Recently, Rush Limbaugh, or Bouncy-Bouncy as Keith Olbermann calls him, ranted about how poor children get a free meal, instead of feeding themselves, which you can hear in the video below. Maybe he is jealous he pays for his gluttony himself and wants to eat free so he can get more painkillers or maybe he does not like who started the program in the first place.
My first thought, when I saw the link and listened to Limbaugh, was, “What? You want them to starve to death?” Truth is, studies show that children learn better if they eat a good breakfast. The more they learn, the better they will do as adults, but of course, the 99% can just die, from what I gather of the rants I listened to of Limbaugh.
Secondly, he might remember when the School Lunch Program started or he might not, but the truth is, as far as I know my parents paid for my lunches when I attended primary school, junior high, and high school, I had no clue such a program existed and some children ate free or received reduced lunches. Then again, maybe my school lunch was free and I did not know it, but whatever the case, I do not think children pay much attention to such things.
Thirdly, why is it just Missouri he picks on in this rant? Many states have this program, thanks to the Black Panthers who started the program in the late 60s or early 70s. Calling children waifs and serfs is demeaning and degrading, as well as just plain wrong.
Fourth, he does not realize that we do have the money for this. The answer is to stop spending so much damn money on the military and put it into social programs, such as Medicaid/Medicare, food programs, health, education, and housing. In the long run, people will have their basic needs and when those needs are fulfilled, they will not be struggling to meet those needs. They can focus on bettering their lives, but when a parent worries about how they are going to feed and house their child(ren), there is little energy left to educate themselves better in order to get a better job. Living hand to mouth is not life and one cannot better themselves or their family, if they are always hungry and homeless. It becomes a struggle just to survive. Regardless of what the Religious Reich or the Reich Wing says, food, water, shelter, education, and health are basic human rights, which, if not fulfilled causes big problems. These problems are financial and health problems mostly, as they struggle to meet their needs. That is all one has time for, if these needs are not met, and consequently, makes us exactly like other animals, fighting to survive. As humans, who form communities, in order to survive, we can do better than letting people starve like wild animals.
Fifth, children do not feed themselves and cannot feed themselves. That is why so many animals have parents until they grow up enough to do these things for themselves. However, I find it funny that the Religious Reich does not believe we are animals or even related to animals, yet they want people to live like animals, struggling to survive. Such ideas are a total contradiction to the things they say.
Paul Kurtz explained these issues in his book Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for a New Planetary Humanism. On page 13, he stated, “For the first time in human history we possess the means- provided by science and technology- to ameliorate the human condition, advance happiness and freedom, and enhance human life for all people on the planet.” Apparently, this is something the Reich does not want, because it would show that humans, not God, have the power to improve their condition in life.
In the VII statement, A Planetary Bill of Rights and Responsibilities (p 41), Kurtz wrote the first right and number one right of all human beings concerning this section of the Manifesto:
First, we should strive to end poverty and malnutrition and to provide adequate health care and shelter for people everywhere on the planet. This means that nobody should be denied adequate food and clean water and we should try our best to eradicate infectious diseases, ensure proper sanitation, and guarantee a minimum standard of housing for everyone. This is quite a task; yet on moral grounds it is imperative that we begin to undertake this work.
This is the first right and responsibility that Kurtz gives the human race in his book concerning the Humanist Manifesto 2000 section VII. Ending poverty and disease, and ensuring peace and prosperity are the promises of this Manifesto.
Of special significance is the "Planetary Bill of Rights and Responsibilities": we have a responsibility to humanity as a whole, to end poverty and disease, and to ensure peace and prosperity for every member of the world community.
Along with these things, Kurtz recommends various reforms to meet the needs of humans around the planet.
The Manifesto recommends concrete reforms to achieve these goals: a new planetary income tax, the regulation of global conglomerates, open access to the media, population stability, environmental protection, an effective security system, development of a system of World Law, and a new World Parliament.
Along with food, clean water, shelter, and medical care, covers economic security and education as Rights and Responsibilities also. Along with those rights and responsibilities, “no person should be discriminated against based on race, ethnic origin, nationality, culture, caste, class, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.” The only roles are those chosen or achieved and without food, clean water, shelter, health care, and education, humans cannot reach their full potential. Human beings must have these things in order to better themselves.
Many of the Reich will shout that this is NWO, but the fact is humans are communal by nature and cannot survive without other humans helping them. They only way we can better society and ourselves is to help each other in unity not at odds in some class war. We cannot do this alone or as various autonomous humanoid islands in a sea of naked apes out to destroy each other. While individuality and betterment of self are important, so is the need for whole societies to strive to better the community, so that everyone receives the chance to reach their full potential. We cannot do these things if people are hungry, without decent shelter, in bad health, and without education. Such things makes individuals slaves to a greater cog, called a Capitalistic slave-master, but not a god. That is not the good life nor is it freedom and no amount of praying or subservience to an invisible master in the sky will achieve the good life and freedom either.
As a humanist, fairly well versed on the Bible, there is one thing that puzzles me about the Reich. It is one key factor found in their Jesus myth, which is humanistic, and the humanists, whom the Reich strives to demonize and demoralize, strive better to achieve these goals than the Religious Reich ever did.
Jesus and his merry tribe of both men and women, almost like Robin Hood, lived as a communal society. Sometimes the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the one or the few, but sometimes the needs of the one, outweighed the needs of the many.
For example, the story of feeding the many found in Matthew 14:13-21, Mark 6:30-44, Luke 9:10-17, and John 6:1-14. Here we find a story where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few, which they did with not only compassion, but also two fish and five loaves of bread! Not enough money to feed hungry children, when you claim your Lord and Saviour did it on two fish and five loaves of bread? Give me a freaking break, Limbaugh. Seems to me you and others possess a twisted sense of even the Bible. Therefore, you say, the story is a Jesus miracle, but I propose the story is really a story about caring for one’s fellow humans, despite the amount of goods available. I do not see any Capitalistic hogging of anything. In fact, I do believe I see the very thing the Religious Reich calls socialism.
Of course, sometimes the needs of the one or the few outweighed the needs of the many, as in the story of the woman who hemorrhaged in Matthew 9:20-22, Mark 5:25-34, and Luke 8:43-48. Supposedly, this woman flowed for twelve years, according to all three authors, but we know this is just a story, so let us ignore the fact that if it were not a mythical story, she would be dead a lot sooner without medical help. Jesus and his merry band of followers were off to save a man’s baby girl from death when a woman started begging him to help her medically. Given that she was hemmorrhaging, there was blood everywhere under her, because at best, women only had rags to catch such things, not only that, she probably suffered great pain, at least if we are talking about reality. Yes, such things are gross and disgusting, but a fact of life in the medical field that emergency rooms, as a rule, treat as quickly as possible. The woman touched Jesus, who immediately shouted, “Who touched me?” Let us say, Jesus was not a tyrant and maybe he asked in a way that said, “Did someone call my name?” The woman said, “I did, Sir,” and asked the “doctor” to cure her. Jesus healed her, by stating her faith did it and then heads to the man’s home, only to tell him his baby girl is dead.
In reality, doctors would probably remove the woman’s uterus, but this is a mythical story, in which Jesus stopped long enough to heal her with words, despite a man’s baby girl possibly near death. Jesus healed a filthy, bleeding, baby making machine and spared her life in that story. As for the baby girl, who Jesus “rose from the dead”, that is a wishful myth that is far older than the Bible and found especially in the Egyptian Book of the Dead.
The point is not miracles, whether Jesus rose the girl from the dead or not, fed the masses with just two fish and five loaves of bread, or anything like that, but as a small communal community, they tried to care for the needs of everyone, whether the masses needed food or “medical care”. Did the Religious Reich not read these stories and more in their Jesus myth or do they really like cherry picking the horrid things and making up bull manure? They receive an honorary BS degree and I do not mean Bachelor of Science. Kudos to Christian sects, such as Episcopalians, who cherry pick the Bible, using the more humane stories to live by, as they strive to be humanistic in their behaviours.
Whatever the case, humanists strive to do these things and more, without religion, yet the Reich demonizes such things, despite the better stories in their book, calling it Socialism and other lame words, as they accuse the poor of stealing form the rich, instead of fending for themselves and dropping dead, because the poor are serfs not fit for society. Of course, according to Limbaugh, their children are waifs and acting as if he would rather stone them to death, much like every other person in the Reich seems to want to do also. If you ask me, these people have a sick and primitive twisted sense of morality and dementedly, as well as delusionally, prefer the barbaric passages.
While Limbaugh did not fall back on religion in that diatribe, he is still part of the problem and that group of people. I guess that is what happens when you do not even finish college and cannot read a book.