| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Hank Schwaeble |
|||
|
Where's that story, Harry? I couldn't find it.
|
|||
Graveside Tales |
|||
|
Link near top of article that says left-wingers.
~Dale |
|||
alienmotives |
|||
|
Well, you know, if I was able to believe that there was a Giant Sky Ghost out there who is interested in every little detail of my life, and that when I
die it won't be for *real* because I'm going to go hang out with said Giant Sky Ghost in his posh house, and if I were also able to believe that the
war in Iraq is just and going great, and that Bush is a fine human being and an excellent, honest leader, and that the sexual preference I was lucky enough to
be born with is the only right one, and that all illegals are bad people, and that evolution and most science in general was just something lefties make up for
no reason other than to annoy me and/or shake my faith in the Giant Sky Ghost, and that above all Fox News is both fair AND balanced and it's only a
coincidences that O'Reilly is telling me everything I want to hear....
Belief is a good way of putting the comment about the Great Sky Ghost because there is no proof of His/Her/Its existence... nor any proof of nonexistence. It's all about belief. I admit I don't have it, but I can appreciate the ability of others to find hope in the accountings of others. I just don't appreciate when they use their rules against others. Not to restrict others from joining their group... more power to them, there; but when they actively injure others, I can't support it. I feel the same way about true athiests; they have an utter, unprovable faith in the nonexistence of a greater power. Good for them, but I can't subscribe to that faith either. If you can't believe the war in Iraq is just, fine; but please, don't delude yourself into believing that's an indication of logical thinking. The circumstances involved in any nation-to-nation interplay tend to be intricate, and with conflicts even more so. Logical analysis of any conflict is only theoretically possible if all of the pressures and negotiations, histories and beliefs of all parties involved are available (which they have never been, in any national conflict) and analyzed objectively. The best you can say is that it's an indication of moral superiority, and that's only based on perception; people who support the war believe that their position is one of moral superiority. Both sides can back up their views with evidence and anecdotes which support them. On a personal level, I approve the war effort, although I disapprove of some of the tactical decisions. People believing that their sexual preference is the right one is not a logical issue at all. It's also not true that tolerance is limited to any one group, nor bigotry... whether aggressive or dismissive in nature... is restricted to one side. Without hunting up any studies, I'd be willing to lay down money that homosexuals are, as a group, far more tolerant than heterosexuals of other sexual preferences, but I also don't know how much of that stems from having to spend so much time in a minority status and perceived as being an outsider. I'm inclined to think that, human beings being as cliquish and exclusionary as they are, Joe Haldeman was right in his novel The Forever War; that in a time in the future where homosexuality was the norm and heterosexuality was a rare deviation, the heterosexuals would be distrusted by many and openly vilified by some. All illegals are not bad people. All illegals have violated Federal law. This does not make them bad (a subjective term), but it does mean they have performed criminal acts (an objective term.) That is logical. If you then believe that criminal laws should not be enforced, or that they should be modified... fine. Propose a viable change to the law, and campaign for it, and get it enacted. But, if you do so, the consequences of that law should be your triumph or your burden. The notion of being praised for the intentions of an action and getting a pass on the actual result is irrational, but exemplified in our treatment of politicians and activists. As far as science goes... I'm an electronics technician. I've been working with a telephone company for nearly a decade; prior to that, I was aiding in design and performing circuit testing on high-voltage power supplies. Before that, I worked as a field tech for a civilian nuclear power plant. Before that, I spent a six-year hitch in the US Navy, as a nuclear reactor operator. While I was in the military, it was my job to teach other people submolecular physics. Before that, until I dropped out of college due to a lack of funds, I was a chemistry major. One of the reasons I tend to side with the right on science issues is that they are the ones who (in the modern era) typically decry groupthink and the automatic rush to accept every pseudo-scientific theory based on one flawed computer model or funded study. The left consistently shuts down arguments in favor of their views, and then denounces the other side for daring to postulate on the possibility of error... despite the fact that much of science has progressed purely upon the back of such theorizations. Nearly every great leap in science has occurred by people challenging the status quo, and suggesting that another possibility exists; and untold failures have occurred as well. But it's not just the "Evolution is wrong, and God told me so" people who are trying to squelch progress and free thought; it's also the "Global Warming is happening, despite the field data accrued over the last decade" people. Fox News leans right. Most of the other television media leans left. Because one outlet is biased doesn't mean the other sides aren't.
Alien Motives books: www.alienmotives.com
|
|||
Hank Schwaeble |
|||
|
That study on people becoming more liberal as they age is rather vague and didn't track actual individuals, but age groups. I think people become more
open-minded as they age, but that is definitely not the same thing. I'd love people to be more open-minded to things like doing away with the income tax,
allowing school choice, letting me invest my social security withholding, and drilling for oil off the coast of California and ANWR.
|
|||
VeryUnseemly |
|||
|
alienmotives, you've made some great points (a few of which I might address later, when I have more time) but you've overlooked one major factor:
I wasn't really being that serious. Like, at all. |
|||
Graveside Tales |
|||
|
Amen
~Dale |
|||
Brian Knight |
|||
alienmotives wrote: Oh, come on, Toshi! |
|||
alienmotives |
|||
|
You've just been waiting, haven't you?!
Alien Motives books: www.alienmotives.com
|
|||
alienmotives |
|||
|
You've just been waiting, haven't you?!
Alien Motives books: www.alienmotives.com
|
|||
Brian Knight |
|||
|
Yes, I have
|
|||
Qusoor |
|||
Hank Schwaeble wrote: See, this I don't get. You post these threads, but you aren't in fact interested in the subsequent conversation. Why, then, do you post these? From my point of view, you're either a) trolling, posting these just to stir up shit or b) you're not all that secure in your Rightiness, and need to post these to bolster your sense of sense of correctness. I'm sure there are other explanations, and I look forward to hearing yours.
John Goodrich,
My blog: Flawed Diamonds "There's an old Indian proverb that says if you are ever lost, you should sit down and begin to make a curry. Before the water boils for the rice, someone will come out of the forest and tell you you're making it wrong." --Bruce Lierman, "Dutch Mess" |
|||
rchandler |
|||
|
I don't get how conservatives can be very happy while they see and understand how liberals are constantly working to wreck the country. Seems to me
liberals would be the happiest lot because most of them are so oblivious to how destructive the religion of liberalism is to the country.
Take Stephen King for example. The guy seems clueless as to how his recent comment implying that the men and women in our military are illiterate might be seen as an insult (based on a bogus charge). His response to the minor uproar he caused? Shut up. Liberals are all for free speech until you disagree with them. Then they want you to shut up and go away. You can see the video here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/05/05/writer-stephen-king-if-you-cant-read-youll-end-army-or-iraq
Last Edited By: rchandler
05/08/08 03:39:32.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
rchandler |
|||
|
And here is King's reply, posted by his message-board lackey: http://www.stephenking.com/forums/showpost.php?p=157320&postcount=15
|
|||
Hank Schwaeble |
|||
Qusoor wrote: Dude, WTF? That's your response to a joke? And what the heck are you talking about, I'm "not interested in the subsequent conversation"? You've got to be fucking kidding me. Jesus, to think of the time I spend on this board engaging in subsequent conversations. I posted a link to what I thought was a mildly interesting story, explained the only quibble I had with it in my initial post, then responded to your post. There wasn't any serious "subsequent conversation" that I saw that seemed worthy of any indepth response. And just how did your nine-word post contribute to any kind of conversation that I was supposed to show interest in? |
|||
BryonMorrigan |
|||
Hank Schwaeble wrote:
Jupiter Optimus Maximus is appalled by your apostasy! Furthermore, he also doubts your commitment to Sparkle Motion! GOOD DAY SIR!!! |
|||
Hank Schwaeble |
|||
|
Oh yeah? Well, I think you're the fucking anti-Christ!
|
|||
Graveside Tales |
|||
|
Why does this always have to happen?
~Dale |
|||
Hank Schwaeble |
|||
|
What? Bryon and I trading lines from Donnie Darko? We can't help ourselves!
|
|||
BryonMorrigan |
|||
|
Obviously, Hank is an Anger Prisoner. A textbook example. DO YOU SEE THE FEAR, PEOPLE? This man is scared to death of the truth. Son, it breaks my heart to say
this, but I believe you are a very troubled and confused young man. I believe you are searching for the answers in all the wrong places...
|
|||

Logo design and background image by Caniglia