Re: Miranda died
On 3 Nov 2003, at 2:19 am, Julia Thompson wrote: Dan went out to take some scraps out to the dogs, and Miranda didn't come. He went looking for her and found her body next to the shed. She was a very nice dog, very *doggy*, utterly adoring. We're going to miss her very much. That's sad news. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. -George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Public trans (was Re: other things)
As someone who grew up there, I have to say, I'm shocked to hear you say it. I always hated the DC Metro system because it was: 1) Too expensive and 2) Not extensive By which I meant that it cost a lot to get anywhere, and I couldn't get to the parties in Georgetown, which is where I wanted to go :-) Plus, it stopped at midnight. I can't tell you how much I preferred NYC's and Boston's subway systems. The buses run at all hours, which is a *lot* more than you can say for Austin. When I was last in DC, the system was *incredibly* good for getting me where I wanted to be going. (And as for having to walk to Georgetown, we were doing an awful lot of walking that day, didn't give in to the public transportation system until *after* the free evening concert at the Kennedy Center.) Julia I'm 10 miles from my job. I drive every day and park a ten minute walk away for free. Going by standard rates I figure it costs me $140 a month. That's almost three times the amount to drive compared to the bus rates. But the bus was neither convenient nor reliable. I consider my time to be worth enough that I'm saving money by driving myself. Even if it was faster, I think the rates are too high by at least half. When I was offered my job I figured I'd be taking the train in, but it's even higher and the times are horrible. I can't get to work before seven, and the first train home is after 4:30. (Actually the first train leaves at 2:55. It's like Amtrac doesn't realize people work 8 hours a day.) Of course I tried bike commuting, but I was scared once too often. I enjoy bike riding, but when I started to dread it I stopped. Plus, I cannot do that and get clean enough at work, just the type of person I am. They are talking of putting in a light rail service here using the Amtrac lines. If the rates are cheaper than Amtrac and the times better, I will use it. Kevin T. - VRWC and I'm going to be late now ;-) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: religious/political question
Julia Thompson wrote: :) 1) Yes, it would be nice if Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden died of cancer, the world would be better off. Don't mean to be a kill-joy but the world would be better off only to the extent of two nasty characters ceasing to exist. From all accounts, OBL's continued existence has become an incidental issue for Al-Qaeda. Same holds true for Saddam and the resistance in Iraq. Ritu GSV Spreading Good Cheer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
- Original Message - From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:40 AM Subject: Re: Dogmatism --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 1:37 PM Subject: Re: Dogmatism And then there was some other rambelings by someone who clearly has not studied Marx, and instead has listened to some bs from some dogmatic group. Out of curiosity, who taught the Marxism class that you took, Jan? I do not remember his name. The class was on world history and political systems. We spent 3 weeks on Marxism/communism, 3 on fascism, the other 10 on other various systems inclusing several forms of capitalist democracy. Why do you ask? Because, as far as I can tell, you took a swipe at Gautam's education in the field. He received a degree in government from Harvard, with a specialization in international affairs. His thesis advisor was Stanley Hoffman, who is one of the two or three most accomplished liberal thinkers in international relations. He Marxism professor was Harvey Mansfield, who is considered the foremost conservative political philosopher. Gautam also worked at the John F. Kennedy school of government at Harvard, specializing in Russian affairs. I know that Dr. Hoffman thought very well of Gautam's work, even though he's liberal and Gautam's conservative. Its hard to fathom anyone having such a favorable impression of someone who is ignorant and dogmatic in opposition to one's own beliefs. Gaining such a favorable review from one of the most respected writers who disagrees with you typically indicates real talent. Given that, I was very curious to see what gave you the bases for dismissing very well respected Harvard professors out of hand. With all due respect, I do not believe that having taken a survey course from someone who's name you cannot remember is sufficient basis for such dismissal.** That doesn't mean that you need to lie down and play dead if Gautam writes something you disagree with. I don't have a Harvard education in political science, and I'm more than willing to take him on, as the archives of brin-l over the last 5+ years should show. However, in our disagreements, I know that Gautam is a very reasonable person who just happens to be wrong on a particular issue. :-) As an aside, what I'd really like to see is Gautam and Ritu go at it over international affairs. Both are very articulate debaters who tend to appreciate the subtleties of a problem. They have fascinating similarities/differences in background as an Indian and as a second generation American of Indian decent. Further, neither tends to devolve into a polemic arguments when debating ideas. Dan M. ** If it wasn't Gautam you were dissing, I've misunderstood your post. But, I looked at who replied to Tom before you did and his post was the only one I saw. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: EMP device? was 'The Burning Man'
On 2 Nov 2003 at 22:45, David Hobby wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: ... My reaction to such behavior was to inform the offender sweetly that if he uses that bullhorn one more time while people (like me) are trying to sleep, ... My reaction to s similar incident involved the one and only time I used an EMP generating device in the field. I think there were only two collateral casualties (a cell phone and a pocket TV), both of which belonged to the offender. And no-one else DID work out what happened. Andy Dawn Falcon Andy-- A good story, but I don't believe in the EMP device that small and unobtrusive. Do you want to divulge some technical details? : ) It's not precisely small and unobtrusive. It's more no-one had any idea what it WAS (and at that time of the night, no-one really cared). It was also one-shot, which helped keep the size down. Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. - Bjarne Stroustrup ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Costume Gets Osceola H.S. Student Suspended
http://www.wftv.com/education/2604761/detail.html Halloween Costume Gets Osceola H.S. Student Suspended POSTED: 10:15 a.m. EST November 3, 2003 UPDATED: 10:56 a.m. EST November 3, 2003 KISSIMMEE, Fla. -- Osceola High School administrators thought a student's Halloween costume was more trick than treat. So they suspended her. SURVEY Do you agree with the high school's decision to suspend the student for her halloween costume? Yes, it was inappropriate No, it was a good PSA Results | Disclaimer Lanessa Riobe, 16, was told to go home Friday after wearing a T-shirt decorated with condoms. Lanessa said she decided on the costume after seeing safe-sex commercials on television. Not strange enough? Read more strange news from WFTV.com. A lot of my friends are sexually active, Riobe told the Orlando Sentinel. I tell them, if you're going to do it, be safe. Riobe taped condoms to a white T-shirt and began passing them out to her classmates. Her first-period teacher alerted school administrators, who sent her home with a three-day suspension for class disruption. They also said she had an insolent attitude. Osceola High principal Chuck Paradiso later reduced the suspension to one day. This is not acceptable, he said. This is something you don't do in a public school. Ribose's mother, Melissa, supported her daughter's decision, and even helped her get the condoms for the costume. Sex can be deadly and people need to know that, Melissa Riobe said. I just can't believe they suspended her for doing something good. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Miranda died
- Original Message - From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 8:19 PM Subject: Miranda died Dan went out to take some scraps out to the dogs, and Miranda didn't come. He went looking for her and found her body next to the shed. She was a very nice dog, very *doggy*, utterly adoring. We're going to miss her very much. Julia I am very sorry to hear about your loss Julia. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:44:04 + On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com _ Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings! Go to http://www.msn.americangreetings.com/index_msn.pd?source=msne134 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. Hay, I'm a conservative myself, I favor Capitalism and Democracy, and I am definitely not an anti-Semite. There was a time before I could drive that I considered the benefits of a more highly structured system such as Marxism. I read just about everything I could find on the subject. I decided that the benefits were unattainable. But I do not recall at any time reading anything about Marx as an anti-Semite, or anything that would have suggested such from his writings. You would think that if Marx was an anti-Semite, we would have learned that in my survey course. We did after all learn that many Germans of the time were. Dan, you have many times requested references, and in this case I think that some reference is warranted. We are talking about what someone said after all. What Gautam has said is to me akin to being told that Hitler was a Communist, or that Stalin was a Christian. You can't just blurt stuff like that out with out some proof. You would think that if it were the case, then it would be just as common knowledge as that Stalin was an Atheist and Hitler hated Communism. Besides, if you are going to say something so incredible, and provocative, and you have the credentials to be believed, then you have the responsibility to at least list said credentials. Otherwise it's just another form of trolling. Intellectual trolling, is no better than the idiotic variety. If you have such a position then you gain a lot of responsibility, wouldn't you say? Responsibility like that of a black belt not to get into a fight, since such a fight might be lethal for the opponent. --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 12:40 AM Subject: Re: Dogmatism --- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 1:37 PM Subject: Re: Dogmatism And then there was some other rambelings by someone who clearly has not studied Marx, and instead has listened to some bs from some dogmatic group. Out of curiosity, who taught the Marxism class that you took, Jan? I do not remember his name. The class was on world history and political systems. We spent 3 weeks on Marxism/communism, 3 on fascism, the other 10 on other various systems inclusing several forms of capitalist democracy. Why do you ask? Because, as far as I can tell, you took a swipe at Gautam's education in the field. He received a degree in government from Harvard, with a specialization in international affairs. His thesis advisor was Stanley Hoffman, who is one of the two or three most accomplished liberal thinkers in international relations. He Marxism professor was Harvey Mansfield, who is considered the foremost conservative political philosopher. Gautam also worked at the John F. Kennedy school of government at Harvard, specializing in Russian affairs. I know that Dr. Hoffman thought very well of Gautam's work, even though he's liberal and Gautam's conservative. Its hard to fathom anyone having such a favorable impression of someone who is ignorant and dogmatic in opposition to one's own beliefs. Gaining such a favorable review from one of the most respected writers who disagrees with you typically indicates real talent. Given that, I was very curious to see what gave you the bases for dismissing very well respected Harvard professors out of hand. With all due respect, I do not believe that having taken a survey course from someone who's name you cannot remember is sufficient basis for such dismissal.** That doesn't mean that you need to lie down and play dead if Gautam writes something you disagree with. I don't have a Harvard education in political science, and I'm more than willing to take him on, as the archives of brin-l over the last 5+ years should show. However, in our disagreements, I know that Gautam is a very reasonable person who just happens to be wrong on a particular issue. :-) As an aside, what I'd really like to see is Gautam and Ritu go at it over international affairs. Both are very articulate debaters who tend to appreciate the subtleties of a problem. They have fascinating similarities/differences in background as an Indian and as a second generation American of Indian decent. Further, neither tends to devolve into a polemic arguments when debating ideas. Dan M. ** If it wasn't Gautam you were dissing, I've
Re: Dogmatism
--- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. Have you _read_ On the Jewish Question? William and I have discussed it briefly, and I've talked about it considerably more with someone else on the list. William described it as a defense against Bruno Bauer. As Prof. Mansfield pointed out when lecturing on the book, Marx's problem with Bauer was that Bauer _did not go far enough_. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
more life at fox news
http://www.poynter.org/forum/?id=letters From MATT GROSS, assistant editor, New York magazine: As a former editor at Foxnews.com -- and therefore clearly a disgruntled ex-employee -- let me just say that the right-wing bias was there in the newsroom, up-front and obvious, from the day a certain executive editor was sent down from the channel to bring us in line with their coverage. His first directive to us: Seek out stories that cater to angry, middle-aged white men who listen to talk radio and yell at their televisions. (Oh, how I'd love to stick quotation marks around what is nearly a direct quote.) What followed was a dumbing-down of what had been an ambitious and talented news operation. Stories could be no more than 1,000 words, then 800 (I heard it was reduced further after I left, in March 2001). More and more effort was devoted to adapting FNC scripts into Web stories, which meant we were essentially correcting the errors of FNC reporters who couldn't be bothered to get the facts. To me, FNC reporters' laziness was the worst part of the bias. It wasn't that they were toeing some political line (though of course they were; see the embarrassing series on property rights from 2000), it was that the facts of a story just didn't matter at all. The idea was to get those viewers out of their seats, screaming at the TV, the politicians, the liberals -- whoever -- simply by running a provocative story. The bizarre and sad part of this was that, at the Website, most of the reporters, editors, and producers were liberals -- and not only liberals but young, energetic, ambitious, talented journalists. Some of my friends still work there, and some of them no doubt wish they could leave for a better job elsewhere. Why don't they (and why didn't Charles Reina)? Well, despite the Bush administration's clear success in revitalizing the U.S. economy, the job market for journos is still pretty poor, especially if your portfolio is full of badly reported 600-word clunkers. (Sorry, guys.) But what do I know? I haven't worked there in two and a half years -- I haven't voluntarily watched FNC since then -- so maybe things have changed. But from what Reina wrote, and what I experienced, it doesn't sound like it. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 6:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question) If you want to spend hours commuting to and from work, Jersey's your place then! You're acting like New Jersey is somehow uniquely bad in this regard. The traffic near Boston, DC, Long Island, LA, and Atlanta is at least at bad and probably worse. The Long Island Expressway is not nicknamed The World's Longest Parking Lot for nothing. Forbes Rating of Worst Commutes to work: Greater Los Angeles San Fran Dallas/Fort Worth Houston Washington D.C. Denver Nerd From Hell (On the other hand, I will admit that around here, people pray not to have to commute through Princeton...) Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last. - Dr Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] A Tirade Against 'The Burning Man'
Julia wrote: I later came up with a way of radically expressing myself regarding the bullhorn. Seize the bullhorn, drop trou, and shower it. And I made it clear that if I'm ever pregnant and awakened by a bullhorn at an ungodly hour ever again, I *will* do that. So now the real Julia comes out... :-) Reggie Bautista Remind Me To Not Make Her Mad Maru _ Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings! Go to http://www.msn.americangreetings.com/index_msn.pd?source=msne134 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Taking it all off (was Re: religious/political question)
Robert Seeberger wrote: Question: Why do people on this list so frequently show their ass? Jim replied: I do it because I'm an attention whore. Well, that and I like the feeling of dollar bills sliding into my g-string. To (probably mis-)quote an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, did anyone else just go to a really scary visual place? Reggie Bautista MY EYES, MY EYES! Maru _ Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: DRAFT
d.brin wrote: But yes, a priority has to go to novels! So, guess where I'll be returning next? Hint... they swim. They talk. They fly Jim replied: Glee! It's a story about a bunch of Gameras! :) LOL! By the way, has anyone else noticed that there are suddenly a whole lot of Godzilla and related movies in the cheap DVD bins at Walmart? Reggie Bautista Thread Creep Maru _ Enjoy MSN 8 patented spam control and more with MSN 8 Dial-up Internet Service. Try it FREE for one month! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Miranda died
Julia wrote: Dan went out to take some scraps out to the dogs, and Miranda didn't come. He went looking for her and found her body next to the shed. I'm so sorry to hear this. You have my and my wife's condolences. Reggie Bautista _ Fretting that your Hotmail account may expire because you forgot to sign in enough? Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: [Listref] A Tirade Against 'The Burning Man'
--- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Deborah Harrell snippage And Jeff snorted: This is completely unreadable. In the future, could you please refrain from attributing tone to my comments where I insert none? Thanks. cha-grin I meant to be whimsical, not denigrating. I was in a silly mood; no insult taken or intended. Umm, did you guys see my comment and smiley? This struck me as hilarious, especially seeing as it's Halloween... I don't get the humor, sorry. OK. Debbi __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question)
I wrote: Someone else said once in the same newsgroup Of course, since JMS is an atheist, he doesn't believe in hell, anyway. jms' reply was Says you. I'm FROM New Jersey Jim replied: Now, why does everyone have to crack on New Jersey? There aren't that many areas in the world where you are always within three hours' drive of the ocean, mountains, and major metropolitan areas. Yes, we have toxic waste and obnoxious IROC drivers, but otherwise it's not too bad a place. Either that or I'm beyond help, which is not out of the realm of possibility. Sorry, I didn't mean to start a debate about the relative merits of New Jersey. I just thought jms' line was funny in the context of the religion/anti-religion tirades going back and forth. I personally have nothing against New Jersey. I was born and raised in Kansas (although I live in Missouri now), and have always heard about how boring and how desparately flat it is, which I never really got since the Kansas City area is quite hilly and interesting. Then I drove to Colorado. If most people's experience of Kansas is from driving across I-70, then I think I get it now. Reggie Bautista _ Fretting that your Hotmail account may expire because you forgot to sign in enough? Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
--- William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip So the Scopes trial was a case of throwing out the baby with the bath water? I can see that people objecting to the nonsense of Social Darwinism could get it conflated with biological Darwinism, but I didn't know it actually happened. I thought Scopes was purely about the teaching of evolution in school. Weeel, there mighta been a teensy bit o' good ole Southern grandstandin', don't ya know... ;) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/monkeytrial/peopleevents/e_drugstore.html It began over cokes and phosphates in a drugstore in Dayton, Tennessee. A little scheme to boost the local economy exploded into the trial of the century. The defendant wasn't even guilty -- but nobody cared. After all, two of America's greatest orators were coming to town. And the whole world was watching. The story of how the Scopes trial began -- as a publicity stunt in a small town drugstore -- has fascinated people for over 75 years...It was at Robinson's drugstore in Dayton, Tennessee where, in 1925, a group of town boosters hatched one of the most famous schemes in history, taking up an ACLU challenge to try Tennessee's anti-evolution law. The group believed a big trial would put their town on the map, and they conceived their plan sitting around one of Robinson's tables. According to historian Edward Larson, Those were the days of Prohibition so the strongest thing they could drink was Coca-Cola!... ...Reporter H. L. Mencken had his own inimitable opinion of the town and its famous drugstore. It would be hard to imagine a more moral town than Dayton. ...There is no gambling. There is no place to dance. The relatively wicked, when they would indulge themselves, go to Robinson's drug store and debate theology... Talk About Yer Snowballin' Maru :) __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question)
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Reggie Bautista Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 01:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question) Then I drove to Colorado. If most people's experience of Kansas is from driving across I-70, then I think I get it now. I saw Kansas at its most scenic - at night.. during a snowstorm. -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Miranda died
--- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: She was a very nice dog, very *doggy*, utterly adoring. We're going to miss her very much. I'm sorry - it's so hard to lose the animal members of our families. A tiny consolation is that she died at home instead of the vet's... Debbi :( Dee's Rainbow Bridge Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Speaking of anti-Semitism
EU embarrassed as poll labels Israel world's biggest threat More Europeans see Israel as a threat than North Korea. The US and North Korea are tied. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storyu=/afp/20031103/wl_mideast_afp/eu_poll_israel_031103172948 Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
--- Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: [...] if a certain friend of mine had gotten pregnant (and she was doing everything she could to prevent it) Why do I get the impression that everything she could do did not include celibacy? Just Wondering Maru Are you saying that anyone who doesn't want to have children should refrain from ever having sex? Even if they're married? And what of those who haven't found a permanent partner; are they to be denied this aspect of their humanity for a lifetime? (I personally don't think that 'going it solo' is a good substitute for a caring, intimate relationship.) I think abstinence is correct until one is a responsible adult (for emotional and physical reasons at least), and then if one is 'called' to celibacy that is one's choice to make. Even in the animal world, sex is not only for procreation, especially among the 'higher' mammals. Debbi Not At All In Favor Of Casual Sex, BTW Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Key Network Nodes
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2003/11/02/the_crusad ers/ The Crusaders A powerful faction of religious and political conservatives is waging a latter-day counterreformation, battling widespread efforts to liberalize the American Catholic Church. And it has the clout and the connections to succeed. By Charles P. Pierce, Globe Staff, 11/2/2003 There is a glow to the priest when he talks. Something lights him up inside, and its intensity is increased by the mild way he says what he's saying. The words, harsh and unyielding, seem not so much a departure from the mainstream as they do a living refutation that there is any mainstream at all, not one to which the priest has to pay any mind, anyway. He is talking about a futuristic essay he wrote that rosily describes the aftermath of a relatively bloodless civil war that resulted in a Catholic Church purified of all dissent and the religious dismemberment of the United States of America. There's two questions there, says the Rev. C. John McCloskey 3d, smiling. He's something of a ringer for Howard Dean -- a comparison he resists, also with a smile -- a little more slender than the presidential candidate, perhaps, but no less fervent. One is, Do I think it would be better that way? No. Do I think it's possible? Do I think it's possible for someone who believes in the sanctity of marriage, the sanctity of life, the sanctity of family, over a period of time to choose to survive with people who think it's OK to kill women and children or for -- quote -- homosexual couples to exist and be recognized? No, I don't think that's possible, he says. I don't know how it's going to work itself out, but I know it's not possible, and my hope and prayer is that it does not end in violence. But, unfortunately, in the past, these types of things have tended to end this way. If American Catholics feel that's troubling, let them. I don't feel it's troubling at all. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
- Original Message - From: Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:37 PM Subject: Re: Dogmatism As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. Well, he certainly wasn't foolish enough to call Tom anti-Semetic. :-) If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. He did. He gave the work of Marx that he based his opinion on. Its easy to find and read on the web; its quite short. I just typed marx jewish question and got http://csf.colorado.edu/psn/marx/Archive/1844-JQ/ let me quote from it. quote Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man -- and turns them into commodities. Money is the universal self-established value of all things. It has, therefore, robbed the whole world -- both the world of men and nature -- of its specific value. Money is the estranged essence of man's work and man's existence, and this alien essence dominates him, and he worships it. The god of the Jews has become secularized and has become the god of the world. The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. The view of nature attained under the domination of private property and money is a real contempt for, and practical debasement of, nature; in the Jewish religion, nature exists, it is true, but it exists only in imagination. It is in this sense that [ in a 1524 pamphlet ] Thomas Munzer declares it intolerable that all creatures have been turned into property, the fishes in the water, the birds in the air, the plants on the earth; the creatures, too, must become free. Contempt for theory, art, history, and for man as an end in himself, which is contained in an abstract form in the Jewish religion, is the real, conscious standpoint, the virtue of the man of money. The species-relation itself, the relation between man and woman, etc., becomes an object of trade! The woman is bought and sold. The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of of the merchant, of the man of money in general. unquote You would think that if Marx was an anti-Semite, we would have learned that in my survey course. We did after all learn that many Germans of the time were. Dan, you have many times requested references, and in this case I think that some reference is warranted. We are talking about what someone said after all. What Gautam has said is to me akin to being told that Hitler was a Communist, or that Stalin was a Christian. He gave the reference. quote Marx _certainly_ would have approved of Lenin's and Stalin's anti-semitism. On the Jewish Question is so viciously anti-semitic that the historical affinity of some Jewish intellectuals for Marxism has always confused the hell out of me. unquote You can't just blurt stuff like that out with out some proof. You would think that if it were the case, then it would be just as common knowledge as that Stalin was an Atheist and Hitler hated Communism. I certainly knew it for a long time. I guess that simply reflects the differences in the schools we went to. I studied origional works of philosophy from my freshman year on. I tend to have a bias towards that tyoe of study. Lots of things that are true should be but are not common knowledge. The reasons for this could be the subject of a long thread. :-) Besides, if you are going to say something so incredible, and provocative, and you have the credentials to be believed, then you have the responsibility to at least list said credentials. But, it wasn't incredible and provocative. How could any serious student of Marxism not think of On the Jewish Question when trying to understand Marx's philosophy with regards to the Jews? Otherwise it's just another form of trolling. Intellectual trolling, is no better than the idiotic variety. If you have such a position then you gain a lot of responsibility, wouldn't you say? Responsibility like that of a black belt not to get into a fight, since such a fight might be lethal for the opponent. You didn't know Gautam went to Harvard? I guess those of us who are old timers just took it for granted. This exact subject has been debated at length here too, probably before you were on list. The thing that I objected to was assuming you knew more than you did about Gautam. I really don't understand why you didn't ask for a quote from On the Jewish Question I significantly differ with the idea that one must trot out one's credentials every time one knows a lot more than someone else about a subject. Sometimes I do; sometimes I don't. I do admit that, if someone starts to claim that I'm ignorant about a subject that I have studied in
I'll bite Re: Dogmatism
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Dan Minette wrote: Lots of things that are true should be but are not common knowledge. The reasons for this could be the subject of a long thread. :-) I would be interested in reading such a thread. Care to begin it? :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip ...He gave the work of Marx that he based his opinion on. Its easy to find and read on the web; its quite short. I just typed marx jewish question and got http://csf.colorado.edu/psn/marx/Archive/1844-JQ/ let me quote from it. snip Part II _was_ short (and besides being anti-Jewish seems anti-Christian as well, just somewhat less so); Part I was _not_ short, and I'm very glad you didn't say 'light reading' either as it was heavy slogging (OK, not as bad as some other philosophical texts I've read)... ;) ). Good thing I'm wearing knee-high boots, though. Both of these treatises were full of unjustified assumptions, grand generalizations, and what I can only call 'statements of rabid fervor.' When you make up your own definitions of words and phrases, I guess it's easy to come to 'logical conclusions.' :P In my not-so-humble opinion, of course. From Part I: ...Only when the real, individual man re-absorbs in himself the abstract citizen, and as an individual human being has become a species-being in his everyday life, in his particular work, and in his particular situation, only when man has recognized and organized his own powers as -social powers, and, consequently, no longer separates social power from himself in the shape of political power, only then will human emancipation have been accomplished. An individual is never an abstract being, and while we reduce populations to predictable statistics, the individual is not solely constrained within them. From this paper, I'd put Marx in the I love Mankind, but find people despicable category of elitism. (Admittedly not having read any more of his work than this and the little I remember from a couple of college courses.) Debbi Four Feet Good, Two Feet Better Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
In a message dated 11/2/2003 1:30:10 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Marx _certainly_ would have approved of Lenin's and Stalin's anti-semitism. On the Jewish Question is so viciously anti-semitic that the historical affinity of some Jewish intellectuals for Marxism has always confused the hell out of me. Well, one can like a philosophy without liking the philosopher or at least all of his views. Of course Marx was the grandson of one the important Rabbi's in his section of Germany. His father rejected his religion like many other jews of that period. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: New Jersey (was Re: religious/political question)
--- Chad Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Forbes Rating of Worst Commutes to work: Greater Los Angeles San Fran Dallas/Fort Worth Houston Washington D.C. Denver grunt I saw this the other day...hard to believe that we're worse than New York or Boston, but I can vouch for Dallas being worse than Denver. Fortunately I have flexible hours, and avoid driving in rush-hours (which BTW are from ~ 6:30-9:15AM and ~4:30-6:30PM, but much longer in icy weather, such as we're having now). Debbi who rode in a T-shirt last Wed. (80oF), but the next day it barely got above freezing (32oF)! __ Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
- Original Message - From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:17 PM Subject: Re: religious/political question If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. For every asshole there is an equal and opposite reaction. Crap equals ass times the speed of life squared. Everybody will remain on the list, in a uniform state of emotion, unless acted upon by an asshole who doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. xponent Anything That Doesn't Matter Has No Mass Marurob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Brin: A review of The Life Eaters from CBG
Does anyone remember how I said I wasn’t interested in checking out DB’s and Ascott Hampton’s new graphic novel, _The Life Eaters_, because I didn’t care for _Forgiveness_? Well, Brent Frankenhoff, Managing Editor of _Comics Buyer’s Guide_ (www.comicsbuyersguide.com) has a different view, and now I may go ahead and take a look at it after all. To wit: “After a disappointing first graphic novel (_Star Trek: The Next Generation – Forgiveness_) Brin and Hampton team up again for an alternate history graphic novel where the Norse gods are summoned to help the Nazi cause during World War II. And this time, the team gives readers a slam-bang adventure that doesn’t let up. Of course, the usual Norse archetypes pop up here with Odin and Thor helping the Nazis and Loki betraying the group by aiding the Allies, but Brin digs deeper and questions whether the “gods” are really mythological beings or aliens or simply belief made flesh. An intriguing concept and one that has been explored elsewhere with “gods” fading into obscurity as their followers dwindle in number. The only drawback to the story is that Brin doesn’t fully apply this concept to other mythological pantheons, leaving readers to do that work. Hampton’s art is well-suited to this story with its powerful imagery and need for flame-lit effects. One scene, featuring a squadron of helicopters invading southeast Asia, is reminiscent of a similar scene from _Apocalypse Now_ and one can almost hear the strains of Wagner’s “Ride of the Valkyries.” This is a book that can easily be shared with non-comics readers who will quickly be immersed in the story and forget they’re reading a comic book. Look for this book to pop up on several awards lists next year.” Grade: A+ Pros: Excellent alternate history. Cons: More adventures needed. Taken from _Comics Buyer’s Guide_ #1565 Just wanted to share an opposing POV from my initial reaction. I may grab a copy and give Dr. Brin and Mr. Hampton’s collaboration a shot despite my earlier misgivings. Jim The Comic Book Guy Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
On 3 Nov 2003 at 18:19, Robert Seeberger wrote: - Original Message - From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 1:17 PM Subject: Re: religious/political question If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Crap equals ass times the speed of life squared. Not bad. Try: Trolling is like Russian Roulette. You get away with it until you come across someone who knows who he's doing Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
Jon Gabriel wrote: As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Actually, that was Julia, but I do share the sentiment. Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Brin: A review of The Life Eaters from CBG
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Sharkey Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 04:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Brin: A review of The Life Eaters from CBG Jim The Comic Book Guy Maru Thanks for posting the review; what did you think of Y:The Last Man, btw? -j- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Taking it all off (was Re: religious/political question)
Reggie Bautista wrote: Robert Seeberger wrote: Why do people on this list so frequently show their ass? Jim replied: I do it because I'm an attention whore. Well, that and I like the feeling of dollar bills sliding into my g-string. To (probably mis-)quote an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, did anyone else just go to a really scary visual place? And 'lo, my day is complete. :) Jim The Brain Brill-O Fairy Maru ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: DRAFT
- Original Message - From: Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 3:05 PM Subject: RE: DRAFT d.brin wrote: But yes, a priority has to go to novels! So, guess where I'll be returning next? Hint... they swim. They talk. They fly Jim replied: Glee! It's a story about a bunch of Gameras! :) LOL! By the way, has anyone else noticed that there are suddenly a whole lot of Godzilla and related movies in the cheap DVD bins at Walmart? Reggie Bautista Thread Creep Maru I've only seen Godzilla King Of The Monsters, Rodan, and Godzilla's Revenge. But I would be interested in the newer Godzilla flicks if and when they show up in the bin. xponent Kaiju Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Br!n: A review of The Life Eaters from CBG
Miller, Jeffrey wrote: Thanks for posting the review; what did you think of Y:The Last Man, btw? I've been picking it up since you encouraged me to try it; it's quite good, though I have yet to buy the first two issues. As a result, I have no idea how it all starts yet. I'm just not willing to pay the ridiculously inflated prices those issues are going for at the moment. :( Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
- Original Message - From: Andrew Crystall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 6:31 PM Subject: Re: religious/political question On 3 Nov 2003 at 18:19, Robert Seeberger wrote: Crap equals ass times the speed of life squared. Not bad. Try: Trolling is like Russian Roulette. You get away with it until you come across someone who knows who he's doing Excellent Andy!!! xponent The Rules Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
On 3 Nov 2003, at 7:59 pm, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. Have you _read_ On the Jewish Question? William and I have discussed it briefly, and I've talked about it considerably more with someone else on the list. Marx was the atheist son of Jews who converted to Christianity to get ahead in society. He was anti-Judaism and anti-Christianity. The most intelligible reading of On the Jewish Question is that by Jew he means someone following the Jewish religion rather than someone of Jewish descent. Anti-Semitism normally means both. Unless you think his tirade was directed against himself. William described it as a defense against Bruno Bauer. As Prof. Mansfield pointed out when lecturing on the book, Marx's problem with Bauer was that Bauer _did not go far enough_. Not far enough in the sense that Marx thought that rather than Jews adopting Christianity, both Jews and Christians should give up religion... -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs. -- Robert Firth ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: First Kill Bill review
On 26 Sep 2003, at 6:12 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/25/2003 7:23:11 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Subj: First Kill Bill review When I saw the title, I thought: My puns aren't _that_ bad. William Taylor - Waiying to see uf Puckoon makes it to Hernland, I went to see it on Saturday. I thought the pacing was a bit off (probably due to getting cut in two) but it was quite good. And Uma Thurman's stunt double had a different-shaped ass. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ How long a minute is depends on which side of the bathroom door you're on. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
--- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. Have you _read_ On the Jewish Question? William and I have discussed it briefly, and I've talked about it considerably more with someone else on the list. William described it as a defense against Bruno Bauer. As Prof. Mansfield pointed out when lecturing on the book, Marx's problem with Bauer was that Bauer _did not go far enough_. Wasn't Marx a Jew ethnicaly? Were his statments about the Jewish religion and not the Jewish people? Doesn't Marx speak poorly about nearly all religions? I admit I have not read all of On the Jewish Question but from skimming it and reading the first bit it does not seem to speak of Jews as an ethnic group but as a religious group. It does not seem to suggest any opression of that religious group. Granted I have not read all of it. Do you consider someone who disaproves of a religion to be a racesist? Are the two not distict and seperate? Can one not for instance disaprove of Islam while at the same time have nothing at all against arabs? Or disaprove of Christianity while not having a promlem with Aglos, or Disaprove of Budhism while having nothing at all against Asians? Does any Jew hate East Indians becouse of the apparent idol worship in Hinduism? Would a Protistant in Northern Iserland hate me simply becouse my last name is Coffey? I must read the whole thing, but from what I can tell, it seems that you are mixing concepts. While Marx clearly had issues with all religions, he does not seem to have issue with any ethnic group, and therefore classifying him as an anti-semite seems dogmatic in the context of the converstation we were having. Granted Marx had did have a bunch of whack ideas, but hate for any particular racial group doesn't seem to be one of them. Since you are so versed in the document, why don't you point out where he specifies anything to the contrary. = _ Jan William Coffey _ __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: First Kill Bill review
In a message dated 11/3/2003 6:22:00 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How long a minute is depends on which side of the bathroom door you're on. And who's holding the fire ax. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[L3] RE: religious/political question
ritu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert J. Chassell wrote: snippage throughout Is the theological-political connection right? Is it fair to say that many people do wish to behave with the same qualities as their God? If so, and if the qualities are as stated, does this predefine the attributes that Americans seek in their presidents, on the one hand, and that Eqyptians and others seek in their leaders, on the other? I don't know what to think of this theoryhe has very carefully refrained from mentioning what the muslims look for in their leaders - the only thing he says is that the kind of leaders muslims like evoke only revulsion among AmericansAnd what is so very different between the Americans and the Arabs/Muslims/Islamic world that no muslim leader could ever hope to win the adulation of both his people and the west? And where do the 5 million American muslims fit in Spengler's analysis? I know Spengler at least believes in an unbridgeable gap between the American and the Islamic world view - what I don't know is why...why does his entire article seem to hinge on the premise that the Islamic world view is bad, repulsive and nasty?the entire article contains just one sentence, by a jewish theologian, on the nature of Allah. The rest are blanket assertions to the effect that more details wouldn't help, familiarity would only breed further contempt and that there are so many fundamental differences between the two faiths/cultures that most Americans understand why Boykin has cast the war on terror in religious terms. While I _understand_ why Boykin* has done so, I strongly disagree with him; all who cast this war on terror in a religious frame invoke Crusade on the western (which Boykin has equated to 'fundamentalist Christian') front, and jihad on the Muslim. That is a recipe for bloodshed. It is wrong-headed, divisive, and arrogant; it invites, nay demands! further extremism and absolutism. *IMO he ought to be demoted, retired or least sidelined to a non-sensitive administrative position, and he should _never_ be allowed command of a fighting unit or missile site. I came across this in a search for sites on the Enlightenment (which I wanted WRT America's founding principles); the article is much longer. While the author, Abdal-Hakim Murad, clearly believes in the moral superiority and universality of Islam, he also calls for tolerant engagement and for Islam to be a prophetic, dissenting witness within the reality of the modern world. http://www.themodernreligion.com/ht/faith-future.html ...I want to talk about religion - our religion - and address the question of what exactly is going on when we speak about the prospects of a mutually helpful engagement between Islam and Western modernity. I propose to tackle this rather large question by invoking what I take to be the underlying issue in all religious talk, which is its ability both to propose and to resolve paradoxes. We might begin by saying that theology is the most ambitious and fruitful of disciplines because it is all about the successful squaring of circles...what we call universalism...Islam does not limit itself to the upliftment of any given section of humanity, but rather announces a desire to transform the entire human family. This is, if you like, its Ishmaelite uniqueness: the religions that spring from Isaac (a.s.), are, in our understanding, an extension of Hebrew and Occidental particularity, while Islam is universal... [He overstates his case here, as most Christians consider Jesus 'given for the sake of the world' and I think there is a Jewish concept of 'being a light unto the world' also.] ...This will demand the squaring of a circle - in fact of many circles - in a way that is characteristically Islamic. Despite its Arabian origins, Islam is to be not merely for the nations, but of the nations. No pre-modern civilisation embraced more cultures than that of Islam - in fact, it was Muslims who invented globalisation...It also demonstrates the divine purpose that this Ishmaelite covenant is to bring a monotheism that uplifts, rather than devastates cultures...Perhaps the greatest single issue exercising the world today is the following: is the engagement of Islamic monotheism with the new capitalist global reality a challenge that even Islam, with its proven ability to square circles, cannot manage? ...The current agreement between zealots on both sides - Islamic and unbelieving - that Islam and Western modernity can have no conversation, and cannot inhabit each other, seems difficult given traditional Islamic assurances about the universal potential of revelation. The increasing number of individuals who identify themselves as entirely Western, and entirely Muslim, demonstrate that the arguments against the continued ability of Islam to be inclusively universal are simply false...Palpably, there are millions of Muslims who are at ease somewhere
Re: [L3] RE: religious/political question
[He overstates his case here, as most Christians consider Jesus 'given for the sake of the world' and I think there is a Jewish concept of 'being a light unto the world' also.] There is a core Jewish concept of the people Israel being called upon by God to be or l'goyim (a light unto the nations). We are supposed to be a holy nation in obedience to God, which will inspire the rest of the world to goodness and unity. Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last. - Dr Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Gold shells can kill inoperable tumours
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/11/04/wnan04.xmlsSheet=/news/2003/11/04/ixworld.htmlsecureRefresh=true_requestid=22758 Tiny golden nanoshells offer a new way to kill inoperable tumours without harming surrounding tissue, according to a study published today. The shells, which consist of glass coated with gold, are called nanoshells because they are a few billionths of a metre (a nanometre) across, and mark another example of the burgeoning field of nanotechnology. A Texan team, led by Dr Jennifer West at Rice University, claims that the shells could be used to treat tumours which have been hard to target until now. Most solid tumours are removed by surgery but there are some that are impossible to remove because they are so small, mingled with surrounding tissue or located within a vital organ or tissue. There are ways to deal with inoperable tumours but they often damage healthy tissue too. Now Dr West's team has found a way to kill these cells by combining two harmless treatments - nanoshells and infrared (heat) laser light which passes harmlessly through normal tissue. In today's Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Dr West says her team designed the nanoshells to absorb this particular frequency of near-infrared light. The nanoshells warmed rapidly so that they could be used selectively to cook and kill tumours. xponent Creamy Golden Nougat Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
On 3 Nov 2003, at 7:17 pm, Jon Gabriel wrote: From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:44:04 + On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Jon Is that a 'no' ? -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Build a man a fire, and he will be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life - Terry Pratchett ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Miranda died
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: Dan went out to take some scraps out to the dogs, and Miranda didn't come. Sorry about the loss, sucks to have a void like that in a household. Funny how pets have so much character, and their own personality. Good thoughts (2 and 4 legged licks from this house). Dee - who now has a dog crazy for yogurt containers We have a toddler who was crazy for yogurt containers a year ago. Still is crazy for yogurt Julia p.s. thanks for all the kind thoughts; Briana is grieving now, and needs all the TLC we can give *her* ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [Listref] A Tirade Against 'The Burning Man'
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Reggie Bautista wrote: Julia wrote: I later came up with a way of radically expressing myself regarding the bullhorn. Seize the bullhorn, drop trou, and shower it. And I made it clear that if I'm ever pregnant and awakened by a bullhorn at an ungodly hour ever again, I *will* do that. So now the real Julia comes out... :-) Reggie Bautista Remind Me To Not Make Her Mad Maru Hey, I try not to give much more than I get. :) If the guy in question had apologized to everyone in the quiet area of camp that he woke, I'd have accepted the apology and left it at that. He claimed he was doing no wrong, and anyone close enough to the lower field to be awakened by the bullhorn was just asking for it to begin with. *That* didn't sit well, and prompted the idea of the radical self-expression I came up with. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Taking it all off (was Re: religious/political question)
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Reggie Bautista wrote: Robert Seeberger wrote: Question: Why do people on this list so frequently show their ass? Jim replied: I do it because I'm an attention whore. Well, that and I like the feeling of dollar bills sliding into my g-string. To (probably mis-)quote an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, did anyone else just go to a really scary visual place? Probably wasn't as scary to me as it was to you. :) I've been to some really visually-scary places in reality, and not minded. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 3 Nov 2003, at 7:17 pm, Jon Gabriel wrote: From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:44:04 + On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Jon Is that a 'no' ? Whatever it was, it was more tactful than a number of the things The Fool has said. Then again, on *occasion*, being blunt is what's called for. I just don't think this is one such occasion. Julia working very hard on tact for a number of years now -- how'm I doing? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: [L3] RE: religious/political question
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [I wrote:] [He overstates his case here, as most Christians consider Jesus 'given for the sake of the world' and I think there is a Jewish concept of 'being a light unto the world' also.] There is a core Jewish concept of the people Israel being called upon by God to be or l'goyim (a light unto the nations). We are supposed to be a holy nation in obedience to God, which will inspire the rest of the world to goodness and unity. Ah, nice to know that my recall of comparative religions class is not totally faulty. OTOH, I'm fairly sure that the concept of Jesus as a world-savior is of course from interpretation of Jewish texts...duh! Should have remembered _that_. Debbi __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 02:42:51 + On 3 Nov 2003, at 7:17 pm, Jon Gabriel wrote: From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:44:04 + On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Jon Is that a 'no' ? And here I was thinking that subtlety isn't my strong suit. Jon Le Blog: http://zarq.livejournal.com _ MSN Messenger with backgrounds, emoticons and more. http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/cdp_customize ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
On 4 Nov 2003, at 1:23 am, Jan Coffey wrote: --- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Spock would say when confronted in such a way, ...Indeed. He did, however, sound to me like one of many Everyone who isn't a staunch conservative is out to get the Jews kind of thinker. If he can come off that way to someone such as myself then he definitely needs to back up his claims that Marx was an anti-Semite. Have you _read_ On the Jewish Question? William and I have discussed it briefly, and I've talked about it considerably more with someone else on the list. William described it as a defense against Bruno Bauer. As Prof. Mansfield pointed out when lecturing on the book, Marx's problem with Bauer was that Bauer _did not go far enough_. Wasn't Marx a Jew ethnicaly? Were his statments about the Jewish religion and not the Jewish people? Doesn't Marx speak poorly about nearly all religions? I admit I have not read all of On the Jewish Question but from skimming it and reading the first bit it does not seem to speak of Jews as an ethnic group but as a religious group. It does not seem to suggest any opression of that religious group. Granted I have not read all of it. Do you consider someone who disaproves of a religion to be a racesist? Are the two not distict and seperate? Can one not for instance disaprove of Islam while at the same time have nothing at all against arabs? Or disaprove of Christianity while not having a promlem with Aglos, or Disaprove of Budhism while having nothing at all against Asians? Does any Jew hate East Indians becouse of the apparent idol worship in Hinduism? Would a Protistant in Northern Iserland hate me simply becouse my last name is Coffey? I must read the whole thing, but from what I can tell, it seems that you are mixing concepts. While Marx clearly had issues with all religions, he does not seem to have issue with any ethnic group, and therefore classifying him as an anti-semite seems dogmatic in the context of the converstation we were having. Granted Marx had did have a bunch of whack ideas, but hate for any particular racial group doesn't seem to be one of them. Since you are so versed in the document, why don't you point out where he specifies anything to the contrary. Discrimination based on one's parentage (race), sex, sexual orientation and age are all obviously unfair because one doesn't get to choose those. Discrimination based on one's political, religious and other affiliations is arguably reasonable if those affiliations are directly related to the situation - a vegetarian group might not want to hire a venison-eating hunter as PR person. Discrimination based on one's intelligence, athleticism or beauty... well :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs. -- Robert Firth ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
subtlety Re: religious/political question
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Jon Gabriel wrote: And here I was thinking that subtlety isn't my strong suit. One day, a number of years ago, my sister told me that I wasn't very good at being subtle. You think I'm blunt. I wouldn't put it *that* way. But *I* would. After that, I figured I ought to work on tact, at least, if not subtlety. Threatening to piss on someone's bullhorn isn't exactly subtle, now, is it? :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
--- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't Marx a Jew ethnicaly? His family converted. It's certainly possible to be a self-hating Jew. Were his statments about the Jewish religion and not the Jewish people? One of the things that makes Judaism special is that you can't really distinguish the two. When he talks about the Jewish God being money he was trafficing in the vilest of anti-semitic stereotypes. Doesn't Marx speak poorly about nearly all religions? He didn't write _On the Christian Problem_. Do you consider someone who disaproves of a religion to be a racesist? Are the two not distict and seperate? They can be, but in the case of Judaism, they tend not to be. Jewish is both an ethnicity and a religion - pretending otherwise is sophistry, to be frank. I must read the whole thing, but from what I can tell, it seems that you are mixing concepts. While Marx clearly had issues with all religions, he does not seem to have issue with any ethnic group, and therefore classifying him as an anti-semite seems dogmatic in the context of the converstation we were having. Again, he didn't write _On the Christian Question_. If you want to argue that he didn't have a specific animus against Judaism, you're going to have to find similar statements against other religions in his work _of the same intensity and focus_. And you can't, because they don't exist. Granted Marx had did have a bunch of whack ideas, but hate for any particular racial group doesn't seem to be one of them. Since you are so versed in the document, why don't you point out where he specifies anything to the contrary. _ Jan William Coffey Luckily for me, Dan M. did that for me. Look, Jan, you don't have to believe Marx was an anti-semite if you don't want to. You can argue with the textual evidence all you want. I think you might want to be a little more restrained in suggesting that someone doesn't know anything about a subject, though. I didn't call you on it - I was pretty confident that everyone on the list knows that I know my way around political philosophy without me waving my resume around. But it didn't exactly strengthen your argument here. = Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freedom is not free http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
On 4 Nov 2003, at 3:04 am, Julia Thompson wrote: On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 3 Nov 2003, at 7:17 pm, Jon Gabriel wrote: From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: religious/political question Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:44:04 + On 2 Nov 2003, at 4:54 pm, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, William T Goodall wrote: On 1 Nov 2003, at 9:38 pm, Jim Sharkey wrote: The Fool wrote: So when andrew crystal starts building concentration camps and death camps, for atheists, freethinkers, and rationalists SNIP further rantings Considering that you have made it clear you would cheerfully eliminate all religions if given your druthers, I find this over-the-top hysteria pretty darn ironic. Talk about double-speak. The method religion has usually used to eliminate disagreement is to eliminate those who disagree. The freethinker's approach to eliminating religion is through information, debate and education. Just as you don't convert many people to religion these days by telling them to repent or they'll go to hell, telling them they're dead wrong and idiots for believing in any sort of god isn't going to go over well, either. Debate doesn't mean slamming the opposite view and getting hyperbolically hysterical. *That* is the problem a number of folks here are having with how The Fool is saying what he's saying. I'd suggest that he re-think his debating tactics on this matter if he wants to convert anyone to his point of view on it. Well I think it is very generous of The Fool to try and help the memetically handicapped on the list with their affliction in the face of a notable lack of gratitude, or even downright hostility. If you seriously think we should be grateful to you both for insulting the intelligence of list members and repeated smug declarations of intolerance toward their beliefs then y'all need to share whatever you're smoking with the rest of us. As Jim so wisely said, the arrogant, condescending attitude you're adopting isn't likely to win you any support. Jon Is that a 'no' ? Whatever it was, it was more tactful than a number of the things The Fool has said. Then again, on *occasion*, being blunt is what's called for. I just don't think this is one such occasion. Julia working very hard on tact for a number of years now -- how'm I doing? I think you may have confused tact with tactile on some occasions :) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Those who study history are doomed to repeat it. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
On 4 Nov 2003, at 3:29 am, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't Marx a Jew ethnicaly? His family converted. It's certainly possible to be a self-hating Jew. But Marx was quite obviously ebulliently full of himself. Were his statments about the Jewish religion and not the Jewish people? One of the things that makes Judaism special is that you can't really distinguish the two. Conflating separable ideas leads to worthlessly muddled thinking. When he talks about the Jewish God being money he was trafficing in the vilest of anti-semitic stereotypes. He was a Jew attacking the role of Jews in a Christian society wherein money-lending was still regarded as a sin and Jews were tolerated as they could perform the valuable service of giving loans with interest. The stereotypes he used were the ones of the society he lived in - and he was criticizing them. Doesn't Marx speak poorly about nearly all religions? He didn't write _On the Christian Problem_. On the Jewish Problem pretty even-handedly dishes out to Christianity too :) Do you consider someone who disaproves of a religion to be a racesist? Are the two not distict and seperate? They can be, but in the case of Judaism, they tend not to be. Jewish is both an ethnicity and a religion - pretending otherwise is sophistry, to be frank. Pretending that short-circuits debate is sophistry, to be frank :) I must read the whole thing, but from what I can tell, it seems that you are mixing concepts. While Marx clearly had issues with all religions, he does not seem to have issue with any ethnic group, and therefore classifying him as an anti-semite seems dogmatic in the context of the converstation we were having. Again, he didn't write _On the Christian Question_. If you want to argue that he didn't have a specific animus against Judaism, you're going to have to find similar statements against other religions in his work _of the same intensity and focus_. And you can't, because they don't exist. That would be the this footnote doesn't have a footnote argument :) Luckily for me, Dan M. did that for me. Look, Jan, you don't have to believe Marx was an anti-semite if you don't want to. You can argue with the textual evidence all you want. I think you might want to be a little more restrained in suggesting that someone doesn't know anything about a subject, though. I didn't call you on it - I was pretty confident that everyone on the list knows that I know my way around political philosophy without me waving my resume around. But it didn't exactly strengthen your argument here. So that would be the appeal to the resume argument then? -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone. - Bjarne Stroustrup ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Miranda died
At 08:19 PM 11/2/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: Dan went out to take some scraps out to the dogs, and Miranda didn't come. He went looking for her and found her body next to the shed. She was a very nice dog, very *doggy*, utterly adoring. We're going to miss her very much. I'm sorry to hear it. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: religious/political question
At 04:04 PM 11/2/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: On Sun, 2 Nov 2003, Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 10:50 AM 11/2/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: [...] if a certain friend of mine had gotten pregnant (and she was doing everything she could to prevent it) Why do I get the impression that everything she could do did not include celibacy? Just Wondering Maru Actually, it did at that time. That, *plus* birth control pills. But there was always the possibility of rape, which she was paranoid about at the time. Something about having been molested by someone she trusted fairly recently at that time. And she was concerned enough about it to talk to me about it all. Umm . . . I was being a smart aleck, expecting the answer to be that she was already married at the time. I did briefly consider the possibility that she was single and paranoid about rape, but not in the sense that she had any special _reason_ to be paranoid. My problem is that I don't usually think of such things: I know that they happen, but they're just not something that comes to mind first. Or even second. A couple of years later, the problem had corrected itself, and she has a daughter now. That is great! Open Mouth, Insert Foot Maru -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
William T. Goodall wrote: Discrimination based on one's intelligence, athleticism or beauty... ... is just shallow? :-) Or did you mean discrimination based on definition 2 below? Dictionary.com defines discrimination as: 1) The act of discriminating. 2) The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment. 3) Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners. If you hire someone because they are smart, and you need someone smart in the position you are hiring for, is it discrimination? By definition 2, maybe. By definition 3, I would argue it is not. You are simply hiring someone based on their individual merit and how well they would fit the job. That would not be definition 3 discrimination. The same would hold for hiring someone beautiful to be a model or hiring someone athletic to play for your sports team. Reggie Bautista _ Crave some Miles Davis or Grateful Dead? Your old favorites are always playing on MSN Radio Plus. Trial month free! http://join.msn.com/?page=offers/premiumradio ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogmatism
--- Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Jan Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wasn't Marx a Jew ethnicaly? His family converted. It's certainly possible to be a self-hating Jew. Oh come on! That's a stretch and you know it. I think you will agree that it is more likely that he made the distinction you do not. Were his statments about the Jewish religion and not the Jewish people? One of the things that makes Judaism special is that you can't really distinguish the two. I knwo a lot of friends who are very proud to be jewish, but are athiests, so exactly how many such individuals do we need to document before it falsafise your assertian that there is not a destinction? When he talks about the Jewish God being money he was trafficing in the vilest of anti-semitic stereotypes. I personaly do not believe that stereotype, even when discussing religion. However, he is specificaly discussing religion and therefore ideas not ethnicity. Is it vile to have differing views from another's ideas? We may agree that Communism is a bad idea and that the way that communist act in the world is not benificial to a greater society, but that doesn't mean that we think that any Rusians are bad people. There is a distinction. Doesn't Marx speak poorly about nearly all religions? He didn't write _On the Christian Problem_. That is a good point, but he did write plenty that clearly showed his views about christianity as well. It also wouldn't have been politicaly feasable for him to have written that document at that time. Once again, I am not agreeing with his viewpoint, and I am not taking up for him in the slightest. I disagree with nearly everything he had to say. I don't personaly like religion of any sort for me personaly, but I that doesn't mean that I agree with his assesmnet of the Jewish faith. Please do keep this in mind. There is a distinction even here. Do you consider someone who disaproves of a religion to be a racesist? Are the two not distict and seperate? They can be, but in the case of Judaism, they tend not to be. I disagree. The most outspoken critics of the Jewish faith are generaly Jews. (At least in my circles). I will say that the idea that anyone who is anti Judaism is anti jew, is a dangerous consept. There is no group which should be beyond critisim. No matter what has happened in the past. Jewish is both an ethnicity and a religion - pretending otherwise is sophistry, to be frank. Yes I agree. So when one speaks today about the two one must be very specific about which one they are refering to. I am not so sure that at that time, one _who himself was ~ethnicaly~ jewish_ would have bothered making the distinction. It is clear in such a case that he would have been refering to the religion. Sophistry is such an issue here in both directions, claiming that someone who disaproves of a religion is a raceist is just as bad. I must read the whole thing, but from what I can tell, it seems that you are mixing concepts. While Marx clearly had issues with all religions, he does not seem to have issue with any ethnic group, and therefore classifying him as an anti-semite seems dogmatic in the context of the converstation we were having. Again, he didn't write _On the Christian Question_. If you want to argue that he didn't have a specific animus against Judaism, you're going to have to find similar statements against other religions in his work _of the same intensity and focus_. And you can't, because they don't exist. That is not what I learned in school. And I think that is what everyone learned as well. Since you are the scolar, why don't you enlighten us as to why this well known fact is not the case. To be quite honest, I don't have the time, or the pacience, to study the writings of someone so infuriating. I don't know why I would have learned that Marx was an athiest if he wasn't. Quite frankly I do not care. But anyway you have stated enough here to make my point that people do not make distinctions about information, they come to the expression with pre-concieved notions about what sets of consepts automaticaly belong with what other sets of consepts. Quite simply Dogmatism: a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises. Granted Marx had did have a bunch of whack ideas, but hate for any particular racial group doesn't seem to be one of them. Since you are so versed in the document, why don't you point out where he specifies anything to the contrary. _ Jan William Coffey Luckily for me, Dan M. did that for me. No he didn't. Look, Jan, you don't have to believe Marx was an anti-semite if you don't want to. You can argue with the textual evidence all you want. I think you might want to be a little more restrained in suggesting that someone doesn't know anything about a subject, though.
Re: Speaking of anti-Semitism
Dan Minette wrote: EU embarrassed as poll labels Israel world's biggest threat More Europeans see Israel as a threat than North Korea. The US and North Korea are tied. Absolutely staggering. Exactly what do they think Israel ever would (or even could) do that would be a threat to world peace. I'm no expert on this, but I don't recall any action since 1948 that wasn't either securing its own borders or responding to aggression. Admittedly, NK hasn't done any more than that since 1953 either, but it publicly and belligerently proclaims that it will. The reality is that countries are no longer the major threat to world peace - organisations are. Most of the militant dictators intent on using military force are fully occupied using it in or on their own borders. Cheers Russell C. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: subtlety Re: religious/political question
At 09:22 PM 11/3/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Jon Gabriel wrote: And here I was thinking that subtlety isn't my strong suit. One day, a number of years ago, my sister told me that I wasn't very good at being subtle. You think I'm blunt. I wouldn't put it *that* way. But *I* would. After that, I figured I ought to work on tact, at least, if not subtlety. Threatening to piss on someone's bullhorn isn't exactly subtle, now, is it? :) My reference to beans at least had a tiny bit of subtlety . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Barbour campaign shows GOP's white supremacist side
At 10:34 AM 11/2/03 -0800, Gautam Mukunda wrote: --- Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I imagine that a number of white people in Texas who own guns would have something to say about this Julia I would imagine that a number of black and Hispanic people in Texas who own guns would have something to say about this as well. Genocide is much harder to conduct against an armed populace, as the Founders well understood. Can you say gun control? -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Taking it all off (was Re: religious/political question)
Reggie Bautista wrote: To (probably mis-)quote an episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, did anyone else just go to a really scary visual place? Sorry, no. :) I have no idea what Jim looks like but a g-string on a string of letters isn't scary at all. :) Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Barbour campaign shows GOP's white supremacist side
At 01:43 PM 11/2/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I imagine that a number of white people in Texas who own guns would have something to say about this You would hope they would not be thinking selfishly of themselves (You can't move them people into MY neighborhood) One suspects that a part of the plan would be to move them out of the area. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
[Listref] House Cats and Ferrets Are Easily Infected With SARS Virus
And here I thought my kitties just increased my risk of finding half-a-mouse on the doorstoop and the occasional hairball on a carpet... http://my.webmd.com/content/Article/76/90032.htm?printing=true ...New research shows that common house pets such as cats and ferrets may easily become infected with the SARS virus and spread the disease to others. Researchers say the original source of the virus that causes SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) is still unknown, but many suspect it emerged from a wild animal species. However, the results of a new study suggest that the animal reservoir from which the virus may have jumped to humans may include a wide range of animals, both domestic and wild... ...Domestic cats living in an apartment complex in Hong Kong that was particularly hard hit by the SARS outbreak also were found to be infected with the SARS virus. In this study, researchers found through laboratory testing that both domestic cats and ferrets were easily infected with SARS virus taken from a human patient. They also transmitted the virus to other animals that live with them... It shouldn't be a problem in the US at the moment, but a quarantine on animals from China and Hong Kong is reasonable, until they find a reliable screening test or a proper vaccine. SARS becoming established in the feral cat population here would not be good for humans (or the endangered black-footed ferret). Debbi __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
