Trump: U.S. to withdraw from Paris climate pact, calls it 'unfair' for America

You can't be serious, that that is what you get, from what I posted.

Bottom Line ~ it is always a good thing when the Liberty of America and Americans is preserved!

 

Sounds like base selfishness to me; there are people other than Americans in the world you know.

 

"other people in the world" ? Well, not exactly a newsflash, or even a subject challenged or disputed.

While I can be and am fully aware of "other" people in the world, so what?
What is MY adherence to Scriptural duty to "them"?

To KNOW WHERE "others" are, as the LORD challenged Abel?
To KNOW WHERE "non-Americans" are, as the US Government is "charged" with KNOWING, particularly, NON-Americans, WITHIN the US, but have FAILED miserably?

Gen 4
[9] And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

What else?

To TAKE CARE OF MY OWN FAMILY? And to NOT do so, is revealed in Scripture how God views such non-adherence.

1Tim.5

1. [8] But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

What else?


What is your basis for calling me selfish, because I look out for ME FIRST?

 

Phil 3:20 for starters. As Christians we have a duty to move beyond narrow nationalisms and heed the Lord's call to love our neighbours (including the Samaritans!) as ourselves. As He says in the Sermon on the Mount, even the pagans love those who are theirs. We are called to go further to avoid that selfishness; indeed, that is an essential tenet of our faith.

And, um, to answer your question, putting "me first" is pretty much the definition of selfishness.

 

Love thy neighbor. Who is disputing that? I didn't.

Do you suppose to LOVE thy neighbor means to FORCE one people to GIVE to others?

And more specifically .... GIVE financial support to others hypothetical theories?

Because as YOU seemingly support the US being compelled to put in the pot for ONE group of people's VIEW of the climate,
even though, not ALL people agree with that view, but yet, the US must first FORCE her People to be financially Burdened with PAYING FOR "that view" and "effects" that view prescribes is the "remedy" to institute.

Additionally, NOT only is America been in compliance of supporting that VIEW, (financially), which ONLY is such finances available, when the US must FORCE the American to PAY for it........BUT America has put putting in the pot, MORE THAN the "agreed" amount.....thus TAKING by FORCE from the American People .... more than the "agreed" amount.....AND other countries WHO ALSO agreed to put in the pot, a specific amount......HAVE NOT DONE SO.

Germany - DID NOT, Has not, put in the pot....their pledged amount...
China - DID NOT, Has not contributed to the pot .... their pledge amount...

So, by that respect, I completely agree with Trump, it is slanted, and UNFAIR to the US and her citizens!

That is your opinion and NOT what defines "selfish".

selfish
(of a person, action, or motive) lacking consideration for others; concerned chiefly with one's own personal profit or pleasure.

I said ME FIRST.....America FIRST. I said nothing whatsoever about lacking consideration for others, or profit, or pleasure!

And FYI ~ study scripture. God is always FIRST in ALL things.
So do you apply your same opinion to God, that He is "selfish" ?

 

Presumably by the same token, then, you are against people being compelled to pay tax for defence and law enforcement, particularly when those benefit more people other than themselves?

Oh and, BTW, I study Scripture daily, and that leads me to the conclusion that we are called to love sacrificially, and that 'me first' is the antithesis of that. Yes, it is selfish and one of the firstfruits of the Fall. As Christians, we need to rise above that and obey the teachings of Him Whom we purport to follow.

 

SLAM DUNK!!!!!!

 

IF you understand the Constitution, which IS the Limiting Document by which the Servants of the Government are restricted, and pledge to adhere to such restriction; you would find the FEW things that the Government is authorized TO DO.

The Government Servants ARE authorized to collect taxes from the People, according to the rules and manner as the Constitution dictates, for the purpose of certain things, that APPLIES to the Benefit of the WHOLE of the People. Defense is one of those particular things that benefits the WHOLE of the People, in preservation of the People's Liberty.

Law enforcement? Law "enforcement" is effected by and through, specific Jurisdictional LAW enforcement "agencies", in order to provide Due Process of Law. It is the States jurisdiction to provide the Laws that affect "their" jurisdiction, which all States, legislate to create a tax for such departments.

So, no, wrong again on your assumption. Defense is specifically a US Constitutional allowed tax. And States have their own jurisdictional authority to create agencies / departments / laws / regulations; to lay and collect taxes for purposes their own States Constitution Authorizes.

sacrifice ~

noun: sacrifice;

1. 
   an act of slaughtering an animal or person or surrendering a possession as an offering to God or to a divine or supernatural figure

verb: sacrifice;

1. offer or kill as a religious sacrifice.

Not sure how you arrive at the term "love sacrificially".

Personally, the Scripture simply teaches me to LOVE the LORD "above" all other things and to Love every person. PERIOD.

I don't give up or sacrifice ANYTHING to LOVE another, as you have "coined" the phrase for yourself to "love sacrificially", to which I do not find any such thing taught in scripture.

No it isn't. I noticed you did not answer the fact that God is FIRST and teaches He is FIRST in ALL all things, IF you also put Him in the same category of selfish.

You have decided a person who puts themselves FIRST, IS "selfish".

I disagree with you.
The definition of selfish disagrees with you.
God's own position He teaches of Himself disagrees with you.

And it appears you don't comprehend WHY there is disagreement with you.

Firstly, the disagreeing with you concerns.....LOVE has no "conditions".

LOVE ~
an intense feeling of deep affection.

It is mankind, such as yourself who has put a "condition" on the term LOVE, by claiming LOVE requires a "sacrifice".
It doesn't!

Secondly, NOTHING whatsoever, implied or precluded, AFTER taking care of oneself FIRST, means, IGNORING all others, which would be SELFISH, but that NOTHING whatsoever was implied or claimed that was the case.

Thirdly, Gods teaching, REVEALS KNOWLEDGE, to which No one, is FORCED to believe it, trust it or rely on it.

I have ZERO obligation to be FORCED to believe, trust or rely on hypothetical, theoretical information from Scientists, you, or anyone else.

I further have been GIVEN my Liberty to CHOOSE my own beliefs, on any subject, via MY creator, who IS the Lord God Almighty, AND further have been GIVEN notice the US Government recognizes MY God given Liberty to Choose my own beliefs, on ANY subject.

You can dictate ALL DAY LONG, what YOU think I should believe, think, do, support, finance, agree with....and it means NOTHING to me. You do not have Dictatorial Authority over me. You can call me names all day long ~ while touting yourself a studied Christian, and it only reflects on YOU, not me.

You can announce ALL day long, YOU think it a good idea to financially support a hypothetical scientific theory, financially support feeding people who will not feed themselves, or provide housing for the homeless....

No one IS STOPPING YOU, from financially supporting theoretical science ( of what "might" happen), or feeding those who do not themselves, provide housing for the homeless.......or whatever YOU THINK should be financially supported....
go do it. But stop offering MY finances as a good idea to be FORCED to be paid to the CAUSES YOU "choose" to support.

Because get real.....What IF I supported chopping the hand off every thief.....and you didn't support such a thing. Would you, without disagreement, be JOYFUL that I was promoting the GOVERNMENT TAX (force) you to financially PAY for MY IDEA?

You need to assess, what you are told to do, and not add to it your own additions, then pretend you have the authority to dictate that to others your version, and couple that with your assessment of those who ignore what YOU CLAIM, as being further, what you judge them, as being "selfish".

Aside from what Scripture teaches....your teaching doesn't even make common sense.
A man who does not take care of himself FIRST...financially, his family, his home, his food supply, his health, his whatever...
.....is the man you would seek to aid you?

ya right! no!

 

"Love sacrificially" = "greater love has no man than he lay down his life for his friends". Jesus (not your Constitution or mine BTW), Whom we are called to emulate goes further in that He died for us whilst we were not yet His friends.

I see that you agree that taxation is ok if it benefits everyone. You presumably therefore agree with me then that education, healthcare and a well-stewarded environment are all such public goods which should be funded by taxation; a healthy, well-educated workforce and society living in a healthy non-polluted environment being beneficial for all. I am therefore at a loss, based on your own reasoning, to understand your stated stance as being (a) beneficial and (b) Christian

 

You have decided your own terminology of what Love is.
Still, I disagree with you. For all the reasons I have told you.


Jesus teaches a man has no "greater" love, (not sacrifice), than a man WHO lays down his life FOR, his "friends".
Then Jesus teaches WHO "ARE" His friends.

Technically. NOT everyone, but specifically every American, yes.

No, I would not give a general agreement with you on such things.
First of all I do not trust you are well versed in legal jurisdictional understanding, so your ideas could be based on anything, subject to whatever you are thinking.

The Federation (ie the Central Government), you may call the Federal Government has no Constitutional Authority over the education of private citizens. Over, teaching, educating, their employees, yes, the military under their command, yes, authority over foreigners residing in the US, yes.

Education is a individual States right to conduct educational programs; and most States, for the most part have devised their own laws regarding education that the people of said States agreed is satisfactory, and the means of who will pay for the operation of said education, and by what means it will be paid.

Health-care of the Government's ward? Yes. Private citizens? No.

well-stewarded environment? Government encouraged, promoted? Yes. Required, in some respects Yes. Carte blanch for all private citizens? No.

Sure, that would be ideal. However, Laws do not make people well educated, or healthy, or the environment not polluted.
And well educate and healthy and non-polluted would require a STANDARD of what that means. AND? How does everyone benefit IF all do not agree on the STANDARD?

Well educated in what? Needle-point?, Growing plants?, Arts & crafts?, Mechanics?, public schools books written by Liberals? The government who dictates a "certificate" certifying the person has obtained passing grades to be warranted the certificate? (When the bulk of such students have admittedly cheated)

Academic Integrity in High School:
The Josephson Institute Center for Youth Ethics surveyed 43,000 high school students in public and private schools and found that:

• 59% of high school students admitted cheating on a test during the last year. 34% self-reported doing it more than two times.
• One out of three high school students admitted that they used the Internet to plagiarize an assignment

For more survey results from the “2010 Report Card on the Ethics of American Youth,” see http://charactercounts.org/programs/reportcard/2010/installment02_report-card_honesty-integrity.html

In a survey of 24,000 students at 70 high schools, Donald McCabe (Rutgers University) found that 64 percent of students admitted to cheating on a test, 58 percent admitted to plagiarism and 95 percent said they participated in some form of cheating, whether it was on a test, plagiarism or copying homework.

Donald McCabe | Rutgers Business School

86 percent of college students say they've cheated. It's easier than ever with mobile devices
86 percent of college students say they've cheated. It's easier than ever with mobile devices

Healthy according to what? People who put food in their body that DOES NOT fulfill the body's nourishment, of vitamins and minerals needs? And then become ill or diseased and then are prescribed chemical compounds that band-aid their ills and reek havoc on other parts of their body? And the public at large forced to pay for their "pseudo" fix?

Your loss is your lack of understanding. Educated, Healthy, non-polluted environment all "sounds" ideal.

You fall for the utopia pipe dream....to give the government money....they will make laws, requirements, programs, for good things, and you never investigate IF it is their authority to do so, or IF their "blah blah" is successful or on the up and up.

ooooh rah....your children, (if you have any) are in public schools, are most likely being taught by a cheater! WHO cheated because they do not know, WHAT you are depending on them to "teach" your children! LOL....money well spent, eh?

And healthcare, oooooh rah....foreign imported foods (grown on rested land or depleted of vitamins and minerals?) picked before it is ripe, and rotting by the time you get it home from the store? People stuffing themselves with junk food, then you think it a good idea, I should be financially responsible for the result of their choices? No thanks, YOU provide for them, by imposing yourself on them. I give to others as God commands, according to Scripture.

The environment, ooooh rah...the "government" keeps you safe from pollution...right? LOL Laws do not keep you safe.
And precisely why, WHEN factories keep polluting, they simply pay a penalty. So, the government collecting penalties, must therefore keep you safe, right?

 

So let's abolish laws then! Let's be anarchic. The law against murder doesn't stop murder so let's just make murder legal.

That's the 'reasoning' you've put forward up there. It's ludicrous.

 

Now the globalists will have to try to figure that into their redistribution of wealth schemes.

Or will they consider it too much trouble and just set about discrediting it or lying about what it means?

Oh, what to do? Oh, what to do?

 

Four of the top five coal companies have declared bankruptcy including Peabody Coal. Did you have a lot of money in them? If you did you lost a huge amount. I just retired after a 40 year career as an engineer with an MS in Engineering. What do you know about new technologies? probably NOTHING but you still claim to be an expert like Trump himself.

 

Source of your data? Four out the five largest coal companies in the U.S. went bankrupt including Peabody Coal, the largest. I assume you were heavily invested in them? Then you took a bath.

 

Peabody Chapter 11 tops string of U.S. coal bankruptcies
Peabody Chapter 11 tops string of U.S. coal bankruptcies

 

Where, exactly, in the U.S. budget did this little $1 billion line-item expenditure come from?

 

Sea Level Rise: Risk and Resilience in Coastal Cities
The current best estimates predict that sea level will rise up to 6.6 feet, or 2 meters, by the year 2100. Until recent years, this figure was viewed as pessimistic, with a rise of 3 feet considered more likely. Recent studies raise the concern that the 6.6-foot estimate is actually the more probable one with “business as usual” carbon emissions. Earlier work accounted for glacial and Arctic melt, but had greater uncertainty about the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. The new research, developed in the last three years, modeled that the West Antarctic sheet would be undermined by warmed seawater, accelerating its decline. The study also found that adhering to the agreements in the Paris climate summit of 2015, and thereby keeping the mean global temperature increase under 2°C, would lessen the melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. Nonetheless, even in this optimistic case, some sea level rise will continue to occur due to current greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere and the attendant warming.

Sea Level Rise: Risk and Resilience in Coastal Cities

 

2016 was the year solar panels finally became cheaper than fossil fuels. Just wait for 2017

Solar and wind is now the same price or cheaper than new fossil fuel capacity in more than 30 countries, the WEF reported in December (pdf). As prices for solar and wind power continue their precipitous fall, two-thirds of all nations will reach the point known as “grid parity” within a few years, even without subsidies. “Renewable energy has reached a tipping point,” Michael Drexler, who leads infrastructure and development investing at the WEF, said in a statement. “It is not only a commercially viable option, but an outright compelling investment opportunity with long-term, stable, inflation-protected returns.”

In 2016, solar-panel energy finally became cheaper than fossil fuels. Just wait for 2017.