World Views

[Amigoo]

Morning meditation ...
"More common in post-conflict or reconciliation settings" suggests that major countries
have not yet had enough conflict to desire a Department of Peace.


Q: Administrative commentary that the U.S. Department of Defense
might be renamed to Department of War suggests a trio of Departments:
Department of War, Department of Defense, Department of Peace.

Do any countries have a Department of Peace?

(Perplexity) "Some countries do operate government bodies that are formally called a Ministry of Peace,
which is functionally similar to a "Department of Peace." Examples include Costa Rica, Nepal, the Solomon Islands,
and Papua New Guinea. In addition, South Sudan, the Philippines, and Kyrgyzstan have established Offices of Peace
or comparable structures at the highest level of government, though the exact naming and status may differ.

Countries with a Ministry or Department of Peace

Costa Rica: Recognized for its long-standing commitment to peace, Costa Rica maintains a Ministry of Justice and Peace,
reflecting its demilitarized status and focus on peaceful conflict resolution.

Nepal: Nepal’s Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction was established after the country’s civil conflict
to support peace processes and national reconciliation.

Solomon Islands & Papua New Guinea: These countries have formalized peace ministries as part
of their post-conflict governance structures.

South Sudan, Philippines, Kyrgyzstan: These countries have developed Offices of Peace or similar agencies
at the uppermost levels of government, oriented toward national reconciliation and peacebuilding.
International Context

While no major Western country possesses a formal "Department of Peace," the United Nations operates entities with similar purposes,
such as the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and the Department of Peace Operations, both of which play important roles
in peacemaking and peacekeeping at the global level.

In summary, yes, several countries do have a dedicated Department or Ministry of Peace, although most are not Western nations
and these structures are more common in post-conflict or reconciliation settings."


Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://thewinepress.substack.com/p/pol ... s-americas
"America's First-Ever AI Threat Detection Platform"

Effectively announcing AI-supported police state monitoring of the internet.
Time to start being circumspect about what's shared online everywhere

Consider: Computers can't always identify, humor, exaggeration, etc.
Such misidentification can become a file for future reference.


Rod

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.gazetaexpress.com/en/France ... next-year/
"France orders hospitals to be ready for war by next year"

Maybe the expectation is for less than major war, otherwise ...
Considering today's super-powerful weapons, the only meaningful preparation
for world war is to make your final preparations and compose your epitaph.

Rod

[Amigoo]

AI needed to assist this discussion:

Q: Online news: "Hot mic picks up Putin and Xi discussing organ transplants and immortality"
Do organ transplants still require anti-rejection drugs, drugs not usually associated with long lives?

(Perplexity) "Anti-rejection medication is still a requirement in transplant medicine today;
while necessary, these drugs do present significant health trade-offs for long-term patients."

Rod

[Amigoo]

Q: More people today seem to be bisexual earlier in life, then choose dominating sexuality
as they become adults (and with their continuing habits reinforcing that choice).

(Perplexity) "There is clear evidence that bisexual identification and behavior have increased sharply among
younger generations, with many people exploring bisexuality earlier in life and later choosing labels or partners that
reflect a more dominant sexuality as adults.This phenomenon is shaped by changing sexual norms, greater visibility,
and acknowledgment of sexual fluidity, which allows individuals to adapt identity or habits across their lifespan.

Generational Trends

Surveys show that younger cohorts, Gen Z and Millennials, are vastly more likely to identify as bisexual —
59% of LGBTQ+ Gen Z and 52% of LGBTQ+ Millennials, compared to just 19% of Baby Boomers.

The proportion of adults reporting bisexual behavior (having had both male and female sexual partners) tripled
from 3.1% in 1989 to 9.6% in 2021, showing a generational surge in bisexual activity and identity.

Sexual Fluidity and Life Course

Sexual orientation is not always fixed; many people experience sexual fluidity — changes in attraction, identity,
or behavior — especially younger adults or those in LGBTQ+ communities.

It’s common for people to experiment with bisexuality and later settle into relationships or identities
that reflect one side of their sexuality more fully, sometimes due to personal preference or societal factors.

This process is not simple “switching,” but reflects the continuing habits and environmental reinforcement
affecting identity expression over time.

Social Factors and Identity Labels

Increased acceptance, visibility, and the decline of heteronormative and binary thinking have enabled
more young people to openly identify as bisexual or to see it as part of a spectrum rather than a fixed category.

Some individuals change their label not due to a shift in orientation, but as they find vocabulary that better fits
their experiences, or as their relationships evolve.

Key Takeaways

Bisexuality is most common among LGBTQ+ young adults and less so in older cohorts,
who tend to identify more as gay or lesbian.

Many people experience fluidity in attraction and behavior throughout life, with the possibility of habits,
relationships, or societal expectations reinforcing one dominant sexuality as they age.

The rise in bisexual identification is not just a trend or fad, but a result of generational changes in visibility,
sexual norms, and more nuanced understanding of sexual identity."


Q: This suggests bisexuality is normal human behavior with fewer constraints in modern society?

(P) "Yes, current research and demographic trends strongly support that bisexuality is a normal aspect
of human sexual behavior that faces fewer societal constraints in modern contexts than in previous eras.

Prevalence and Normalization

Surveys indicate that around 4-5% of US adults now openly identify as bisexual, demonstrating greater willingness
to claim this identity as social acceptance increases.

Among younger generations, especially Gen Z, a majority of LGBTQ+ individuals identify as bisexual, with two-thirds
of young queer adults describing attraction to multiple genders — a dramatic rise tied to relaxed norms and visibility.

The increase in reported bisexuality does not reflect a change in innate human behavior, but rather a reduction
in stigma, more nuanced self-labeling, and a broadened conception of sexuality beyond rigid binaries.

Historical and Cultural Perspectives

Cross-cultural and historical studies suggest that bisexual behavior has existed globally, often suppressed or hidden
due to social and legal constraints.

Modern societies' growing openness and recognition of sexual fluidity have led to greater acceptance and open identification
with bisexuality, especially among women who now face fewer constraints than men in exploring their sexuality.

Societal Shifts

Today, individuals increasingly feel able to express bisexual identity and behavior, as prejudice, "bisexual erasure,"
and heteronormative pressure decline. Bisexuality is increasingly seen as part of the broad spectrum of normal
human sexuality and not merely a trend or anomaly.

In summary, bisexuality is a universal, normal human variation, and the contemporary rise
in open identification primarily reflects evolving social norms that allow more people to express
their natural diversity of attraction and relationships."


Rod

[Sandy]

Thanks Rod. I just caught up on your recent postings here.

I'm sitting here wondering why the shooting was labeled antisemetic when the target when you get to the bottom of it was children. The gunman shoot Catholic children, He may have been Antisemetic, but the shooting did not reflect that.
I won't say more than that, as your other post points out "someone" soon may be looking over our shoulders. I will say in regards to Israel...does it seem "the tail is wagging the dog"? (AIPAC) https://www.trackaipac.com/

xxSandy


This internet era (and media reporting for attention) makes us believe
that some (most?) news is widespread, yet the reporting is often about
more isolated events. Now, AI is contributing to this media lure!

Rod

[Amigoo]

Apparently, a ban simply clarifying the differences between these two "laws".

Re: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... trols.html
"Texas announces ban on Sharia Law after Muslim 'patrols' tried to ban alcohol and pork"


Q: Explain the difference between state "law" and religious "law".

(Perplexity) "State "law" refers to the legal rules created and enforced by governmental authorities — such as constitutions, statutes, regulations, and decisions by courts — that apply to everyone within a specific jurisdiction, regardless of personal beliefs or affiliations. Religious "law," on the other hand, consists of the moral codes and rules set forth by religious traditions, which are intended to guide the behavior of members of a particular faith community but are not imposed by government on the broader population.

State Law

Created and enforced by government institutions like the legislature, executive, and judiciary.

Applies universally to all individuals within the geographic or political boundaries of a state or country, regardless of their religious beliefs.

Can cover matters such as civil rights, criminal offenses, taxes, contracts, and property.

Is subject to interpretation and change through democratic and legal processes.

Religious Law

Derived from religious texts, teachings, or beliefs (e.g., canon law for Christians, sharia for Muslims, halakha for Jews).

Binds only those who voluntarily accept the beliefs and authority of that religious tradition.

Addresses moral, spiritual, and sometimes social conduct according to religious principles.

Is interpreted and enforced by religious leaders or authorities, not state officials.


Key Differences

Source of Authority: State law comes from governmental institutions; religious law comes from sacred texts or religious traditions.

Scope and Applicability: State law is mandatory for everyone in the jurisdiction; religious law is voluntary and specific to adherents of a faith.

Enforcement: State law violations can lead to legal penalties such as fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions; violations of religious law can lead to spiritual consequences or community sanctions, but not state-imposed punishments (unless in a theocratic system where the two overlap).

Purpose: State law primarily protects the public order and individual rights;
religious law aims to foster spiritual, moral, or ethical conduct among believers.

When state law and religious law conflict, most democratic societies maintain a separation of church and state,
ensuring religious freedom while also preventing religious rules from becoming mandatory for non-adherents."


Rod

[Amigoo]

Apparently, "connect to the cloud" actually means "connect via the cloud."


Q: What is cloud computing?

(Perplexity) "The cloud consists of physical equipment — servers, storage devices, and networking hardware —
located in data centers on Earth. Wireless communication is one way systems (like smartphones, IoT devices, and laptops)
connect to the cloud, typically using Wi-Fi, cellular, or other radio-based technologies for the last mile; from these devices,
data is routed over the internet to these physical data centers, often via fiber-optic cables and other wired infrastructure.

Physical Nature of the Cloud

Data centers housing cloud infrastructure are highly secured, climate-controlled facilities scattered globally.
Equipment includes powerful servers, backup batteries, cooling systems, network switches, and massive storage arrays.

Wireless Connection Explained

Wireless communication connects end-user devices to the internet, allowing them to send and receive data
from the cloud without physical cables. Once data enters the internet, it travels — often through wired networks —
to reach servers in physical data centers.

So, while users may interact with cloud resources through wireless connections, the data, services, and applications
they access are ultimately powered by real-world equipment anchored in secure data centers on Earth."

"The term "cloud" reflects the abstraction and flexibility of accessing data and applications,
where the underlying hardware and locations are hidden and irrelevant to the user.

Communication protocols and technologies (internet, web APIs, virtual networks) enable this experience —
making the cloud a distributed environment centered on connectivity and access, not on the physical place."

"The cloud in a future with lunar data centers will be hybrid ecosystem spanning Earth and space,
combining terrestrial infrastructure with moon-based hubs to meet next-generation data needs ...

And data centers in space will offer cloud-enabled data storage, processing, and AI/machine learning
capabilities, servicing not only space assets but also reducing reliance on terrestrial infrastructure.
Their presence on space stations or dedicated orbital platforms is intended to improve data security,
resiliency, and reduce latency for satellite communications, while providing a viable alternative
to Earth-based data centers."


Rod

[Amigoo]

The last paragraph seems to summarize the problem and the rest (not included)
suggest years of this confrontational activism that encouraged intense criticism.

Q: Why was Charlie Kirk so controversial?

(Perplexity) "
Nearly every major public appearance attracted fierce criticism and counter-protests for his positions on race, gender,
and political issues, cementing his reputation as one of the most polarizing political activists of his generation."


More Q&A later ...

Q: Online news: "Charlie Kirk's message was one of love, Jesus Christ and prayer."

Perplexity, earlier today: "Nearly every major public appearance attracted fierce criticism and counter-protests for his positions
on race, gender, and political issues, cementing his reputation as one of the most polarizing political activists of his generation."

Are these perspectives both true?

(P, summary) "Both perspectives are accurate: Charlie Kirk's public persona combined messages of Christian faith and prayer with highly polarizing rhetoric and political activism, especially on issues of race, gender, and identity. Kirk's platforms combined messages of Christian love and prayer with controversial and divisive political stances ... Both descriptions are true, reflecting the complexity of Charlie Kirk’s public influence, which married religious language with political polarization in contemporary America."

A good example of "polarization"? (two opposing groups kept distant with this type of activism)


Rod

[happyrain]

I think what is polarizing is the weaponization and manipulation of ideological concepts. Our media, including social media, is responsible for the state of affairs present in the West. This may bring about the digital ID swami V said would occur 2025-2026(the mass onboarding). What is becoming apparent(to me) is the youth is desensitized by the content they see online- despite rapid communications, we are less connected than ever. Human connection is replaced by scrolling through content and being addicted to our phones. Media itself shapes a narrative, where any one entity can frame things in order to "polarize." It is predatory and it is real.
The radicalization of the youth is something we see through out history. A young girl told me she had no empathy for Charlie because of what she believed he stood for. I am heart broken to think her coldness may be commonplace.
That young people could watch Charlie Kirks death, and then scroll to some TikTok dance video seconds later- is unnatural.
God Bless Charlie Kirk, and his family. I believe in freedom of speech, and sovereignty as being bestowed by God. I soon learned Charlie believed it would not be possible to have a society with these ideals without Christ.

May I offer Love and prayer.

[Sandy]

I am sorry that Charlie Kirk was assassinated. This is NOT the way to solve our differences! Our country has been built on the ability to express our views, and, as well, on a separation of church and state. Which is very important. I think some groups' blurring of those lines has also led to the problems we are experiencing, in addition to what Eric has mentioned with the desensitization... Freedom these days seems to mean or imply the pushing on everyone our own religious, social, or political identities and agendas.
It's like one person's reasoning on any issue should mean more or hold more weight than someone else's. It doesn't help when our supposedly adult, grown-up representatives in government fan the flames of dissention and divide as they are doing so now. It is disheartening.
I pray for Charlie Kirk's family just as I pray for the families of former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark.
We are supposed to love each other... This country and the world have a long way to go.
But these assassinations are not something new to this generation. It has happened all through history. I was young when Bobby Kennedy was killed, and Martin Luther King Junior...both a great loss to this world. and the names go on...When will it stop!
xxSandy

[Amigoo]

Free speech is still a good thing! But with today's internet (and now AI),
what one says then becomes encumbered by what other people then say,
by social media commentary, by public media restatement/paraphrasing
of what we say, etc.

Thus, positivity and negativity in original speech is intensified!
... and effectively repeated many times!

We become super influencers (and good targets).

Rod

[happyrain]

Here's how what I witnessed was understood. Feel free to comment with your opinion.

Charlie Kirk was influential, welcomed discourse, encouraged debate, took almost any question thrown his way. For this, he was murdered. (Or maybe he was murdered *for his influence?).

I have witnessed conservatives and Trump supporters vilified, by political leaders, where the talking point has always revolved around this: "Trump is a fascist. Trump is a dictator- he's the next Hitler."

What was on the bullet?
"Catch Fascist"

Though I did not know Charlie Kirk personally, from the content I did view(as a consequence of his murder) I did not see a fascist- nor do his actions exemplify that of an oppressor. I saw someone firm in their beliefs, and cordial to those who opposed him.

What I see in the shooter is a radicalized youth, whose reality has been shaped from "Top down" through "leaders" and perhaps more-so through social media outlets, Universities(there were teachers celebrating Charlie Kirks death) and even news networks that appear manipulative rather than informative.

I have also witnessed the proliferation of fake accounts designed to keep users engaged by promoting polarizing views and manipulating emotions.
Sometimes these accounts are intentionally hateful to "paint a picture" where a minority or minor issue is portrayed as the majority- where laws might be passed because of the "framing" these "warbots" have successfully deployed.

This young man could not separate the narrative he was lead to believe, and the reality that was Charlie Kirk.

It looks like those radical youths that think they are fighting fascist are pawns for nefarious entities(foreign and domestic) who would seek to undermine our constitutional rights or challenge God-given sovereignties.

There is also a reality we have yet to address or are not ready to face- young killers groomed online. But I think this discussion might come about as a consequence of what we've witnessed.

And let's not forget the attempted assassination of the President himself. Where celebrities made music videos showing him being murdered, or held up bloodied Donald Trump heads for photo shoots-

A stark contrast in expression compared to the voice of Charlie Kirk.

I find his Faith invigorating. The tormented individual who shot Charlie, did not kill him. I am witnessing a movement. More people are turning to God and through Charlie's example are holding "fellowship" outside the institutions.

This is what I am witnessing. I can't speak for others.

[Amigoo]

I know very little about Charlie Kirk, probably because I avoid this type of media promotion*.
So, I've been asking this AI to recap what's currently known about him. Another Q&A:

* where group emotion seems to compete with logic and inner spirit guidance,
especially where religion is combined with politics and social issues.
Jesus was not confrontational and did not combine these:

"Always and everywhere did he say, 'You shall do this — you ought to do that.'
Never did he employ the negative mode of teaching derived from the ancient taboos.
He refrained from placing emphasis on evil by forbidding it; he exalted the good
by commanding its performance." (UB, 127:4.2)


(Perplexity) "Charlie Kirk was widely regarded as a confrontational speaker, both by media commentators
and through direct observations of his debate style. While some of this perception is undoubtedly influenced
by disagreement with his opinions, much of it substantiated by his own rhetorical approach and public persona."

Note: Perplexity has good reputation for accurately summarizing
what the world expresses in its writing as posted on the internet.
Of course, we're free to disagree with this majority expression.

I asked (P) to identify Charlie Kirk debates where he was confrontational
and it provided links to those where he was indeed confrontational!
All good examples of a "Don't do that!" style of debate.


Not a link but, apparently, one of many articles this AI finds online
to support its perspective that these debates are "confrontational" ...

Re: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/charlie-k ... -1.7631690

"... he called on popstar Taylor Swift to 'submit' to NFLer Travis Kelce and have 'a ton of children,'
shortly after the couple announced their engagement last month, telling Swift, 'You're not in charge.'
These simplistic and traditional views Kirk embraced are appealing to young people who are struggling
to find their footing amid uncertainty in the world ..."


Another article not provided by AI, identifying his confrontational style.
Polarization with provocative speeches seems the reason for his popularity
(college students, especially, wanted this type of emotive interaction):

Re: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62n6ql215ro

"His views were polarising on the college campuses where he held large events, and his provocative speeches
would draw crowds of vocal opponents as well as fans.

Kirk was a strong supporter of gun rights, vehemently opposed abortion, was critical of transgender rights
and promoted false claims about Covid-19. He wasn't shy when it came to expressing his views -
and his detractors also didn't hold back."


Re: https://rumble.com/v6ypfni-god-or-gover ... -from.html
"God or Government: Where Do Our Rights Really Come From?"

"Jesus was not, therefore, a political reformer. He did not come to reorganize the world; even if he had done this, it would have been applicable only to that day and generation. Nevertheless, he did show man the best way of living, and no generation is exempt from the labor of discovering how best to adapt Jesus’ life to its own problems. But never make the mistake of identifying Jesus’ teachings with any political or economic theory, with any social or industrial system." (UB, 140:8.10)

"The kingdom of heaven, being a spiritual brotherhood of the spirit-born sons of God, may be promulgated only by the power of the spirit. This distinction of procedure refers to the relations of the kingdom of believers to the kingdoms of secular government and does not nullify the right of social groups of believers to maintain order in their ranks and administer discipline upon unruly and unworthy members." (178:1.2)

The UB does not agree that natural rights come from the creator of this universe. The UB clarifies that spiritual rights (especially to life everlasting) come from the creator - political rights are created and upheld by political systems. Jesus taught that, once God-focused spirituality is one's guidance, this will inspire and motivate individuals to create and uphold society-nurturing political rights.

At least, this video shows Kirk having a healthy and dynamic confrontational style for important discussions. But repercussion of his mixing of politics and religion suggest why Jesus, the very creator of our universe, avoided this.


One more non-AI-linked article, with "revered or despised" highlighting
typical intensity of repercussion for such confrontational interaction ...

Re: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/hea ... 097870007/

"Kirk, for many in the under-25 crowd, was a symbol. A hallmark of youth political organizing
in the internet age. A person they revered or despised."


AI response but supporting articles are easily found without AI assistance ...

Q: Observation: News and videos about Charlie Kirk hint that his confrontational style is intended
to create more interest (thus attendance) at his public presentations. His presentations include
political opinions more than religious teaching like that of Billy Graham and other evangelists.

(P, beginning of response) "Charlie Kirk’s public presentations are characterized by
a confrontational style that aims to generate heightened interest and engagement,
attracting large audiences, especially among young conservatives.

Unlike religious evangelists such as Billy Graham, whose events focused primarily on faith
and spiritual teachings, Kirk’s appearances center much more on political opinions and
controversial social topics, often stirring debate and provoking strong emotions
from both supporters and opponents."

Observation: Not necessarily problematic presentation style
but with greater risk of martyrdom in today's society.


Rod

[happyrain]

I wouldn't rely on AI to define the character of others. That's because the monopolized language of AI and the "authoritative sources" it cites come with inherent biases. Instead, I would watch videos of him speaking and between your listening, feeling and stillness- allow for spiritual discernment.
I had never watched a Charlie Kirk video- never really knew about him, then some radicalized and tormented individual killed him. Now I'm watching his videos and coming to the conclusion that Charlie is a passionate and loving young man.

Posted 3 days ago:
God or Government: Where Do Our Rights Really Come From?
https://rumble.com/v6ypfni-god-or-gover ... -from.html

Watching the tribute to him from his foundation,

https://rumble.com/v6ytv38-tpusa-releas ... -kirk.html

the way his little girl ran to him in excitement- the joy he displayed in receiving her hug, brought tears to my eyes. That little act is more powerful than any intellectual debate. And it says more about his character than what AI has to offer.

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/onl ... 00645.html

"Superyachts don't exactly blend in. They're massive, loud, and burn through fuel like there's no tomorrow.
To many, they look less like boats and more like floating billboards for excess."

Interestingly, supersize cruise ships have similar excesses but don't cause similar criticism.
On the other hand, this technology provides opportunity to demonstrate what humans can create.
That human brains can solve the excesses problems is encouraging but needs demonstration.

Rod

[happyrain]

https://youtu.be/aaxy9qipKJU?si=kLkH-h5MN9RmHi9i

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaxy9qipKJU
"Erika Kirk speaks for the first time "

Powerful farewell to a "crowned martyr" with promise
to continue promoting the gospel and family-centered life.

"The Gospel according to the Bible is the good news about Jesus Christ - his life,
death, and resurrection - which brings salvation to all who believe."

"Jesus said: 'The people of another age will better understand the gospel of the kingdom
when it is presented in terms expressive of the family relationship - when man understands
religion as teaching fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man, sonship with God.' " (UB, 142:7.4)


Rod