Came across this article this morning. Talks about what is happiness and why some people are and some are not.
It is from a secular point of view. It does not address the spiritial aspect, which I think is really important.
http://www.livescience.com/health/080822-top5-keys-happiness.html
Still its a good article.
The thing is, it seems, is that happiness really is a choice.
And you have to define it for yourself. Is it feeling great? Or is it just the absence of feeling bad? You have to define it for yourself and then decide you want it to have it.
The writer of Ecclesiastes was pretty pessimistic. He wrote.
Ecc. 1:2 "Meaningless! Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless."
1:8 All things are wearisome, more than one can say. The eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing.
In a strange way, I take comfort in that. Even if things seem really bad, or if you have a really bad week, its still meaningless. If things are great, that too is meaningless.
Hard to say what is good or bad even.
I lost my job through a senseless mistake and some senseless actions, yet ... i feel very good. I am at peace within myself and more relaxed than I have been in years.
As Bob Dylan wrote
"whats good is bad, what's bad is good."
Youll find out when you reach the top, you're on the bottom"
Or, as Jesus said
The first will be last and the last will be first.
Everything is meaningless, as it is writ.
So it is up to us to decide what attitude to take about it. What ever is , is, whatever will be, will be.
This is a good thought for me, as well as Arkansas City.
Attitude is everything in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteGalatians 5: 13-15
ReplyDelete13 You my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature, rather, serve one another in love.
14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
15 If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out you will be destroyed by each other.
I couldn't find the Kelley blog - unrelated - sorry.
ReplyDeleteMore on (pun intended!) Kelley (it's from late last month)
The budget framework approved yesterday by the Kansas House Appropriations Committee wasn't a beautiful thing- after all, it did slash spending on public schools by more than $100 million- but it didn't include a Republican proposal to include mandatory day-long furloughs for the next year for state employees.
It did, however, eliminate spending on a program that is was slowly increasing state employee pay up to a level state employees would make if they worked in the private sector.
From Hawver:
The committee eliminated the $8.5 million expenditure for Fiscal Year ‘10’s part of a five-year program to bring state employee wages to market levels and spent more than a half hour considering mandatory furloughs of a day a month for a year for all but public safety and direct health-care employees.
State employees ought not rest easy, however, because my very favorite nasty piece of work in the Legislature, GOP State Rep. Kasha Kelley, still wants to fire as many state workers as she can- or, at least, she wants them to have to take a cut in pay.
[I]t sounds like Rep. Kasha Kelley, R-Arkansas City, will be putting together a bill aimed at furloughs or state employee pay cuts for the Veto session.
Our economy is still in a tailspin. A greater percentage of Kansans are unemployed today than have been for nearly 30 years. Families are struggling to pay basic bills, let along keep up on mortgages and car payments. Even with all of that taken into account, Kasha Kelley still thinks the responsible action for the state to take it layoffs or pay cuts.
Here's a novel idea- rather than trying to balance the budget of the state of Kansas on the backs the hardworking folk employed by the state, how about make the tough choices to *gasp* increase revenues?
"Oh, but a tax increase might hurt business!" Can anyone really think slashing the take home pay of thousands of Kansans won't hurt the Kansas economy just as bad- if not worse?
Damn...I hate it when the pro-business rhetoric of conservative Republicans is so, so clearly opposed to the success and well-being of the individuals they are supposed to represent.
Perhaps, though, I have the solve for this whole problem: I think the state would be best served if the people of Kasha Kelley's district gave her a permanent involuntary furlough. Kansas can't afford people in the Legislature who are willing put Kansans behind business interests.
Gee, that article of Kasha Kelley wasn't biased at all.. where'd you copy and paste that from, www.ihaterepublicans.com?
ReplyDeleteor was it www.liberalwhiner.com?
A greater percentage of Kansans are unemployed today than have been for nearly 30 years. Families are struggling to pay basic bills,
ReplyDelete>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well then why don't we make Kansas a more business friendly State. Create more private sector jobs - then with less or the even the same government workers there might be more to raise the remaining ones pay.
But, you want to make more government or maybe even drive more business from the State!
You should spend some time looking at California. They have had more people leave their State in the last four years than move there and they are losing talent and business to other surrounding States. All the while they are replacing them with Mexican poverty!
It has been suggested that California has a big enough economy that they all by themselves can delay any economic recovery for the rest of the Country.
One last note - the government employee unions in California (which is stated to be at 57% while all other states average around 37%) want the Federal economic stimulus money spent on them which would most likely take all the money.
It can't go back to the way it was - the Government at any level was never intended to be used to favor one or any group or individual over another. It is those who wish to keep or perpetuate their own agenda above all others that will most likely delay any recovery!
Not sure where it came from...I searched for kasha Kelley business interests and this was just one article I got. There were more...many more.
ReplyDeleteOh, and spare me...I know, I know...you went to school with her and she was just a sweetheart with nothing but good in her heart.
ReplyDeleteNo, actually I didn't, but the constant bashing of republicans by you liberals just gets old. What, now that Bush is gone you had to find someone new to bash?
ReplyDeleteObviously more people like Kasha's views, since she won re-election. If any of us gripe about Obama you lefties say that we should support him because he is our President, no matter whether we voted for him or not.
I must take exception...she's the only one I bash, because she is bad for Kansas , bad for the GOP, and worse for citizens of Cowley. They are simply too uninformed to realize it.
ReplyDeleteYou are free to bash Obama all you want. I didn't vote for him.
Do you pay taxes? With more of us being laid off, it is putting the tax burden on fewer people. Some would rather cut spending and reduce government to prevent this while others want to raise taxes to the few left paying them. Left wingers believe we are to stupid to fend for ourselves and want the governement to do it for us. If you do not believe me, just read some of their rants on the blogs. They think they are the only one with brains or an education.
ReplyDeleteGOP have many geniuses in their camp...Rush, Bush, Colter...need I go on??? I don't think that as a democrat I am smarter than Republicans but you haven't shown many smarts recently...
ReplyDeleteI always loved competitive sports - but going in you know there is always a winner and a loser! Nobody likes a loser, right?
ReplyDeleteThe object is always to win!
However, without opposing sides or players there wouldn't be a game at all. Even the team that loses had good plays and some exceptional players. If its a really close game it might even be decided by the referees. Btw: I hate games that end with penalties that decide the outcome or determine the winner.
But, If the players ever reached the point where "playing" was not worth the risk of losing?
There would be no game at all!
It is through competition that we achieve the discipline and drive to achieve greatness.
Even the loser is a winner when they can participate in the sport. Their victory may be in one play or one shot. Their contribution to the overall teams effort.
I don't see the basis of politics as much different than competitive sports. The stakes may be of greater importance short and long term.
But, the fact that there are players willing to find solutions and debate them to find or reach a common goal is way better than any other alternative we see around the world.
So don't be disheartened when opposing sides choose to do battle for the greater good of the
game!
But, be worried when they choose to quit playing!