The fruit a tree bares

[HydrogenBond]

The is an old saying, that a tree can be judged by the fruit it bares. It may be hard to tell a peach and plum tree apart until they bare fruit. Then one can tell which is which. The question is, based on the fruit of the Democratic and Republican parties lines or trees, which of two better reflects the fruit that suggest equality?

 

If we work under the assumption that all races, sexes, etc are equal, then logic would imply nothing needs to be done to assure equality since everyone is already equal. An analogy are two people playing golf. If we say they are equal they both start with the exact same handicap. If we give one a 10 handicap, then they were not equal. In the second case, the tree or lip service may says equal, but the fruit of that tree, i.e.,handicap, suggests they are not equal. Based on that, the Democrats talk a party tree that looks like an equality tree, but it bares fruit that suggest they believe the various groups are not equal. The Republicans have a tree that talks like an inequality tree, but their actions are in line with the fruit of equality. The mistake often made is to look at the tree instead of the fruit it bares. This allows one to mistake the peach for the plum tree and vice versa.

[Racoon]

I disagree that all people are equal (created equal). They're not.

 

But rather everyone should be treated as equal under civilized law; and in a perfect world.

 

As far as it being a Democratic vs. Republican tree, what do you prefer?

 

A tax and spend Dem?

or a borrow and spend Repub?

[freeztar]

The is an old saying, that a tree can be judged by the fruit it bares. It may be hard to tell a peach and plum tree apart until they bare fruit.

 

For someone that cannot distinguish between a peach tree and a plum tree, then yes, it would be a matter of waiting for the fruit. :naughty:

[HydrogenBond]

I am an independent. Both parties have some good points. I look at the two parties as analogous to husband and wife. The republican husband likes to earn money, wants to secure the family's house (country), tries to be practical with large debt purchases, and expects the children to leave the nest. The democratic mother likes to spend the couple's account, so she can stays up with the latest fads. The inequality fruit is mother spoiling the children so they will stay dependent. Dad wants them to get a job. But mother would be feel lonely without her children around her. Dad is a little too strict, while mother is a little more liberal but nevertheless, likes to stick her nose in the affairs of her children so she can manage their lives. Somehow this couple seems to work things out, although there are always fighting.

[freeztar]

Well, as you are an independent, I would be hoping for an analogy more along the lines of a threesome. :naughty:

 

I personally think that this American "bi-partisan culture" needs to quickly erode and be replaced by a "value-oriented culture". I believe that bipartisanship culture is a continuing relic of the past and should allow for more room than a stifling, and pigeon-holed, two-party system.

[paigetheoracle]

Tree bares? The question should be who's been eating my porridge.

[nutronjon]

I think a common error is being made here. That is to interpret the word "equal" as meaning the same. We are no more that same than the Gods and Goddesses, each one having his/her own specialty. Democracy is an imitation of these Gods.

 

The ancient Greek philosophers asked, how do the immortals resolve their differences. The answer was, reason, is the controlling force of the universe. That is, they imagined the gods arguing until there was a consensus on the best reasoning. Even the gods themselves are subject to the laws of reason, as each one of us are subject to the laws of reason. Cicero said, laws that are not compliant with the laws of nature, are tyranny, not real laws. All our learned forefathers studied Cicero, a Roman stateman who tried to save the Republic of Rome and wrote many books. He studiesd in Athens, so the foundation of our democracy beings in Athens, and is tied to the laws of nature.

 

In golf it is assumed golfers come to the game with different skill levels and it is reasoned handicapping the most skilled golfer, gives all a more equal chance to win the game. Please, note, what is important here is not winning, but the spirit of the game and the relationship of the players. This is to be a social activity nor win or loose warfare. Handicapping some players is to make the game more congenial, rather than a competition, like when I play Scrabble with those of lesser skill, I use my skill to place my words where they will open the board up for other players, rather than trying to get the highest score. When Srabble players are playing for the highest points, they can quickly close up the board and leave no room for building new words. That is strong competition can ruin the game. Opening the board for others, may cost me the game, but it is a much better game when there are many places to build new words. Democracy is about having a good game for everyone. It is about bringing heaven to earth, with secular morality built on understanding the laws of nature.

 

Democracy is an ideology of relationships that is no longer understood, and this failure to understand our democracy is making our lives hell on earth, rather than the heaven on earth that people like Jefferson thought democracy would manifest. The fruit on this tree has been diseased, and it may be time to cut it down.