Sunday, March 3, 2024

Eating Right Makes Me Fit for the Destination

Fasting and Eating

This is the first Sunday of the Month of March. Every month, usually on the first Sunday of the month, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints celebrate a period of fasting. Those who can,  abstain from food and drink for two consecutive meals. They donate the value of those meals to be used to directly help the needy in their area. They typically refer to this day as "Fast Sunday."
Because today is Fast Sunday, I am thinking about food, and what we eat. What I eat. Or what I should eat (more on that later).

Fit or Fat

With the advancement of medical sciences we have gained a lot of insights into how diet affects our health. We know that too much food, in excess of what we need to fuel ourselves for the day, tends to make us fat. We know that some foods, regardless of the quantity or our caloric needs then to make us fat. We also know that being fat, carrying excess weight, tends to produce some very bad health outcomes, most of which culminate in suffering and death at an earlier age than might otherwise be the case. The medical studies citing the role of excess weight in heart disease, strokes, joint failure, liver failure, and other issues are too numerous to cite, or refute.

The "get skinny" and the "get fit" industries (the two overlap but are not the same) capitalize on these facts to promote a variety of products and processes. Most of those products and processes have dubious benefits and some are more harmful to our health than being fat.

Junk Food

All this is a roundabout way to make the point that if I feed myself a steady diet of junk food, I can only expect to suffer weakness, ill health, and untimely death. In contrast, if I eat a reasonably healthy diet, ensure I have at least some moderate regular exercise (walking is exercise), I can expect to enjoy physical strength, mental acuity, and moderately good health until my body wears out, or I exit mortality from some abrupt misfortune. Of course, fat or fit, I have no guarantee that some ailment or accident won't somehow wreck me.

Now that I am thinking about the effects of my diet on my physical body, I'm going to s switch gears and consider the diet and exercise I am feeding my spirit.

Natural Diets

For all the advancements of medical and physical sciences none of the sciences can identify what animates a living being and is then absent from the deceased. They can measure and track the evidences of animation, and they can even note many things which directly result in the cessation of animation. However, they are unable to see, even with the most powerful of microscopes or other medical imaging devices, the source of what animates our minds and bodies. Natural sciences can only reveal nature.

Spiritual Diets

To gain insight into the world which science is unable to penetrate requires reliance on sources that are outside of nature. The supernatural. God is, by definition, a supernatural being. He does not appear to be bound by the same laws of nature which we observe. Fortunately for us, He has deliberately revealed himself to humanity on many occasions throughout time. Although it is not my purpose here to delve into those occasions, it is relevant to note that He has repeatedly revealed some key facts which we could not discover on our own:
  1. He exists
  2. He is more powerful and wise than we can imagine
  3. He cares about us
  4. Each of us has both a spirit and a body
He has revealed a lot more than this, but these are the relevant points for this essay.

What animates our minds and bodies is our spirit. 

Spiritual Junk Food

My question today is, what happens if our spirit has the same kind of diet and exercise routine as we give our bodies? And what does a good, or bad, spiritual diet and exercise routine look like?

I believe that if I feed my spirit a steady diet of spiritual junk food and give it very little spiritual exercise, it makes my spirit weak and sickly. It may even bring me to a form of spiritual death, perhaps before I am ready to leave mortality.

On the other hand, if I feed my spirit healthy spiritual diet and at least moderate spiritual exercise I will enjoy a more robust physical and spiritual life. This leads to some important questions:
  1. What is a good spiritual diet or a bad spiritual diet? 
  2. How can I know the difference between them?

Seeing Good and Bad

I am going to start with the last question. How can I know the difference between things that are good for my spirit and those that are bad for my spirit?

The answer is simpler, and harder, than people may imagine. It is encompassed in the teaching that "by [its] fruits you will know [it]"

Good Fruits

In my experience, a good spiritual regimen has the following effects or fruits:
  • I have more energy
  • Gratitude - My appreciation and enjoyment of the good things in your life is enhanced, making the bad things in my life more tolerable.
  • Patience / Tolerance - I feel more peaceful because I know that getting things wrong is a necessary part of growing and learning, both for me and others. I am inclined to kindness toward others who may not be able to anything for me. I am more patient with stupid people, selfish people, and mean people because I understand that I have my own flaws, which may not be the same as theirs and we are all trying to get through this life wearing a spiritual blindfold most of the time.
  • Optimism - While a good spiritual regimen doesn't give me an unrealistic outlook on the world, it makes me a more optimistic person. If God is real, and He cares about me, then, although I may not see what he does or understand it, I can trust that He is working for my well-being. And, if I have God in my corner rooting for me, how can I not get back on my feet when I have been knocked down and push forward when everything else seems to be trying to hold me back and drag me down?
  • Attractive - It attracts people who want or who have a good spiritual regimen. It is a natural fact that "birds of a feather flock together."

Bad Fruits

In my experience a bad spiritual regimen has the following fruit (and yes, I do have experience with bad spiritual regimens of myself and others):
  • Depression - a lack of energy
  • Pessimism - the expectation and outlook that good things don't stay in my life
  • Anxiety - the constant fear of getting it wrong and bringing extra pain and embarrassment into my life.
  • Impatience / Perfectionism - Life is too short to get anything wrong and others are constantly stealing my most precious and unrenewable resource in this life, my time. If they can't help me to get what I want, then they need to get out of the way and stop slowing me down. Also, I hate it when I get in my own way by not doing something perfectly and getting the exact outcome I desired.
  • Self-Righteousness / Intolerance - Anyone who doesn't see the world the way I do lacks the intelligence to be worthy of life and liberty or my time and attention. They will just waste their own and steal my time. Their biggest sin is their stupidity in not sharing my opinion.
  • Ingratitude - What I have is never enough. There is always more out there that I don't have in my grasp.
  • Envy and Covetousness - The worst part of life is that I can see that others, who aren't as deserving as me, have more and better in their life than I. I cannot celebrate their success, I can only mourn that theirs isn't mine.
  • Repulsive - Ironically, although like attracts like, no one truly enjoys the company of consistently negative or toxic people. Although I may accrue some power and followers, and some may love me despite myself, no one will enjoy being around me for long.
So, look at the fruits above. Which list resonates more? Those fruits are the effects of a bad spiritual diet and exercise regimen.

The Good Food Diet

This leads me to the first question: What is a good spiritual diet or a bad spiritual diet? 

I know, that is really two questions, but I will deal with them as one. They are one because the bad spiritual regimen is most often the absence of a good spiritual regimen. My spiritual regimen, good and bad, is what I do everyday, even if I am unaware of it.

I am naturally more aware of my physical diet and exercise because it is right there front of my eyes. My spirit is unseen and I am often blithely unaware of my spiritual diet and exercise. Unlike my body which promptly gets my attention when I neglect it, the neglect of my spirit doesn't make me visibly collapse and put me in the hospital because I abused it.

Confessions and Disclaimers

So, what is a good spiritual regimen (diet and exercise)? Before sharing this I must confess to whomever reads this two things:
  1. I do not perfectly practice a good spiritual regimen. I am not perfect. I have my flaws, some of which I enjoy and shouldn't. I am trying to want to be the person I should be.
  2. I am an unapologetic believer in Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ and the Only Begotten Son of God. I believe that Jesus was telling the truth when he said, "I am the way, the truth, and the light." He said "the" not "a" way. I also believe that the truths that lead us to Him are seeded in all the religions of the world. Because of that, regardless of your religious affiliation, a good spiritual regimen will bear good fruits for you.

Good Eating

Here are the parts of a good spiritual regimen, as I and many others have experienced them:
  • Wake up to what I am "eating." 
    • A diet of emotionally, sexually, and mentally numbing movies, video games, music, reading, and other entertainment is the spiritual equivalent of junk food.
    • In a physical diet, exercising the "table muscle" of pushing yourself away from the table before I feel full is an important part of not overeating. Likewise in my spiritual diet, I exercise my table muscle and push back from the junk food buffet being pushed at me by media and society. Instead of mindlessly eating what is being served up, I try to push back from the table. I take a look at what is available, and replace junk food with healthy food.
  • Deliberately start putting good things into my spiritual diet.
    • Try to make time each day to read (or listen to) the scriptures. Whether the scriptures of my religion are called the Quran, Bible, Torah, Shastras, Mahayana, or the myths of my ancestors, I need to make time each week (or daily at best) to read them.
    • While I am reading and listening, I think about how it might apply  to my life and to my challenges and I write down or record my thoughts and impressions.
    • I have made (or borrowed) a list of the books which have been around for decades or centuries as  examples of great literature and important reading. I pick one. I read it. I write down, or record, my thoughts as I read it and after I am done reading it. 
    • Make time to think about what I am reading and listening to. I think about how it might apply  to my life and to my challenges.
    • Then, I pick another book from the list and do it again. If I finish all the books on my list, I make another list and do it all again.
  • Wake up to what I am thinking.
    • Thinking is the spiritual equivalent of chewing. When I chew my food, I break it up into smaller pieces and taste it with my mouth. When I think, I am tasting with my  imagination, my mind, and my spirit. 
    • Are my idle thoughts filled with bitterness, revenge, self-indulgence, or self-pity? Or are they filled imaginings of me acting like the kind of person I want to become?
    • Your thoughts will become your words. Your words will turn into your deeds. Your deeds will make your destiny.
    • I want to be the hero of my story, not the victim, and certainly not the villain.
  • Take more control of my thoughts.
    • Meditate. I periodically make time to be still. Silence the noise and activity around me. I clear my mind for a time, focusing on slow and steady breathing and releasing the tensions in my body. 
  • Build inner self-awareness.
    • I have tried to learn what are my "buttons" that others use to manipulate and control me. I pick up one thought, word, or action of my own in my life, recent or long past. Something I have thought, said, or done. I decide if is it something I am proud of and pleased about, or uncomfortable with. I seek to understand what seemed to compel  me to think, say, or do that. Was that the only course I could have taken in that situation? I examine if my thought, word, or deed was the result of me letting something (or someone) control and compel me, a reaction? Or, was it a deliberate choice I made after quickly considering the alternatives and choosing the one that would likely have the outcome I desire most.  
  • Decide what kind of person I want to be.
    • I strive to learn lessons from my past. If I could relive a moment, would I make the same choice? If not, then I decide how I want to handle any similar situation that may occur in my future. I imagine myself making the clear choice and imagine the probable outcomes of that choice. Do I like those outcomes? If not, then I do it again in my mind and make different choices.


Making conscious choices for ourselves is the most important part of maturity. Choosing the kind of person I want to become is the single most important choice I can make in my life. Everything else, every other choice is more chance than choice until I make that big choice. 

I am convinced that choosing the kind of person I want to become, for it to be worth the prices I pay, must be made for myself. To please me. It is foolish for me to choose what to become to please my spouse, children, parents, friends, or even God. Although all of those may have my best interests at heart, if I don't choose because that is what we want, I will never be happy or content either in my journey or my destiny / destination.

For my part, I want to want to be like God. I struggle because there are moments when I want to do things that aren't at all godly. Every time I fail and fall down, I can hear God in my corner urging me on saying, "It's not over and you're not finished. Consider the lesson you just learned. Make it a part of you. Get back up on your feet. Face forward and press on. It's the journey that will make you fit for the destination I have prepared for you."

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on X: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Sunday, February 25, 2024

Choose Love

The other day I was taking an Uber to the airport and chatted with the driver along the way. When I mentioned my wife, she asked how long I have been married. I told that this year will mark our 43rd anniversary. She immediately asked how I had managed to stay married for so long.
I told her that every day I chose to love my wife more than I love anyone else.

"Love is a choice." I told her. "It is something you choose. It is not something that happens to you."

Hollywood loves to sell us on the fabulous lie that we fall into (and out of) love. 

While it is true that sexual attraction can happen to you, love cannot. Sexual attraction may involve hormones, pheromones, and other stimuli that bombard you, so in that regard attraction can happen to you. Unlike sexual attraction, love doesn't happen to you, it is something you choose.

And before we move off the topic of sexual attraction, while that can happen to you and catch you unawares, what you do about that attraction is entirely your choice. You can ignore it. Walk away from it. Or, you can indulge it. Regardless, after the initial unexpected jolt, what happens next depends entirely upon the choices you make. So, own it.

When we foolishly and erroneously talk of love as something we fall into or out of, we willfully ignore and excuse ourselves for the choices we make. 

Love is not something you fall into. You are walking down the street, not watching you step and accidently step into an uncovered hole at the bottom of which is a pile of love. Likewise you aren't walking down the street covered in love and fall into a hole and the love you felt for someone is suddenly thrown off, out of reach on the street above you where you walked a moment before.

Let's move off for a moment from the topic of the love that binds the lives of people together in a relationship that brings out the best in both of them. Let's talk about the broader situation where we need to choose to love.

Choosing to love is the hard choice that makes life much easier. Just as choosing to hate is the easy choice that makes life harder.

Today, we are living in a world that is being torn asunder with hatred and enmity. Too often our political and sometimes even our religious leaders teach us that those who don't agree with us are evil and hateful. They are bad people. 

This is taught in political rallies all the time. 

The people in the other party want to destroy you and your way of life. They must be stopped at any cost. Whatever you do to thwart them is good, and whatever they do is always bad. They are a threat to your very existence.

In his Sermon on the Mount Jesus of Nazareth taught that we should love those that hate us and pray for those who despitefully use us. Christ showed that God hates the sin and loves the sinner.

We can, and should, stand up for what we believe is right. However, we must not hate those who don't agree with us. In fact, we must choose to love them in spite of whatever "sin" they embrace and even in spite of however they may "despitefully use [us]."

When others actually harm you, or even appear to be supporting things that may harm you, it is easy to hate them. Unfortunately, when you choose to hate, you fill your life with hate.

Hate is the easy choice that makes your own life hard.

In contrast, when you choose to love, you make a hard choice which ends up making your life so much easier because when your life is filled with love, everything is easier to bear.

Just to be clear, I know that evil is real. I know that there absolute, cosmic standards which differentiate between right and wrong, good and evil. Yes, I believe that both Christ and Lucifer are real individuals, each with their own agendas and followers, both seen and unseen.

I also know that there will come a great day of reckoning where each of us in turn will stand before God and account for our actions, choices, deeds, words, and thoughts in this life. 

While I can see the actions of a person and typically judge correctly if they are good or evil, I can never have the knowledge needed to be able to say if that person is good or evil. That judgement is left wholly to God, because he sees the entire picture of each of us.

The great news is that each of is given the gift of choice. We have our own agency and freedom to choose. However, we don't have freedom from the consequences of our choices. Many of those consequences are as inevitable as the effects of gravity.

When we choose to hate, the consequence is that our thoughts and feelings in all aspects of our lives become tainted with the grit of bad feelings. Too often this results in the destruction of the loving relationships we have in our lives. Then, we end up alone, bitter, and hateful, i.e., full of hate.

When we choose to love, even when unlovely things happen or are done to us, our thoughts and feelings are lubricated with love. Bad things happen, but they don't destroy us. Others try to wound us with their words and deeds, but regardless of the harm they do us, we know that they are harming themselves even more and we feel sorrow for them. 

When we choose to respond with love to hate, it confuses people. It also deprives them of their opportunity to control us. If we only give love for love and harm for harm, then anyone can control us. They can lead us to destruction with words and deeds which appear to be kind and loving. They can drive is to do great evils by prodding us with anger and blatant harms.

I could go on, but I believe I have made my point. I hope you will ponder my points and add your own. 

Our ability to choose how we act, instead of reacting, is a singular quality that sets us apart from the brute animals. The only way we will quell the divisive and violent nature of our society (and our lives) is to choose love.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Monday, March 6, 2023

America the Great

The history of the United States of America has it share of unsightly stains. I categorize a "stain" on our history as things which run counter to the ideals and principles espoused in The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights.

The most enduring and noteworthy stains have been slavery, racism, and elitism, which both run directly counter to the foundational principle that "all men are created equal." An emerging stain is the intolerant, and anti-democratic movements of 'social justice', critical race theory (CRT), and 'wokeness.'

In spite of very real stains, the United States of America is unequaled in the history of the world for enabling the political liberty and economic prosperity of people all over the world.

Part 1 - Slavery

In fairness to the Founding Fathers, many of them recognized the hypocrisy of their egalitarian principles and the institution of slavery. They made some concessions in their principles to keep the states united as one nation. At the same time, they took steps to minimize the political leverage that might accrue to slave owners by discounting the value of their human chattel with regards to apportioning legislative seats

I believe the Founding Fathers also trusted that, over time, the principle of 'forming a more perfect union' would continue to erode slavery until it could be abolished entirely. Which is exactly what happened. 

The Three-Fifths Compromise

The so-called three-fifths compromise, alluded to above, is actually a racist statement, but it may surprise some to realize that it isn't racist towards blacks. It is racist toward Native Americans (Indians):

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other Persons

Note that the words 'slave' and 'black' are not used anywhere is the Constitution. Rather the terms used are "free Persons," persons "bound to service for a term of years" (i.e., indentured servants), and "all other Persons." Only the "Indians" (all Native Americans) who were undeniably free persons, were called out and excluded by race from either category.

As a matter of Constitutional law, slavery was not a racial matter. Slavery was a legal status.

US Civil War Ended Slavery

The US Civil War was the slave owners' last ditch effort to preserve the institution of slavery which was, then, cornerstone to their economic livelihood. They had no way to know that less than thirty years after the Civil War (about 1894), Eli Whitney would invent the cotton gin, which would effectively eliminate a significant reliance on manual labor for the production of cotton.

Regardless of arguments over states' rights versus slavery as the proximate cause of the Civil War, it is incontrovertible that the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution is directly linked to the Civil War. It was passed in January of 1865 and ratified in December of that same year. The amendment ensured that the debate over the legality of slavery would be ended when the Union prevailed over the Confederate States of America. The amendment converted the Emancipation Proclamation, a potentially temporary executive order using the wartime powers of President Abraham Lincoln, into the overarching law for all states in the United States of America.

Separating Racism and Slavery

The 13th Amendment does not address racism, at all. It further perfects the Union by eliminating slavery. It also eliminates the portion of the US Constitution which discounted the voting power of slaves, because it eliminated the legal status of slavery.

Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Source: National Archives 

Slavery is a legal status, not a racial one. 

There is ample evidence in the historical record to support this assertion. If we accept the terms 'black' and 'white' as racial identifiers, then the fact that blacks in America owned slaves substantially destroys the argument that slavery is a racial issue. Further, the historical evidence supporting the involuntary servitude (i.e., slavery) of Irish prisoners brought to the American colonies by the English destroys the remaining foundation of any argument that slavery in the Americas was purely a racist institution.

Part 2 Racism

Racism Defined

Racism has existed from time-immemorial. It is based on prejudice.

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines racism as:

  • Belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
  • Behavior or attitudes that reflect and foster this belief : racial discrimination or prejudice
  • Systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another
  • A political or social system founded on racism and designed to execute its principles


Webster defines prejudice as: 

  • injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights
  • preconceived judgment or opinion
  • an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge
  • an instance of such judgment or opinion
  • an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

Notice that prejudice is characterized by being based on lack of knowledge and irrationality.

Prejudice and racism are nothing new. Throughout history, nearly every distinct tribe, people, and nation have fostered prejudice against others.  

Among the Native American tribes of the USA most nations referred to themselves as some variant of "the human beings." This implied that other nations were less than human.

The peoples of the USA believed they had a "manifest destiny" to conquer and control all of North America (and at times beyond those limits).

Romans considered themselves superior to the barbarian nations on their borders.

Germans are better than the French. The French are better than the Germans.

Before World War II, the racial prejudice of the Japanese led them declare themselves the "master race" and justify their conquest of Korea, China, and everywhere else as a logical outcome of their racial superiority and natural right to rule.

Nearly everyone is aware of the Aryan master race theory promoted by Adolf Hitler as the rationalization for the subjugation of all "inferior" races and even the extermination of specific races. His delusion led to the death of more than six million Jews as well as contributing to the deaths of 75 to 80 million soldiers and civilians in World War II.

Racial Slavery Justified

Regardless of the legal nicety distinguishing the issues of slavery and racism, it is irrefutable that, in the years leading up to the Civil War, most slaves in the United States of America were of African descent. The ethnic characteristics of the Africans were often very different than the European ethnic characteristics of those in power. This facilitated the mental gymnastics of Bible-toting slave owners to justify their enslavement, even in the face of Christian mores condemning slavery.

They reasoned that the ethnic differences between Africans and Europeans were outward manifestations of fundamental differences in the intellectual and spiritual capacities of Africans and Europeans.

This ethnicity-driven attitude toward slavery contrasts sharply with the historical justification of slavery as the merciful fate of the weak at the hands of the strong. Throughout human history, those who survived the violent conquest of their people were enslaved.

The Root of Raced-Based Slavery

Slave owners in the USA did not have the pretext of conquest to provide any moral justification for slavery, so they had to invent a moral pretext. If Africans were inherently inferior to Europeans, then enslaving Africans was an act of service, lifting them above their brute existence and into the lowest rungs of civilization. 

At best, this was a specious argument. At worst it was simply a lie and blatant rationalization to quell a guilty conscience. The suppression of teaching slaves to read and write was a necessary measure to prevent the refutation of this ethnic rationalization of slavery. Blacks who could read, write, and reason as well as any European would put the lie to the argument that they were inherently inhuman brutes, barely better than savage beasts, or other domesticated livestock.

To support slavery in the USA, the ethnic differences of Africans and Europeans had to be portrayed as more than ethnic variations. Instead the Africans had to be transformed into a species that was similar to humans, but something slightly less. They had to be portrayed as a separate race of humans-like creatures with capabilities and potentials distinctly different, and less than European humans.

Part 3 - Modern Stains

Critical Race Theory (CRT)

CRT is nothing more or less than racism. Its foundational concept is that individual and collective behavior is predestined based on skin color. But, CRT is not color-blind. It is specifically and particularly anti-white.

Under the notions of CRT, white people are evil oppressors and black people are oppressed victims.

A key premise is that any institution (such as the government of the United States of America) which has been created and supported by white people is inherently designed to promote white-supremacy. Further, such institutions are irredeemably corrupted by this racist purpose and cannot be corrected. Instead, they must be dismantled and replaced by institutions built by black people. The assumption inherent in the is either that black people will inherently create untainted institutions, or that building institutions which are anti-white is definitively "good" because white people are defined as "evil."

It doesn't take a revelation from God to see that such vituperative views will inevitably lead to genocidal violence. Violent, genocide is the logical end of advocacy of any philosophy based on irrational hatred of others because of their inherent traits.

Racial violence deriving from CRT will come from any or all of three sources:
  1. As a natural extension of CRT as its advocates embrace their own version of Hitler's "Final Solution" and seek to exterminate whites.
  2. White supremacists winning adherents and supporters to aggressively "protect" whites from  increasingly threatening and militant CRT supporters.
  3. Ordinary people who reject racism, embrace Constitutional principles, and band together to defend themselves against militant CRT black supremacists and militant white supremacists.
When that happens, it will be another stain on the history of the USA.


While the dictionary definition of wokeness sounds like a good thing, its practice is pretty vile. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines wokeness as:
Aa state of being aware, especially of social problems such as racism and inequality
Being aware of social problems such as racism and inequality is a good thing. If we are unaware of problems, we are nearly incapable of resolving them. Unfortunately, in practice, wokeness is particularly centered in the notion of intersectionality
The way in which different types of discrimination (= unfair treatment because of a person's sex, race, etc.) are connected to and affect each other
Intersectionality, in practice, is a game of one-upmanship where each person tries to show how much more (potentially) they are oppressed than others because of their unique behaviors or characteristics. The underlying motive is to secure preferential treatment for some intersections more than for others. The reasoning is that the greater preference is required to offset the greater degree of oppression or discrimination. The reality is that practitioners of intersectionality want to derive financial benefits based wholly on their characteristics (inherent or otherwise) without any effort or value-add to society. The narcissistic foundation of intersectionality is that society should pay for the enrichment is supposedly receives from the presence of such intersections.

The Irony of Wokeness

The consummate irony of intersectionality is that when you carry it to its logical end point, you inevitably arrive at a doctrine which determines that the individual, is the ultimate expression of intersectionality and thus merits the greatest degree of societal protection and support. 

Individual worth and protection, regardless of other characteristics, is the cornerstone of the principles of Constitutional law and liberty. That is why the Constitution begins with the words, "We the People..." 

Social Justice

The Cambridge Dictionary defines social justice as:
"The idea that all people should have the same rights and opportunities and that a country's wealth and resources should benefit everyone in that country"

Like wokeness, this is another movement that sounds right in its definition, but is totally wrong in its execution.

Let's unpack this definition to find out where it goes wrong.

 "all people should have the same rights"

That statement is totally in agreement with the founding principles of the USA. 

 "all people should have the same ... opportunities"

Life Isn't Fair

Here, we begin to skate on thin ice. Opportunities are often closely linked with circumstances and personal characteristics. Suggesting that everyone should be given the same opportunities is based on the false assumption that life is fair and evenhanded in the distribution of our circumstances and characteristics. 

Some of us have greater intellectual capacity than others. The person with an IQ of 60 is unlikely to have the opportunity to attend MIT because that low IQ indicates the inability of that person to succeed at the level of intellectual endeavors needed to matriculate and succeed in studies at MIT.

Although there is not equivalent of and IQ for artistic talent, someone with my mediocre level of artistic skill is not going to benefit from, and hence not receive, an opportunity to attend Julliard. My abilities simply aren't sufficient to qualify me for attendance. 

Legislating such "fairness" of opportunities without regard to abilities will have the end result of destroying excellence, and all the benefits that come from excellence. Excellent inventions such as smart phones, excellent art such as a Warhol (even mediocre art such as a Bob Rossi), and many other marvelous and beautiful enhancements to our lives will cease to occur.


"a country's wealth and resources should benefit everyone in that country"

This component of social justice is focused on individual outcomes. Everyone, means every individual. The premise here is that we should all get the same outcomes. The assumption is that these outcomes are universally good, hence the word "benefit."

The bitter reality is that the only way you can ensure that everyone gets the same benefit is by denying all but the most rudimentary benefits to everyone. Worse, such enforced egalitarian poverty is at odds with basic human nature and thus is doomed to failure. Enforced poverty will inevitably lead to corruption as people seeks ways to manipulate the system to provide themselves with what levels of comfort they want (regardless of what they may, or may not, deserve).


Worst of all, this phrase is totally anti-capitalist. 

The beating heart of capitalism is sustained by two things:

  1. the free and uncoerced exchange of goods and services
  2. the natural principle of supply and demand
While governments and individuals may strive, or succeed, to exert coercion in exchanges, the natural principles of supply and demand cannot be subverted. They are inexorable.

Scarcity and utility are the natural drivers of value. People are willing to exchange more goods and services for those goods and services which are more scarce or of greater utility. They unwilling to exchange goods and services which are scarce or very useful and will do so only if the exchange is of equal or greater value to them.

Because of this natural principle, those who provide the most scarce or most useful goods and services will inevitably accrue a greater abundance of other goods and services than others.


This is true even (or especially) in the halls of socialist governments, where valuable information or access is clandestinely and routinely traded for such goods and services as the holder of information or access desires. Political and economic power are commodities which are scarce and very useful. Thus, such egalitarian utopias almost immediately upon inception descend into corruption as illegal exchanges become the only means whereby anyone can rise above the enforced poverty dictated by the state.

Even if equality of outcomes were possible, it would be undesirable. The behavior of slaves is especially instructive in this point.

Social Justice is Economic Slavery

All slaves enjoy an equality of outcome from their labors. From their masters they get food, clothing, and shelter. The rewards do not increase in proportion to the success of the master's enterprise. As a result, when the master is not overseeing their work, slaves do only the minimal amount of work they are not forced to do.

No one will exert themselves to excellent inventions, art, innovations, or anything else, unless it will directly increase the rewards they receive for their efforts. You may argue that this should not be how people behave. However, you can just as effectively argue that the sun should rise in the West as many days as it rises in the East, and have just as much success at changing things.

Equality of Outcomes Equals Destitution

Equality of outcomes is both unattainable and undesirable. Equality of outcomes destroys initiative, innovation, excellence, and abundance. It leads only to universal poverty and destitution.

Part 4 - The Greatness of America

As I mentioned at the start of this essay, the United States of America is unequaled in the history of the world for enabling the political liberty and economic prosperity of people all over the world.

The USA is the first nation in the history of the world which was founded on the principles of individual liberty. The US Constitution and Bill of Rights is the first government expressly designed to protect the rights of the people and preserve them from oppression by the state.

The success of the American Revolution, and its founding principles, led directly to democratic revolutions all over the world, beginning first with France. It is arguable that if the American Revolution had failed, most of what we currently know as "the free world" would still be governed by powerful monarchies. Instead, they are republics, governed by leaders who are elected by the people to serve for a time while representing the best interests of the people. 

The USA has fought and won two world wars to defend the political liberty of people in other countries. Unlike conquering powers throughout history, the USA did not require political or economic subservience or servitude of its defeated foes. Rather, it expended its treasure to rebuild its former foes and encouraged their self-determination.

In the wake of the successful imperial efforts of the USA (a stain in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries) instead of colonizing and retaining the servitude of countries such as the Philippines, Cuba, Mexico, and most of the Pacific Islands, in the twentieth century the USA relinquished control of these countries to self-governance.

Through most of the twentieth century and now in the twenty-first century, the USA consistently eschews colonialism and imperialism. Preferring instead to encourage self-governance, the rule of law, and universal recognition and protection of the inalienable rights of humanity.

The Decline of America

Nation Building

Sadly, our national good intentions have been abused as politicians have been seduced into "nation building."  We try to impose our economic and political values and structures of governance on other nations which have not reached a point of maturity where they have a majority of people who desire these. 

Most recently we see this failure in Afghanistan. Instead of using our military might to teach the Taliban that it is not in their best interests to support those who attack the people of the USA, we took over their country for a time. While there, we tried to encourage democratic government. We failed because democracy is never something that can be imposed upon a people. They must win it for themselves. True, they may need outside help, but it is worth noting that no French armies took the field with American revolutionaries against the British. The greatest share of bleeding for freedom was done by Americans.

Previously, we saw this same lesson explained to us in Vietnam. Before that, it was taught to us in the jungles of Central America during the so-called wars of the Banana republics. In all those cases, after we removed our military, the governments of those countries collapsed and re-emerged in forms that the people of that country were willing to support.

Moral Decadence

At the same time as we are seeking to build other nations, our national public persona has come to be widely portrayed by media and popular culture as dissolute, licentious, and pleasure seeking. Our movies, societal trends, and many of our laws seem to disregard the importance of the nuclear family, religion, and the sanctity of life. 

All these destructive societal trends were manifested preceding the destruction of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. They are clearly critical performance indicators for the survival of any nation. Many of our current trends, are repugnant to wholesome people of all nations. It isn't hard to understand how Muslim extremists can gain credibility with more mainstream people by calling the USA "the Great Satan." Our society is becoming increasingly devilish and degenerate.


We have many old, and some new, stains on our history. Slavery, racism, CRT, wokeness, social justice, and even some imperialism are all stains on our history. Many of our old stains have been removed. Some persist and are made worse by new stains. Although the old stains of slavery and imperialism have been vanquished, racism persists and is being exacerbated by things like CRT and wokeness. Before the rise of CRT, racism in the USA was on the wane and nearly extinct.
Despite these stains on its robes, the USA is still the best place on earth to live. We enjoy a level of economic abundance, mobility, and liberty which is the envy of the world. Our political freedom (though rapidly eroding) is still substantially greater than anywhere else. The USA is still a shining city on a hill and a beacon of freedom. Those who say otherwise are either ignorant of the facts, or jealous and conniving for our downfall.

We will solve our social ills by ensuring that the law applies equally to everyone, without any regard to their immutable characteristics, or their choice of religion.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2023 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Monday, December 12, 2022

Conspiracy Theory or Fact?

(c) 2014 by Stefan Kunert; Used under license from

When does a conspiracy theory become fact?

We have been conditioned to discount and deride accusations of conspiracy. “Conspiracy theorists” are openly derided and automatically depicted as tinfoil hat-wearing near-lunatics. For many years I, like so many others, tended to adopt this same benign disregard for anything labeled a conspiracy or conspiracy theory.

Recently, my thinking was challenged when I read an author who asserted that throughout history conspiracies are the norm, not the exception. I decided to test the validity of this assertion. To do that I started with defining the word conspiracy. This forced me to first look at the definition of the root word, conspire.

A conspiracy is formed when people conspire. Self-referential definitions are meaningless, by themselves. So, to define what is a conspiracy, we must first determine what it means to conspire.

Per conspire, a verb, means:

1.     to agree together, especially secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal:

2.     to act or work together toward the same result or goal:

In today’s world the terms “wrong”, and “evil” are considered relativistic value judgements; meaning what is considered wrong by one person may be considered right, by another. This is epitomized in the saying, “one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.”

This means, we must discard those values-based elements from the definition. They become part of the connotation versus the denotation of the word. We all know that the connotation of a conspiracy is that it has bad intentions. Unfortunately, that connotation is preventing us from accurately evaluating the truth of the notion that conspiracies are widespread and normal.

For similar reasons we can disregard the connotation of “illegal.” What is legal varies too widely from one part of the world to another to provide any help with this exercise.  For instance, is countries where Sharia Law prevails homosexuality is illegal and punishable with death, while in the US it is legally recognized as a form of marriage. Because of this variability we must discard the illegal modifier as another value-based part of the connotation rather than a legitimate part of the definition of conspire or conspiracy.

This leaves us with the simple elements of agreeing together, acting or working together, toward the same goal or result. While “especially secretly” is thrown in, that too is more of a connotation than the actual definition. It isn’t reasonable to assert that a publicly viewable conspiracy is less of a conspiracy than a private one. Public or private, they both meet the same criteria of being two or more people working cooperatively toward a common goal.

Per a conspiracy, a verb and a noun is defined as follows:

1.     the act of conspiring.

2.     an unlawful, harmful, or evil plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.

3.     a combination of persons for such an unlawful, harmful, or evil purpose:

4.     He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.

5.     Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.

6.     any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

Again, to get at the definition we must strip away the values-based connotations which have been used to modify the definition. When we set aside “unlawful”, “evil”, and “harmful” that also allows us to disregard the adjectives (or adverbs) of “crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.”

All this leads me to the unambiguous definition of conspire (the verb) to be:

·       Two or more people agreeing to do something.

And conspiracy (the noun) becomes:

·       Two or more people cooperating to achieve a common goal

Stripping out relativistic values from the definition, we are left with a definition that can apply as accurately to the Boy Scouts, or the US Senate, as to Al Qaeda.  

Well, perhaps the US Senate doesn’t qualify as a whole because they seldom appear to be working toward the same result or goal. However, the political parties of those Senators certainly qualify as conspiracies. The members of their political parties conspire with each other to do what it takes to elect their chosen minions to public offices and political appointments where those conspirators can work to further the agenda of the political party (the conspiracy).

Interestingly, using this working definition, any business that is more than a sole proprietorship is correctly defined as a conspiracy. Add in the fact that the notes from board meetings of most companies are routinely classified as corporate secrets, we can make a blanket inference that secrecy is the same as “evil, illegal, criminal, fraudulent, etc.

The same could be said of almost any meeting of top government officials (for all countries).

My point?

The next time someone seeks to denigrate a story as a “conspiracy theory” instead of just going along with the potential smear-job consider the fact that the accuser is almost certainly part of a different conspiracy that has its own objective(s) and the conspiracy theorist is gumming things up for the author’s pet conspiracy.

© 2022 Thomas K Sheppard, All rights reserved.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Wednesday, June 15, 2022

The Roots of Liberty

Creation of Adam (C) Sergey Nivens licensed through

Most of my career has been focused on solving problems. First as a computer programmer, then as a systems analyst and later as a project and program manager my job was to solve problems for my clients. Early on I learned that if you can correctly define the problem you are about half way to solving it. However, correctly defining a problem is not as easy at is sounds. Problems are often so distracting, urgent, messy, volatile, or all of the above that it is difficult to separate the symptoms from the actual problem.

To illustrate this concept consider a situation where fires are springing up all around you. What do you do first?  Do you call the Fire Department, start throwing water, or, do you stop the arsonist from starting more fires? Good sense demands the latter. However, when you are distracted by all the smoke, flames, noise, panic, and confusion it is often easier to try to extinguish one fire and then another. Unfortunately, when you treat the symptoms (in this case the fire) your efforts are in vain because the real root of the problem keeps causing more symptoms.

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.
Henry David Thoreau

Thoreau's statement (above) illustrates the fact that, most of us are more than ready and willing to address symptoms while those who address the root of an issue are much more rare.

As a professional problem solver I was trained in techniques of root cause analysis. I have used those tools and techniques many times to ensure that the time, energy, and money provided to me was used to resolve root causes instead of being wasted treating symptoms. Metaphorically, instead of simply putting out fires I made sure the arsonist was dealt with first, then we could move on to putting out the fires and repairing the damage.

On July 4, 1776 The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America was published. Among the words of the Declaration it stated "... we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights..."

Allow me, please, to unpack this a bit and in my own order and hopefully I can explain the connection between the elements in this phrase, symptoms, and roots.

Unalienable Rights

Unalienable rights are rights ingrained into humanity. When governments seek to deprive people of these inherent, ingrained, and unalienable rights, they cannot rule in peace. They can only deprive people of these rights through the constant, consistent application of force and violence. Efforts to deprive people of these rights inevitably provoke strong resistance from people. Depending on the conditioning of the people this resistance can range from editorials in the press, petitions, peaceful protests in the streets, violent protests, assassinations, insurrections, and armed rebellions.  

If you look at the arc of events leading up to the American Revolution you see that same progression. The American Colonists first resorted to opinion pieces in the papers. From there to petitions sent to the government. When these seemed to be ignored, or worse used as pretext to attack them, they escalated to peaceful protests, then violent protests. Finally, finding their efforts only resulted in greater violence against them they came out in open rebellion against their government.

When their rebellion prevailed and they were able to establish their own government, instead of embracing a monarchy where an elite few made and enforced the laws, they opted to form a constitutional republic. A government "... of the People, by the People, and for the People." Through the power of elections, Americans are given the power of rebellion. Every election we can throw off those leaders who fail to represent our interests over their own, or those of others. This electoral system balances the power of the majority against the rights of the minority, and is based on the foundational principle that either the rights of every individual are important, or none are important. 


To endow is to equip. An endowment, often associated with large contributions to charitable institutions, is to provide a financial source of income which keeps providing benefits in perpetuity, forever. Their value typically exceeds anything we could give in return for them. Endowments are gifts, not purchases. 

These unalienable rights are a gift that equips us to live our lives in a manner that makes us responsible for our own outcomes, rather than allowing us to be victims of others' actions.

The most fundamental of our unalienable rights is freedom of conscience. The right to embrace and act on our own beliefs. This is only restrained if our actions have the effect of depriving others of their unalienable rights.

The unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, mentioned specifically in the Declaration, all rest upon our freedom of conscience.

By the Creator

Monarchies prevailed across the world at the time of the American Revolution. Under a monarchy (and other forms of dictatorship) all rights flow from the monarch (the King or Queen). If the ruler grants a right, s/he can subsequently revoke that right. History shows monarchs and dictators have rescinded rights and privileges from their people almost as often as they granted them.

In blatant defiance of all forms of dictatorship (monarchies or otherwise) the Declaration of Independence states that the Creator gifted these rights to humanity and no government has the authority to revoke them.  

Here we arrive at the root.

The implications of acknowledging a "Creator" are significant and affect everything that comes after that acknowledgement.

Many today embrace the notion that there is no Creator. They argue that against all the mathematical odds the extremely complex creatures and ecosystems which surround us came into being spontaneously and over eons of time have self-modified to result in the current state.  If one of these advocates of wholly natural evolution were somehow transported to a distant, uninhabited planet and there, amid the sands of a desert came upon a digital camera their reason would conclude that the camera was the product of a creator, an intelligent designer. They would never accept the argument that the cosmos had shaken the sand of that desert so long that the minerals and crystals there had spontaneously formed to make this camera. And yet, they can look at the human optic system, which is much more complicated than that of a camera and assert that it was not created, it evolved.

The root reason why many people today reject the notion of an intelligent Creator is not through lack of evidence. Rather they reject the Creator out of fear. What people fear the most is the unknown.

A mind which can create the cosmos we see is infinitely more capable than us. If we cannot comprehend the cosmos, its origins, its rules, its destination, its purpose, then we certainly cannot comprehend the intelligence which set it all up. Living in the shadow of such an unfathomable and powerful intelligence is naturally very frightening. 

If you acknowledge the existence of a Creator, what choices does that lead to?

A) You can choose to pretend that the Creator doesn't exist. Because you cannot fathom the mind of the Creator you can imagine that you are of no consequence. The Creator takes no notice of you, so you are free to do as you please.

B) You can choose to cower in fear of unwittingly offending such a being and finding yourself on the wrong end of the wrath of a cosmic power. Down this road lies a life of superstition. Like the ancient Greeks, you erect altars to all aspects of the Creator you can imagine. To cover your bases you even set up an altar to "the Unknown God" mentioned by Paul in Acts 17:23.

C) You can seek to find the Creator in order to either align your life with the Creator's purposes or defy that power, seeking to thwart it. This course is quite challenging because there is nothing you can do which will uncover the existence of the Creator. You cannot force the Creator into the light of day under a microscope or a telescope. You can only find the Creator if the Creator chooses to reveal himself to you, and the very concept of revelation really scares most people and is easily faked by someone seeking power.

For now, allow me to set aside the issue of revelation. Instead, let's focus on the implications from our being endowed by our Creator with these inalienable rights.

If the Creator thought it worthwhile to give us these rights, then it stands to reason the Creator will hold us accountable for what we do with these rights. It is logical that it is especially important whether or not we seek to preserve them, or seek to deprive others of them.

It seems clear to me that the Declaration of Independence makes clear that the Creator is the root of our rights and the associated duty to preserve those rights. We may ignore the many witnesses in nature, history, and word which bear witness to the intelligent hand of a Creator but our willful ignorance does not alleviate us one whit from our accountability to honor and defend these unalienable rights.


Today we are in the midst of what is still a largely civil conflict over these rights. At the root of this conflict is the belief in a Creator. If you acknowledge a Creator then you must deliberately defy that Creator or seek to align with that Creator. It becomes an important, conscious choice with significant consequences.

Those who seek to deprive us of our rights almost unanimously also seek to deny us the rights of conscience, particularly when it comes to religion. If our religion will adapt to not oppose their views then it is marginally acceptable. However, if our religion doesn't admit of compromise on fundamental issues, then we are to be redefined as dangerous extremists and turned into enemies of the state. Once that latter indictment sticks, then the full power of government can be unleashed to exterminate us and eradicate our views.

Our best defense against being destroyed (spiritually and physically) by this escalating conflict is to speak up in defense of our rights. Silence is acceptance. Show your gratitude to the Creator by speaking up in defense of the rights endowed to us. Use your voice. Use your vote. Use your time and money to support people and organizations who are trying to defend our rights.

When you speak up in defense of our rights you will definitely offend some people and incur the anger of others. Speak up and defend rights politely, but firmly. Don't resort to demonization and name calling. If they are offended when you are not being offensive it is their choice, not yours. 

When you remain silent and inactive in the defense of our rights you will offend your Creator and may incur that divine wrath.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God

Thursday, April 7, 2022

Give to Get

Truth persists regardless of our beliefs, feelings, complaints, or votes.

Without regard to your beliefs, feelings, or complaints, gravity keeps you from floating off the planet to asphyxiate in space. Gravity is a physical law of the universe. To live a happy and healthy life we have to adjust our lives to the inexorable law of gravity.

There is a force which animates each of us. It turns this lump of clay we call our body into a living organism. When that force departs, our body dies. This essence which animates each of us is undeniably real, though we don’t seem to be able to detect it with our five senses or any of the scientific instruments we have built to extend those senses. Whether you call it a soul, a spirit, or don’t believe it exists, it exists. Its effects on our body are undeniable and our death when it departs is unavoidable.

Just as the universe abounds with laws our bodies must accommodate, such as the law of gravity, there are laws in the universe which our spirit must accommodate. Perhaps the most important of these is known in western religions as the law of the harvest, or in the eastern, karma.

This universal spiritual law is that we get what we give. We reap what we sow. And, just as the harvest does not come immediately after planting the seed, usually the receipt of what we have given is delayed.

Whether you believe it, or not, this law affects your life.

  • If you want love in your life, give forgiveness.

  • If you want peace in your life, give kindness.

  • If you want abundance in your life, be generous.

  • If you don’t feel forgiving, kind, or generous, fake it until you make it. Over time you will become what you do.

What you give may not come back into your life immediately. It may take a lifetime. It may come to those you love, who you leave behind when you are dead. The effects it has upon your spirit are immediate.

Try it. You’ll like it.

See Tom's political views on Facebook at:
Follow Tom on Twitter: @ThomasKSheppard

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM).

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein.

(c) Copyright 2020 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

If you believe Government is NOT the answer to all our problems, you will want to read
 Godvernment: Government as God