“We pass the word around; we ponder how the case is put by different people; we read the poetry; we meditate over the literature; we play the music; we change our minds; we reach an understanding. Society evolves this way, not by shouting each other down, but by the unique capacity of unique, individual human beings to comprehend each other.”

This quote speaks eloquently to the human capacity for growth through mutual understanding.

(-; I like it ;-) Now, if the patrons of the statist theocracy that now infests this land would convert, we could reach understandings in this way.

We should all keep this in mind when we tend to shout down our opponents.

Society devolves that way. Society evolves when good men are productive.

Mike gives it five stars and then contradicts it. Mike the gentleman said that we do in fact evolve in this way, and if we are a "statist theocracy" (a phrase to which I don't subscribe) as you say that we are, we have evolved that way by the aforementioned process. So my friend our unique capacities to comprehend each other have led to where we are at. Now will things continue to change of course. Should we cling to stupid repeated phrases like "statist theocracy" which does nothing to advance comprehension, of course not!

I am currently reading a book titled " The Liberal Mind,The Psychological Causes of Political Madness". This is done in an effort to try and see what goes on inside the liberal skull and why. By the way Waff , I believe Mike gave it four stars, not five.

This is a great sentiment. Sadly though we have never been more divided nor more prone to violence against a government hell bent on enslavement. Well I shouldn't say "never"...1776 comes to mind.

Thanks Jim for keen eye and attention.

The quote is not complete. It is not just to comprehend each other, we must also be willing to work together to reach consensus. Read the book by David Barton titled, "Original Intent, The Courts, the Constitution, and Religion." The Founders are the shining example of how society evolves.

Carol, David Barton has put out a lot of good things over the years Your source is a good read.

Carol, Why would we need to reach consensus? Consensus on what? Why?I like a pluralistic society. Consensus would imply to me a static society, like China and India. Intent is something the Born again Righties like to hang over the heads of everyone else that America was intended to be Christian, and that Muslims cannot be tolerated in particular. What was intended is really never to be known from the era of the founders, and can only be implied. Although I have not read the book, mixing Religion in this slurry sounds pretty dark ages to me. Not sure that America's evolution has been ideal given the slave labor that it took to settle it after it was stolen from the American Natives. WE are a country bent on violence, and cannot seem to disconnect from it. There is a wide diversity of opinion in the comprehension of whether we have been a model or not. The current direction is surely not enviable. The courts are corrupt almost through and through. When it started is likely at the start. Money and power always influenced the courts, just as the Supremes have made such edict.

This nation was called a Christian nation, not because there were any Christians here but, because it was to be a nation of laws discoverable through Judeo - Christian history and writings and the teachings of Jesus the Christ. That body of States united was to be limited to those laws that were uniquely secular, and addressed only life, liberty, and property that was beyond intrastate affairs. A strong democratic (anti-republicanism; the country being a majority of professing Christians) thread of philosophy did take over the original intent. By way of example: No free government now exists in the world unless where Christianity is acknowledged and is the religion of the country.■ Updegraph vs. Commonwealth PA 1824 - all State religions, establishments of religion, had expired by 1820) The original Christian intent was the Divine right of the sovereign - that being each and every individual was equal as heirs to the Patriarch and King of the Universe. Each and every individual was sovereign, king / queen, Caesar and equal before the law with the government being servant not master (no compelled compliance, license, victimless crimes, or larceny with impunity). Religionists and other related despotic power mongers hijacked and redefined the concept. The subject of slavery and intolerable abuse of the Native Americans were to be legislatively done away. It was by power mongering prejudicial men that the government of law was replaced and the atrocities occurred (are occurring with greater heinous regularity) as a result thereof. If the States united returned to a Christian nation, as was originally intended, Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims, etc. would be beating down the door to get in and those here, would welcome them. I can't see that happening. The statist theocracy's socialism is too entrenched in the hearts of the many, everyone wanting power over everyone else (only Americans being children of God with inalienable rights - even at that, why isn't the de facto President tried for first degree murder after having Americans assassinated without trial here and abroad). The teachings of Christ are replaced by violence, wars, anger, and despotic dominance.

Very interesting Mike. Thank you. Sometimes I feel like I am in over my head with this comment group. Most of you sound like history professors or religious philosophers.

Judith, pretty funny. A lot of this stuff I've had to prepare for court over the years as back ground support. Some times I had to get real cleaver to show a true history so I could defend myself. I had to be 100 times more prepared and understand the subject matter better than the prosecutors to have any chance. Its all over with now though, the courts have become so corrupt that only the debase judges prejudice is acceptable on any given day Its really sad that so much of what is called Christianity has been reduced to social clubs where people gather in the name of a dead prophet and then justify making up their own by-laws, prejudices, and philosophies of might making right. By the way, I've loved all your references.

Thank you Mike. Sometimes I feel frustrated with some comments that use labels that ridicule liberals, progressives, etc. It divides people and no one is all one or any of the other, I believe it depends on the issue. You are right about the courts, as I have had some shocking experiences in the court room during political persecutions and trying to seek justice. Attorneys will not take cases anymore if they believe it will alienate them to the court in the future, even if it has merit. "If I take your case, I will never be able to win a case in the future." One attorney said that the prosecutor was trying a case that was fully manipulated, no cause, being set up because he liked his job and had to do what the mayor and city council told him to do. I learn a lot from your comments and of course the others too. Whether I write or not I usually read all the quotes and comments. Many stimulating conversations here. Not many places where one can find something mentally stimulating that I have access to, so thanks. :)