Home » Archive by category "Equality" (Page 5)

Freedom to choose in Pay As You Go Phones vs Sim Free Mobile Phones

The never before seen growth of mobile phone usage these days has resulted in tougher competition as well. The main reason behind this was to capture the biggest share of the market and for doing so, companies had to incorporate the best of technologies and advanced applications. Not only with regards to the mobile handsets but the variety of mobile phone offers available has also become quite opulent.

Pay As You Go Phones vs Sim Free Mobile Phones is therefore one such comparison in which two of the most popular deals available are compared. Depending upon the usage and other related requirements, a user may choose most appropriate deal, although both schemes are equally competent. Almost all latest handsets are available today with these deals whereas a number of exciting free gifts may also be availed from time to time. Although these two are not as opulent as the contract phones in terms of their offerings, a large section of users still find them more than suitable.

Pay As You Go Phones for instance have the element of freedom that makes them popular for those not wishing to enter into any contract. Unlike contract phones, payg users does not need to have a credit card or enter into long term deals. They are at liberty to switch over to other network provider in case they find their service unsatisfactory. And in doing so, they do not have to inform the service provider in advance. A user just has to select a particular network provider, choose the mobile handset supported by that provider and insert a SIM card from the same. This is followed by purchasing credit in advance which is done by using a pre-paid card and activating the code given via the customer service. One then uses the service as long as credit is available, on expiry of which one has to recharge the amount. Thus, such an arrangement ensures one never spends too much for phone charges. Secondly, the monthly billing system of the contract phone is done away with.

Pay As You Go Phones vs Sim Free Mobile Phones remains inconsequential without discussing the other contender. This quite popular phone scheme available for the users with similar freedom and usability is the Sim Free Mobile Phones. This type of deal enables one to use any handset with any network service provider. For example, a user may purchase a gadget of his choice, and then select any service provider. He then has to insert a SIM card from the selected network provider after which he starts using the services. There are no restrictions as to choose only those handsets that are supported by a particular network provider as in the case of payg. In case the user feels dissatisfied, he can always switch over to some other by simply changing the SIM card.

Users can choose from some of the most advanced and sophisticated handsets available today, or they can opt for a budget, value for money device. Nokia 5800 XpressMusic, Nokia 6300, Nokia 6500 slide, Samsung tocco lite, Samsung Omnia, Sony Ericsson W880i, Sony Ericsson W995 and BlackBerry Bold are some of the latest handsets available today. Thus as far as mobile handsets are concerned, Pay As You Go Phones vs Sim Free Mobile Phones is more or less on the same terms. It is only after assessing and determining the individual requirement of the user that one will be able to opt for the most suitable deal from these two.

who were the progressives and what are the comparisons and contrasts with the Founders?

with these subjects

1. the grounding of politics (Nature vs history)
2. the meaning of equality
3. the meaning of freedom
4. the source of rights
5. the scope and aim of government
6. the organization of government

Roe Vs Wade answer questions?

1. How does the decision in Roe V. Wade show the government’s goals of freedom, order and equality?

2. How does the decision illustrate the conflict between the government’s goals of freedom, order and equality?

3. How does the Supreme Court in this case resolve which goal is more important when these goals are in conflict?

4. Do you agree with the decision in terms of which goal(s) ultimately won? Why or why not?
@ Foon, for some reason it wouldn’t let me post the question if I had it under the Politics & Government section.

Freedom From Fear Vs. Fear of Freedom

Do I feel free? I don’t think so. Freedom is not just a potential opportunity to do the things that one openly chooses to do, because most human actions are predicated on primal instincts such as fear. Moreover, most of the things that one makes others do are done out of fear. Of course they include not only fear, but also love and other passions, though fear stands out as the most significant component in the motivation for one’s actions.

I can justify this statement by simply analyzing the fact that fear is a major factor that survives across generations throughout the entire span of biological evolution as a result of natural selection. Organisms that experience more fear and are more aware of their surroundings express due diligence and caution in their actions and responses, thereby avoiding more life-threatening dangers. In their aversion they are sustaining their bloodline, or rather their genetic contributions to future generations, and ultimately increase their Darwinian Fitness (pass their genes to the next generation). We can assume that our ability to experience fear is a result of lengthy evolution. Christophe Lambert, in his book “La société de la peur” (“The Society of Fear”), argues that modern society is based on fear. It could be the fear of financial losses, unemployment, or inability to support one’s family, but it also can include the fear of solitude, fear of growing old, fear of sickness, and of course the fear of death. Lambert makes a strong statement that modern society provokes most of this fear by imposing competitive values and an intense pace of life. One of his major concerns is television, which he calls “le ‘nouvel’ opium du peuple” (“the new opium of the people”). Once it started as a very positive feature of life in the early 1950s, extending the horizons and the abilities of common people to acquire knowledge about other nations and about world events, but with time it has become so manipulative that it is difficult for the viewer to distinguish between truth and drama. Lambert mentions that society at the beginning of the twenty-first century still remembers the consequences of attempts to fulfill the utopian ideals of some questionable minds of the twentieth century: Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud.

Nietzsche continued to explore concerns with the existence of God, and therefore finished the work of the philosophers of the Enlightenment and the philosophers of the French revolution. By stating that “God is dead” he started a deep crack in the once-solid belief in the Almighty. He also created the concept of the “superman” that provided the foundation for Nazi attempts to improve the human race.

Karl Marx created a utopian economic theory by criticizing the old brand of capitalism of the nineteenth century, but he also made false predictions about the future development of class struggle which ultimately laid the basis for numerous communist states. This almost led to global nuclear war and a complete extinction of the human species.

Sigmund Freud, probably the most innocent of this trio, developed a theory of the subconscious, arguing that most people’s motivations are based on aggression and libido. This laid the groundwork for a series of sexual revolutions which occurred in the decades of the ‘20s, ‘50s, ‘70s, and ‘80s of the twenty-first century. Most likely Freud didn’t do much damage on a global scale and was also quite successful in developing methods of psychoanalytical theories. But we cannot ignore the likelihood that his ideas had a certain influence on the rate of divorce and jeopardized the institution of the family by diminishing the value of people’s relationships, bringing them down to the “libido-aggression” level.

Christophe Lambert, once again, brings up the statistics of divorce rates in France, which have grown 400% in the last forty years. According to other statistics, 1 in every 3 marriages in the United States ends in divorce. Solitude, absence of family support, confusing religious beliefs, indefinite sexual relationships, and frustrating and scary media provide a full portrait of our fears in a nutshell.

How is it possible to obtain freedom from fear? The only way that I can see is to combat the factors that create fear, the factors that we have analyzed above. In order to combat solitude we must learn to build our relationships on a mutual basis and not to expect more than the other party can give. This even though (as Lambert argues) the internet is separating people rather than connecting them, because it eliminates personal contact. Personally I cannot agree with this statement, because the Internet today allows video conversations and very intense socialization, even with the most distant parts of the world. So I would argue that we should praise the Internet as a wonderful medium for building great relationships and making new friends, because avenues now exist to meet professional colleagues and start relationships with total strangers, which would not otherwise be possible. We also must admit that the Internet is a safe way to do this, in so far as it is not possible to cause any harm in a physical way through such virtual means of communication.

We cannot diminish the importance of the basic needs of each and every individual to have some sort of system of belief that may or may not be based on conventional religious ideas. It doesn’t matter whether the individual chooses to be a believer or an atheist, but it is very important that he build a system of beliefs that he will feel comfortable with and then stay consistent with.

Lambert further argues that the main occupation of modern society is consumption. “Sex idols” have become a commodity not unlike oil, wheat, and sugar. In the same way that excessive consumption of sugar is not good for one’s health and may even cause diabetes, excessive consumption of “sex idols” is not good for your soul or your family and will eventually leave you in a state of isolation and solitude. Alain Delon, the famous French actor who ruled women’s hearts all over the world for almost half a century, now spends his days completely alone in the pleasant company of his three dogs and one cat, as the magazine “Paris Match” reports to its readers. When he was asked in an interview why he is not happy and why he is alone, he answered: “I wasn’t programmed for happiness. I was programmed for success.” Those two things don’t always come hand in hand. Therefore, the world is starting to turn its eyes from the wild promiscuity of the ‘70s and ‘80s to old-fashioned family values that we may choose to adopt in order to obtain freedom from fear of solitude and isolation.

It is important to move towards the restoration of the old-fashioned family values that have been destroyed in the wake of industrialization and post- industrialization. Emancipation, which granted equal rights to both sexes, also has a dark side in that it has deprived women of their privileges as the weaker gender which many women would love to restore. Society, in the era of total emancipation, has failed to provide basic childcare and educational services on a level comparable to that which could be insured by active parental involvement. There is a need to build strong family relationships using compromises and by expressing sincere interest in the problems and beliefs of your loved ones. This can provide us with at least a slight hope of not finding ourselves in old age suffering from solitude and isolation.

I believe that by limiting exposure to the media we may substantially reduce our level of fear and anxiety. We don’t realize how strongly we are influenced by the images we see on TV. One young woman who resides in a tiny French village was interviewed by TF1 and reported that she experienced a lot of fear. When asked why she felt this fear she answered, “Avec tout ce que l’on voit à la télé on a des raisons d’avoir peur” (“With all this that one can watch on TV, one has reasons to have fear”). If TV is negatively impacting the lives of modest inhabitants in distant villages, what can we expect from people living in the frenzy of modern cities?

Protecting ourselves from excessive exposure to the media might reduce our tendency to sink into consumerism, and therefore protect us from an obsession with consumption as the main focus of our lives. In abandoning consumerism as a lifestyle, we may be surprised to realize how few things a person really needs to support their existence.

When we manage to achieve freedom from fear, however, we will need to find a way to overcome our fear of freedom, because there is really nothing to fear but fear itself. The only question that remains is, are we ready to face the possibilities of a free existence?

Bruce Kriger is a prolific scientific writer whose work has been published in a number of languages. He is a member of several associations including: the Canadian Science Writers’ Association, the Canadian Philosophical Association, the International Academy of Science, the World Future Society, the National Space Society and the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada and Planetary Society.

Surprise Locksmith
tx refi
fanny pack antics
ipod car kit

Dr. king Vs. Malcom X?

Dr. King and Malcolm X each suggest radically different approaches to attaining freedom and equality for African-Americans in American society, contrast these two leaders’ approaches to freedom and equality, and state which side you believe is the more effective approach.

Freedom Series

A series of 3 MP3 downloadable Hypnosis recordings designed to assist women who are experiencing difficulties with an ability to . There is in addition a free MP3 downloadable recording for General Relaxation.
Freedom Series

Highway to Financial Freedom

An eBook showing the Way to Financial Freedom via Effective and Simple Way.
Highway to Financial Freedom

Submit Equalizer

Automate Your Website Submissions Fast! Submit Equalizer Is Your #1 Website Submitter That Will Get You Traffic Immediately.
Submit Equalizer

Spirituality VS Religion

Do you think that spirituality and religion are synonymous? I used to think that they were, but as I learned more, I discovered there are major differences. I found out that you can be spiritual and religious, spiritual and not religious, or religious and not spiritual. That may seem confusing. I will explain.

To being with, there are only two basic emotions, love and fear. The loved based emotions include compassion, forgiveness, caring, kindness, and unconditional love, which is true love because there are no conditions. Whereas fear based emotions include control, guilt, anger, abuse, and passive and active aggression.

It is also helpful to understand that we have four basic parts, mental, emotional, physical and spiritual. Our human personalities are composed of our mental, emotional, and physical parts. They make us unique. Our spiritual part is our higher-self, our all-good, all-knowing, unconditional loving part. It is also known as our God-self. We can connect with our spiritual truths through our intuition.

Therefore, spirituality comes from our spiritual part. When we commit to being honest, kind, caring, loving and accepting of others and ourselves, we are acting from our spiritual part. We have integrity, create win-win solutions, and do what we can to make a positive difference, see everyone as equals and deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

For example, I know of a policeman who stopped a truck driver for drunken driving. He knew that if he arrested the middle aged-man, he would lose his job and not be able to support his family. Instead, he drove him home and talked to him about his problem. He also counseled his family. I call him a “spiritual cop.” He cared enough to help the man and not just punish him.

Spiritual people support everyone having equal rights. They act considerate and responsible. They believe in the power of positive thinking and take responsibility for their lives. Spirituality means living from love rather than fear.

Where does God or a higher power come into all of this? If they do believe in a divine being that looks like a light or person, it will be a loving one that supports, protects, and provides for them. They feel supported to be their unique selves. Spiritual people accept that God is all-loving, and all-powerful, and wants them to be happy, healthy, abundant and successful. They often speak directly to God, instead of having a person relay God’s messages to them. Or, they are spiritual and religious because they have loving spiritual leaders and books that support them living from love and acceptance.

Spiritual people do not have any dogma or rules except Karma, (you reap what you sow) what you do to others will be done back to you. For example, if you are cruel to other people, you will probably experience people being mean back. Your kindness will be rewarded with a return of kindness.

On the other hand, religion has a dogma and a human being interpreting their God’s messages. As we all know, human beings have fears and they can alter the information, consciously or unconsciously. Religious books were translated by man throughout the ages. The information can be loving or fear based. It is my belief that if it is loving and supportive, then it is spiritual. However, if it is preaching guilt, control, superiority, judgment of others who are different, and believing only their truth is right, it is not spiritual. If it is teaching that you are sinful and here to suffer and struggle, it is not spiritual.

I do not believe that God tries to control us. God honors our free will, and wants us to be happy as any healthy parent would. “Joy and laughter are signs of God’s presence.” I believe that God gave us the proverb, “Do unto others as you want others to do unto you.” Honor and accept everyone, and allow them to live their lives as they choose. Spiritual people live and let live. They see everyone as equals and support freedom and liberty for all. They live from love!

copyright 2009 by Helene Rothschild, MS, MA, LMFT, Licensed Marriage, Family Therapist, intuitive counselor, and author of,”All You Need Is HART! Create Love, Joy and Abundance ~NOW!” She offers telephone sessions, a relationship check-up report/questionnaire, books, e-books, CDs, Mp3 audios, plus a free newsletter, “Healing Your Body” Mp3 and “Truths Set You Free” e-booklet. http://www.angeloncall.net , 1-888-639-6390.

paintball guns

Liberty Vs License

Where do our rights stop? A popular saying holds that they stop at the end of the next person’s nose. But, judging from the never ending stream of demands that assault us every day, it appears that everything on our personal and collective wish lists have now become rights, without limit.

Do we have a right to say and do anything we want, to unlimited health care, prescription drugs, subsidized housing, “to do drugs,” to prevent others from using drugs, to have health care plans pay for a sex change operation or prescriptions for Viagra, to a free college education, to receive “equal pay” for “equal work” (however that may be defined), to send your children to the school of your choice, to smoke or prevent others from smoking, to force our opinions or beliefs on others (as in Christian, Muslim or atheist, hedonist, or environmentalist)?

If our rights stop at the end of the next person’s nose, does that include their pocketbook? Stealing may be illegal and immoral, but whether or not it is acceptable seems to depend on who does it and why, and sometimes how. For example, is it acceptable for someone to steal food to feed their family but unacceptable if they steal money to keep from losing their home in foreclosure?

Taking money from others by force or at gunpoint or by embezzling it from an employer or some company is a crime, but how many people condone appropriating someone else’s dollars through taxation? Probably everyone, to some degree. But, isn’t that the problem? That is, the degree? Too often, in matters of taxation, right and wrong depend on who has the power to tax or whose ox is being gored.

When did we move from the freedom of speech guaranteed by our Constitution to freedom of speech only if it is politically correct according to some particular group, as in African Americans, Hispanics, women, gays, liberals, conservatives, Christians, Muslims, Jews…..you name it? Our treasured freedom of speech seems to be acceptable only so long as it conforms to some special interest group’s definition of expression they consider “correct.”

There always seem to be good and sufficient reasons to impose our individual or collective will on others. Both sides of the political spectrum find plenty of justification for pressing their values on everyone else. Abortion is about a woman’s right to do what she wants with her body or it is murder, depending on one’s personal beliefs. Those on the left say that the Boy Scouts are wrong to prevent gays from being scout leaders, notwithstanding the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution guarantees their right to make such a determination. But, that hasn’t stopped the ACLU and others who oppose the Boy Scouts’ policies from attempting to force communities around the nation to punish them in various ways, such as pressuring donors, including local governments, to stop giving them money or to cancel long standing privileges to use certain community facilities, such as parks or school grounds.

Schools have always been able to define the types of organizations that are permitted to hold meetings in their facilities or on their grounds or, for that matter, to even organize. But now, under the guise of keeping church and state separated, they go to such extremes as permitting clubs to organize celebrations like Kwanzaa or Voodoo rituals while preventing Christian students from holding club meetings on school grounds.

Or, how about the right of students to swear at others, including teachers, on school grounds? In some places vile language is considered acceptable, while prayer is not.

Do I have the right to demand that I be compensated for some perceived injustice, such as reparations for slavery? After failing to gain any traction with Congress, those who hold this view are now attempting to pursue claims against certain American corporations that were in business at the time their ancestors were enslaved and that profited from slavery. They may have the right to try, but should they? Apparently, stopping at the other person’s nose does not include corporate pockets.

Generally, we have the right to decide what and how much we eat, but there are some people who feel we should not be permitted to eat meat or a diet that’s high in carbohydrates or fat. Should they be allowed to determine what a proper diet should be for everyone else? Is obesity a disease or just lack of control? I suppose it can be either or, depending on the circumstances, but who’s to say? So, for some people it appears that it is just too bad if my “nose,” as in my dietary choices, happens to get in the way of someone else’s notion of what’s good for me.

Rights can be measured on a continuum, ranging from not having any rights to absolute, unrestricted and uncontrolled rights to do or say anything, that is, anything to anyone, anytime, anywhere. But, unlimited rights eventually reach the point where they become license. By license, I mean the unrestricted freedom to say or do anything we please, regardless of whose “nose’ gets in the way. Is that what we want?

In the final analysis, rights are really more about self-control than they are about laws or regulation or the constitution. You may have, or think you have, the right to say or do whatever you please, but that doesn’t always mean you should, law or no law.

Harris Sherline is a retired Certified Public Accountant and executive. His diverse business background includes experience as a partner in a public accounting firm, as a principal in a number of business ventures and as CEO of a hospital. His conservative commentaries appear weekly in two Santa Barbara newspapers. In addition, his op-ed articles currently appear regularly on three widely read web sites and his own weblog, Opinionfest.com.

las vegas hotel deals