An ontology of relationships

Here is a thought: a peronal metaphysics, ontology, epistemology, and ethics with a foundation of relationships. Anything that contributes to relationship is good, and all else is evil. It is as simple as that. Homosexuality -- denying the right of partners to further a relationship is flat out wrong. Abortion -- denial of relationship to one considered socially born is wrong. War -- enough said -- wrong. Everything in nature and out of nature is holistically connected. Despite the fact that I do believe in a God, a philosophy of relationships does not need only apply to Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc. Everything is connected and defined by their relationships with each other. Yesterday, I saw the film entitled, Hotel Rwanda, which was a very powerful film with excellent performances. Politically and ethically the message was obvious: political barriers keep aid from those fighting for their lives to survive, and killing because of a racial idea is wrong, but real. Sociologically, the division of races based upon locale provides political control for those in power, keeping the masses from uprising. Of course the film was permeated with western film-making strategies -- romance, family ties, survival, action, tension...though the film did affect me the way it was supposed to. I felt ashamed, angry, sad, and possessed the will to act. But the will to act is not enough. Action only reveals what the will is, action only contributes to relationships. As a stipulation to my current philosophical stance it has been helpful to value people more than my beliefs -- to maintain a vertical covenant.

Let's kill more babies

A solution to the problem of abortion and poverty:

To whom it may concern:

Overpopulation, the rise in the lower class and those on the margins, and the atrocity of aborting babies is increasing and becoming more and more of a problem in America. Picketers at abortion clinics require too much surveillance for police to contain, not to mention it is costing thousands of taxpayer dollars to hire someone to serve and protect. Population is soaring because of a possible shift in the core units of society shifting from the nuclear family to a postmodern libertinist orgy. And this only contributes to the aborting of many unborn babies, which are considered socially born by cultural standards. Those that are being denied abortions are usually poor and marginalized, or younger teenagers and as such contribute to the problem of more and more people living on street corners and transforming nice, richer neighborhoods into contemporary 'ghettos.'

Solution:

Advocate and carry out more abortions. No one wants a homeless person walking next to their door at night or during the day for that matter, or begging for something every time a decent person steps out of his door at home or at the office. Yes, in killing many unwanted babies people can go about having the sex they've always dreamed of having with as many people as possible and the level of poor and marginalized will not rise as quickly. Adoption only leads to more overpopulation and consumption of scarce resources. Using the American Utilitarian way, aborting is the best fix method. Before aborting why not extract stem cells so that much-needed research can be done to cure diseases and genetic problems or perhaps so that people can have the sort of baby they've always wanted. If aborted later on, and the babies have to be extracted from the body, perhaps we can use the meat to feed those poor and on the verge of starvation in developing countries. This may provide ample meat to keep thousands of people alive overseas. Gay marriage may become less of an issue in the America when those couples wanting to adopt a baby can no longer get one accept overseas which can be regulated if you decide to adopt this idea. The nuclear family may survive afterall if teenagers stop having babies that require time and energy on something stinky and unwanted in the first place. Parents of children will have authority over thier kids once again for longer periods of time giving more guidance and enculturation that will greatly improve the view of the nuclear family. But even further, women will finally have the advantage they need to achieve lawful equality with men without having to take leave at work to have a baby or forgo working all together because of an affair with the sales associate from the local retail shop. Let's not forget about the environment -- less children means less pollution of methane gas, less noise. But here's the kicker: less children means less money spent on them, by the government, by families. In the creation of the pink market (selling babies to foreign investors for various reasons) capitalism will thrive and more and more money will be earned to invest. We could pay off the national debt with the money slowly over time. Next to locations where blood doners can go, America can initiate a fetus donation program. After spending the day shopping without worrying about that man you slept with 3 months ago, you can go next door to the Child Donation Center (CDC) and be out in time for a seven o'clock movie. This is my recommendation.

Response:

Why focus on abortion when poverty is as big or a bigger problem?
Why do Amercian values revolve around two issues: abortion and gay marriage (or lately stem cell research, cloning, etc)?
What ever happened to valuing people within Christianity especially?
Americans are pro-life and try to save babies, because maybe they are cuter and more innocent than the poor, who knows.

Sports or Meaning

Why do Americans have such a fascination with football? Is it the competition, is it the adrenaline rush, or is it being a part of something communal? American football is an expression of American values -- it is a sport dominated by men, who exhibit sexual agression in a game of pure competition. The uniforms express this sex appeal, as do the cheerleaders on the sidelines, half-naked, provocatively dancing and accentuating those body parts most entrancing to men. But the players are not the only ones expressing cultural values. The audience themselves support and acknowledge such an expression of values, because it in turn gives them a sense of meaning. An indigenous anthropologist might extend the term of deep play or art to American football for its expression of cultural values and its way of lending meaning to participants -- audience and players. Though a person cannot ignore the money involved in such an enterprize -- popular culture expoits what sells, what gives meaning, attempts to harness that power with hopes of generating limitless capital, and ultimately works to keep the class system in check within America. The poor find just enough money to see football games or perhaps buy a TV to watch them, and contribute money to the cause which makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. What an ingenius country we live in.