Bloodroot

Alright... I'll get to the Bloodroot of this in a minute. First, a couple of preeliminaries...

Before anybody regurigates the usual "you're so unpartiotic/if you don't like America, you can leave" rhetoric, feel free to be intelligent for once.

1) Talk to me about being patriotic when they put your lifeon the frontline in Iraq... not your son's, not your daughter's. I'm not gonna badmouth the President or Republicans, cuz when you look at it, the balance is still in balance: we just traded in abortion for war casualties.

2) When you're so wrapped up into something that you can't see it's flaws, that's not love... it's infatuation (infatuation is from the Latin word "fatuus", meaning... lol, look it up...). And that goes for loving people as well as loving countries. Love helps the loved entity address it's flaws or becomes the solution to it's flaws. If the thing you love is flawless, then why does it need you? Food for thought...

Back to action (this isn't the Bloodroot yet... patience, patience). Today we're talking about economy vs. humanity. Basically this: there are places that are more concerned about their economies than their people. Evidently, a country is more economics than it is population? For example:

I recently visited Canada... OH how I love Canada! Did you know people in Canada can actually go to hospitals and get treatment if they're sick? "Well, we can do that in America too!" Really? Try being poor and getting expensive treatment you can't afford. You're pretty much dead here. You know what that says to me? "We're more concerned about your money than you. We can afford to lose you, but we need that money."

The only allegiance I pledge is to the Trinity. So it doesn't take much for me to say this: America is more concerned about it's economy than its people. Say something if you ain't scared (as my pastor would say). What's more, America as of recent is deadset against Canada because Canada is living up to everything America claims to be. I found out a few weeks ago about the U.S. trying to stop people from BUYING MEDICINE from more-affordable Canada SO THAT THEY CAN GET WELL. Does that sound humane to you? "You can't afford it here, so you don't deserve it anywhere", I guess? Canada has become subtly hated among __________ Americans because, for the first time, America has another image to compete with instead of being the "standard of right" (that's a pun) that is has always presented itself as. And, like a jealous love interest, America is afraid of her lovers leaving her. (and on that note, maybe I don't love America all that much. Time will tell...)

Noooooooooooooow... the Bloodroot. I woke up this morning to a headline: "Ga. Healer Targeted Over Cancer Treatment". Before I even read it, several things popped into my head. "Healer... Targeted? But 'Healer' means he actually helped some people, right?" Then the word "Cancer Treatment". Ladies and Gentlemen, my mother has cancer. She's had it for some years now. 'Matter of fact, she's at home in bed right now because of a bogus cancer medication foul-up.

The man's name is Curtis Brown. Mr. Brown has been practicing medicine without a license, but it seems he may have in his possession an herb that actually destroys cancerous cells (more accurately, causes them to 'self destruct'). It's called Bloodroot, scientific name Sanguinaria Canadensis. Now, I don't agree with practicing medicine without a license because terrible things can come from that. But a possible cure for cancer? Why isn't anybody jumping on this Bloodroot herb and trying to see if it's the real thing? I think I agree with Mr. Brown's son. According to the article: "He said his father's paste is being singled out because it's an old remedy that can't be patented and therefore wouldn't generate large profits for the medical establishment or giant pharmaceutical companies." (side note... that's the first time I heard a non-Black say that!)

Now, some people complained of alleged damage caused by the herb. The Browns say it only destroys cancerous cells. To me, it doesn't matter either way. My mom has taken several "on the book" medications. She's had the inside of her mouth covered in sores to the point she couldn't eat, and she still can't taste anything even now. Her hair has fallen out recently. Her arms and legs became inflamed to the point she had to stay in a hospital over the weekend. And bruises and similar such injuries have appeared all over her, including a huuuuge swelling on one of her arms. What difference does it make then, supposing that Bloodroot
does cause damage. I say, better damage with cure than damage without cure.

What happened to the days when, if something like this came up, the headline would read, "Possible Cure for Cancer Found"! Instead, I expect to see only a few articles and the word Bloodroot hushed among the mouths of the press. So, I called this blog entry "Bloodroot". For those of you who read this, keep the word in circulation. And America, please be more concerned about giving your people a cure for cancer than making a monetary profit off of it. Supposedly, it's "the American way".