← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Hartley Henry – DLP Political Strategist

Congratulations on the passage of the Health Reform Bill. I am impressed and truly inspired by your vision, conviction and determination!

Many political observers in Barbados have come to compare and twin the politics of Washington to that of Barbados. They liken the Democrats in Washington to the governing Democratic Labour Party and the Republicans on Capitol Hill to the current leadership of the Barbados Labour Party.

Sir, in relation to your recent experience with the health care issue, we have an almost identical scenario existing here in Barbados, where absolutely nothing the government does is supported by the opposition.

I can well understand your frustration at having to fight so hard to effect positive and meaningful change. But that, I suppose, is the nature of politics in 2010. The Health Reform Bill, as I understand it, would bring both immediate as well as long term benefits to millions of Americans.

Straight off the bat, health insurers would be required to let young people stay on their parents’ policy up to their 27th birthday. Also, insurers would be barred from denying coverage to kids with pre-existing health conditions, and tax credits, to the tune of 35 percent of premiums, would start to flow to businesses with fewer than 50 employees to enable them to take out and maintain policies.

Mr. President, it is hard to consider how anyone, voted for by beneficiaries of these changes, could oppose them. Yet, we know that every single Republican, all 212 of those who voted, gave the thumbs down to this measure. This is almost as ridiculous, Mr. President, as our Leader of the Opposition here in Barbados persistently opposing free bus fares for school children. Can you imagine that two thirds of the Barbados Labour Party’s Parliamentary team represents rural constituencies, where many children take two buses to school, and these guys violently opposed the abolition of bus fares for school children?

I know how you must feel, Mr. President, because here in Barbados we also had a situation where the opposition opposed holiday camps for school children, constituency councils that would empower ordinary Barbadians and even more recent, the appointment of a Parliamentary Secretary to oversee the day to day operations of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

Imagine you have a situation in Barbados where over the last five years, it became commonplace for ordinary Barbadians to spend as much as 24 hours at the main, general hospital waiting to see a doctor. Also, where there were persistent reports of less than flattering experiences at the hospital by patients, staff and visitors alike.

Your counterpart, Prime Minister David Thompson, determined that in addition to having an energetic and competent minister of health that he would reinforce the oversight of government, by putting in a Parliamentary Secretary who has developed a reputation for getting things done. Do you know, Mr. President, the opposition in Barbados opposed that as well?

And it gets even worse! We have a serious water problem in Barbados. There are residential communities that have had to put expansion on hold, as a result of a shortage of or inaccessibility to water. Eighty per cent of callers on the call-in programmes complain of nightmares in respect of the Barbados Water Authority. The situation called for urgent and meaningful action. The Prime Minister acted. He appointed one of his then ministers to the position of Executive Chairman of the BWA in an effort to get ageless issues addressed and resolved. The number one problem at BWA is said to be human resource and industrial relations driven. Arni Walters is one of the foremost experts on HR and IR issues in Barbados. Do you know, Mr. President, that Mia Mottley and the opposition opposed that move as well?

So this opposing for the sake of opposing is not unique to Washington, my friend, we encounter the same nonsense in Barbados on a daily basis.

We have school children doing as they like both on and off the school compound. The Prime Minister and Minister of Education are at their wits end to find a solution to this problem. Do you think the Leader of the Opposition or the former Prime Minister has said a word in support of the government’s effort to check and stamp out incidents of antisocial behavior among school children? No! Not a word! Their obsession is with talking arithmetic.

Everything that flows from their mouths is GDP, deficit and foreign reserves related. No one is saying that these are not important, but, as the Prime Minister has said repeatedly, Barbados is more than an economy. It is a society. Yet, the Leader of the Opposition, and presumably Prime Minister-in-Waiting, cannot find a single social issue to associate with or to champion.

Indeed, she and her predecessor attended and spoke at their first party meeting in months (I am going to give you the joke about that another time) and when they discovered that the economic techno-babble was not resonating with even their supporters, do you know what they ended up talking about? Mr. President, you won’t believe it. Their time was spent calling for a member of the cabinet to be fired over some incident they say took place in the Members Room of Parliament.

I am waiting, Mr. President, to see where they and their mouthpiece newspaper are going to take this issue, because I recall hearing of a gun being fired among a gathering of BLP government ministers a few years ago. It was never denied or confirmed whether a then representative for a rural constituency received a gunshot wound, but I can tell you no one messed with the then representative for a very urban constituency thereafter. Interestingly, that incident was never reported in the newspaper.

Furthermore, Mr. President, have you ever heard of a pigtail bucket? Well legend has it that a senior Member of the current Barbados Parliament beat his father to a pulp with a pig tail bucket and when he was confronted with the tale of this in the Parliament of Barbados, a fight broke out with a now deceased former member, and an ex-cricketing great was struck by a flying chair thrown by that senior member. A former deputy Speaker also fractured a colleague minister’s nose with a cuff, right there in Parliament yard.

So I am waiting patiently to see how the Barbados Labour Party and its newspaper arm treat this issue of a recent fracas in Parliament, because, while I do not condone such; perpetrated by friend or foe, I will not sit silent and permit the impression to be given that such is unprecedented.

Mr. President, I agree with you. Such sanctimonious grandstanding is an abomination!

Hartley Henry is a Regional Political Strategist. He can be reached at hartleyhenry@gmail.com

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

246 responses to “Dear President Obama”


  1. Wedding-Wine at Cana.

    “John 2: 1-11: The distinguishing fact is that Christ turned the water into wine. The greek word ‘oinos’; and it is claimed that therefore the wine was alcoholic and intoxicating. but as ‘oinos’ is a generic word, like groceries, hardware, etc, and, as such, includes all kinds of wine and all stages of the juice of grapes, (i.e., sweet unfermented grape juice) or fermented grape juice. As the narrative is silent on this point, the character of the wine, either UNFERMENTED, sweet grape juice, or fermented, alcoholic wine, can only be determined by the attendant circumstances, by the occasion, the material used, the PERSON (Jesus) making the wine, and the MORAL influence of the miracle.” (Bible Wines, Laws of Fermentation, by William Patton, D.D., p. 89) emphasis added.

    Before getting into why it is incomprehensible that The Lord Jesus Christ, the One who Created ALL things GOOD, to believe that He miraculously turned about 60 gallons of water, into intoxicating wine, where in the very ‘Nature’ that He Created, as Professor Turner, in his Chemistry, says of alcohol:

    “It does NOT exist ready formed in plants, but is a product of the vinous fermentation.” -Bible Commentary…Nature NEVER forms spirituos liquors, she ROTS the grape upon the branches; but it is an art which (man uses) which converts the juice into (alcoholic) wine.”- Bible Commentary, p. 370) emphasis added.

    The very process of fermentaion, which MAN developed, in order to bring God’s pure grape juice to an alcoholic stage, are nasty.

    “Fermentation, putrefaction and DECAY are processes of DECOMPOSITION.” -Bible Commentary- 39) emphasis added.

    Against the background of these facts of Chemistry, which man created in order to bring pure SWEET Grape juice, as Jesus Created it, to an ALCOHOLIC stage, which has caused wrecked havoc across history from intoxication, let us hear Rev. Patton’s rational argument in the Wedding at Cana.

    “The occasion was a wedding convocation. The material was WATER – the same element which the clouds pour down, which the vine draws up from the earth by its roots, and its passage to the clusters changes into JUICE. The ‘operator’ was Jesus Christ, the same One, who in the BEGINNING, fixed that law by which the VINE takes up water and converts it into PURE, unfermented juice.”

    “The wine provided by the family was used up, and the mother of Jesus informed Him of that fact. He directed that six water-pots be filled with WATER. This being done, he commanded to draw and hand it to the master of the feast. He pronounced it wine – GOOD WINE.”

    “The MORAL influence of the miracle will be determined by the character of the wine. It is pertinent to ask, Is it not derogatory to the character of Christ and the teachings of the Bible to suppose that He exerted His miraculous power to produce, according to Alvord, 126, and according to Smith, at least 60 gallons of INTOXICATING wine? – wine which Inspiration had denounced as ” a mocker,” as “bitting like a serpent,” and “stinging like an adder,” as “the poison of dragons,” “the cruel venom of asp,” and which the Holy spirit had selected as the emblem of the wrath of God Almighty? It is probable that He gave that to the guest AFTER they had used the wine provided by the host, and which, it is claimed was INTOXICATING?”

    It is therefore, utterly unthinkable, as some believe, that The Lord Jesus Christ, would have used His miraculous power, to turn WATER into fermented, INTOXICATING wine, helping to make people drunk, entirely inconsistent with who HE is, violating the very laws of nature that He Created in the first place, that ONLY gives us, pure SWEET grape juice.

    As Pattons goes on to say, with which I entirely concur:

    “Christ, by supernatural and superhuman rapidity, produced that marvellous conversion of water into the “pure blood of the grape” which, by His own established law of nature, takes place annually through a series of months, as the vine draws up the water from the earth, and transmutes it into PURE and UNFERMENTED juice found in the rich, ripe clusters on the vine.” (Ibid., p. 90) emphasis added.

  2. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Technician on/ April 2, 2010 at 10:48 PM

    I have no idea what qaneh bosm is. Sorry that I cant help.

    Anonymous re April 2, 2010 at 11:04 PM

    can’t resist stirring up the ant’s nest:so GP what Greek or Hebrew word translated as “wine” was used so GP what Greek or Hebrew word translated as “wine” was used in John2:1 – 11?

    I am not sure but it would either be one of the Greek words used to translate wine i.e oinos, or gleukos.
    This would be the same answer for Hants, who asked a similar question.

  3. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Zoe
    The ignorant, incoherent unlearned, illiterate, ilogical, and incorrigible will now run amock. It should be fun!

    It is called challenging.

    Can you understand what the word “the park” means to you. or “the house?” What does the term one’s breadfruits are hanging low mean? Or yampie or goadies or “the Cock”? What is swank? Or “a bread and two” or “a cutter”? What are “Banks”?

    How would a non Bajan translate any of the above?
    Do you know I have even met Bajan youth aged 20 who came to me to sign heath certificates for entry to Cave Hill, who did not know where “the clock” was in “the park” or that there was indeed a “clock”in “the park:? Oh me am!


  4. @DICTIONARY

    A wedding is for fun and merriment . Why would thehost say the wine wasthe best served. Jesus had no responsibilty to those who might have over indulge in the wine if it was alcoholic. man is going to do whatever they choose to . You have no need to be apologetic or to be diverting the crust of this matter.


  5. GP:

    Thanks.

    Wiki on the KJV, bringing out the challenges that may dog even the most respected translations of a given day:

    In January 1604, King James I of England convened the Hampton Court Conference where a new English version was conceived in response to the perceived problems of the earlier translations as detected by the Puritans,[7] a faction within the Church of England.[8]

    James gave the translators instructions intended to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy.[9] The translation was by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England.[10] In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text) series of the Greek texts. The Old Testament was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

    While the Authorized Version was meant to replace the Bishops’ Bible as the official version for readings in the Church of England, it was apparently (unlike the Great Bible) never specifically “authorized”, although it is commonly known as the Authorized Version in the United Kingdom. However, the King’s Printer issued no further editions of the Bishops’ Bible; so necessarily the Authorized Version supplanted it as the standard lectern Bible in parish church use in England. In the Book of Common Prayer (1662), the text of the Authorized Version replaced the text of the Great Bible — for Epistle and Gospel readings — and as such was “authorized” by Act of Parliament.

    Of course, the effect of that was they used a cognate of episkopos — bishop [after brutalisation over the centuries by half literates episkopos became bishop] — instead of its translation: overseer. Similarly, they transliterated baptizo etc instead of rendering “immerse.” Similarly, ekklesia — a gathering or congregation [including a formal assembly] — ended up with a substitute word, a cognate of Kyriakos, the Lord’s, church or Kirk. And of course the pervasive presence of buildings labelled as such, confused reading accurately. (And I am ecclesiologically about the most radical Christian you will meet! Start from how Eph 4:9 – 24 is the operational fo0rm of the church’s mandate.)

    So, even great translations are not perfect, and we need to read with an instructed eye; with aid of serious word studies.

    Onlookers, do you see why my eSWORD has GK, HEB, LATIN and the great English versions from1385 on, including the major alternative to KJV, GENEVA (and notes of same)? And why my favourite electronic KJV has Strongs codes hot above the key words that take me straight to dictionaries? [About 30 translations worth.]

    G’day

    D


  6. This is what Wiki has to say….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sula_Benet


  7. The illiterate,incoherent,unlearned,ignorant,ilogical,
    incorrigible.To all mentioned in the comment 4/3/8.28p.m I say God loves you too..


  8. AC:

    I have not diverted but provided balance on a matter that is distractive, Even as I have had to be dealing with most serious issues on the main subject.

    As I noted, we need to reckon with the breadth of the term oinos used in Jn 2 [as eSWORD shows], as Zoe and GP have aptly pointed out. I have no doubt fermented wine was often served, but that does not entail that what Jesus created was the same; though it would be of little moment to me if he did make it fermented instead of what Welches hoped to be. (In short, I have no stake in proving it one way or the other.)

    D


  9. I seem to have lost a comment,

    Basically, it is of little moment to me either way, but oinos has a range of meanings and that wedding wine was often fermented did not mean it must always be so.

    D


  10. GP

    actually Zoe had actually given the answer i.e. oinos. An online Strong’s verified this. Zoe casts doubt that such “wine” was fermented, do you suggest re:wine skins that it possibly could be the fermented form?


  11. @Dictionary

    Your point and our are at variance. You are probably correct in what you write but it is not the point BU making.

    @Zoe et al

    Your point is made about the wine.

    @GP

    You may want to disagree with the challenge to points made by the theologians and intellectuals by the ordinary folk on BU but why the need even before it happens to deliver a verbal onslaught? This is one of the reasons so far why regrettably we have had to close a few of the blogs. Agree to disagree and move on, and this applies to move sides of the debate.


  12. @Technician

    I feel the same way. However the realities of life seem to alluded some people . For some reason they seem to think that everything is evil. This comes up so much in their reasoning. In somuch that the have a hard time defining a simple word as wine.


  13. Dictionary // April 3, 2010 at 8:49 PM

    I seem to have lost a comment,

    Basically, it is of little moment to me either way, but oinos has a range of meanings and that wedding wine was often fermented did not mean it must always be so.

    D

    On the other side of the coin, it COULD men that it was so…….couldn’t it?

    It just amazes me that when you guys just don’t know or cannot be certain, how you then try to trivialize an issue by saying it is not important, or is of little moment to you.

    Don’t you all see how these ‘little’ inconsistencies can lead to doubts, which like grapes can ferment into serious reservations about the Word.
    Sometimes the questions asked are not stupid, neither is the person posing the question, the illiterate,incoherent,unlearned,ignorant,illogical,
    incorrigible.

    I was most surprised that GP does not know what qaneh bosm means.

    I also asked the question to the BU family but could not get an answer, even from the highly educated and lettered.
    Just goes to show that questions are not stupid, just because you dont know the answer.


  14. @Technician

    In other words they have a hard time saying THEY DON”T KNOW, but would rather down play the issue to name calling.This issue is one that the Church finds
    difficult to confront as It deals with a very social problem as it does not fit comfortably in the scheme of things. That is Wine being a ritual within the church.
    and being participated.

  15. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    David

    I am not disagreeing with the so called challenges by the Bible illiterates. Nor do I understand that you can not perciegve that it has already begun.

    I have said in very simple language and with apt illustrations that it is folly for some to demonstrate their obvious ignorance of a subject by trying to “challenge” proper scholarship. It is nonsense! And has gone on for much too long.

    I have given a perfect illustration and demonstration of how language is used, and how research has to be done to understand the use of words by giving a few examples of terms that we all as Bajans use, that others might not understand without explanation.

    Annonymous and Hants and Technician ask questions, and got good accurate answers. When I was a student I asked sensible questions or did research before making an ass of myself in a public forum. I did not go around trying to mock others just because they were better read than I was, or more informed on a subject than I was.

    I dont do it on BU either. I dont comment on BU or elsewhere on issues about which I am ignorant or illiterate or unlearned. I listen and try to learn.

    I dont go about attacking folk repetitvely, and perrenially and perpetually just because a few others think that these folk should be the butt of silly jokes by folk who are uncouth, uncivil, un learned, unread and insensitive.

    I didnt hear you when I was unfairly and illogically maligned by two persons on a recent blog. All sorts of lies and low remarks were made. You said nothing. And I didnt respond either, because I know the facts, and there was no ned to descend to the dirt..

    I have said what I have said, and what I have said is sound doctrine that can not be refuted. It is your prerogative to close threads and ban folk, but you dont dare to make the comments you made to me to your friends and the major offenders of nonsense on BU.

    I respectfully submit Sir that my use of the words ”
    illiterate,incoherent,unlearned,ignorant,ilogical,” are perfectly used in the context.

    BU obviously means different things to different people. Certainly the theologians and Bible scholars who post here, bring great scholarship to the table BASED ON WHAT CAN BE READ THE MYRIADS OF TOMES ON THE SUBJECT, rather than the stupid opinions of folk who have not studied or searched the scriptures.

    None of you woud go to an illiterate or improperly trained physician.

    Some of us come here and share or experience and knowledge in our areas of expertise as a public service. Some come for other reasons.

    If I and my Christian colleagues are filling to ignore the areas on which others post, because we lack interest or knowledge, why cant those who are clearly ignorant of some of the tings we post do the same. If you have no interst agree to disagree as you say and move on. What challenge what? None of you have ever sought to challenge me ion Basdic Sciences or Medicine, because you have no studied.

    But you supopose that the nonsense that you spew out about the Word makes sense, when you KNOW that you have ot studied or searched it or dont think you need some sort of sysem to rightly divide it.

    This despite the fact that we must ALL KNOW that there is a sysem for learning and practicing every subject or vocation or hobby or profession or subject.


  16. @GP

    This last comment coming from you is most surprising because they are others who would opine that you have been given a lot of latitude on BU to share your views. BU is a place where robust discussion is par for the course and we would have thought you understood such. There is the phrase ‘damn if you do and damn if you don’t.’

    Hear this everyone. Continue to make your points, make them with all the vigour you can muster when you feel it requires it. Also hear this, BU will always use our best judgement to ensure that BU is a place where ALL can feel comfortable.

  17. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Technician

    I can not understand why you are most surprised that I do not know what qaneh bosm means. I honestly don’t. And I said so simply and honestly.

    You of course know that even the highly educated and lettered do not know everything even in their areas of specialty. I am sure that you know that you do not know everything in your area of specialty. I am sure that you know that if I knew that I would have given you a fair answer.

    You are indeed quite correct that “Sometimes the questions asked are not stupid, neither is the person posing the question, the illiterate, incoherent, unlearned, ignorant, illogical,
    incorrigible,” but some times they are! And you know it!.

    Dictionary particularly said that he had no problem with the wine being fermented or not, since we know that wine of all sorts was used because of the poor water available in some areas at the time. I gave an honest note on the 8 words used to translate the word “wine” and what the words meant. I also explained that neither of these words are used in the institution of the Lord’s study.

    No one is spinning anything here. And we need not have to pull teeth to explain why “Word Studies” are important in studying the Bible, or even in the understanding of our conversations by non Bajans. After over a year of trying to explain that the NT was written in the koine greek because it was the universal language of commerce at the time, why should we be still pulling teeth about these basic issues..

    I don’t understand how you can say that when we don’t know or cannot be certain, that we try to trivialize an issue by saying it is not important, or is of little moment to us. Could it just be that it is trivial or not important to us or of little moment. Why does everything said by those at whom you all mock and scoff be challenged? Consider if you were in the same boat?


  18. @Technician

    qaneh bosm” isn’t that a weed used in bibical time. Get real folks all that was done then is being done now,

  19. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    David

    Pray tell

    In what way have I been given a lot of latitude on BU to share my views.

    David if you dont want to upload my contributions on Medicine or Bible you are free to do so. No one has done me any favors on BU or anywhere else. My contributions are not in anyway BELOW THE STANDARD OF MUCH THAT I HAVE READ ON BU AND WITHOUT SCOFFING OR MOCKING OR MALIGNING THE AUTHORS. I LIMIT MY REMARKS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO NARROW AND SPECIFIC AREAS

    David I dont hang around anywhere that I am not wanted. And if you dont think that I have made a valuable or meaningful contribution to BU over the last 2 years or so, I can easily quit. I have had to quit more lucrative and profitable exercises. If you dont think that I have a valuable contribution to make, you know what to do.

    What lattitude have I been given? You mean mockery and scorn and derision? Even when I dont post I am scorned and scoffed at. So are Zoe and Dictionary.

    Does the paragraph below apply to the so called BU Trinity too DAVID?

    “Hear this everyone. Continue to make your points, make them with all the vigour you can muster when you feel it requires it. Also hear this, BU will always use our best judgement to ensure that BU is a place where ALL can feel comfortable.”

    Do you think that low remarks laced with lies constitutes a place where one can feel comfortable David?


  20. @GP

    You decide what you want to do. Don’t know how you could have interpreted the last comment the way you did.

    One thing is for sure if you or anyone is thin-skinned then BU is not the place for you, it is no Sunday School and that is for sure.

    BTW there is nobody in BU who has had to endure more insults than one name David.


  21. Truthfully I have enjoyed most of the comments even those with whom i disagree. So continue as DAvid say to muster up all the vigour to make your pointsand
    stop the bickering.


  22. Has anyone ever met a more mean spirited, arrogant, and immature blogger than GP?
    Is there a more self important, pompous , pretentious know-it-all alive?

    And this all from someone who purports to teach the intricacies of Christianity and to have excelled in the Barbados education system.

    Really interesting how quickly this unpleasant alto ego emerged after a little pressure was applied to the obviously false facade with which we had been presented initially.

    Christianity is not about ‘learning’ to present a particular face to the public, it is about being naturally Christ-like. The attitudes and personalities displayed UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES are then reflective of this Christian personality….. which is characterized by LOVE.

    How disappointing.


  23. @GP…

    You said,..’I don’t understand how you can say that when we don’t know or cannot be certain, that we try to trivialize an issue by saying it is not important, or is of little moment to us. Could it just be that it is trivial or not important to us or of little moment. Why does everything said by those at whom you all mock and scoff be challenged? Consider if you were in the same boat?

    You seem to be contradicting yourself with this and I really cant understand what you are trying to say here.

    If I were as knowledgeable and as brilliant as you or Dictionary, I would try to pass on that knowledge to those that ask for it.
    Those that mock and scoff I would simply ignore.

    The problem (IMHO) is that you guys CAN”T seem to ignore!!
    Dictionary certainly can’t, Zoe tries but is easily roped back in, you were doing a good job up until.
    Now why is that?

    I am sure that at this stage, you all can tell the scoffers and mockers from those who has a genuine question to ask.

    Anyway, I will not detract from the thread anymore before D jumps all over me..lol.


  24. ac // April 3, 2010 at 10:31 PM

    @Technician

    qaneh bosm” isn’t that a weed used in bibical time. Get real folks all that was done then is being done now,

    @ac….

    If you read the link I gave you,you would see that it ‘seemed’ to be well accepted that there was/is a mistake in the translation of the word and the meaning which is now found in the Bible is not the true meaning of the word.
    Qaneh bosm is not just any old herb but in fact cannabis.

    Everything in moderation ac.

    This is another piece of info that really makes sense to me……enjoy a good read here…
    http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/does-bible-permit-drinking-wine-alcohol.html

  25. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    David
    For two years you have to agree that I have had to turn the other cheek, and I have so done. There were times when you were encouraging me to engage. And I kept silent. But it gets overbearing at times.

    I have turned the other cheek over and over, and refused to repond to many nasty remarks. And you know that. But enough is enough.

    How did I respond David when subjected to the meanest nastiest attacks by two bloggers two weeks ago . One I completely ignored. The other person I answered by laughing at what they said, because as I said then and as I say now you can not adjudicate without the facts.

    How did I respond for two whole years David to nasty untrue taunts and remarks made about me? It is now called pressure being aplied . But when I make accurate observations you jump on my back. Hilarious!

  26. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Technician

    You know that I have always tried to answer your questions, and that I have never considered them trivial When I don’t know I do not know. Just as I did not know the answer to the question you asked.

    Do you understand that some things are trivial or not important to others, just as some things are trivial or not important to you? Is this allowable? Must everyone consider the things that you consider important, important?

    The so called BU trinity consider hermeneutics and exegesis important in interpreting Scripture, others don’t and call it nonsense! Was that not trivializing what others find fundamental and important?

    How can you know if someone is uncertain or don’t know? Or just don’t want to know, or to answer or consider the thing trivial?

    You say that if you were as knowledgeable and as brilliant as you or Dictionary, you would try to pass on that knowledge to those that ask for it. I am sure that we try and that we do. We are rewarded with mockery and scoffing, and called thin skinned. When subjected to loathsome low remarks for months on end (almost two years) it is called “pressure”.

    I am glad that you can see that I have done a good job in not responding to the maligning, and the “pressure”. Do you really think that this is necessary? Consider if you were in the same boat?

    I just said a few things about the nonsense I saw starting up on this discussion again, and David and you are all over me. We are human too you know. Even though we are the scum of the earth on BU and the literal “butt” of the jokes of BU posters who don’t share our view. Consider if you were in the same boat?

    You say that you would ignore those that mock and scoff. I am not sure you can Techie. How many times have I begged you to leave Zoe and Dictionary alone?

    And NO Techie It is not easy to tell the scoffers and mockers from those who have a genuine question to ask. The facts are that this is not always possible. That is why I have tended to try to practice John 2:24. LOL You can jump on that or see it in the context and my limitations.

    And I am not brilliant at all. But I have studied. Dictionary obviously is and I salute him.

    Technician I really don’t understand why you think that we should know that “qaneh bosm” was a weed used in biblical time, or that it was in fact cannabis. And honestly I would consider that trivia. If I had read it, I would have remembered it. Knowledge of that fact does not do anything of substance to advancing my scholarship in Bible or the Pharmacology of the substance. Because this herb was used in ancient times means what exactly? Ecclesiastes teaches clearly that there is nothing new under the sun! So that piece of trivia is not going to get anyone anything except it is asked on JEOPARDY or WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE!

    Get real folks! There are the essentials and the incidentals. But the truth is that I don’t know what it was.

    Re If you read the link I gave you, you would see that it ’seemed’ to be well accepted that there was/is a mistake in the translation of the word and the meaning which is now found in the Bible is not the true meaning of the word. Qaneh bosm is not just any old herb but in fact cannabis.

    So how was it used then man? For what purposes? And with what result?
    So you are engaging in techniques of exegesis and hermeneutics Techie?

    Be careful with “Everything in moderation Techie” For some moderation is very dangerous. Suppose your liver enzymes don’t become induced? Check out induction of liver enzymes online.

  27. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Anonymous // April 3, 2010 at 9:03 PM

    actually Zoe had actually given the answer i.e. oinos. An online Strong’s verified this. Zoe casts doubt that such “wine” was fermented, do you suggest re:wine skins that it possibly could be the fermented form?

    It might well have been, but like Zoe and the authors of the texts that he quoted, I dont think so. I think that the opinion of these learned men are reasonable and logical conclusions. But I wont debate that point. It is not a point of significant doctrine in the chapter or the book.

    And to be honest I have found many more pressing and interesting things to study and harp on in John 2 as well as in the whole of John. John’s gospels is filled with threads which he develops throughout the book

    See for instance Nicodemus coming at night in chap 3, emerging tentatively toward the light at the end of chapter 7, and coming right out in the open in chapter 19.

    Or the one with Jesus as the ladder began in John 1:51. I challenge you to find the other references in the book on this concept. Think how does a ladder become useful? It must be lifted up! Right?

    His use of words especially LIFE LIGHT & LIFE. and the fact that he gives not the ipsima verbae but the ipsima vox of what Jesus said. The fact that he follows each of the 8 miracles he chose to record with a disciurse by Jesus. The fact that you have to merge the synoptics into certain time lines in John for a fuller understanding of the Synoptics etc.


  28. @ GP,

    The majority of Bajans were brought up in the Anglican and Methodists churches.
    All we did was listen to sermons,pray and sing Hymns and Psalms.

    The sermons we listened to were simplified for the “average” person to understand.

    The BU Trinity is discussing religion in tone and language that is not for the average blogger on BU and is probably more suited to a forum where people truly study the Bible and search for”deeper meaning”.

    A blog is like a rum shop. People of varying levels of education and intellect have discussions and arguments.

    I hope you will continue to participate on BU.

    Sorry to hear about Tony Kinch. Condolences to his family and friends.


  29. David:

    First, I am sorry but I must endorse the complaint made by GP.

    As you know, I have long pointed out that the trtifecta fallacy — distraction, distortion, denigration and dismissal [= ref herrings + strawmen + ad hominems] — is used to destroy the circle of civility that then undemines the possibility of reasonable public discussion and onward of sound democratic decision making.

    I think by now you pretty well know that I only re-involved myself here because I was asked and significant correctives were needed. I am on my way out of here, as there are other more profitable and less nastiness-riddled things for me to do.

    When it comes to the issues I have raised on the original post and related matters, I am sorry David, this is not just a matter of differences of opinion.

    What is at stake is the difference between opinions, which everyone has, and empirically tested, reasonably well-warranted, credibly reliable bodies of theory and observation, in this case those of economics and finance. (And FYI, I am entitled to say MBA after my name, i.e. I am not just talking off the top of my head based on whatever notions I picked up over the years from whatever sources.)

    Economics is an area where in the period from about 1920 to 1990, there was a major global debate and two parallel experiments pivoting on the issues raised above. The upshot has been plain: von Mises was right, Marx and Oscar Lange et al were wrong. As a direct result of that the largest nominally communist state still in existence is now a market-driven economy, complete with the Shanghai stock exchange. Even Cuba, when i visited it as a delegate some years back now, was moving to an entrepreneurship model, to spark innovation and development.

    This in a world where there are watershed points where the tipping one way or another makes a big difference over time, and in ways that are crucially dependent on those who can spot and support high-risk opportunities that most would shy away from. Which in turn means they have to have large sums of financial capital, to spread across many potential opportunities, so that on average they win [the stock exchange on average for decades has tuned in about 8% compounded growth, after all the ups and downs are factored in], though there will be many cases where they will lose.

    FYI, the dynamics of most bureaucracies or political arenas are such that such high risk behaviour will be severely punished through the political process. basically, no one will remember when you got it right, and there will be many who will twist even success into perceived failure. Where you get it wrong in the teeth of the conventional wisdom of the time — and that is where enterprise and venture capitalisation operates; as Buffet shows — you will be rhetorically sliced, diced and baked. So, such systems tend to enforce conformity to the conventional wisdom, which in turn is usually shaped by the education bureaucracy and the dominant schools of thought in your friendly local university system. Which — for decades — has had a love affair going with Marxism,-tinged radicalism.

    For good or ill David, BU has some influence.

    It therefore has some responsibility to what is sound, even if unpopular.

    And if you doubt me on the implications of flirting with the radical ideas, just look at what happened to Jamaica BEFORE the situation deteriorated into undocumented civil war. FYI, David, in about one year we moved from US$ 150 Mn + foreign exchange reserve to something like US$ 9 mn negative, because the powers that be, enamoured of the radical socialist vision, ignored prudent macroeconomic counsel. And J’ca has gone downhill ever since, with a far more brittle economy and a gaping hole where a once vibrant entrepreneurial and investor class once was.

    Guyana is a similar story.

    I strongly recall the difference in atmosphere as I moved back and forth between J’ca and B’dos in the late 70’s and early 80’s. But now, I am hearing too much ever so familiar patterns of thought and argument that are radically disconnected from economic reality and technological transformation reality.

    All i will say, as a closing warning is:

    THINK HARD BEFORE YOU LEAP!

    And with that Dictionary signs over and out.

    Sorry, this is irrevocable; and not least, because only that will underscore the force of the points I have had to make in recent months and days and hours.

    Good day and good bye, absent a necessary — and utterly final — PS below.

    I hope the voice of reason and common sense will in the end prevail at BU and in Barbados.

    Dictionary FINIS

    [ . . . ]


  30. PS: I forgot one last remark, on cannabis [as though the use in temple anointing oil would warrant the regular smoking of same . . . a big non-sequitur for those who know the rapid, intense impact of administration of drugs by inhalation and the highly restricted use Biblical context for the temple’s anointing oil].

    Here is Wiki on Polish born anthropologist Sula Benet:

    Benet’s writings have gained modern notability for her interpretations of the herb known as kaneh-bosm or kneh-bosm mentioned in the Old Testament and how it relates to the religious use of cannabis. Kaneh-bosm is mentioned in the Old Testament as part of the holy anointing oil used in the temple and has been interpreted since King James to be calamus (an herb that is known in North American shamanism and in vedic atharva and has been discovered in modern times to contain a molecule known as asarone that is a precursor of trimethoxyamphetamine, a psychedelic). Through comparative etymology, analysis of ancient texts (including pre-Hebrew Semitic language), and pharmacological consistencies she contends that the word kaneh-bosm actually refers to cannabis and was used in ancient Jewish religious rites, as a medicine and ritual sacrament. Benet’s work is an example that cannabis use has a long culturally important history, and that the criminalization and demonization of cannabis is a recent invention (an occurrence of the previous century compared to Torah: dating back at least 3,000 years). While Benet’s conclusion regarding the psychoactive use of cannabis is not universally recognized among Jewish scholars, there is general agreement that cannabis is used in talmudic sources to refer to hemp fibers, as hemp was a vital commodity before linen replaced it.[1]

    Because of Benet’s research, it is now confirmed that cannabis appears in ancient Hebrew texts spelled with the Hebrew letters: קְנֵה-בֹשֶׂם “Kuph, Nun, Hé Bet, Shin, Mem,” translated into western alphabetic forms as ¹aneh-bosm, kaneh-bosm or kineboisin. The book of Exodus records the event of Moses receiving the instructions for making and distributing the hemp enriched holy oil, in the most auspicious tones.

    Then the Lord said to Moses, “Take the following fine spices: 500 shekels of liquid myrrh, half as much of fragrant cinnamon, 250 shekels of qaneh-bosm, 500 shekels of cassia–all according to the sanctuary shekel–and a hind of olive oil. Make these into a sacred anointing oil” (Exodus 30: 22-33). [2] [3]

    In 1980 the Hebrew University in Israel confirmed Sula Benet’s interpretation of Kaneh Bosm (kineboisin) as hemp blossoms.[4]

    However, the words ‘Kaneh bosm’ are not in the KJV or the new international version of the bible. This is because the translators from the original language determined that “Kaneh bosm” should be interpreted as “Calamus” and other similar sounding plants.

    In short, there is some reason to see that the plant was used as a component of the oil of anointing used to ordain Kings and priests — but not generally as a medicine, and BTW, protected through a stringent “patent” that made it a major crime of blasphemy to make the same oil otherwise; with the due penalties for such blasphemy attaching. (And BTW, C sativa sativa (rope making hemp) would be more likely to be found in that time and place, not C s indica, the high THC “smoking to get high” variety.) In short, this interpretation — even if correct — is not any credible warrant for general use of cannabis, especially as a recreational drug.


  31. Dictionary,

    On the US issue, pardon me asking if I am correct ‘that you see the burden of the national heathcare system as being inappropriate’, is that right, I want to comment but do not want to misunderstand your underlying cause for concern.

    Now, my own opinion is that the action i.e. the Bill, is due to years of inappropriate treatment or lack thereof of those who cannot afford much, under the current system.

    As in anything, nature abhors a vacuum and such was presented, to be filled by an administration that seeks to improve the status of the general populace i.e. the Obama administration.

    Now, I agree that the revised healthcare system will be expensive, on the face of it.

    But what is the alternative? Let the average American live as a second class citizen in their own country?

    The powers that be expect or will expect a man to die for his country, yet do not want to enable them even healthcare?

    As you know, we can only go by what we read, what is reported, unfortunately most of us do not have the funds to investigate first hand the truths and non-truths.

    But, it appears clear that many war vets who have given, literally even an arm and leg, are maltreated by those who should thank them.

    Is that civilisation?

    Even if you consider that excessively humanitarian and socialist, my question is, how can one justify multiple billions on wars, but not the alternative of healthcare?

    US being ins erious economic trouble has as much to do with fighting multiple wars simultaneously as anything else. Indeed, Clinton left the Treasury in surplus, no?

    Is that not unusual and suspect, that a mere fifteen years on, we are asking about US being in such economic trouble?

    Who gained? One may suggest that I am being ‘conspiracy minded’, but ‘res ipsa loquitor’.

    If it looks like a duck, quacks, it is invariably.. a duck.

    I am not trying to oversimplify the issue, but really sometimes when one does try to over analyse, problems also arise.

    There is no doubt in my mind that when we speak of economic trouble, while at the same time men on Wall Street are still receiving multi-million dollar bonuses, something is perverted.

    One may argue as to their ‘value’ to investors, but ten and twenty million dollars worth? Give me a break.

    Overall, the system itself is broke and to blacklist one Bill for this is not the answer.

    Maybe, the Bill will at the least, make people think of priorities.

    I am not of a specific religious denomination, but, am reminded of those who accuse Western states of being the current Babylon or Soddon and Gommorah.

    I am not so emphatic, but will say that what is sowed, is reaped. Every country has problems and if they are not faced, will eat away at society.

    They must be faced, hence the Healthcare Bill.

    That said, the issue also should consider the medical awards in the US, which make insurance so high.

    A fair award for injury or malpractice should be just that…fair.

    That is part of the issue here, that makes medical practice in the US so difficult.

    One must work with all aprties to achieve success, maybe that is an issue that is not being addressed in the overall approach.

    Have a good day.


  32. Happy Easter

    For he who have done good to the least amongst us . You have done it unto ME.


  33. Crusoe:

    I will make a final exception for you, as you have been serious.

    There were other less intrusive and economically more sustainable alternatives that were not taken up, it seems for ideological reasons. For instance simply opening up competition across state lines would have opened up possibilities and ways forward. Similarly, a basic insurance scheme that was a genuine insurance scheme would have worked.

    On social welfare, years ago Chile showed the way to move forward from a Ponzi scheme: institute a switchover from Ponzi to insurance. The rabble rousers in the US triggered a lie based panic that people would lose their present cover and killed it. The Chili case should have told them different, if they cared about the truth. This alone has the US on the road to the poorhouse, before we reckon with the many other factors doing the same.

    The US’ problem is not inadequate health care or social welfare — what happens is every system has bad cases, but what is headlined to serve someone’s agenda is a different story — but out of control government that is eating up too much of the GDP and building up un-meetable obligations, through playing the idea that we are entitled to largesse from the public purse. They do not even have Germany’s excuse in WW L: fighting a war for survival.

    But the consequences if this madness goes on much longer are going to be too frighteningly similar for comfort.

    And thigs are going tohave to crash and burn enough to get attention. I hope that it is recoverable, but I have no confidence on that.

    We in the Caribbean need to look to our long term sustainability and to resilient development. Barbados with its high pop density and intense urbanisation is especially vulnerable.

    There is enough information accessible that you all should be able to work out the rest of the story.

    Over and out — permanently.

    FINIS

    D


  34. @Crusoe

    With your permission perhaps we can engage amidst the distractions.

    If there were less intrusive and economically more sustainable alternatives as Dictionary is making out why did the Republicans not make a serious effort to legislate or even advocate?

    Is is fair that the world’s richest economy would breed a situation where so many millions are not covered by insurance?

    What does one say to a person with a pre-existing condition that you have to die because you are not covered? How about dem vets as you pointed out?

    However at the drop of a bat the same country can find the money to war. We have a country in the USA which placed border security above all else and that is the bottomline.


  35. PS: As a start, an alternative largely not taken up, and observe that a solution for 30 out of 300 mn should be incremental not replace-mental; what we have is the create a perceived crisis to make a change towards where we want to go strategy. (And AC please read context: personal charitable acts are not to be equated with Government force and bureaucracy.) But then onlookers if I try to answer to every problem I simply embroil myself in more and more of what is the duty of those on the other side of the exchanges to research before asserting confidently on. Just note that they have had nothing to say to the root issue of a trend to vote largesse that ends up breaking the society economically. This, they need to show serious signs that they are facing seriously. And this is precisely what they refuse to face, so that we do not see the implications that for every alternative taken up, something is necessarily foregone in a world of finite resources and rival opportunities, so we had better make sure we are not taking up what is worse rather than better.


  36. @David

    War benefits The Indusrial MilitaryComplex Financially.
    Heath insurance Bill does not sit well with the big Insurance Industry because they are on the losing end.It is all about Big Business in America.


  37. David

    You may debate with me in absentia to your heart’s content. I cannot correct every item of misinformation or half of a story, especially since it is clear I am not welcome.

    And here is the text of an alternative that is a start to that. There is much more out there, but most of it would not make it to CNN or BBC etc.

    All along the line, remember the overarching issue: the USA is long since bankrupt and is refusing to face reality.

    Our challenge is to learn lessons from how they failed, and to find a resilient alternative for when — not if — they crash and burn. Maybe — I hope not — within this upcoming decade.

    For that, we need to start thinking and working right now, especially Barbados.

    Goodbye

    D


  38. @Dictionary

    If that is what you believe so be it.

    It is a strange world when our people cannot disagree and still shake on it.


  39. It is clear that Dictionary actually harbours disbelief (or profound scepticism) in his claimed religious views.

    Why should any West Indian care how the USA resolves its health care concerns? Why should any Christian be so alarmed at economic developments in the USA or anywhere else for that matter? Empires have risen and fallen before, is God’s plan not unfolding? Shouldn’t a Christian’s only concern be that of spreading the Gospel (or is it the gospel of capitalism and the “free” market) and getting themselves ready for His inevitable return? Can any warnings (MBA certified or not) stop what has been prophetically indicated shall happen ? Was the Great Commission to go and defend one human designed economic arrangement (the free market) against another (centralised planning and control)? Are the Christians living in Cuba or China or North Korea somehow less in the eyes of God than those Christians living in the USA, Canada or Montserrat?

    “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money” – Mathew 6:24

  40. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Today is Easter Sunday, and as we celebrate we might no doubt hear read the account in Mark 16 of the three women who set off in the early morning to anoint the supposedly dead body of the Lord in burial as was the Jewish custom.

    As they walked from Bethany to the garden tomb, they began to talk and as they talked they realized they left something out of the planning stage:
    Mark 16:3
    And they said among themselves, Who shall roll away the stone from the door of the sepulcher?
    Note that they questioned in v 3: Who will roll away the stone?
    In verse 3, “they asked” is APO + KULIW – to roll away.

    Now read verse 4!
    Mark 16:4
    And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
    In verse 4, a different greek word is used. And there is nothing to tell us this by reading the translation in English of the KJV or the NASB or the NIV etc
    In stead of APO + KULIW as in verse 3 we now have in verse 4
    ANA + KULIW, which means to do more than just roll it away, but also to roll it up, completely out of the way, out of its track or guide.
    This is the beauty of word studies. Martin Luther called it looking under every leaf. He obviously studied and searched the Scriptures! And he did this before he challenged the RC church of his day!

    The significance of this is that this large stone could not be replaced by anything less than an army of men. If it had been merely rolled aside, the Roman guards could have quickly rolled it back in its track and had the imperial seal replaced and kept quiet about what had occurred. But the stone was moved away from the front of the tomb, and the guards took off.

    Zoe could you kindly comment on the three different words used to translate the word SAW in John 20?

    Im off to sit and listen to some intelligent presentations of the Word- rightly divided.

  41. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Hants
    I know that the majority of Bajans were brought up in the Anglican and Methodists churches and that all we did was listen to sermons,pray and sing Hymns and Psalms. I know as I was an anglican of the anglicans and designated to become a priest therein!

    I disagree that they were sermons delivered because sermon delivery involves both hermeneutics and homiletics. And there was little of these if any. The talks were quite boring actually.

    The BU Trinity is discussing religion in tone and language that ought to be understood to some extent by the the average Bajan with his 98% literay rate.

    I stress too Sir that folk in Bdos in little groups and churches dotted all over the island are indeed truly studying the Bible and searching for”deeper meaning”.

    I am sorry but I have never had the rum shop experience. I dont drink rum. Never have.

    People of varying levels of education and intellect have discussions and arguments on BU too, but some instead of trying to learn, want to scoff and mock those who actually are sincerely seeking to share something of substance.

    For instance yesterday some were questioning Dictionary’s very accurate note on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics about psychtrophic agents, when his remarks were as sound as a bell.

    Similarly one persisted in trying to state that we were spinning the fact that 8 words are translated wine in the Bible, and that a different phrase is used to describe the contents of the cup at the institution of the Lords Supper.


  42. @GP

    Truly amazing is all we can muster. Hants can correct if we interpreted his rumshop analogy incorrectly. Others have pointed out BU is a forum where people from all walks of life contribute from all corners of the globe. Some maybe deemed ignorant and others part of the intelligent class. The point about rumshop is to illustrate that BU attract opinions and comments often time they escape the rigour of peer review in the same way an academic journal would encourage.

    BU will take this opportunity to reiterate that ALL opinions and comments are welcome on BU. What the clashes from time to time manifested on BU show is that we are human being with imperfections. Who said life is perfect? The intelligent thing to do we would have thought is to work to find common ground. No wonder in the Gaza peace remains elusive. The folly of man being the recurring theme.

    It is the biggest irony of all that those who label themselves Christian are the ones to walk away. There is a learning there some where to be had.


  43. Dictionary WILL be back!!!

    I bet my pension on it!

    What the Christians fail to see is that they have created a better than us attitude in the world where they are the righteous and non believers are not.
    They are supposed to set the example and them lead by it, yet still they become angry and vicious when mocked and scoffed.
    Is this not the expectations described to them in prophecy?
    They claim to be brilliant and boast of being lettered but what good is all this when you lack the basics?
    As David has shown (with their help) at the end of the day, we are all human, with the traits of mere mortal men.
    Let them go if they want to David, that is their choice, let Dictionary brag about his civil blog with 87 comments (albeit between him and Pixie, what a discussion) where he ducked the questions and then ended the discussion ROFLMAO!!
    If the heat is so much unbearable for them on this blog, one has to wonder how they function in the REAL world.

  44. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    David,

    Was the Bush Tea who supports the legalization of marijuana the same one who, on the Movado/Vybz Kartel issue said this:

    “Is Jeff suggesting that as a responsible household LEADER, Bush Tea should discard his concerns and be more liberal? that only when some young delinquent drug pusher manages to corrupt one of my family members am I justified in ‘bringing the law’ to deal with the matter….?”

    Or this…

    “occasionally, it may be necessary to ‘inflict’ ground rules, curfews, dress codes and yes…… bans!!! in the long term interest of the family

    One can never be too sure on an anonymous blog 🙂

  45. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    BT,

    The negative consequences of recreational marijuana use are well documented in clinical literature and should be guarded against.

    I disagree with your assertion that marijuana use is only harmful to the individual… the societal costs of drug abuse, particularly in a social democracy like ours, are quite significant (by the way, what seat belt laws what!?! The two issues are as similar as chalk and cheese). The costs associated with law enforcement and the subculture that exists as a result of prohibition, pale in comparison to what we would face if marijuana was legalized and regulated. The first thing we could expect to see after legalization, is a substantial increase in its consumption… particularly among our youth… just examine our track record at keeping alcohol and tobacco out of the hands of youth.

    On the issue of alcohol prohibition in the US, a few things should be noted before rushing to use it in defense of marijuana legalization:

    a) During the prohibition alcohol related arrests decreased by 50%, suicide rates decreased by 50%, cirrhosis of the liver decreased by 35% and admissions to psychiatric hospitals for alcohol psychosis fell by 53%. (BT, you should exclude Al Capone and Eliot Ness Hollywood movies from your literature review). LOL

    b) Prohibition did not end because of an escalation in crime. It ended because it lacked the moral consensus of US citizens (and the international community for that matter).

    BT, your arguments, taken to their logical conclusion, could also be used in support of the legalization of cocaine, crack, heroin, ecstasy etc. Is this your position on these drugs also?

    For the others who drew comparisons with alcohol and tobacco use, you should bear in mind that these are legal and consequently used in significantly greater quantities by more people (adults and minors) than illegal drugs. Used in similar quantities, illegal drugs like marijuana would result in much higher social and health costs. A more rational approach therefore, would be to keep illegal drugs illegal and discourage the abuse of legal drugs through public education and efficient regulation.


  46. @MME

    BU is very reluctant to enter the fray here. Both of you have demonstrated the capacity to debate without a referee 🙂


  47. MME,
    good points and as always most informative with an enviable economy of words.

    I will repeat myself:

    “Health education and social transformation strategies should be the primary response in all cases although some drugs are so potent and dangerous that prohibition probably would have to be enforced”.

    From the vantage point of the window of my “front house”, I believe very strongly that in many St.Michael communities marijuana consumption is pervasive. I do not dispute or underestimate the possible harmful effects described in the medical literature cited but these are not readily evident to most users of marijuana. However the illegal status of marijuana and the attendant police responses has caused an underworld economy and culture to be established which affects me (a non user). This subculture is buttressed by popular music, film and literature.Thus I think marijuana enjoys the same lack of moral consensus that existed for alcohol in the USA during prohibition as you have pointed out.

    I believe that the time has come to decriminalise marijuana (a distinction from legalisation and so I do NOT agree with California’s intention to get taxes from its sale which implies encouragement of its use) and to aggressively pursue health education and social transformation strategies to combat use. The assumption that usage will increase while not unreasonable, I do not think a critical issue given the present pervasiveness of the drug in some communities. As I have already indicated, prohibition will probably have to remain for other “hard” drugs.


  48. @Georgie Porgie,

    I have been in Rumshops but I don’t drink rum. I drink Scotch.lol

    While we recognise your outstanding achievements in Medecine and religious studies, most of us are not likely to spend the time to follow the BU Trinity”s
    “searching for”deeper meaning”.

    David understands the point I am trying to make.Some of us do
    not have University educations and it appears that most of us are not
    religious zealots.(I use the term zealot loosely to describe your passionate
    devotion to religion}.

    Some of us are comfortable in almost any “environment”.
    I get the feeling that you are “different” and I am not likely
    to meet you in a Rumshop or on the beach where I “chill”
    with my fisherman friends.

    I hope you will continue to join is on BU which is still primarily
    a forum for Bajans and friends to discuss all things Bajan and
    other topics of interest.


  49. Dictionary ‘so that we do not see the implications that for every alternative taken up, something is necessarily foregone in a world of finite resources and rival opportunities, so we had better make sure we are not taking up what is worse rather than better’,

    I fully understand that and agree, a poster ‘Anonymous’ above asked why Dicitonary is concerned what the US does, but ‘D’ rightfully asserts that we shall be affected.

    I agree. Indeed, ‘D’ ‘s calls for economic and social sustainability are right.

    That and that alone should be the conclusion, point taken.

    However, and apologies, on backtracking to the cause, surely the ‘alternatives’, which I do not deny could be available, but as someone asked why then did the ‘Republicans’ not push for those?

    The answer lies, I think, in the raison d’etre of the Republicans vs the Democrats.

    The former have not a care of the man-in-the-street. Thus, why even consider alternatves? From this, the Democrats are then pushed into a corner, of railroading through the change that is needed, even if it has repercussions.

    Reality to justify such railroading is that, as David says, the US can find monies for war in an instant, but not healthcare?

    Instantly, all sympathy as to alternatives is lost in analysis of the scenario, no?

    If one is given the time and consideration to present a case and full alternative analysis, together with the support of various states, to implement alternatives, that is one thing. But, to have limited time i.e. only a guaranteed term, what does one do, but push it through?

    Am I wrong in saying that alternatives involving state legislation will also invlove much more bargaining and time than Federal Legislation?

    Maybe then, we are looking at the ‘best available’ alternative, given the limitations of politics and the peculiarities of the US, in implementaing effective legislation?

    Dictionary also said something interesting on the bankruptcy of the US.

    Point taken, but while another weight on the back of the donkey may break it, I do not think that the Healthcare alone is to blame nor the worst of the weights.

    While I fully understand the economic approach in assessing the scenario, the problem is that neither the cause nor solution can be purely economic, especially considering the politicsl play involved, including political humbugs i.e. those behind the scenes thwarting moves towards and improved society i.e. right wing.

    Surely a complex issue, that is not solved easily.

    But, to reiterate, ‘D’ message of our own sustainability is clearly our best and safest approach. We cannot lose by that, however the winds blow.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading