Old Pottery Bowl With Red Flowers

I really like old pottery. I'm not sure who manufactured this old serving bowl, but the pattern is interesting. The flowers remind me of little creatures, owls maybe, and they seem to have eyes that watch you and a little mouth. Look at them upside down and they have still seem to have eyes. I've noticed that a lot of old pottery decorations have flowers that seem to have eyes.

Here's a picture of the bowl. Maybe someone out there knows who manufactured it.

Gifts to the gods

Four individuals (a Christian, a US marine, a Jew, and a Muslim) enter a throne room where various gods sit upon their separate thrones behind a huge altar. Each man carries a dead body, recently deceased in the latest surge of numerous wars, and their job is to provide the fresh offerings to each individual’s respective god; thus, the god would provide mercury and bounty to those who worship under him. Piles of dead bodies litter over the great alter; so many, in fact, they spill over onto the floor in tremendous mounds before the altar and about the room.

The men stop in confusion and fear.

“Where do we put them?” wonders the Jew.

“I was just told to place my offering before the god with the beard,” said the Christian.

“They all have beards,” comments the Muslim.

The gods, their exchange disrupted by the approaching men, turn to frown down upon the four with ominous expressions.

“Well, what have you brought us?” questions a god, his thunderous voice booming around the enormous room.

The four men flinch. The Jew swallows hard.

“Fresh gifts,” he supplies.

The gods look over the offerings.

“More of the same,” one god mutters, turning away with disinterest.

“What do we do now?” whispers the Muslim.

“I don’t know about you guys,” says the marine “But I’m pretty sure the one over there with the white beard is Uncle Sam. I’m giving my offering to him.”

And he heads off with confidence.

Do Christians Believe They Are The Only Humans Who Deserve Good Things To Happen To Them?

God either wants to eliminate bad things and cannot, or can but does not want to, or neither wishes to nor can, or both wants to and can. If he wants to and cannot, he is weak -- and this does not apply to god. If he can but does not want to, then he is spiteful -- which is equally foreign to god's nature. If he neither wants to nor can, he is both weak and spiteful and so not a god. If he wants to and can, which is the only thing fitting for a god, where then do bad things come from? Or why does he not eliminate them?" 

-Epicurus (from "The Epicurus Reader", translated and edited by Brad Inwood and L.P. Gerson, Hackett Publishing, 1994, p. 97)

Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion - several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight.  

-Mark Twain

Do Christians believe they are the only humans who deserve good things to happen to them?

In a nutshell:  Yes.

Follow the line of thinking.

Christians believe the following:

• ·         The god of the Christian religion is good
• ·         The Christian god is the true god and all other gods are false gods
• ·         God is a god of love
• ·         God is perfect
• ·         Satan is evil
• ·         Satan is the cause of all bad things that happen to people (God does bring upon people bad things, he only allows Satan to sprinkle bad things upon people)

Using the above criteria, let us examine the thought-line of the Christian way of thinking.

God is a good and loving god; therefore, he wants his bounty and blessings to be bestowed upon the people of this Earth. However, there are criteria (rules) which must be followed before this great outpouring of good things can be bestowed upon the people of the Earth. The people of the Earth must come to the Christian god and worship him, and obey him, and keep his commandment in order to receive the good things. Then, and only then, will the good things be bestowed.

Anyone who is not in this small, select group of persons, meaning anyone who is not a Christian, anyone who follows a different god (false god according to the Christian way of thinking), or anyone who does not follow any god, will not receive the bounty of good things. Why should they? They are not Christian and therefore will not be blessed.

Now God, being a good and loving god, does not bring harm to the people of the world. Satan does that. God, however, does not stop Satan; he allows Satan to bring bad things. Bad things are famine, disease, poverty, etc.

Why does God allow Satan to bring bad things?

Only Christians (those who worship the Christian god and who are faithfully following his rules) are under the umbrella of God’s protection. All others Satan can rain harm upon at will.

Furthermore, God will allow Satan to rain harm upon any Christian who is allowing sin or evil into his or her life. This is the punishment for not obeying, but if the Christian is willing to run back to God and beg and worship and promise to be good, God (because he is so good and loving) will bring that individual back under his umbrella of bounty and protection. 

Following this line of thinking, we now understand God chooses those who are blessed with good things and those who are not, either by providing protection and provisions or by standing aside and doing nothing so Satan can bring about bad things.

Since God is perfect, and and therefore cannot make mistakes, Christians must make the logical assumption that anyone who has good things happen to them deserve (it is justified) to have good things happen to them (because God has chosen and since he is perfect, he cannot be wrong). Those who have bad things happen to them deserve to have bad things happen to them because God has chosen to allow Satan to bring bad things upon them. God has decided.

To think otherwise (to think no human deserves to have bad things happen to him or her) would be disloyal to God; this line of thinking mean disagreeing with a decision of God, which would be disobedience against God.

Therefore, Christians, in order to stay in-line with the Christian line of thinking, must believe that those who remain faithful to the Christian god merit having good things happen to them. The flip side of this line of thinking is that anyone who does not faithfully follow the Christian god deserves to have bad things happen to him or her. This is because everyone else is either an individual following a false god, an individual following no god, or an individual who is a Christian but is not faithful, and, therefore, does not warrant protection or provisions by the Christian God.

That is why Christians, when faced with a bad thing happening to another, will shrug their shoulders and say, “It is God’s will.” They are following the Christian line of thinking that the individual merited the bad thing happening to them or God would not have let the bad thing happen, or, for some unknown reason, their god chose to let the bad thing happen, which is God’s will also.

Do not confuse desire with deserve. Christians do not necessarily desire bad things to happen to everyone else but themselves, but they feel bad things happening to everyone else other than their small group is an inevitability.  It is bound to happen. Christians are taught to desire for everyone to join their god under his umbrella and thereby share in the goodness and protection the Christian god will afford all those who worship and obey him. However, for any who does not choose to follow the Christian god, well, it is to be expected that bad things will happen to that person.

When the belief that only faithful Christians deserve to receive the blessings and protection of the Christian god is coupled with the mentality of the inevitability of bad things happening to all those who are not faithful Christians, the Christian attitude becomes elitism toward themselves (they are under their god’s protection  and therefore deserve good things to happen to them) and indifference and fatalism towards the fate of all other human (an acceptance of the predetermined and inevitable certainty that bad things will happen to everyone other than themselves).

When we apply this line of thinking to the current world situation, it becomes understandable how those who follow the Christian god can justify brutalities inflicted upon others. These others (non-Christians, followers of false gods, those who believe in no god) do not warrant protection under the umbrella of the Christian god, therefore it is justified to have Satan rain bad things down upon them including bad things occurring at the hands of another human. To the Christian line of thinking, since this is God’s right and acceptable way, Christians should be unconcerned about the suffering of these individuals because anything but indifference would be an indication of disagreement with the perfect way of their god.

A Christian, faced with the dilemma of confronting a human who is not a Christian and who suffers from an affliction caused by Satan, must fight the inner battle of deciding whether to approach the person as a Christian with the attitude that the individual brought on the affliction by turning away from God and consequently was not provided with protection, or whether to approach the individual as a fellow human being with the attitude that no human deserves to to have bad things happen to them.

Thought for the day

"the god of war has no altar,

     taking his feasting indiscriminately. "

                                   by unknown

Photography- White Spots in Eyes

I take a lot of pictures and every time a picture shows white spots in a child's eyes, I worry about Retinoblastoma, a childhood eye cancer that kills or blinds.

I did not know about this illness until I came across a website titled Daisy's Eye Cancer Fund, www.daisyfund.org, that discusses various diseases which will show up as 'white eye' in a picture. As well as Retinoblastoma, the site list Coats Disease, Cataracts, Severe Refractive Error, and Ocular Albinism. The white spots could, however, be a perfectly normal reaction when the light bounces off the optic disc at the back of the eye. Only an eye exam will determine if the white spots are signs of an underlying condition.

Recently I took pictures at my grandson's school with a large group of children on the stage. I can't say if it was due to the lighting, my photography technique, or sheer chance, but a number of the children showed white spots in their eyes. It really made me stop and think about how important it is to have a child's eyes checked regularly.

The website Daisy's Eye Cancer Fund gives instructions on how to take pictures to check for white spots in a child's eyes and stresses how important it is to check regularly. It is hard to believe that something so simple as being aware and taking pictures with an inexpensive digital camera could prevent blindness or death, but these simple test can help spot a developing condition. If white spots show up, it is best to take the child for an eye exam and share your concerns with the doctor.

A thanks to those who put free content on the Web

I use the Internet daily for all kinds of things. I keep up with the news; laugh at jokes and cartoons; look up recipes and craft ideals; find self-help articles; get advice and guidance from experts; read stories and books; and poke through blog pages and forums. I can find everything from information on how to lay floor tiles to suggestions on a science projects for my 11 year old.

As the copyright lawsuits fly left and right--the latest in the news is of Viacom suing Googles--I would just like to thank all the millions of people who put free content out on the Web with no expectations of getting paid for every picture, article, cartoon, story, piece of advise and help. Daily, people share parts of their lives, experiences and expertise freely and with good will, not asking or expecting to be paid for each snippet of content. This is the spirit the Internet was built on, and I am thankful for all of you who make it happen.

Tipping-is it a fair practice

Being between jobs and needing quick money to keep myself living in my apartment, I decided that a position as a waitress would be the perfect employment. I applied to a sophisticated, dine-in restaurant with an impressive reputation and a menu that included all the usual elegantly named steak and seafood dishes, all to be accompanied by the perfect fruity drink, tea or glass of expensive wine.

Not being a total moron, I had some idea of how the tipping system worked before I took the position. Officially the server is hired by, and works for, the restaurant, but is paid less than minimum wage by the company; in my case, $2.15 an hour. It is expected that the diner will provide the bulk of the waitress' wages through tips.


"What if I don't get any tips? I asked naively.

I was quickly reassured that I would make more than minimum wage, and if I didn't, well, I just was not doing my job properly. Furthermore, if I did not average minimum wage, I would no longer have a job. I quickly learned the reason for this. If I did not make enough tips to average minimum wage, the restaurant is, by law, compelled to compensate to make up the difference; something no restaurant wants to do.

God forbid that any of the restaurant's profits go towards paying the wages of their employees.

Also at this 'learning' session the practice of tip sharing, a custom I was totally unaware existed, was explained to me. It goes like this. The restaurant not only does not want to pay the entire wages due the waitress, but neither do they wish to pay the minimum wage earnings of other employees. This includes: the hostess, busboys, and runners who help bring the food from the kitchen. The waitress, I find out, gets to pay part of the wages of these employees out of her tip money.

"Why," you might ask, and I certainly did. Because, it was explained to me by management, these employees are helping the waitress to do her job, which is to give the customer a speedy, efficient and totally wonderful dining experience. Due to the great overload placed upon the server by the sheer variety of duties expected of her in taking and placing orders, making and serving drinks, making salads and desserts, fetching food from the kitchen, handling special needs, and taking the time to make each diner feel special and comfortable, it is impossible, during busy times, to do all of these duties within the time frame expected and allotted for the optimal dining experience.

Simply put, a person can only do one thing at a time and can not take orders at one table, get drinks for another, fetch food for the third, while putting desserts together for a fourth, all at the same time, although all of these things needs to be done at the same time for each table to have the perfect dinner.

Since a server cannot do the job alone, helpers are hired in the form of the hostess who seats the customer, busboys who help clear the tables, and runners who help bring food from the kitchen. For this gift of help, the server is expected to give 6% of the gross amount of her sales, out of her tip money, to help pay the wages of these support personnel. This is not, mind you, 6% of the total tip money she makes for that shift, but 6% of the total sales. This means all of the food the waitress serves to her tables each shift is placed in the computer under that waitress identification number. At the end of the shift, this amount is totaled and the server pays 6% of that amount. If a server receives poor tips that shift, she may take home very little money.

"But why doesn't the restaurant pay the wages of the busboy, hostess and runners," I wanted to know. Is it not the restaurant's duty to provide adequate personnel to get the job done? I was bewildered as to why it was my responsibility to pay their wages. It was explained to me, as if I were slightly simple for not immediately grasping why it was my responsibility, that these support persons were helping me to do my job, and since it was my job, it was my duty to help pay them.

Well, we can take the support personnel away, it was subtly suggested, and then see how many tips you get. After all, if the diner has a bad dining experience, (say there are no clean tables, or the food is late coming from the kitchen) the server is the one who will be blamed and not get a tip.

So, I grudgingly agreed to help pay the extra help. By that time even I almost believed it was my duty to shell out my hard earned money to receive support help. Why not, after all? Apparently it was my duty to persuade the customer to pay me; by that logic it only stood to reason that I get more from the customer to pay the rest of the help too.

It was only after being hired and spending countless hours memorizing the hundreds of menu items, the long list of wines, whiskies and various coffee drinks, as well as absorbing all the other endless tidbits I would need to know in order to dazzle the customer with my suave serving skills, did I realized I was doing a lot of work but making little money.

First there was the waiting. Not the serving kind, but the standing around waiting for a customer to arrive kind. And while hanging out, I was making the whopping sum of $2.15 per hour Of course the restaurant wasn't going to pay 7 to 10 servers more that that to stand around waiting, although they wanted that many available just in case the restaurant got busy. I don't know how many other business would keep employees with that practice. If the restaurant didn't fill up and the waitress waited on only a couple of tables (or none in some cases) and went home with 5 bucks (minus the tip share, of course) well that was just the waitress' hard luck.

Now, to make things worse, before leaving each waitress had 'side jobs' that had to be finished each shift. Side jobs included stocking the salad bar, condiment bar, and dessert bar, cleaning the bathrooms, mopping the restaurant, bisseling the carpet, scrubbing down walls, hosing down trash cans... the list was endless. Sometimes I spent as much time doing side work as I did waiting on tables. And for side work I was paid waitress pay of $2.15 an hour. Restaurants can't get away with slave labor, but it's close.

I never became a great waitress, although I did eventually get into the range of about ten dollars an hour. Yet I did learn that when dining out, to tip my server really well because I understand how difficult the job is. I also know that the server is not being fairly paid by the company they are working for. Yet each time I lay down that tip, I can't help think how unjust it is for the customer to be expected to pay the wages of an employee rather than the company they are working for. Somehow, it seems to me that if an employee gives a good days work, they should be fairly paid a just wage by the company they work for. Every other company has to pay their employees using the government minimum wage standards. Why should restaurants be given special privileges? Tips should be used to show appreciation, not as a means for a company to bypass its responsibility to pay its employees a decent, well deserved wage.