Subject:
|
Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 20 Oct 2003 18:15:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
951 times
|
| |
|
|
The family: myth and reality
http://www.alsagerschool.co.uk/subjects/sub_content/geography/Gpop/HTMLENH/patp/pp72.htm
Families in the real world are often not what the policy makers think. And ‘the
family’ everywhere is under immense stress from rapid economic, social and
environmental changes. In this Year of the Family Jodi Jacobson introduces our
special report on The family: myth and reality.
The nuclear family takes a hit
http://dir.salon.com/mwt/feature/2001/06/07/family_values/index.html
Yet when the idea of family is addressed in a political context (and Americans,
despite our reputation as rugged individualists, still insist that our private
lives are political), a dichotomy arises, usually along partisan lines, between
abstract notions of an ideal American family and the real families that the
majority of Americans actually live in.
I am reminded of how tiresome discussions can get in debate. We are now mired in
fundamental ignorance and misunderstandings of fact so profound that Schuler is
patiently explaining details like belief vs. disbelief.
My advice: get a ****ing education before you open your trap here!
Yes, you have the right to believe anything you want to believe. You don’t have
the right to claim superiority for your particular brand of superstition over
that of another. Sure, you like it and it works for you -- that doesn’t make
people that believe in something only slightly different your enemies,
murderers, or people in need of conversion.
When Justin uses phrases like “fatally flawed teachings” to describe the theory
of evolution I really just have to laugh out loud. Does the Theory of Evolution
end with anything as frightening as the Book of Revelations? Answer: hell, no.
Personally, I find most organized faiths to be “fatally flawed teachings” --
absolutely filled with antiquated stories in support of value systems that have
disappeared and logic so stretched that most properly educated people are
disbelievers of these collections of myths. Even John Neal knows better than to
claim some kind of logic exists behind these stories of the bogeyman in the sky.
Frankly, it’s too funny that one of the most scandalous things to have happened
in regards to lugnet is the advent of Rev. Brendan Powell Smith and his “Brick
Testament” or whatever. When people are actually confronted with the texts
behind their belief system they suddenly have to realize that there are really
spooky stories in the bible that would seem to support all kinds of weird
behavior like genocide, incest, polygamy, rape, murdering one’s children, etc.
I am sorry, but I just cannot take some of you believers too seriously. I don’t
think that I have closed mind, I just lack the necessary patience to tolerate
your stumbling questions and strained rhetoric. Hey, believe whatever voodoo
pleases you best. Just try to act in a way that you do not ensnare the rest of
us in your delusions.
But for those too appalling ignorant to understand the basis of morality I
provide this: morality derives from the fact that human beings are social
creatures, not from the edicts of a mythical being. We have spoken and unspoken
understandings between us all that allow us to interact with one another without
resorting to what is sometimes referred to as the “law of the jungle.” The
reality is that most of us do not go around killing each other because that
would be anti-social. Because we are social we tend to collectively frown on
the anti-social behavior of the few acted upon against the many. You don’t need
any superstitious mumbo-jumbo to know this. “Morality” arises as an outgrowth of
the need to be social.
It seems to be that you “believers” attribute to god all the things that you
simply have figured out for yourselves yet. A pretty story about the cloak of
the goddess forming the darkness of the night sky doesn’t make the story true
however beautiful or lyrical the idea of it may be.
What stands as proof behind the Bible? Absolutely nothing. What stands as proof
for the theories behind modern science? Observable phenomena.
Big difference.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
