Climate Damage to Major Cities

March 17th, 2017

Published as an OpEd in the Salt Lake City Deseret News, 3/16/2017

Mexico City and Salt Lake City share many similarities. Both are high-altitude urban areas that sit on ancient lakes; increasing temperatures plague both; and over-pumping of groundwater has lowered both water tables. In addition, each has a spiraling population. Salt Lake residents, then, should be concerned about the recent news that Mexico City is sinking (“Mexico City, Parched and Sinking, Faces a Water Crisis,” New York Times, Feb 18).

Desperate attempts have been made to bring water to Mexico City’s 21 million residents by pumping groundwater. This has depleted this water source and caused the sinking of the city. As pore-filling water is removed, the pores collapse, and the land sinks. Mexico City is now exporting wastewater and importing fresh water to its high-elevation location through canals. But even the canals are failing to flow properly because of the sinking land. The cost of moving water to and from the city is becoming unsustainable

Consider Salt Lake City with its growing population, expected to nearly double by mid-century. We live in a desert and must face the fact that the only water available to us comes from the sky in the form of rain and snow. Precipitation either runs off into the Great Salt Lake (becomes salty and no longer useable), evaporates, or soaks into the ground. The vast majority of our water for domestic, agricultural, industrial use and for watering our lawns is pumped out of the ground. The more we build and pave over the surface of our earth, the greater the runoff and the less soaks in. And with the increasing temperatures and drought conditions in Utah, we have less water coming down to replenish the groundwater.

Let me compare groundwater to an ore body. When the cost of extracting the commodity in the ore body gets higher than the price it can command, the mining town becomes a ghost town. When groundwater is being mined, wells must be drilled deeper to reach it. Someday the cost of extracting groundwater and the collateral costs of importing surface water may exceed what a growing community is willing to pay. Major desert cities will eventually become ghost towns. Is that Salt Lake City’s future?

We have already experienced land sinking in Utah (Utah Geological Survey). If we continue to pump groundwater here, will subsidence become an issue? Additionally, the depletion of our groundwater is affected by our warming Earth, resulting in increased evaporation. The average annual temperature in Utah has continually increased since 1895; the last few years have set records as the warmest, not only in Utah but nationwide.

Utah leaders are already moving water around and considering other major projects in order to bring water to growing cities (Bear River to Salt Lake Valley, Lake Powell pipeline to St. George). The collateral consequences of the Utah projects include drying of the Great Salt Lake, resulting in toxic dust and loss of habitat and depletion of the already overtaxed Colorado River.

For we who choose to live in desert cities, these concerns must be considered for long-term viability. The experience of Mexico City (and other major cities worldwide) should be carefully studied and public policies developed with their consequences kept in mind. Utah and Salt Lake Valley are desirable places to live. But, as with Mexico City, we may damage our environment beyond livability by wanting more than our desert location can supply. Let’s learn from Mexico City. Demand that our local and federal leaders create policy that preserves a healthy and safe community for our families!

Dr. L. Cameron Mosher is a geology instructor and author at Salt Lake Community College and member of the Citizens Climate Lobby.

Trump’s CEO Administration

March 17th, 2017

As an earth scientist, I am increasingly concerned about Trump and his cabinet people.  As a business CEO himself, Trump has filled his cabinet with CEOs of major corporations.  The job of CEOs of major corporations is to evaluate risks, examine models, make decisions, and deal with their consequences, all to the benefit of their stockholders. But now their “stockholders” are all of the citizens of the United States, indeed the world, not just their companies or their minority base.  As a business CEO, Pruitt, now head of the EPA, should be skilled at looking at consequences of decisions that are predicted by models based on real data.  Yet he diminishes the role of Carbon Dioxide in climate damage.  Climate science predicts specific recognizable consequences of climate damage based on peer reviewed models.  These consequences can already be seen.  Does Pruitt see them or not?  How about Trump’s other CEOs?

Citizen’s Climate Lobby and other science-based messengers continue to emphasize this message.  Pruitt (and his boss Trump) must either kill the messenger, ignore the message in the face of the evidence, or come to recognize the obvious.  The consequences won’t go away because Trump and his cabinet ignore them or deny them!  We citizens hope Trump and his associates won’t ignore these consequences until we have crossed some irreversible threshold.  Things like permafrost melting and other positive feedback mechanisms are not in the public view but are potentially devastating as we and the climate progress toward as yet poorly understood thresholds beyond which we have lost control!  Science is working to understand such thresholds.  This research must be funded!  We must demand that the administration pay attention to all citizens, not just their base!

To ignore or deny climate change and its consequences is pandering to Trump’s beloved “uneducated” base.  To all the rest of us, I address this appeal!

To the Climate Change deniers

March 15th, 2017

When the subjects of Climate Change and Global Warming come up as something we humans are exacerbating, a frequent objection to doing something is that it will cost jobs.  Let’s just look at history.

Around the turn of the 20th Century as the automobile was coming on-stream, an entire industry basically went out of business and significant numbers of once vibrant occupations were lost.  Wagon makers, wheelwrights, liverymen, and blacksmiths watched the demand for their trades shrivel as technology advanced.  They either learned new trades or went out of business.  When science and technology give us progress and new information, those affected either adapt or are left behind.

Over the last few decades, a growing scientific awareness has warned of dramatic changes in our climate that are already causing destruction and loss of lives, and in the not distant future will render now populated regions uninhabitable.  Nearly all climate scientists concur that the atmosphere is warming, the oceans are increasing in acidity, polar ice is melting, sea level is rising, low island nations are being drowned, and human civilization is being affected.  Many powerful policy makers deny this is happening and human consumption of fossil fuels is accelerating the pace of this process.  During the campaign, President-elect Trump called it a hoax fomented by the Chinese and promises to dismantle our progress regarding Climate Change.

Various solutions include research and development of alternative sources of energy and the infrastructure and machines to utilize these sources.  Will this eliminate some classes of jobs?  No doubt.  Will it spawn whole new industries with whole new classes of jobs?  Absolutely!  It is time to envision a healthier environment and get to work!

I sympathize with those who fear losing their jobs, but we march on with scientific and technological information.  Don’t let yourself be left behind.  And don’t be part of the deniers who, by their denial and obstruction, may well condemn humanity to a future of climatic and environmental disaster for our posterity.  We can still do some things to control the future, but our window of opportunity is fast closing.

Energy companies who produce coal and petroleum as fuels need to decide what business they are in.  Are they in coal and oil?  Or are they in ENERGY?  If the latter, they should be at the forefront of research and job training to create positive solutions for a sustainable future.  If the former, they and their jobs will gradually be phased out as earth’s changing environment forces humanity itself to either adapt or go extinct.  Science says this is no hoax.  This is no illusion.  It is real!  And the companies who move into that future will have the jobs and the market!

If you want to be part of the solution, communicate with Congress and the President about the climate, encourage research and development for a sustainable future, and support public and higher education in subjects relevant to science and technology and jobs in a future with sustainable energy sources.  Join an organization like Citizens Climate Lobby that promotes solutions at the state and national level.  Let’s ensure that our future is determined by a government by, for, and of the people!


L. Cameron Mosher, Ph.D.

Geologist and instructor at Salt Lake Community College

Heroes for Our Times

February 9th, 2014

In our litigious world where victimhood seems to predominate as an attitude and people have to find someone to blame whenever anything goes wrong or perceived injury is experienced, or people sit in self-pity whenever they have circumstances that they see as limiting them or “disabling” them, here are some real human beings who had the courage, will, gumption, or whatever we want to call it, to transcend their circumstances and build satisfying lives, even make a real difference in the world.  You can find each of these, and many more, by searching online.


Helen Keller.  Remember her?  Born blind, deaf, and mute, she lived in a world of silence and darkness, unable to communicate in or out.  In childhood she was angry and bitter, her restless human spirit locked away, until someone (Annie Sullivan—check out the book, movie and play “The Miracle Worker”) exercised the patience and compassion to find a way to reach through these apparent “disabilities” and release the magnificent Helen Keller within.  Helen Keller was never without these “disabilities” but went on to become an inspiration for uncountable other human beings that meaningful life is not defined by so-called “physical” abilities.  Her remains rest in the lower level of the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C.  You can visit the spot!


Stephen Hawking.  Born with an amazing mental ability, he was diagnosed in his twenties with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), often referred to as Lou Gehrig’s Disease, and given only a short time to live.  Now in his 70’s, having lost virtually all use of any of his muscles, he sits virtually motionless confined to a wheel chair.  YET he has way outlived the prognostications, built an amazing career as an astrophysicist, occupies the Cambridge University Chair once held by Issac Newton, goes to his office every day, still lectures not only to his students but to worldwide audiences, is personally acquainted with many of the luminaries of the world, has been married and has children, has contributed deep understanding of the mysteries of the universe, and . . .   A long time ago, he addressed his circumstances, and decided he was not a victim.  He decided they were just the hand of cards he was dealt in the game of life and he would play it as a winning hand!  He has a sense of humor and does not sit in his chair in self-pity.  Rather uses his amazing mind to not only contribute to science, but also keep ahead of his muscle loss and maintain communication of his ideas to us, the rest of the world.  When I look at Stephen Hawking, I do not see a man with disabilities.  I see a man of amazing human ability!  I have all my physical and mental faculties, yet I ask myself what have I done of note that would gain me such a worldwide reputation and admiration?  Who is disabled?  Stephen Hawking, or me?


Viktor Frankl.  He was a Jewish psychiatrist in Austria who got caught up in the Nazi death camp system and was sent in a cattle car to Auschwitz.  He survived to write an amazing book about his experiences there and what he learned about life entitled Man’s Search for Meaning.  It is available in paperback at most bookstores.  Its descriptions of his experiences at Auschwitz are not pleasant reading, but in writing about what he learned, he models the magnificent human capability to transcend circumstances.  In Auschwitz, he discovered there was a place within him where he had choice!  They could not take that away from him.  They could not force him to hate them!  eHeNo matter how hard they tried, they could not remove from him his humanity!  He could choose his response, even to those unimaginable circumstances that surrounded him and to which he was continually subjected!  I doubt that I or most of us here in these United States will ever experience anything resembling the horror he had to survive every day.  If Viktor Frankl, just another human being like me, has that amazing place of inner choice where he could transcend even those horrible circumstances, surely I can handle mine and we can handle ours!


I was recently invited to meet with a sixth grade class at a local school and talk about my book, I’m OK! I’m just not finished—A Handbook for Empowerment, Second Edition.  The teacher alerted me that they were having problems with bullying there.  When I was a kid, bullies attacked others physically, often recruiting others to participate in beatings.  Now they attack emotionally, online, alone, anonymously, and recruit their cohorts anonymously.  Mob mentality gathers the crowd.  Bullies do not represent superiority.  They represent cowardice and low self-esteem.  They have to hide.  They seem to come from the place of, since I feel like a piece of crap myself, if I can reduce someone else to my level or below, then maybe I can look downward and feel a bit of power or a shred of self-esteem.  Empowerment is not achieved externally.  It is completely an internal experience.


With these amazing heroes to inspire us, I invite everyone to find that ability within, given to every human being with the package of our inherent humanity, to find our own magnificent ability to transcend circumstance, physical, mental, or social, and live that satisfying life of self-acceptance and self-esteem.  I invite parents to find it within yourselves, practice it in your own lives, and teach it to your children.  We have good examples and models to follow that demonstrate it is possible!


February 24th, 2013

The amount of money that changes hands in the United States to benefit lobbyists and special interests and influence elections has really gotten my attention.  Lobbyists and special interests spend big money and give big perks to garner favors and favorable legislation from Congress.  I strongly believe that all issues should stand on and be argued on their own merits, not on the money and perks their supporters can give to the involved Congressmen and public officials.

The members of Congress and government officials who benefit from the corrupting influence of this money won’t do anything to stem its flow.  I believe the most important thing we as citizens can do to eliminate the influence of money and get rid of corruption in the USA is to actually support doing it ourselves.  I have discovered a growing national movement to accomplish just that!

I’m supporting a campaign called Represent.Us to get money out of politics and stop the corruption in our government. The Represent.Us campaign will completely change how business is done in Washington: Represent.Us has a plan to stop lobbyists from bribing politicians, end secret election money, and put voters back in control of elections and citizens back in control of our “government of the people, for the people, and by the people.”  You can go to their website and read the proposed American Anti-Corruption Act.

The first step is getting a huge number of people behind The American Anti-Corruption Act, so I’m collecting names and eliciting support. Can you take a minute to add your name to my list?  Use this link:

This is truly a multi-partisan effort.  Everyone from left, right and center can agree that getting money out of politics is the only way we’ll ever get our government back. It’s the only way we can fairly deal with issues like jobs, the economy, the environment, war and taxes.

Please add your name:

It’s only the future of our country at stake!

Cam Mosher


February 24th, 2013

In a political environment where there are loud voices arrayed against any control of guns in the face of the Second Amendment, I propose a solution for the benefit of society, a solution that focuses on the responsibilities of gun ownership.

The United States of America is an amazing experiment, the first in human history to base government on the will of the people governed.  I thank God every day that I was privileged to live here, at this time, able to enjoy the freedoms enshrined in our Constitution and its bill of Rights.

To live harmoniously in community requires that we give up total freedom; we don’t live alone on a desert island and we must each moderate our behaviors to accommodate our community.  Freedom in community is NOT absolute!

The Constitution is a social contract among us for living in a people-governed community.  It establishes a method of government and guarantees certain rights to protect us against tyranny.  Our diversity requires that we live by the rule of law; with laws enacted by legislatures elected by the people.  There are even processes in the Constitution to protect us from tyranny by the majority, thus preserving the rights of minorities and ideally giving a voice to all in our diverse society.

Laws are enacted by people-elected legislatures that restrict some freedoms for the benefit of all of us living in community.  No rights are absolute.  All rights guaranteed under the Constitution are conditional.  Those conditions are necessary to enable us to live harmoniously in community.  For example, the right of free speech is conditioned by protections against libel and slander or creating panic by shouting “fire” in a crowded theater.  Rights of free travel are conditioned by laws regulating speed, traffic patterns, etc.

The right of gun ownership was deemed subject to regulation by the Supreme Court (District of Columbia vs. Heller, June 26, 2008, in NYT, Supreme Court Ruling Doesn’t Block Proposed Controls, Dec. 16, 2012).  The Supreme Court concluded that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is NOT unconditional and may be subject to legislative regulation for the benefit of society.  But the main obstacle to the imposition of conditions, according to the New York Times, “is likely to be politics, not constitutional law.”

Since it seems unlikely that the right to own a gun and to use it for self-defense will be restricted by Congress, and the Utah Legislature may well put Utah in the questionable position of obstructing any controls, we must recognize that ALL rights guaranteed by the Constitution are NOT absolute and carry RESPONSIBILITY for behaving in a manner to benefit community as a whole.  Let us therefore enshrine in law the responsibilities of gun ownership with suitable penalties for abdication of those responsibilities.

If one CHOOSES to own a gun, then that person accepts the responsibilities for such ownership and ANY consequences that occur from operation of that gun BY ANYONE.  Thus anyone can legally own a gun, but associated with the nature of, and potential for harm caused by a particular gun, the consequences for unlawful use can range from small to very serious.  If one chooses to own a particular weapon, for example a rapid fire-multi cartridge weapon, and that gun is used to inflict serious injury or death by anyone who obtains and uses it, the owner as well as the perpetrator are subject to serious penalties for such use.

Along with the right to own any weapon, for example a rapid fire-multi cartridge gun, goes the responsibility to use it lawfully AND keep it out of the hands of anyone who might use it for unlawful purposes.  If you choose to own it, you also incur the responsibility to keep it secure!

 To put teeth in this law, since the responsibilities of ownership increase with the potential for harm of the type gun owned, it is reasonable to prescribe increasingly severe penalties for failure to accept responsibility for increasingly dangerous weapons.  You can own it, but with the knowledge that you have serious responsibilities for doing so, the abdication of which subject you to serious penalties!

In a political climate where loud voices proclaim absolute Second Amendment Rights, and lots of lobbyist money supports no gun controls whatsoever, perhaps it is time to put into law the responsibilities each gun owner has in order to protect society from unlawful use of that weapon, no matter who may so use it, and enshrine appropriate penalties for both the owner and any other person whose use of the weapon causes unlawful harm to anyone in our Constitutionally protected society.

If one chooses to own a highly dangerous weapon AND that weapon is used by anyone to inflict unlawful harm, the penalties for such irresponsible ownership should parallel the penalties for inflicting harm with it.  Minor consequences get minor penalties, and MAJOR CONSEQUENCES get MAJOR PENALTIES, including confiscation of the weapon, fines, and prison time.  Both the perpetrator AND the gun owner both have responsibility and share prison time together.

Such penalties might cause a reasonable person to think carefully about owning any weapon, particularly one with which very serious penalties are attached.  No one says you can’t own it, and no one says the government will take away your gun, but you should think carefully about your responsibilities to society to control its accessibility as well as its use, even use by someone else, AND the penalties you might incur for irresponsible ownership!

I believe this approach honors both the spirit and the requirements of the Constitution and the Second Amendment, and may get past the shrill screams of the Second Amendment absolutists.  It’s worth a try!

Cam Mosher

The “47%”

November 4th, 2012

I don’t hear this perspective from the media and I believe it should be heard.

Regarding Romney’s now famous “47%” comment, I believe he stated a real truth (although he stated it poorly and in a “politically incorrect” way, given the country club crowd who was his audience). But because it may be “politically incorrect,” does not mean it doesn’t have merit!

I believe he was referring to a very large proportion of our population that has an ATTITUDE OF ENTITLEMENT. Who believe it is government’s job to take care of them. Who believe that if others have more, it is their duty, actually governmentally enforced duty, to take care of them. Who believe it is better to receive welfare than to work. Who believe if they can’t take care of themselves, someone else should step in and pick up the slack. And he was talking about a tax structure that creates a large proportion who pay no taxes, even receive money back in lieu of paying taxes, thus who depend on redistribution of income for their sustenance instead of doing all they can to provide for themselves and their families. People who actually believe they are entitled to this redistribution!  And he was talking about people who prefer to remain on unemployment, even demanding extensions of unemployment, instead of looking for ANY job, even one below their experience and qualifications, in order to provide for themselves and their families.  He was talking about ATTITUDES, not people! An attitude arising since the 1960’s, not out of the depression nor from “the Greatest Generation.” And I think he hit the number pretty close, including the many in and out of the media who have the personal means of sustenance but who look with bleeding hearts on those who don’t, and who, through this so-called “caring” attitude, ENABLE them to stay stuck in their dependency on others.

The belief Romney stated is not limited to the “wealthy,” nor is it evidence that he doesn’t care about those who are not in the “country club crowd.” It IS evidence that he recognizes the enabling nature of current attitudes, policies and resulting programs and that he is concerned about getting the nation and its people back on the road to responsible productivity.

I realize that my perspective is probably viewed as harsh by those who also find harshness in the 47% comment. I teach Developmental Math at a local college, basically REMEDIAL grade school and high school math to “high school graduates” who didn’t learn it when they had the taxpayer funded opportunity, and are now taking remedial math in college instead of college credit math (second time around with taxpayer funding!). Somewhere around 25% of our enrolling college students require remedial classes in basic literacy (reading, writing, and math)! 

While I do my job with enthusiasm and joy, I ask myself regularly why we in an enlightened culture allow these students to graduate from high school in the first place! Why do we ENABLE them to believe that they can get by in life with such a minimal effort? This societal attitude, reinforced as it is by the very things Romney was targeting in his 47% comment, promotes the “dumbing down of America” and an ever increasing mediocrity and dependency among its people. What kind of informed (and informable) citizenry are we developing under these policies and philosophies? It is all part of what Romney was referring to in his 47% comment!

Cam Mosher


September 6th, 2010

Posted by Cam Mosher

I have been blessed with the opportunity to be an Adjunct Faculty member at Salt Lake Community College in Utah.  My assignment is teaching Developmental Math.  That is basically grade school arithmetic and high school algebra taught to adults in college who either did not learn it at a younger age or who come here from another country where it was not taught to them.  Their reasons for being in my classes vary but for most, they could not pass a college placement test administered to determine if they are ready to do college level math.

After a few semesters, I have noticed my students sort into three recognizable groups.

  1. Those who view developmental math (and their earlier math classes in grade and high school) as an unfortunate inconvenience in their lives and the college math requirement as an unreasonable and unnecessary obstacle in their career plan.  All they want to do is get it over with and will do just enough to pass.  They often do not pass the course!
  2. Those who view development math as a necessary evil to get past so they can move on with college.  They will settle for any passing grade just to get this non-credit requirement out of the way.  They often put it off until math is their last requirement to graduate, and since they can’t get required college credit math classes done until they have completed developmental math, they give up and quit college.
  3. Those who are eager for education and realize (perhaps finally) that learning developmental math is not only a college requirement but also a necessary skill for adult living in our society.  They work hard to not only learn developmental math but also to improve their study habits and attitudes and strive for good grades.  Some decide, perhaps for the first time in life, they deserve and will strive for an A in math!  Furthermore, they find that these improved study habits and positive attitudes transfer to other classes and education becomes a positive experience of success for them.  This success sets them up for future success in career and life.  If I were an employer, these are the students I would want to hire!

I believe these categories apply not only to math, but to all of education and to all of career and adult life!  I believe we can recognize these categories among parents, the workforce, politicians, educators, and professionals in all fields.  In which category are you?  Dislike, settle for, or strive for?  When you depend on someone else for products or service, which category do you want serving you?

I have a particular philosophy of education that seems to work well to sort people into these three groups.  As a professional facilitator (see the above tab Our Work in my website for what that means) as well as math teacher, I attempt to get my students to use my class as a mirror in which they can see how they sort.  It is my hope that at least some of my students in the first two categories will see that fact and make some different choices about their lives.  Here is my philosophy:

  1. The objectives of education are twofold:
    1. Develop Comfort and Confidence with the subject matter covered and one’s ability to apply it in life and career.
    2. Demonstrate Competence in applying the learning to life and career.
  2. Therefore, the learning experience is not complete until BOTH have been accomplished, AND grades should reflect the completed result, not the journey!
  3. So I use class time and homework assignments for the student to do the Developing of Comfort and Confidence, and the tests for the student to Demonstrate Competence, and I strongly encourage the students to view the tests as mirrors in which they can see deficiencies in their learning and do what it takes to correct the deficiencies.   
    1. I don’t believe learning has been demonstrated by a single test.  That serves only as a one-time mirror of competency. 
    2. If I had to accept what I see in the mirror in the morning just after getting out of bed, and expect my world to judge me on the basis of that, I would never lay my head on a pillow but always sleep sitting up in a chair!
  4. I then give retake opportunities so the students can demonstrate improved competency after further study to make the corrections.  I record the highest scores.
  5. The course grade is based on the highest scores achieved and is intended to reflect BOTH the actual learning achieved by the student AND the attitude applied to the process. 
    1. Those who don’t care will likely not put in the effort to actually learn the material and will likely settle for whatever they achieve the first time.  Their accumulating deficiencies (especially in math) will retard their learning all through the course. 
    2. Those who do care will make the corrections, retake the tests, and demonstrate both improved learning and the attitude of success that drives them in their education, and will propel them upward in life and career.

If our entire educational philosophy incorporated more of this philosophy from kindergarten on, perhaps we could foster a more positive result across our whole educational spectrum and we would not be falling behind among the educated nations of the world!  People may always sort themselves into these categories, but our job as educators is to shift more people from categories one and two into category three.

Cam Mosher


September 6th, 2010

Posted by Cam Mosher

As a professional facilitator, I have noticed some interesting things about people on this blog.  People can be sorted into three groups:

  1. People who are genuinely interested in the blog topics, follow it, and occasionally make contributions.
  2. People who are mainly interested in using the blog and the Internet to promote themselves and their websites/products.
  3. People who set up automatic programming devices to game the system and automatically find blogs, automatically and repeatedly make initially sincere sounding but meaningless comments, and automatically insert fictitious names and email addresses into the required blanks, in order to get their URLs onto the comment pages.

I learned this sorting pattern after noticing an initial bloom of comments on certain specific posts.  When I picked up on the sort categories and began to delete specific kinds, the comments have died down significantly (basically stopped).  Since doing the deletions, I have added at least one potentially controversial post, with NO comments.

I am drawn to these possible conclusions:

  1. My “loyal followers” have deserted me.
  2. I had no truly “loyal followers” to begin with, regardless of some comments to the contrary.
  3. The time period since my last post has caused any true followers to go elsewhere.
  4. The Internet manipulators (categories 2 and 3 above) are laying in waiting to see if I will be equally diligent in deleting them in the future.

I remain a student of people and committed to the purpose of this blog.  My posts will continue to come, at intervals consistent with my personal schedule.  And I will continue to review all submissions to keep this blog on purpose.  You can count on me to be as diligent as I can to delete and toss in the Spam Can or Trash Can any posts and comments that seem to me to be irrelevant and self-serving.  If I have misread anyone’s intentions, please find a way to prove yourself legitimate to me.  One way is to use legitimate email addresses (I will check them) and NOT use URLs that link to pornographic or “blue” websites.  If that is all you have to offer the Internet, I am not sure you are really interested in contributing to solving the problems of the world!

If you agree with this philosophy or want to contribute to How To Solve The Problems Of The World, please make comments, or use the Contact Us link at the left to submit a post.

Cam Mosher


August 17th, 2010

Posted by Cam Mosher

I love how the Universe keeps dragging me “kicking and screaming” into self-examination!

Coming from my own little narrow perceptive background AND applying to myself the principles I teach (see at least my previous post PERCEPTION AND REALITY, 7/20/2010, and the Principles under the Our Work tab above), the issue of Gay Marriage is up for me.  It brings up a personal and internal debate for me, and being all over the media, it brings up a great legal and social debate for us as Americans, and perhaps for us as Human Beings.  There is much passion on all sides.  Those opposed to making any form of same sex marriage/union legal or even accepted in society are viewing it through their own filter of perception, probably a perception based solely on their own experience and what they have been taught by society and their religion.  Those in support are viewing it through their own filter of perception, possibly (probably) a perception based on their own experience.  And since every one of them (and each of us!) IS RIGHT about our own perception of reality, of course our perception must apply to everyone AND be enforced on everyone.

If we really want to solve the problems of the world, including the problems of our own lives, relationships, and communities, WE MUST GET THIS PRINCIPLE.  None of us know what is real.  All any of us know is what we perceive to be real! Regarding a subject as personal as Gay Marriage (and many other issues facing us today), for anyone to tell another human being what their reality must be is simply wrong and impossible!  If we claim to want to live in community on this planet (and sadly, I am not sure that is what we as a species REALLY WANT, based on human history!), we must FIRST accept the diversity of us.  Let’s get real, folks!  The only thing we truly share in common is the fact that we are human.  Unfortunately, some of us won’t even accept that.  There are races, cultures and religions among us that see others and their choices and behaviors as inferior.

I am of the belief that no matter who or where a human being comes from on the planet, we all share the fundamentals of humanity.  We all love, grieve, hurt, feel joy and excitement, and share in common the basic human emotions.  We all want pretty much the same things for our life partners and children, security and opportunity.  No matter the color of our skins, we all bleed red.

I believe the United States of America was founded on (or has at least matured to) some basic principles contained in its founding document.  “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”  I see no exceptions in that simple statement.  And I hold out that this statement IS TRUTH as it states, and that it applies to all human beings everywhere as it states.  If we humans want to solve the problems of the world (beginning at home, wherever we live!), we must all get the meaning of this incredible line from the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.  ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL AND ARE ENDOWED WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, which are enumerated in simple terms.  These apply to ALL MEN EVERYWHERE (meaning all men and women), including all races, all genders (and gender preferences), all nationalities, all cultures, etc.  I am forced by the principles I believe in and teach to confront my own personal beliefs, judgments, biases, prejudices, etc., kicking and screaming if I must.  I invite you to confront yours.  The Creator who created ALL MEN mentioned in that document can have intended no less.

Life is good, if we are willing to live it in a goodly way!

Cam Mosher