Breath Wind Spirit Words

In many languages the words breath and spirit are connected. My earlier article is on the many traditions which believe that God/Creator breathed the animating spirit into human beings. See The Breath and Spirit of Life.


Today's column is related in that it presents a list of words from many cultures and languages that have the double meaning of breath and spirit or life force.

Aramaic – ruach/ruakh – wind, air, gas; spirit, breath

Aztec – tona – vital energy; heat

Babylonian – vahu – wind god; breath of life

Chinese – qi – breath; vital energy










Cree Native American – oenikika – breath of life

Greek – pneuma – breath, air, wind; spirit, soul

Hawaiian Ancient – ha – breath of life, life force energy

Hebrew – nephesh – breath, soul, life

Hindu – prana – life force; the breath of god

Lakota Native American – woniya waken – holy air

Maori – nge – breath of life

Mayan – ik – breath of life, spirit, life force; name of the wind god; wind, vital energy

Zoroastrian – raman – breath of life

Listening to God

In the last post I talked about all the ways people over the centuries and around the world have found to speak to God.

Today, I list many of the ways people hear God.

This can be a rather controvercial topic. Hearing what God has to say is called Divination, and that's a very dirty word with some people. I don't know though. If you are going to go through all the trouble of speaking to God, isn't it right and respectful that you should listen, or don't you think God will respond?

God does respond, and a couple of the terms for that response are "oracle" and "divination." The following definitions are from the pages of the Online Etymology Dictionary.

oracle c.1384, "a message from a god, expressed by divine inspiration," from O.Fr. oracle (12c.), from L. oraculum "divine announcement, oracle," from orare "pray, plead." In antiquity, "the agency or medium of a god," also "the place where such divine utterances were given." This sense is attested in Eng. from c.1400.

divine (v.) originally "to make out by supernatural insight," early 14c., from L. divinus which also meant "soothsayer." Hence, divination (c.1374), from O.Fr., from L. divinationem (nom. divinatio) "the power of foreseeing, prediction," from divinatus, pp. of divinare, lit. "to be inspired by a god."

-mancy combining form meaning "divination by means of," from O.Fr. -mancie, from L.L. -mantia, from Gk. manteia "oracle, divination," from mantis "seer, prophet, soothsayer," related to mania "madness, frenzy."

Maybe that's why divination is frowned upon, it implies madness or frenzy! As you will see, that can be a component, but certainly isn't necessary.

A friend and I had the discussion years ago on the topic: "How do people hear God's message?" The answer we came up with was: "Whatever way you are most likely to be listening for it!"

That means that there is no wrong way, no evil way, no way that can be frowned upon or discarded as worthless. It all depends on how you listen! You know we are all unique, and you know that people speak to God in different ways, prayer, chanting, singing. Why shouldn't we hear God in different ways, too?

I personally have used Tarot, Runes, Yijing (I Ching), Scrying, and Stichomancy.

So, here are a few of the ways people hear God's reply. Some are ancient, some come from the middle of time, and some - like computer divination - are relatively new. All are valid for the people who use them!


How do you hear God's message?

Aeromancy – the prediction of future events from observation of weather conditions.

Alectryomancy – using a rooster to select grains of food placed on letters of the alphabet, the letters being put together in the order in which the grains were eaten.

Aleuromancy – the use of flour as a means of divination.

Alomancy / Halomancy – divination by means of salt.

Alphitomancy – the use of barley meal as a means of divination.

Anthracomancy – divination by inspecting a burning coal.

Anthropomancy – divination by the entrails of a human being.

Arithmancy – divination by the use of numbers, especially by the numbers of letters in names.

Astragalomancy – divination by means of small bones or dice.

Astromancy (slightly different than astrology) – divination by means of the stars.

Austromancy – divination from observation of the winds.

Axinomancy – divination by means of an ax or hatchet.

Belomancy – divination using arrows drawn at random from a quiver or other holder.

Bibliomancy – divination by interpretation of a passage chosen at random from a Bible.

Botanomancy – divination by means of plants, especially sage and fig leaves.

Capnomancy – divination by means of the ascent or motion of smoke.

Cartomancy / Chartomancy – divination using cards.

"The World" from the Carey-Yale Visconti Tarot Deck, c. 1440

Catoptromancy – divination of health by means of regarding one's face in a mirror submerged in water. If the image was distorted or ghastly, it was an ill omen; if fresh and healthy, it was favorable.

Cephalomancy – divination by means of a head or skull.

Ceraunomancy / Keraunomancy – divination by use of thunderbolts

Ceromancy – divination by dropping melted wax into water.

Chaomancy – divination by means of appearances in the air.

Cheiromancy / Chiromancy – palmistry.

Chronomancy – divination of the best time to do something.

Cleidomancy / Clidomancy – divination by use of a key, keys.

Cleromancy – casting of lots as a means of divination.

Coscinomancy – divination by means of a suspended sieve.

Crithomancy – divination by scattering grain, meal, or flour over sacrificed animals.

Crystallomancy – divination by means of a crystal.

Cubomancy – divination by throwing dice.

Cybermancy – divination by computer.

Dactyliomancy – divination by means of finger rings.

Daphnomancy – divination by means of the laurel.

Demonomancy – divination by demon.

Empyromancy / pyromancy – divination by fire or smoke.

Enoptomancy – divination by use of a mirror. (Remember "Mirror, Mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?")

Gastromancy – (a) A kind of divination, by means of words seemingly uttered from the stomach. (b) A species of divination, by means of glasses or other round, transparent vessels [i.e. crystal ball], in the center of which figures are supposed to appear by magic art (i.e. scrying).

A quartz crystal ball

Geomancy – divination by geographic features or lines. [Traditional Chinese feng shui is a style of geomancy that measures favorable or unfavorable settings for home/business (yang style) or grave (yin style).]

Graptomancy – divination by handwriting.

Gyromancy – divination performed by drawing a ring or circle and walking in or around it. Also, 1557, "a method of divination by walking in a circle till the person falls down from dizziness, the inference being drawn from the place in the circle at which he fell," from M.L. gyromantia, from Gk. gyyros "circle" + manteia "divination, oracle."]

Hieromancy – divination by observing the objects offered in sacrifice.

Hydromancy – divination by means of the motions or appearance of water.

Ichnomancy – divination by footprints.

Lecanomancy – divination practiced with water in a basin, by throwing three stones into it, and invoking the demon whose aid was sought.

Lithomancy – divination by means of stones or stone talismans.

Logomancy – divination by words.

Meteoromancy – a style of divination by meteors, chiefly by thunder and lightning, which was held in high estimation by the Romans.

Metopomancy – divination by physiognomy.

Molybdomancy – divination by the motion of molten lead.

Myomancy – divination by the movements of mice.

Narcomancy – divination using sleep, especially eliciting information from a sleeping person.

Necromancy – divination through communication with the dead.

Nomancy / Onomomancy – divining the destiny of persons by the letters of their names.

Oinomancy / Oenomancy – divination by wine.

Omphalomancy – divination by means of a child's navel, to learn how many children the mother may have.

Oneiromancy – divination through dreams.

Onychomancy – divination by the finger nails.

Ophidiomancy – divination using snakes, by their manner of eating or by their coils.

Ornithomancy – divination by means of birds, their flight, etc.

Pedomancy – divination by examining the soles of the feet.

Pegomancy – divination by fountains.

Pessomancy – divination by pebbles, stones, rocks.

Psychomancy – divination by means of communication with souls or spirits.

Pyromancy – divination by fire or by forms appearing in a fire.

Rabdomancy / Rhabdomancy – divination by means of a rod or wand, especially in discovering ores, springs of water, etc. (i.e. dowsing).

Rhapsodomancy – divination by means of verses.

Scapulimancy – divination by observation of the cracking of a mammal's scapula that has been heated by fire or hot instrument. [This is similar to the first method of I Ching (Yijing) divination which applied fire to tortoise plastrons and observed the cracks.)

An oracle bone

Scatomancy – divination by excrement.

Sciomancy – divination by means of shadows; by communication with shades of the dead.

Sideromancy – divination by burning straws on red-hot iron, and noting the manner of their burning.

Spodomancy – divination by means of ashes.

Stichomancy – divination by lines, or passages of books, read at random.

Stigonomancy – divination by writing on the bark of a tree.

Tephramancy – divination by the ashes of the altar on which a victim had been consumed in sacrifice.

Theomancy – a kind of divination drawn from the responses of oracles among heathen nations.

Uromancy – divination based on urine.

Xylomancy – divination by wood.

Speaking to God

In the Greek and Latinate traditions, the word for God is connected to the ideal of Light, no doubt a connection to solar deities.

However, in Old English language traditions, God is related to words and sound. Consider this from John 1:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201;&version=31;

The Word Became Flesh

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Let's look at the word Word for a moment. Today it indicates a thing, a noun, but way back when, it was a verb. (All etymological definitions are from the Online Etymology Dictionary at http://www.etymonline.com/ )

word

O.E. word "speech, talk, utterance, word," from P.Gmc. *wurdan (cf. O.S., O.Fris. word, Du. woord, O.H.G., Ger. wort, O.N. orð, Goth. waurd), from PIE *were- "speak, say" (see verb).

verb

1388, from O.Fr. verbe "part of speech that expresses action or being," from L. verbum "verb," originally "a word," from PIE base *were- (cf. Avestan urvata- "command;" Skt. vrata- "command, vow;" Gk. rhetor "public speaker," rhetra "agreement, covenant," eirein "to speak, say;" Hittite weriga- "call, summon;" Lith. vardas "name;" Goth. waurd, O.E. word "word").

Now, if God was the Word and the word was a verb, God moves from being an "it" to a "be," from an "out there" to an "in here," from a separate personage/being to an activity in which we all are included in our Being-ness.

Checking out God again, how do we access this being-ness? Possibly through the practice of making sounds. The derivation of the word God shows us how earliest peoples connected with deity; they called or invoked the divine.

god

O.E. god "supreme being, deity," from P.Gmc. *guthan (cf. Du. god, Ger. Gott, O.N. guð, Goth. guþ), from PIE *ghut- "that which is invoked" (cf. Skt. huta- "invoked," an epithet of Indra), from root *gheu(e)- "to call, invoke." Not related to good. Originally neut. in Gmc., the gender shifted to masc. after the coming of Christianity.

Here is a peek into some of the ways we talk to God. You'll notice that these methods are universal, another example of how unified we truly are in our seeming diversity!

pray

c.1290, "ask earnestly, beg," also "pray to a god or saint," from O.Fr. preier (c.900), from L. precari "ask earnestly, beg," from *prex (plural preces, gen. precis) "prayer, request, entreaty," from PIE base *prek- "to ask, request, entreat" (cf. Skt. prasna-, Avestan frashna- "question;" O.C.S. prositi, Lith. prasyti "to ask, beg;" O.H.G. frahen, Ger. fragen, O.E. fricgan "to ask" a question).

bead

1377, bede "prayer bead," from O.E. gebed "prayer," from P.Gmc. *beðan (cf. M.Du. bede, O.H.G. beta, Ger. bitte, Goth. bida). Shift in meaning came via beads threaded on a string to count prayers, and in phrases like to bid one's beads, to count one's beads. Ger. cognate Bitte is the usual word for conversational request "please." Also related to bid (O.E. biddan) and Goth. bidjan "to ask, pray." [This is a very universal tradition: to name a few, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, and Muslims all use prayer beads.]

mantra

1808, "that part of the Vedas which contains hymns," from Skt. mantra-s "sacred message or text, charm, spell, counsel," lit. "instrument of thought," related to manyate "thinks." Sense of "special word used for meditation" is first recorded in Eng. 1956.

chant

c.1386, from O.Fr. chanter, from L. cantare, freq. of canere "sing," from PIE base *kan- "to sing" (cf. Gk. eikanos "cock," O.E. hana "cock," both lit. "bird who sings for sunrise;" O.Ir. caniaid "sings," Welsh canu "sing"). The frequentative quality of the word was no longer felt in L., and by the time Fr. emerged the word had entirely displaced canere.

sing

O.E. singan "to chant, sing, tell in song," also used of birds (class III strong verb; past tense sang, pp. sungen), from P.Gmc. *sengwanan (cf. O.Fris. sionga, M.Du. singhen, O.H.G. singan, Ger. singen, Goth. siggwan, O.N. syngva, Swed. sjunga), from PIE base *sengwh- "to sing, make an incantation." No related forms in other languages, unless perhaps it is connected to Gk. omphe "voice" (especially of a god), "oracle;" and Welsh dehongli "explain, interpret." The typical IE root is represented by L. canere (see chant).

oracle

c.1384, "a message from a god, expressed by divine inspiration," from O.Fr. oracle (12c.), from L. oraculum "divine announcement, oracle," from orare "pray, plead" (see orator), with material instrumental suffix -culo-. In antiquity, "the agency or medium of a god," also "the place where such divine utterances were given." This sense is attested in Eng. from c.1400.

adore

c.1305, from O.Fr. aourer "to adore, worship," from L. adorare "speak to formally, beseech," in L.L. "to worship," from ad- "to" + orare "speak formally, pray" (see orator).

We know that any of these activities, when we engage in them whole-heartedly, invokes a state of altered consciousness. That is often the reason we practice them, to walk through the door from the everyday world and become One with Universal energies.

So, whether you sing, pray, chant, or even consult an oracle, you are engaging in the Word and the word is Be-ing, and the Word/Be-ing Is GOD.

And so are we all.

Give Peace a Chance

Here are two videos from YouTube, both based on John Lennon's song "Give Peace A Chance" They were created by the same person, have slightly different slide-shows as background, and are just about eight minutes each.

Enjoy!


Give Peace A Chance (A Tribute)



Give Peace A Chance (Version 2)

Some theories on the origins of religion

The One Who Watches - petroglyph from The Dalles, Oregon.














From the pages of Religious Tolerance.org

Copyright © 2002 to 2007 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Originally written: 2002-MAR-23
Latest update: 2007-MAR-05
Author: B.A. Robinson

Groups of theories on the origin of religion:

There are two broad groups of theories about the origin of religion.

Faith based: According to David Barrett et al, editors of the "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions - AD 30 to 2200," there are 19 major world religions which are subdivided into a total of 270 large religious groups, and many unique faith groups. ₁ Among this great religious diversity, there are probably hundreds of different religious creation stories which describe how humans, other species of life, the Earth, and the rest of the universe came to be. Many of these stories describe the origins of their particular religion. It was typically a revelation from one or more deities.

Science based: Anthropologists, evolutionary biologists and other researchers have reached a near consensus that humans of the species homo sapiens evolved from a species of proto-humans who originated somewhere in Africa. (This statement probably upsets any white supremacists who are reading this essay. That can't be helped; scientists consider the evidence to be conclusive; ultimately, we are all descended from Africans.) These proto-humans walked upright, and had an opposing thumb and little finger. Their internal brain structure represented a major advance over those of previous animals in terms of its flexibility, its ability to reason, and its ability to plan for the future. This gave proto-humans an improved ability to pass on their accumulated knowledge to their descendents, to form more advanced societies, and ultimately to create religions.

The following essay will deal with the science based theories of the origin of religion. If you are interested in faith-based theories, we suggest that you do a search on Google with a search string like: origin Christianity

Science-based theories of religion:

Nobody knows with accuracy how the first religions evolved. By the time that writing had developed, many religions had been in place for millennia and the details of their origins had been forgotten. However, there is speculation that the first religions were created to give people a feeling of security in an insecure world, and a feeling of control over the environment where there was little control.

The developing abilities of proto-humans were a double-edge sword:

§ On the one hand, they aided their chances of surviving in a cruel and unpredictable world. They helped each successive generation of proto-humans to build upon the knowledge base of their ancestors.

§ This increased mental ability led to a terrifying piece of knowledge: personal mortality. For the first time, individual animals on earth became aware that their life was transient; they would die at some point in their future. This knowledge produced an intolerable emotional drain.

During their evolution from proto-human to full human, they developed questions about themselves and their environment:

§ What controlled the seasonal cycles of nature -- the daily motion of the sun; the motion of the stars, the passing of the seasons, etc.

§ What controlled their environment -- what or who caused floods, rains, dry spells, storms, etc?

§ What controls fertility -- of the tribe, its domesticated animals, and its crops.

§ What system of morality is needed to best promote the stability of the tribe?

§ And above all: what happens to a person after they die?

Living in a pre-scientific society, people had no way to resolve these questions. Even today, with all of our scientific advances, we still debate about the second last question, and still have no way of reaching an consensus on the last. But the need for answers (particularly to the last question) were so important that some response was required, even if they were merely based on hunches. Some people within the tribe started to invent answers based on their personal guesses. Thus developed:

§ The first religious belief system,

§ The first priesthood,

§ The first set of rituals to appease the Goddess,

§ Other rituals to control fertility and other aspects of the environment,

§ A set of behavioral expectations for members of the tribe, and

§ A set of moral truths to govern human behavior.

These formed an oral tradition which was disseminated among the members of the tribe and was taught to each new generation. Much later, when writing was developed, the beliefs were generally recorded in written form. A major loss of flexibility resulted. Oral traditions can evolve over time; written documents tend to be more permanent.

Unfortunately, because these belief systems were based on hunches, the various religions which developed in different areas of the world were all different. Their teachings were in conflict with each other. Because the followers of most religions considered their beliefs to be derived directly from God, they cannot be easily changed. Thus, inter-religious compromise is difficult or impossible. Also, because religious texts are often ambiguous, divisions developed within religions. Different denominations, schools, or traditions have derived different meanings from the same religious texts. Thus were laid the foundations for millennia of inter-religious and intra-religious conflict.

Evolution of religion:

The first organized religions appear to have been based on fertility. They were focused on the worship of the great Earth Goddess. Religion evolved to include male Gods who were gradually given increased importance by the priests. This development may have been caused by developing knowledge of the male's involvement in the process of reproduction.

Today, most people follow either:

§ A monotheistic religion, in which a single male god is worshipped, or

§ A henotheistic religion -- a religion which recognizes a single main deity, but which recognizes other gods and goddesses, heroes, or saints as facets or manifestations or aspects of that supreme God.

Most religions teach that they were directly revealed by their deity/deities to humanity, and are unrelated to other world religions. However there is considerable historical evidence from ancient times that religions in the area from India to the Middle East shared many religious beliefs. One example of this are:

§ The many passages in the Hebrew Scriptures which contain concepts or passages taken from Egyptian, Babylonian and other nearby Pagan religions.

§ Many of the events in the life of Jesus as recorded in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) appear to have been derived from earlier Hinduism and other Pagan religious sources.

Religions were originally based on the particular beliefs of their founders and prophets. Thus, there were few points of similarity among the various spiritual paths:

§ In terms of their belief about supernatural being(s), various faith traditions have taught Agnosticism, Animism, Atheism, Deism, Duotheism, Henotheism, Monism, Monotheism, Panentheism, Pantheism, Polytheism, Trinitarianism, and probably a few that we have missed. It is obvious from these conflicting ideas about deities that almost all religions are just plain wrong.

§ Few agreements exist among the world's religions about religious beliefs, sacred ritual, organizational structure, optimum family structure, personal sexual behavior, etc.

§ Religions' traditional teachings in the area of science differ greatly from each other and from the findings of scientists. Examples are: how the universe was formed, where rainbows came from; the world-wide flood; talking animals; the sun standing still in the sky; the cause of epilepsy, deafness, blindness, and mental illnesses; demonic possession, etc.

Religions today:

Some observers believe that the main function of religions today is to provide their followers with a feeling of security.

John Shelby Spong, retired bishop of the Episcopal Church, USA has written:

"Religion is primarily a search for security and not a search for truth. Religion is what we so often use to bank the fires of our anxiety. That is why religion tends toward becoming excessive, neurotic, controlling and even evil. That is why a religious government is always a cruel government. People need to understand that questioning and doubting are healthy, human activities to be encouraged not to be feared. Certainly is a vice not a virtue. Insecurity is something to be grasped and treasured. A true and healthy religious system will encourage each of these activities. A sick and fearful religious system will seek to remove them."

David C. James, rector of St. John's Episcopal Church & Diocesan Mission Center in Olympia, WA, wrote:

Many times when we think we are worshipping God, we are actually comforting our very fragile egos. I’m not so naïve as to assume that we build temple and erect altars to ourselves…directly. But our core need to been safe, secure and sound mandates that we construct reality systems that will support us. ₂

Reference:

1. David Barrett et al, "World Christian Encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions - AD 30 to 2200," Oxford University Press, (2001). Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
2. David C. James, "The Perils of Religion," St. John's Episcopal Church, at: http://stjohnsoly.org/

A Universe In Harmony

I just couldn't resist posting this video from YouTube. It's called The Hubble Deep Field for the pictures returned by the Hubble telescope of the farthest reaches of our univers.

All spiritual traditions look up into the sky at night with awe and amazment. You'll feel it too after watching this six-and-a-half minute video that shows just how breathtaking - not to mention unfathomably large - the universe really is.

"In 2003, the Hubble Space Telescope took the image of a millenium, an image that shows our place in the universe. Anyone who understands what this image represents, is forever changed by it."

The girl who silenced the world for 5 minutes and Rio Declaration On Environment And Development

Here again is something a bit different than a post on religions; it's about spirits trying to be in environmental harmony; that is, the United Nations General Assembly providing us with 27 principles designed to save and protect the people and the planet.

First, here is a video, an impassioned plea from a young lady who would like some assurance that there will be enough clean air, clear water, and unpolluted food to support the lives of her own children and grandchildren. She made this plea in 1992.

That's right, 16 years ago. Watch this six and a half minute video, then read the Principles that were published by the U. N. General Assembly, and come to your own conclusion as to whether we have stepped up or turned our backs when it comes to protecting the environment and our future generations.

United Nations

General Assembly

REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON

ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT*

(Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992)

Annex I

RIO DECLARATION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development,

Having met at Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992,

Reaffirming the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human

Environment, adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972, a/ and seeking to build upon it,

With the goal of establishing a new and equitable global partnership through the creation of new levels of cooperation among States, key sectors of societies and people,

Working towards international agreements which respect the interests of all and protect the integrity of the global environmental and developmental system,

Recognizing the integral and interdependent nature of the Earth, our home,

Proclaims that:

Principle 1

Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature.

Principle 2

States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

Principle 3

The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.

Principle 4

In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.

Principle 5

All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world.

Principle 6

The special situation and needs of developing countries, particularly the least developed and those most environmentally vulnerable, shall be given special priority. International actions in the field of environment and development should also address the interests and needs of all countries.

Principle 7

States shall cooperate in a spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem. In view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities. The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command.

Principle 8

To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all

people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production

and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.

Principle 9

States should cooperate to strengthen endogenous capacity-building for sustainable development by improving scientific understanding through exchanges of scientific and technological knowledge, and by enhancing the development, adaptation, diffusion and transfer of technologies, including new and innovative technologies.

Principle 10

Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.

Principle 11

States shall enact effective environmental legislation. Environmental standards, management objectives and priorities should reflect the environmental and developmental context to which they apply. Standards applied by some countries may be inappropriate and of unwarranted economic and social cost to other countries, in particular developing countries.

Principle 12

States should cooperate to promote a supportive and open international economic system that would lead to economic growth and sustainable development in all countries, to better address the problems of environmental degradation. Trade policy measures for environmental purposes should not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade. Unilateral actions to deal with environmental challenges outside the jurisdiction of the importing country should be avoided. Environmental measures addressing transboundary or global environmental problems should, as far as possible, be based on an international consensus.

Principle 13

States shall develop national law regarding liability and compensation for the victims of pollution and other environmental damage. States shall also cooperate in an expeditious and more determined manner to develop further international law regarding liability and compensation for adverse effects of environmental damage caused by activities within their jurisdiction or control to areas beyond their jurisdiction.

Principle 14

States should effectively cooperate to discourage or prevent the relocation and transfer to other States of any activities and substances that cause severe environmental degradation or are found to be harmful to human health.

Principle 15

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

Principle 16

National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and investment.

Principle 17

Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.

Principle 18

States shall immediately notify other States of any natural disasters or other emergencies that are likely to produce sudden harmful effects on the environment of those States. Every effort shall be made by the international community to help States so afflicted.

Principle 19

States shall provide prior and timely notification and relevant information to potentially affected States on activities that may have a significant adverse transboundary environmental effect and shall consult with those States at an early stage and in good faith.

Principle 20

Women have a vital role in environmental management and development. Their full participation is therefore essential to achieve sustainable development.

Principle 21

The creativity, ideals and courage of the youth of the world should be mobilized to forge a global partnership in order to achieve sustainable development and ensure a better future for all.

Principle 22

Indigenous people and their communities and other local communities have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development.

Principle 23

The environment and natural resources of people under oppression, domination and occupation shall be protected.

Principle 24

Warfare is inherently destructive of sustainable development. States shall therefore respect international law providing protection for the environment in times of armed conflict and cooperate in its further development, as necessary.

Principle 25

Peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible.

Principle 26

States shall resolve all their environmental disputes peacefully and by appropriate means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

Principle 27

States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilment of the principles embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable development.

==========================================

This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.

Date last updated: 12 January, 2000 by DESA/DSD
Copyright © 1999 United Nations

Evolution and Religion in 1902 - still worlds apart

Normally I post articles here showing the similarities between various religious groups.

Today, I have something a little different, an essay written in 1902 showing the compatibility between the Scientific Theory of Evolution and Religion. It's hard to believe we still have not made progress, and in fact have seemed to lose ground, over the last 100 years.

The original article was just three large paragraphs. I have broken it into many smaller ones for the sake of readability in this narrow space.


Check out the drawing at the end, too. It's unrelated to the article, but sure puts a different spin on the arguement!


Quote:
Classics in the History of Psychology

An internet resource developed by
Christopher D. Green
York University, Toronto, Ontario
ISSN 1492-3713

Herbert Spencer's Service to Religion

By John Fiske (1902)

First published in Essays Historical and Literary, New York, II, pp. 232-237.
Reprinted in G. Daniels (Ed.) (1968). Darwinism comes to America. Waltham, MA: Blaisdell, pp. 106-110.

All religions agree in the two following assertions, one of which is of speculative and one of which is of ethical importance. One of them serves to sustain and harmonize our thoughts about the world we live in, and our place in that world; the other serves to uphold us in our efforts to do each what we can to make human life more sweet, more full of goodness and beauty, than we find it.

The first of these assertions is the proposition that the things and events of the world do not exist or occur blindly or irrelevantly, but that all, from the beginning to the end of time, and throughout the furthest sweep of illimitable space, are connected together as the orderly manifestations of a divine Power, and that this divine Power is something outside of ourselves, and upon it our own existence from moment to moment depends.

The second of these assertions is the proposition that men ought to do certain things, and ought to refrain from doing certain other things; and that the reason why some things are wrong to do and other things are right to do is in some mysterious, but very real, way connected with the existence and nature of this divine Power, which reveals itself in every great and every tiny thing, without which not a star courses in its mighty orbit, and not a sparrow falls to the ground. Matthew Arnold once summed up these two propositions very well when he defined God as "an eternal Power, not ourselves, that makes for righteousness."

This twofold assertion, that there is an eternal Power that is not ourselves, and that this Power makes for righteousness, is to be found, either in a rudimentary or in a highly developed state, in all known religions.... I said, a moment ago, that modern civilized men will all acknowledge that this two-sided assertion, in which all religions agree, is of far greater importance than any of the superficial points in which religions differ.

It is really of much more concern to us that there is an eternal Power, not ourselves, that makes for righteousness, than that such a Power is onefold or threefold in its metaphysical nature, or that we ought not to play cards on Sunday, or to eat meat on Friday. No one, I believe, will deny so simple and clear a statement as this. But it is not only we modern men, who call ourselves enlightened, that will agree to this. I doubt not even the narrow-minded bigots of days now happily gone by would have been made to agree to it if they could have had some doggedly persistent Socrates to cross-question them....

What men in past times have really valued in their religion has been the universal twofold assertion that there is a God, who is pleased with the sight of the just man and is angry with the wicked every day, and when men have fought with one another, and murdered or calumniated one another for heresy about the Trinity or about eating meat on Friday, it has been because they have supposed belief in the non-essential doctrines to be inseparably connected with belief in the essential doctrine.

In spite of all this, however, it is true that in the mind of the uncivilized man, the great central truths of religion are so densely overlaid with hundreds of trivial notions respecting dogma and ritual, that his perception of the great central truths is obscure. These great central truths, indeed, need to be clothed in a dress of little rites and superstition, in order to take hold of his dull and untrained intelligence. But in proportion as men become more civilized, and learn to think more accurately, and to take wider views of life, just so do they come to value the essential truths of religion more highly, while they attach less and less importance to superficial details.

Having thus seen what is meant by the essential truths of religion, it is very easy to see what the attitude of the doctrine of evolution is toward these essential truths. It asserts and reiterates them both; and it asserts them not as dogmas handed down to us by priestly tradition, not as mysterious intuitive convictions of which we can render no account to ourselves, but as scientific truths concerning the innermost constitution of the universe -- truths that have been disclosed by observation and reflection, like other scientific truths, and that accordingly harmonize naturally and easily with the whole body of our knowledge.

The doctrine of evolution asserts, as the widest and deepest truth which the study of nature can disclose to us, that there exists a power to which no limit in time or space is conceivable, and that all the phenomena of the universe, whether they be what we call material or what we call spiritual phenomena, are manifestations of this infinite and eternal Power.

Now this assertion, which Mr. Spencer has so elaborately set forth as a scientific truth -- nay, as the ultimate truth of science, as the truth upon which the whole structure of human knowledge philosophically rests -- this assertion is identical with the assertion of an eternal Power, not ourselves, that forms the speculative basis of all religions.

When Carlyle speaks of the universe as in very truth the stardome city of God, and reminds us that through every crystal and through every grass blade, but most through every living soul, the glory of a present God still beams, he means pretty much the same thing that Mr. Spencer means, save that he speaks with the language of poetry, with language coloured by emotion, and not with the precise, formal, and colourless language of science.

By many critics who forget that names are but the counters rather than the hard money of thought, objections have been raised to the use of such a phrase as the Unknowable, whereby to describe the power that is manifest in every event of the universe. Yet, when the Hebrew prophet declared that "by him were laid the foundations of the deep," but reminded us "Who by searching can find him out!" he meant pretty much what Mr. Spencer means when he speaks of a power that is inscrutable in itself, yet is revealed from moment to moment in every throb of the mighty rhythmic life of the universe.

And this brings me to the last and most important point of all. What says the doctrine of evolution with regard to the ethical side of this twofold assertion that lies at the bottom of all religion?

Though we cannot fathom the nature of the inscrutable Power that animates the world, we know, nevertheless, a great many things that it does.

Does this eternal Power, then, work for righteousness? Is there a divine sanction of holiness and a divine condemnation for sin? Are the principles of right living really connected with the intimate constitution of the universe?

If the answer of science to these questions be affirmative, then the agreement with religion is complete, both on the speculative and on the practical side; and that phantom which has been the abiding terror to timid and superficial minds -- that phantom of the hostility between religion and science--is exorcised now and forever.

Now, science began to return a decisively affirmative answer to such questions as these when it began, with Mr. Spencer, to explain moral beliefs and moral sentiments as products of evolution. For clearly, when you say of a moral belief or a moral sentiment, that it is a product of evolution, you imply that it is something which the universe through untold ages has been labouring to bring forth, and you ascribe to it a value proportionate to the enormous effort it has cost to produce it.

Still more, when with Spencer we study the principles of right living as part and parcel of the whole doctrine of the development of life upon the earth; when we see that in an ultimate analysis that is right which tends to enhance fulness of life, and that is wrong which tends to detract from fulness of life -- we then see that the distinction between right and wrong is rooted in the deepest foundations of the universe; we see that the very same forces, subtle, and exquisite, and profound, which brought upon the scene the primal germs of life and caused them to unfold, which through countless ages of struggle and death has cherished the life that could live more perfectly and destroyed the life that could only live less perfectly, until humanity, with all its hopes, and fears, and aspirations, has come into being as the crown of all this stupendous work -- we see that these very same subtle and exquisite forces have wrought into the very fibres of the universe those principles of right living which it is man's highest function to put into practice.

The theoretical sanction thus given to right living is incomparably the most powerful that has ever been assigned in any philosophy of ethics. Human responsibility is made more strict and solemn than ever, when the eternal Power that lives in every event of the universe is thus seen to be in the deepest possible sense the author of the moral law that should guide our lives, and in obedience to which lies our only guarantee of the happiness which is incorruptible -- which neither inevitable misfortune nor unmerited obloquy can ever take away.

I have but barely touched upon a rich and suggestive topic. When this subject shall once have been expounded and illustrated with due thoroughness -- as I earnestly hope it will be within the next few years -- then I am sure it will be generally acknowledged that our great teacher's services to religion have been no less signal than his services to science, unparalleled as these have been in all the history of the world.

End quote.

What if. . .

Engaged Spirituality Blog Carnival

One of the posts here at Spirits In Harmony has been included in the very first Engaged Spirituality blog carnival hosted by Beth Patterson at Virtual Tea House.

Beth has chosen some fabulous posts to include in the carnival....more than food for thought, she has provided a veritable feast for thought!

Please hop over and enjoy the Carnival!

Blessings from many traditions

Tibetan Prayer Wheel - hand held style

Every spiritual tradition includes the concept of Blessing, asking the favor of the Divine in personal, family, and business endeavors, and expressing thanks to the Divine for the good luck and prosperity received.

I happened to be searching today for a blessing to deliver to a rather diverse group of spiritual people some of whom practice eclectic traditions, and I found this wonderful website: Worldwide Blessing Generator

The main page says:

"In an effort to balance the negativity of the world, we have created the WBG. It mixes blessings and prayers from all world religions and gives a random hybrid of spiritual goodness. We think of this as a digital version of a Tibetan prayer-wheel a "device for spreading spiritual blessings and well being." Our intent is to mix the wisdom of all cultures to create blessings in a spirit of religious tolerance that applies to all faiths and are truly worldwide in origin.

"The first three lines are taken from various sources as diverse as "The Irish Blessing", Buddhist writings, The Bible and African prayers. See the sources link for a complete listing. The fourth line comes directly from "Daily Necessities -Tips & pointers for building a spiritual life from scratch" from Awakening The Buddha Within by Lama Surya Das. It is a random combination of two words from his list of several dozen positive actions to take. It is used again as the subtitle of this page. The single line of benediction at the bottom is a translation of Peace, Love, Om or Amen in various languages."

Isn't that fabulous?! I just love it.....what a great way to bring together and honor a diversity of spiritual traditions!

Following are two blessings I generated today:

"May knowledge and intuition combine to guide you in thought and deed, and may you attain the completion of inward peace.
Breathe in, cherishing yourself; and breathe out cherishing others.
Listen and radiate."

"May peace abide with you, and forgiveness be your silent secret gift.
Allow yourself to feel the love and appreciation that already exists in your heart.
Love and give thanks."

Wouldn't this be a great way to begin your day, with a visit to the Worldwide Blessing Generator for words of wisdom and spiritual blessing! I plan to make this one of my first internet stops in the mornings.

I will leave you with these words from the Worldwide Blessing Generator:

"May the blessings of love be upon you, and wisdom illuminate your heart.
Grace comes to us as an unmerited favor. Be all ways gracious and you will be all ways favored.
Play and enjoy."

New Threat To Religious Freedom In the US?

I had hoped to leave you with the Winter Solstice Celebrations article for the holidays, but the following news is very disturbing, and if you are an American citizen in favor of the freedoms granted by the Constitution, I hope you tell your Representative in the House of Representatives how you feel about this threat to the equality of religion in the United States that he or she may have favorably voted for. See Roll Call below.

Thomas Jefferson, in his Autobiography 1743 – 1790 said: "The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason & right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that it's protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of it's protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination." (Bold emphasis added by Michelle) (University of Virginia library)

No mention of any God or any God's prophet or messenger was allowed into the statement for the freedom of religion in order that all people of all religions would be accorded equal – let me emphasize EQUAL – respect and rights and freedoms.

If anyone happens to be in the vicinity of Thomas Jefferson's grave and feels a rumble in the ground, don't be surprised. It's not an earthquake. It's Jefferson spinning away in his grave.

He's heard that the U. S. House of Representatives has just taken the first major step toward undoing the religious freedom granted to American citizens by the U. S. Constitution, or laying the foundation to make Christianity the state religion and enabling the prosecution of anyone who disagrees with it, thereby making religious prosecution legitimate in the United States.

The members of the House have passed a declaration pointing out that Christianity is the leading religion in the United States and the World, it has contributed greatly to the development of western civilization and by extension to the United States because its civilized roots are in Christianity, and they promise to deeply respect Christians in the US and around the world.

Just what does this declaration of respect for Christians and Christianity mean for the people who practice other religions in the U.S. and other parts of the world? In the words of Rodney Dangerfield, I suspect it means they "don't get no respect around here." Worse, it opens the door to legal prosecution if they should speak out against Christianity.

A lot of people think this bill on "Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith" is stating the obvious. Well, yes, it is, and people only go out of their way to state the obvious in order to set up action on it later.

For those of you who may think this is just "a nice thing to do at Christmas time," guess again. It is one of two things (maybe even both):

1. It's a set up for the declaration of Christianity as the state religion of the United States.
2. It is the set up to restrict the freedom of speech by declaring any words spoken against Christians or Christianity as being "persecuting toward Christians" because the declaration "rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide"

Either way, it's a pretty nasty subversion of the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America. By declaring reverence for Christians and Christianity, they have subverted the intent of Jefferson and the writers of the Constitution by elevating one religion to a status above all others, and in doing so, silently stated that it is ok to be bigoted toward and to persecute people of other religions not only in the U.S., but worldwide.

The next logical step is all too obvious: declare Christianity the state religion, and to support the prosecution of anyone who speaks out against Christians and Christianity. As a believer in the religious rights of all people, not to mention the freedom of speech, I would not want to put this ability to prosecute into the hands of an administration that isn't sure "water-boarding" is really torture. Would you?

Below is a commentary on this Bill. Below that is the complete wording of HR847 and the list of Representatives who voted for it, voted against it, and didn't vote.

I hope that if you find this Bill as disturbing to religious tolerance and as threatening as I do to the freedom of speech and the freedom to practice your chosen religion, you will visit the website for the U. S. House of Representatives at http://www.house.gov/ , locate your Representative – they have a very easy search-by-zip-code option near the top of the page – and call or write to tell your Rep how you feel about the erosion of religious freedom in the United States.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following post is from The Crypt Mysteries, a website of political commentary on Capitol Hill.

December 10, 2007
Congress to say Christmas is important. Sun and Moon declared good too

This is one straight from the headlines of the Onion. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) has introduced a resolution (H.Res. 847) saying, and I am not making this up, that Christmas and Christians are important. The House is scheduled to vote on this groundbreaking resolution on Tuesday.

As someone with a Christian background, I can safely say this may be the silliest resolution ever introduced by, or voted upon, by Congress, although I am a little curious to see if anyone will vote against it.

Do we really need Congress to say Christmas and the Christian faith are important? Isn't that pretty self evident by now? Don't Christians already pretty much run everything in this country, except for the mainstream media, which is of course controlled by a Jewish-Illuminati-Bill Gates cabal? Don't we already get Dec. 25 off? Wasn't I forced to shell out $65 for a scrawny Christmas tree this weekend? Won't I have to go to Pentagon City or some other godforsaken place and spend more money in the next couple weeks as part of this strange ritual? What about the terrible songs that get endlessly recycled year after stinking year? And the useless catalogs that clog my mailbox, despite my efforts to get off mailing lists? Where will the horror end?

So, in the war on Christmas, I must declare myself a warrior for the anti-Xmas side. Bill O'Reilly, please take note. You too, Mr. King.

Update - The House passed this bill today. The vote, surprisingly, was 372-9, with 10 members also voting "Present," meaning they took no position on the legislation, and 40 not voting. One of the "Present" votes was cast by Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.). More Democrats -195 - voted for the bill than Republicans, 177.

The nine members who voted against the bill - God bless them! - are Reps. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Bobby Scott (D-Va.), Pete Stark (D-Calif.) and Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.).

Here's the text of H.Res. 847, just so you know how important Christianity and Xmas are:

"Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.

Whereas Christmas, a holiday of great significance to Americans and many other cultures and nationalities, is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and the world;

Whereas there are approximately 225,000,000 Christians in the United States, making Christianity the religion of over three-fourths of the American population;

Whereas there are approximately 2,000,000,000 Christians throughout the world, making Christianity the largest religion in the world and the religion of about one-third of the world population;

Whereas Christians identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible;

Whereas Christians and Christianity have contributed greatly to the development of western civilization;

Whereas the United States, being founded as a constitutional republic in the traditions of western civilization, finds much in its history that points observers back to its roots in Christianity;

Whereas on December 25 of each calendar year, American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ;

Whereas for Christians, Christmas is celebrated as a recognition of God's redemption, mercy, and Grace; and

Whereas many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others: Now, therefore be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;

(2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;

(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;

(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;

(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and

(6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here is how the voting went, from the official voting results page:

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 1143

(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)

H RES 847 2/3 YEA-AND-NAY 11-Dec-2007 7:02 PM

QUESTION: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended

BLL TITLE: Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1143.xml

-- YEAS 372 ---
Abercrombie Aderholt Akin Allen Altmire Andrews Arcuri Baca Bachmann Bachus Baird Baker Baldwin Barrett (SC) Barrow Bartlett (MD) Barton (TX) Bean Becerra Berkley Berman Berry Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Blackburn Blumenauer Blunt Boehner Bonner Bono Boozman Boren Boucher Boustany Boyd (FL) Boyda (KS) Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Broun (GA) Brown (SC) Brown-Waite, Ginny Buchanan Burgess Burton (IN) Butterfield Calvert Camp (MI) Campbell (CA) Cannon Cantor Capito Capps Capuano Cardoza Carnahan Carney Carter Castle Castor Chabot Chandler Clay Clyburn Coble Cohen Cole (OK) Conaway Cooper Costa Costello Courtney Cramer Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Davis (AL) Davis (CA) Davis (KY) Davis, David Davis, Lincoln Davis, Tom Deal (GA) DeFazio Delahunt Dent Diaz-Balart, L. Diaz-Balart, M. Dingell Doggett Donnelly Doolittle Doyle Drake Dreier Duncan Edwards Ehlers Ellison Ellsworth Emanuel Emerson Engel English (PA) Eshoo Etheridge Fallin Farr Fattah Feeney Filner Flake Forbes Fortenberry Fossella Foxx Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen	Gallegly Garrett (NJ) Gerlach Giffords Gilchrest Gillibrand Gingrey Gohmert Gonzalez Goode Goodlatte Gordon Granger Green, Al Green, Gene Grijalva Gutierrez Hall (NY) Hall (TX) Hare Harman Hastings (WA) Hayes Heller Hensarling Herger Herseth Sandlin Higgins Hill Hinchey Hinojosa Hirono Hobson Hodes Hoekstra Holden Honda Hoyer Hulshof Inglis (SC) Inslee Israel Issa Jackson (IL) Jackson-Lee (TX) Jefferson Johnson (GA) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jones (NC) Jones (OH) Jordan Kagen Kanjorski Kaptur Keller Kennedy Kildee Kilpatrick King (NY) Kingston Kirk Klein (FL) Kline (MN) Knollenberg Kucinich Kuhl (NY) LaHood Lamborn Lampson Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham LaTourette Levin Lewis (CA) Lewis (GA) Lewis (KY) Linder Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lowey Lungren, Daniel E. Lynch Mack Mahoney (FL) Maloney (NY) Manzullo Markey Marshall Matsui McCarthy (CA) McCarthy (NY) McCaul (TX) McCollum (MN) McCotter McCrery McGovern McHenry McIntyre McMorris Rodgers McNerney McNulty Meek (FL) Meeks (NY) Melancon Mica Michaud Miller (MI) Miller (NC) Miller, George Mitchell Mollohan Moore (KS) Moran (KS) Moran (VA) Murphy (CT) Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Tim Musgrave Myrick Nadler	Napolitano Neal (MA) Neugebauer Nunes Oberstar Obey Olver Ortiz Pallone Pascrell Pastor Pearce Perlmutter Peterson (MN) Peterson (PA) Petri Pickering Pitts Platts Poe Pomeroy Porter Price (GA) Price (NC) Putnam Radanovich Rahall Ramstad Rangel Regula Rehberg Reichert Renzi Reyes Reynolds Richardson Rodriguez Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothman Roybal-Allard Royce Ruppersberger Sali Sánchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sarbanes Saxton Schiff Schmidt Scott (GA) Sensenbrenner Serrano Sestak Shadegg Shays Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuler Shuster Simpson Sires Skelton Slaughter Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Snyder Solis Souder Space Spratt Stearns Stupak Sullivan Sutton Tanner Tauscher Taylor Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thornberry Tiahrt Tiberi Tierney Towns Tsongas Turner Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Upton Van Hollen Velázquez Visclosky Walberg Walden (OR) Walsh (NY) Walz (MN) Wamp Waters Watson Watt Waxman Weiner Weldon (FL) Weller Westmoreland Whitfield Wicker Wilson (NM) Wilson (OH) Wilson (SC) Wolf Wu Young (AK) Young (FL)
---- NAYS 9 ---
Ackerman Clarke DeGette	Hastings (FL) Lee McDermott	Scott (VA) Stark Woolsey
---- ANSWERED	"PRESENT"	10 ---
Conyers Frank (MA) Holt Payne	Pence Schakowsky Schwartz Wasserman Schultz	Welch (VT) Yarmuth
---- NOT	VOTING 40---
Alexander Boswell Brown, Corrine Buyer Carson Cleaver Cubin Davis (IL) DeLauro Dicks Everett Ferguson Graves Hooley	Hunter Jindal Johnson (IL) Kind King (IA) Lantos Lofgren, Zoe Lucas Marchant Matheson McHugh McKeon Miller (FL) Miller, Gary	Moore (WI) Murtha Paul Pryce (OH) Rush Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salazar Sessions Tancredo Wexler Wynn