MORNING SEDITION-My Favorite Radio Show

Each morning as I drive to work, I listen to
Morning Sedition on the radio with Marc Maron
and Mark Riley. Some mornings I laugh all the
way to work. Some mornings I just listen and
try to absorb. I especially like the authors
they bring in to discuss newly published books.


Regardless of whether I agree with them or not,
they are always entertaining, creative and
questioning. This morning, they had a 'caller-in'
that I think was legitimate (with them, you are
not always sure).

The caller-in, as it turns out, was a vegetarian
and faced with the dilemma of what to do with a
sausage that was included in his sandwich by
mistake. The C-I said he doesn't eat anything
that 'had a mama or eyeballs.'

H-m-m-m-m-m-m.

That got me to thinking (see, I told you it was
a good show). Why would anyone say such a thing?
Then it dawned on me, it's a moral judgement. It
really doesn't have anything to do with taste or
health. It's purely a moral decision on the part
of the C-I. A person can be a vegetarian and that
is ok, for whatever reason. But when we project
our beliefs into/onto another entity, then we are
moralizing; "Well, she shouldn't do that (the
unstated belief is- because I believe it is
wrong, the moral is- it's wrong... according to
my beliefs)."

Man is a warm-blooded animal. Animals everywhere eat
other animals. The difference between Man and animals
'in the wild' (i.e., their homes) is that man is a
'fight' animal, as Monty Roberts pointed out, and all
others are 'flight' animals.
Man will kill for a thrill, animals kill to eat and
feed their offspring, they do not kill for 'sport.'
Is a life, any life, trivialized to the point of
just being a "sport"? Where is the moralizing of
"has a mama or eyeballs" when we send our sons and
daughters to other countrys to kill... people?
Where is the projecting of our beliefs, our morals
when this happens? We temporarily suspend them because
we think we don't know what is best for us and our
country. We think that those higher up have access
to more knowledge than we. (Does that mean they are
closer to God than we are? Not likely.)
In our country we have laws that say it is NOT ok to
kill someone. That is also as close to a God-given
law as we will ever get.
Yet, it somehow becomes ok when we put
on the proper costume, carry a loaded weapon and are
directed to that entity which 'wants to kill us.'
We know this because, well, not because we have had
close contact with that entity or argued with that entity,
but because we are told, with much fanfare, that
it's ok!!??

It also means that our beliefs say its' ok to kill, it
is just not ok to eat what it's ok to kill. Huh?
But they 'had mama's and eyeballs!??'

To consider that the food before you may have 'had a
mama or eyeballs' is a moral judgement based on
ones' projecting ones' beliefs onto another entity;
'Would you want someone else to eat your father?'
Yuk! OK, then I won't eat something else's father or
mother.'

WHAT IS THIS FORM OF REASONING?
Easy enough to answer.
Peer pressure.
Your peers are; your mother, your father, your sister,
brother, relatives, friends, ministers, school teachers,
newspapers, television, books, movies, on and on!
You absorb their beliefs and actions and incorporate
them into your own belief system. It doesn't matter if
they are right or wrong, these are not things to be
questioned. They just are. Right?

But, as Mark and Mark did, they accepted what the
C-I said and went on with their show.
Therefore, it is up to us to examine what we've heard.
It is up to us to TAKE THE TIME to examine what we see
and what we hear and decide if there is reason or truth
in any of it. Does it fit with our other beliefs?
If not, why?
If we don't do this, we will probably, at some point in
our lives, visit a psychiatrist who will help us do
just that, something we can do ourselves.

Morning Sedition on Air America, my wake-up call.