If you talk to god, you are praying; if god talks to you, you have schizophrenia. ~~ Szasz
If you talk to god, you are praying; if god talks to you, you have schizophrenia. ~~ Szasz
JTF, I'll answer anyway.
Yes, I have.
I was sitting in a barbershop, minding my own business waiting for a haircut one day. The day was unremarkable.
Something, and I cannot tell you what, except perhaps the fact that the barbershop was directly across the street from a church, got me to thinking about God and Christ. And as vividly as I can remember anything, I remember being asked "Who do you say I am?". And it was repeated.
I have no question in my heart or mind God was calling me to make a decision about Christ.
"He is my Savior and my Lord." was my only possible reply.
I am a Christian JTF, not by my own words, or because I'm such a great guy, just a sinner saved by grace.
IF that makes me crazy in the eyes of some, or you, there's nothing I can do about it.
As you may already know, for years I have referred to the users of those devices as The Proto-Borg.
I think it was the little, blinking, blue light that freaked me out a bit when I first saw it.
I know . . . i know . . . That's Crazy Talk . . . today, i pay it no mind.
except, of course, on those rare occasions when i wonder:
how come phones are getting "Smarter" and people are getting dumber?.
1 Kings 19:11-13 (King James Version)
11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake:
12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
13 And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?
personally, i think that this is just as true today as it was when it happened.
even if the nuts in the "school of higher criticism" wants to nit-pick the issue of whether "'still small' voice" actually meant "still" in the sense of "not moving" or "not getting bigger". of course, i used to be a big J. Vernon McGee student so . . . wow. come to think of it, i'm STILL a J. Verson McGee student . . .
No, but he did look like he was a boxer at one time. He had pretty good moves. My wife and I both thought that he had probably taken too many hits to the head. Of course, that is what made it even more dangerous because he was strong enough and had the boxing knowledge to kill someone with his bare hands, even if the victim tried to fight back.
Jim K: There would have been a couple of exclamation points next to the "Like" ^^ if that feature was available.
Just to lighten it up a bit . . .
THEY should have thrown a net over the entire crowd and hauled them away to the nearest PsychoGulag in the Archipelago.
Did you notice how they--not THE THEY, but they, the nuts and flakes comprising the crowd--cheered at the words, "crazy" and "insane"?
Did you see how few of them were texting or talking on phones during the performance?
As much as I would love to talk to you about your conversation, let's just rule out religious dialogue as a sign of mental instability. What about my Uncle Chester telling me to throw knives at kids in the park. Would that put me over in the 'crazy' column?
You know, let me just cut to the chase. Do you SoonerDave think there are mentally ill people in the world?
Back to the original topic: It wasn't budget problems, or even the revelation of horrible asylum conditions in such books and movies as "The Snake Pit" that caused most of the "mental cases" to be turned out on the streets. It was, in fact, the same judicial/legal mentality that has given us such illogical policies as "zero tolerance" in schools and caused kindergarteners to be expelled for pointing a finger at another student as if it were a gun.
Starting in the mid-50s, and gaining ground through the 70s and 80s, courts began holding that keeping the mentally ill confined to treatment centers was in violation of their civil rights. The mantra was "mainstreaming" and the general belief was that, like Professor Harold Hill in "The Music Man", the desired result (return to society's mainstream in this case) could be achieved by simply thinking the correct thoughts...
The result should have been predictable by anyone NOT themselves in need of mental assistance -- but as soon as the most severe schizophrenics were turned out of the places where their medication was assured, the situation began going down that road paved with good intentions...
The elephant in the room, of course, is that one size CANNOT fit all; each and every one of us is a mental case, even those who are 100 percent rational and functional. "Mental illness," just like physical illness, covers a continuum from "unnoticeably small" to "totally impaired" but all people have their individual quirks, that others may interpret as mental problems.
In fact, the definition of "sanity" may even depend on specific conditions and vary from time to time. I met an artillery captain in Korea who freely admitted that he got his greatest pleasure from killing people. He was on his second tour at the time, having been seriously wounded on his first -- and having a fist-sized hole in his back where the bullet had torn away muscle that never grew back. And the day after the shooting stopped in 1953, he applied for transfer to the advisory group in Viet Nam. His solution to his love of killing was to stay in the military and on the front lines, where killing the enemy was a good thing to do.
Most folk respond to my recollection of him with "The man was insane." On the contrary, I telieve he was one of the sanest people I ever met, since he recognized his inner drives and went to great lengths to channel them into socially acceptable areas. Had he returned to civilian life, then yes, he would have been insane -- and probably would have become notorious as a serial killer.
Is there an answer to the problem of the homeless? Not really, not in the sense that we can apply any sort of "one size fits all" bandage and magically make everything right for them. We have to view them as individuals, not as a group, and do what we can to meet the needs of each one of them. For some, it may be simply providing shelter and a chance to make one's own way in life. For others, it may mean providing medication and treatment. And for a few who are so far out of touch with what the rest of us call reality that they pose dangers to themselves and others, it may require confinement. Determing such needs on an individual basis would tax the wisdom of Solomon (Sulemain?) himself -- but we need to address it, and do so yesterday if not sooner!
Thank Jim. That is exactly what I would like to talk about. We need family members to look out for the best interest of these people without having to take on the financial burden of doing something. It was only last month a mentally ill man killed a family of 4 in OKC. I have to think that this family would still be alive today if they could have had their relative institutionalized for everyone's safety. Not only are the people dead but this person has to live the rest of his life knowing he killed his sisters, a child, and his mother.
http://kfor.com/2013/08/15/three-wom...ct-in-custody/
Neighbors say they didn’t know the family well, but they had frequently seen Daniel Green walking the street. They say he often talked to himself or spoke to them about previous lives.
...
Megan also knew the suspect. However, she was shocked to find out he was the one arrested for the crime.
Megan said, “I didn’t think he’d ever do something like that.”
It just dawned on me that all of this may have something to do with explaining why Vinita, Oklahoma--to this very day--has only one gas station.
Say! . . . Maybe Aubrey McC saw a future need for housing/ending homelessness/providing treatment and that is why The Campus on Western . . .
(nah. scratch that idea. nevermind.)
See the merit? So freedoms are only freedoms if one agrees with the content? I can only find one redeeming thing about Westboro folk. In my own opinion they do seem to be stellar at being bad examples of how to conduct oneself in public. But they have the right to expression and assembly, however wrong headed I may feel their views are. Doesn't mean I have to stand across the barrier and listen, or holla back.
Doesn't mean that you don't have to neither (nor vice-versa). . . doesn't it? =)
[Old Joke Ending:
A: Why don't you take one lug nut off each of the other three wheels and refasten that one?
B: Wow. That's really smart. What the heck are you doing on that side of the fence?
A: I'm in here for being crazy . . . Not stupid.]
JTF's taco bell lady was hardly menacing. Came across a local version, never knew his name, always just referred to him as Sarge. Back when I was in classes, and for some time after while reading more than writing, it was common for me to study at night at what was then the Kettle on W Main. Could eat if I wanted without waking my lovely or the babies. Didn't have to muss with coffeepots, etc.
Sarge would wander in from time to time. By all outward appearances, Sarge was alone. But it never took long for someone new to realize that, at least for Sarge, his entourage numbered three. His reaction to the 'others' was always distinct. He didn't merely ramble, as some thought, he truly seemed engaged with the others, whether we saw them or not. So far as I know, Sarge never hurt anyone, except perhaps himself. i do not imagine he was at all loyal to whatever medication regimen he was supposed to be following.
I can think of many such situations I would not consider menacing at all. I can think of far more completely sane situations I would consider significantly more menacing.
But, I probably ought to also acknowledge I've known a lot of people both personally and professionally whose walks through life were somewhat different than the stereotypical strolls of the vast majority of folk.
If we were to start locking folks away at a far greater rate than it used today ... since no one wants govt. to spend what they already spend, then it has to come at the expense of something else. So, what do we do without to fund the meaningful care, medication and therapy of the ill? Or, for those who might hold a more callous view, to fund the minimally necessary expense in order to warehouse them folk what be different, cause after all, being different, that's bad.
This far into the thread and nobody has mentioned that many of the psychotropic drugs only cause more havoc. The idea of "treatment" these days is a prescription. For many, that prescription becomes a time bomb.
Not true JTF. We presently do lock away dangerous folk. True, we do not lock away tree boxers in mass. Of course, we don't lock away bank robbers when they are at the Wal mart register buying note pads and pen the night, week, month before the heist. We're funny like that. And yes, sometimes it means someone who many know is a bit off does kill his family. Definitely tragic. But was he doing anything the six hours before, a day before, a month before, that indicated clear danger to self or others?
I've had hot under the collar gotta vent days. I know I wouldn't want someone making a lasting decision on my mental status based on a 10-20 minute jag when enough is enough of certain piles of bullfeathers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks