within those veins, the goals are extreme in differences of aspect. One side relishes particular types of opportunities – like having a sickened, immoral, unrepentant father who is on the verge of crossing over by raping his daughter – because they want him to go through with it (while possibly fulfilling their getting the most important part of him). The other is saddened by such situations/inclinations, yet still seeks to save, to turn around, not just the individual perpetrator – but the related circumstances (including victims’) as well. In a scenario such as this, which force’s “will” (or proposed “plan”) would be fulfilled by the man scarring a girl for life – while (possibly) forever losing his own? For that impregnated child, what would be more likely during her agonizing trial? : thoughts of a heartless “prince of this world” and its minions having triumphed, at least in directed torture – or realizations that a Loving God and His servants may implement intense measures to win certain battles, though her savaging by a perverted father would improbably be one of them? (P.S. Ever heard of Free Will?)
Al Franken Slams Supreme Court: “This could lead to the creation of a high-speed lane for wealthy corporations and transform the Internet from an open playing field into yet another place where powerful economic elites have a bigger megaphone than the rest of us. Some of the same people who were instrumental in the Federalist Society’s effort to change our legal system are now working to help corporations increase their control over the flow of information. If you control the flow of information, you can control the conversation. . . . If you can control the conversation, you can change this country.” (Think “Waterboarding in the Media” and “Torture Is. . . .”)
The Fate of the Internet — Decided in a Back Room: “This is what a failed democracy looks like: After years of avid public support for Net Neutrality – involving millions of people from across the political spectrum – the federal regulator quietly huddles with industry lobbyists to eliminate basic protections and serve Wall Street’s bottom line.”
Yet, Obama to Expand Broadband Internet Across U.S. (??)
Interesting timing, considering what is happening behind closed doors at the FCC. And, if Net Neutrality is quashed, expanded broadband will be essentially meaningless (unless you are a controlling interest corporation). (Remind anyone of the Mandate/Public Option setup/sellout?)
Posted by WindHarps 
Awakenings 