The Original (For Africa)
The Remake: We are the World for Haiti
And the SNL Version
That original song was wonderful. It crossed all generations. Sadly, the for Haiti version just made me sad. I hate hate hated the ending. I got depressed seeing Michael Jackson, who had done so much with the original. I knew who all the artists in the original were. I only recognized a few in the Haiti version.
But to be fair, I was a lot better 20 some years ago than I am today, so perhaps I should be kinder. I was very disappointed in the much awaited We are the World for Haiti. SNL brings it all home. Don’t ya just love Willie Nelson?
My cousin, the fastest mouse in all Mexico, tell me to count the seconds until I hear about Sen. Bunning and the elevator!
Slowest. Dad-gum-it!
Don’t hold your breath. I am not at the top of my game this week. But thanks for the tip.
Personally I think the coco-cola “I’d like to teach the world to sing” was a much more powerful and lasting message of world peace and belief harmony….
I really hate to do this again but you closed comments on the previous blog, before I could answer back to wolverine…
In my own way this is my solution to world peace and harmony…
Adopt the philosophy of the Freemasons, seperate Church and state, stop racism, racial and ethnic preference, and oppressive religious laws and behaviors used to control individual lives and needs by oppressive religious states (theocracies and political laws supporting religious beliefs of one religion over individual rights to choose religious beliefs for each individual…
Adopt democracy which celebrates and protects the rights and welfare of the individual over all other forms of oppressive government…
W.
I think you misinterpreted my beliefs toward Christians. I do not hate Christians, I am one. What I am advocating and trying to get others to understand is that their exists a class of religious Christians called “obligation keepers” who oppress and create misery (and classes of other religious oppressors) that use levitican old testament law as a political instrument of cruelty and oppression in the name of God and this class of christians throughout history has used God’s laws as they interpret them as a politically oppressive weapon to enforce “man’s laws” and misery on individuals, as these powerful political men interpret it, not as the individual interprets it and receives it individually from God. This is not “pietness”, this is religious liberation (and thus the term Liberator Christians to describe this class of non-oppressive Christians that seperate church and state to live free from religious oppression of others, like the founding father’s and free mason’s intended ) of the kind like Martin Luther…who was shocked at what Catholicism and the Church of England had done to individual religious freedom and individual rights to happiness as interpreted by each individual’s interpretation of scripture for themselves. This is a democratic religious concept, not a theocracy or monarchy interpretation of scripture, such as that advocated by the Catholic church throughout history….
The heart of the problem is found directly in the case of Bob Marshall and the religious oppression he believes in and the actions he takes as a government representative to impose his religious will on others, by using his political position of power to enforce his religious beliefs and definition of morality on others using the government…
Regardless of people’s personal interpretation of scripture, I take issue with any government legislator who is unable to seperate church and state, and who uses his position of government appointment to advance his own personal religious morality and clearly personal Christian beliefs and personal interpretation of the Bible by taking the political act of denying government funding, and by taking political action in favor of one religious belief over another in violation of the Constitution and assuming he has a right to dictate to others what God’s intentions are for other people and their unborn child. Bob should stick to denying himself funding and not denying other people funding and choosing only for himself to not choose abortion and not restrict others from having their own religious choice to choose abortion if it is right for them according to thier own understanding of scripture. It is not Bod Marshall’s God given right to deny the rights of others to choose for themselves what the scripture mean regarding abortion, and it is not Bob Marshall’s right to determine who is and is not a proper “christian” according to the “word” as interpreted by Bob Marshall. Bob needs to keep these comments in his own Church and to his own convictions and personal discussions with God, not force his beliefs of what the scripture mean upon others who are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves what scriptures mean.
“Obligation Keepers” of Levitican old testament law force others to follow the religious interpretation of the Old Testament by enacting legal and social laws they believe are what God meant, rather than allowing others to choose for themselves what God meant. Obligation keepers are those class of oppressive religious fanatics throughout history who have denied others the right to choose for themselves what scriptures mean..and have oppressed and kept people in misery in the name of God…
What God’s word and the Bible intends for others is up to God and those individuals, seeking their own advice and direction from God, and freely chosing that path for themselves, not decided by a politician who clearly advocates against abortion because of his own religious beliefs and not because he represents the “people”, “all” of them, and not just the people he agrees with that abortion is a sin according to the bible and according to Gods word.
Here is my issue…not one single scripture exists that I can find in the Bible that defines abortion…Not one single scripture exists that I can find that specifically prohibits women from having an abortion, and that specifically prohibits women the RIGHT to consult God on what they need to do about having or not having a child based on what is best for that woman and what is best for that child.
Quote me the SCRIPTURE that says abortion is a sin and that women will not get into heaven if they have an abortion and that God will punish them?
If you find it explicitly in the old testament, and I seriously doubt you can, I can find lots of other old testament levitican law that advocates putting people to death who violate levitican law in direct scriptural defiance of moses’ law “thou shalt not kill”.
Personally I believe if you can’t understand how the new testament overrides the law of moses and levitican law, then I seriously doubt Obligation Keeper Christians will ever understand Liberator Christians needs to fight for the right to seperate Church and state to avoid the religious oppression of Obligation Keeper Christians who use politics and government to impose on others their version of what God wants, and will never understand that religious law is between the believer and God, punishment is Gods alone for not understanding the new covenant, and people who go against the compassion of God for the welfare of all his children, by forcing publically religious ideology on people according to their own interpretation of scripture, understand neither the mother nor the unborn nor likely even the second covenant. It is my belief that God has the best interest of all in mind by allowing freedom of choice to choose what the scripture means and what it does not mean for each individual according to his own needs and Gods personal voice. God’s compassion and God’s love for each of his children, both the unborn (who he takes care of when they are not born into this world), and the born who he takes care of if they simply understand and believe in the second covenant.
Why is it so hard for Obligation Keeper Christians to let God’s words be heard by each individual themselves and not ramed down every individuals throat using oppressive legal laws and government intervention using politics, government and religious oppressions to impose their personal wills onto people’s personal religious needs and beliefs? I can find lots of scripture where Christ supported the needs of women, the needs of the miserable, the meek, and politically oppressed, against the Levitican law, and he himself was crucified because of religious oppression by the government and enforcement of levitican law…
I challenge any individual fellow Christian to show me the scripture where people like Bob Marshall have the right to supercede God’s will to let people choose for themselves and show me the scripture where people like Bob Marshall (whom I call obligation keepers) because they believe they have the right to impose God’s Levitican law on others and the right to impose their interpretation of scriptural beliefs on others through Levitican enforcement and religiously oppressive action using the government?
When I use the word “you” in the above diatribe Wolverine, I’m not referring to “you” explicitly, I referring to “you” challenging all fellow Christians who think they have a right to impose God’s laws on individuals other than themselves….to prove this by scripture…this is the right of the second covenant between the individual and Christ…
I challenge them to show me the scripture where they (obligation keepers) have the right from God to interpret scripture for anyone other than themselves and God’s personal voice to each individual…
Michael, there is always an open thread. Please use those, especially for long posts.
I will leave this up this one time for a day so you have an opportunity to cut and paste and move it to the open thread. Thanks for your cooperation. No one is censoring WHAT you say, just WHERE you say it.
And when Martin Luther preached freedom from the obligations imposed upon the people by Rome, many of the peasants in the churches took that word “freedom” literally. Infused with their new religious fervor and freedom, they rose up against the princes, dukes, and electors who were their secular overlords. When Luther saw that, he realized that the actions of his religious followers would destroy the cozy, protective relationship he maintained with those same overlords. He cried out to the peasants that the “freedom” of which he had spoken applied only to religion and that they must be sure to separate church from state and accept their powerless political status. Then he turned his back on them. And then the powerful overlords sent out their armies. And then the peasants who sought political liberty were slaughtered mercilessly. For a long time after, attendance by the peasantry at Luther’s sermons in Wittenberg and elsewhere thinned out quite dramatically. Calling Luther a purist example of a “Liberator Christian” might be just a bit of a stretch.
Pretty good video! I love it when Sanjaya Malakar sings!! I used to hang out in one of the same strip-clubs in Atlanta that Jamie Foxx frequented when he was “on his way up”, so to speak. He sort of single-handedly soils the whole video with his presence. Maybe I’m just jaded now. I didn’t know all these things about the artists when the first one came out, and Michael Jackson truly was the king of Pop.
Wyclef Jean’s final summary of account for work on “We Are the World, Haiti”:
Proceeds: $5,600,000.00
Diverted to Wyclef Jean’s Record Label: – $5,000,000.00
To Haiti: – $600,000.00
Did he ever fix those problems? And are those serious numbers?
I was just thinking this morning that there are no groups coming on to speak out for those in Chile. Does anyone even know of any relief efforts? Something is wrong. Why are we not jumping through hoops for those people. Disaster victims are disaster victims.
Granted, Chile isn’t the poorest nation in the western hemisphere either….
CIF, you bring up (intentionally or otherwise) an important point about knowing the organization you are contributing to. I gave through Salvation Army and the Bush/Clinton organization. I figure if you couldn’t trust them, who can we trust.
I remembered people getting badly burned after Katrina so I held off.
Those are not serious numbers…just my attempt at humor. I’m not sure he can fix it, I think it’s already done. I’m just not a fan of his caterwauling on this video.
I liked about 70%, the other 30% I really did not get. Love Josh Groben, love Pink, love Jennifer Hudson, and I like Jamie Foxx’s voice. wyclef or whatever his name is, I totally did not get the A_A_A_A_A_ was he choking on something? That sorta ruined it for me.