Jump to content

Who was baptized?


hrabia
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, madmick666 said:

It seems that you want to live life according to 'live and let live' but this is not how humans are, fundamentally. This is clearly shown by recognizing that around 84% of the worlds population identify as religious. People want to be part of groups, they measure their worth and the correctness of their actions against what the group deems as appropriate. If you live outside of a group then you're living a life of moral relativism.

Even YOU crave being part of a group, you're here aren't you? And as much as you think you live your life on your own terms, there are actually many decisions which greatly affect you that are completely outside of your control. 

If the idea of religion was suddenly stripped from the earth, then people would still find a way to come together in large groups, invariably having to come to a consensus of the fundamentals of how to live a worthwhile life. It must be this way because people simply cannot live in groups as distinct individuals doing what they want without a concern for others in the group.

Like it or not, you ARE a part of a group (society) and if you want to enjoy the freedom that a democratic society has, then you also have to learn to live with decisions that don't always suit your personal preference.

So, you clearly take exception to people in power who are religious and making decisions that affect you personally. But my point is to look at this from a broader perspective. If a religious person was not making rules and laws that affect you, it would be someone else. And if that someone else didn't subscribe to any religion, then you couldn't be sure what their motivations are or what values they hold.

I'm not religious in the slightest, but my view is, with a religious person in charge, at least you know what you're getting. 

You say you should not have to tolerate other people making decisions that affect you based on their religious beliefs, and that is something I agree with but its nothing more than a nice thought. 

You want to talk about decisions being made that affect your life? How about $390 million of taxpayer-funded equipment sent to the most corrupt country in Europe without my agreement?

I understand that my bitching about shit won't change anything, and that there are plenty of decisions far beyond my control being made by religious and secular people alike that I have no choice but to accept. But learning to accept and live with decisions, and liking it are two different things. I think you might be discounting how much better it makes me feel to bitch about shit.

To your point about groups of people having to come to a consensus, I think it would be a lot easier to accept decisons I didn't personally agree with if I knew they were being derived from an actual consensus. Perception of fairness goes a long way toward placation. I find this minority rule thing quite aggravating.

You are of course right when you say if it's not one group running shit it'll be another. But I don't think I agree with your 'the devil you know' platitude. If you're already certain that one side is despicable and not trustworthy, what do you really have to lose by exploring alternatives? And seriously how can we ever truly know anyone's motivations and core values? All we can ever really know is what they show us. 

Also, I'm not sure it's even possible for most individuals to truly live life on our own terms if we're part of contemporary society. But I do think people can be part of a group on their own terms. Which is why the internet comes in so handy. I can join in when I want and withdraw when I want. That lets me be a part of a group when I want to without having to completely relinquish my sense of individuality. When I turn my device off and go do something else am I actually still a part of this group?

And lastly, what's your problem with moral relativism? Sounded like you thought it was a bad thing. Isn't everything relative? All of us card carrying postmodernists would be fine living a life of moral relativism. Because that's the way we see things anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, KillaKukumba said:

I'm not saying you're wrong to feel the way you do I know things are a bit more extreme in the US than they are here, but knowing that the leaders of this country pray to a god, use god to bless their parliament and who knows what else does not really get in the way of my day. I also can't blame one side more than the other given that both sides do it and have done it since day one. I know some will make a connection between me paying 60% more for diesel today than I did 12 months ago and religion. I know the shops are shut twice a year for religious events I don't much care about. But I also know that a large portion of those who claim to be offended by religion are more than happy to not go to work on those chosen days. However despite all that I still don't think the religion of others effects what I do on a daily basis. Like I said I'm sure someone can try to make a connection for me, but for me it's just there.

I personally don't know any Christians that are against it, not totally anyway. I know in the US it's a hugely different thing and I don't pretend to understand it but here the only ones really making a big deal of it is the media and the extreme outliers claiming, without any solid evidence, that we'll follow America and ban abortion in the future.

How would you feel if Victoria passed laws banning the business of buying & selling cows on 'moral' grounds because they decided it was morally wrong to treat cattle like slaves or less than human or some such stupid made up nonsense that most Aussies were not even in favor of? Effectively making you a criminal for something you had up til then been doing perfectly legally for 40 years. We're not talking about what your neighbors choose to do on Sundays Kuke, or atheists getting a free day off work for religious holidays they don't even celebrate or care about. We're talking about the minority making rules for the majority that most citizens don't even agree with that they attempt to justify using some stupid made up bullshit. I get that it doesn't affect your daily life down on the farm because they haven't passed any laws like that which have impacted you personally and they probably won't. If they ever did then you'd care and maybe then you'd see why the Yanks are so pissed off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I would. Maybe I'd also see things differently if there was a synagogue next door too. Maybe a lot of things would be different if there was more to it. I barely even hear about what is happening in the US and when I do it's really only headlines, or the occasional forum post by someone.

Religion doesn't effect me and I can't pretend it does, just as I can't pretend to feel the same way Americans do.  I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm not thinking there is something wrong with you because of your thoughts and comments. I'm not even disputing your calls about minorities and majorities because I don't know. I probably wont ever fully understand either.

I got abused by a yank not long back for seemingly not caring that America was about to have a Civil War soon. Fuck me I thought Civil War was a song by Gunners, I missed the news report that it's going to actually happen. But now that I know you all have my sympathies. It's my own fault, I could seek out more international news I just don't. I do however have an opportunity many don't in that I can happily live for quite a while and not have anyone from the rest of the world effect what I do. If I turn off the computer and TV I barely even hear cars drive past the gate let alone hear what happens in the world and I can go on like that for 2, maybe even 3 weeks if I try.

So if you want to be pissed off about such things I'm all for that and I'm certainly not going to try and tell you not to be, just as I wouldn't expect you to tell me I should be pissed off because you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KillaKukumba said:

Maybe I would. Maybe I'd also see things differently if there was a synagogue next door too. Maybe a lot of things would be different if there was more to it. I barely even hear about what is happening in the US and when I do it's really only headlines, or the occasional forum post by someone.

Religion doesn't effect me and I can't pretend it does, just as I can't pretend to feel the same way Americans do.  I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm not thinking there is something wrong with you because of your thoughts and comments. I'm not even disputing your calls about minorities and majorities because I don't know. I probably wont ever fully understand either.

I got abused by a yank not long back for seemingly not caring that America was about to have a Civil War soon. Fuck me I thought Civil War was a song by Gunners, I missed the news report that it's going to actually happen. But now that I know you all have my sympathies. It's my own fault, I could seek out more international news I just don't. I do however have an opportunity many don't in that I can happily live for quite a while and not have anyone from the rest of the world effect what I do. If I turn off the computer and TV I barely even hear cars drive past the gate let alone hear what happens in the world and I can go on like that for 2, maybe even 3 weeks if I try.

So if you want to be pissed off about such things I'm all for that and I'm certainly not going to try and tell you not to be, just as I wouldn't expect you to tell me I should be pissed off because you are.

I have no problem with people thousands of miles away not staying on top of international news or not caring about or fully understanding the depth and nuance of our American problems. Why should they? You're not trying to control me either which is always a plus. You're just doing your own thing down there eating your dim sims while thrashing it up with your bovines and that's cool with me brother. I'm just tawkin' ovuh heeyuh. Was just trying to clarify where I'm coming from since it seemed like you were not understanding. Hope you don't think I'm 'abusing' you here Kuke since I do think of you as a friend. Even if you may not have the best taste in music I wouldn't ever hold that against you. 😍 Us old men gotta stick together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn it now I wish I did have a dairy farm. Some farmers used to swear by music in the dairy to make the cows calmer while milking, "thrashing it up with the bovines" sounds like a great way to calm the herd. My cows do love thrash when it's coming from the tractor they follow around, and I'm sure it has nothing to do with the hay or silage that I'm carting around at the same time.

If you weren't a worthy friend I wouldn't tolerate your terrible taste in music!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

As a journalism student I don’t have that luxury ku, first thing we got told was half of what you write about will be politics. Unfortunately I probably care a little too much these days about things happening in other countries which I can’t have any influence over.

What's the other half going to be about? Fluff pieces? Metal maybe? Your own cooking blog?

I've spent a lifetime trying not to be overly concerned about politics. Aware, but not obsessed. I've definitely never been one of those political junkies. But with the heightened levels of divisiveness and absolute insanity in my country these days it's become really hard to ignore what's going on in the world and just carry on like it doesn't really matter and everything's fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RelentlessOblivion said:

As a journalism student I don’t have that luxury ku, first thing we got told was half of what you write about will be politics. Unfortunately I probably care a little too much these days about things happening in other countries which I can’t have any influence over.

Once upon a time I probably cared more too, and it's impossible not to be influenced by it but like so many other things as one gets older they become a need to know topic rather than a want to know. I used to watch the news, I used to read the papers daily and for a while I even subscribed to news outlets and turned on the computer to catch up on news, but these days not so much.

I don't remember the last time I read a mainline newspaper, maybe the free local paper occasionally and I don't watch the news on TV much. I read the Weekly Times sometimes but mainly only the stuff that effects me. I do keep up with farming news and techniques etc from a variety of sources. But I spend more time reading technical sites, things like computer building, website building, video manipulation etc type websites out of personal interest rather than reading to understand what's going on in the world.

6 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

What do you mean "tolerate?" No one's forcing you to listen to it! Or your silly cows.

I listen to everything you post because a good friend accepts others faults and failings while not judging. (except where I said that your music was terrible, that was definitely judging, but my silly cows said such judgement was justified!)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/23/2022 at 6:37 PM, SurgicalBrute said:

A generalization that could easily be applied to almost any group when you look at their worst actors. "Metal fans aren't right in the head, look at that music they enjoy and how it's always going on about murder, rape, horror, etc. Those people clearly aren't right in the head."

Every day you literally have to tolerate people making decisions that affect you based on a multitude of reasons...many of them you most likely wouldn't agree with even if the decision itself is something that's favorable to you. Did it really matter if people wanted Roe vs Wade gone because of religious reasons vs because of their own moral standards? The end result was still exactly the same.* People make decisions based on a whole host of factors including, but not solely based on, religion. It sounds like what you're objecting to isn't religion or religious people though. It sounds like you're objecting to outcomes that you don't personally like, and falsely assuming that if there weren't religious people those outcome would have gone in your preferred way.

 

Sounds to me like you're rationalizing. I don't see how one can separate religion from things that are enacted or laws that are passed in the name of 'morality.' Now maybe you're religious, or possibly a god believer and if so, since I think you also happen to be a reasonably rational and intelligent person with common sense you probably don't like to be associated with the Jesus freaks, religious nuts and right-wing fundamentalists and some of the wacky things that they do. It'd be pretty embarrassing I think. I don't happen to think their actions reflect badly on all people who identify as some type of Christians, but I could see someone either wanting to distance themselves from the nutty overzealous fundamentalists or try to make excuses for them that it wasn't really the religion that made them do it.

Overwhelmingly most people claim to have some sense of morality, or right & wrong if you will, even confirmed atheists such as myself. It's so prevalent that people who don't have this are seen as mentally ill. Not all of us feel this sense of right & wrong we have is based on reasons of a religious nature. Religion or a god is not required for morality. But the thing is most people who are not god believers have more of a live and let live attitude towards others and we're rarely (almost never) the ones clammoring to take everyone else's rights away. 

It's really not hard to make the connection that at least in this country it's the religious fundamentalists (the Christian Taliban) who are mainly the ones up in arms and making noise about things of a moral nature, like abortion and threatening to take away people's rights to obtain birth control (among other things) and putting prayer back in the schools and trying to influence school curriculums to get things they want like having our kids taught creationism fairy tales in school. Things that a clear majority of people are not in favor of. Even people who subscribe to a religion.

Like I've said, I have much less issues with outcomes I may not happen to personally agree with when they've resulted from a general consensus that the majority actually does agree with. I believe in the democratic process and I'm willing to go along with the majority when it comes to most laws. It's this minority rule thing that really gets my knickers in a twist. The tail wagging the dog as it were. When fully 70% of people are aginst something, but the minority go ahead and do it anyway, and do it behind our backs after testifying under oath (the concept of putting your hand on the bible to be placed 'under oath' means absolutely nothing to me but I'd think it would mean something to them) that they wouldn't do this when specifically asked, all because their fervent religious beliefs have clouded their judgement then yeah I have a big problem with that.

It is not a false assumption that if there weren't people on the SC letting their deep religious beliefs guide their actions then this particular Roe v Wade outcome would not have gone the way it did. There is no logical basis to believe that something like this could've happened for any other reason. All 'morality laws' in this country have been driven by Christian fervor and sanctimoniousness. I'm not saying secular non-religious politicians wouldn't fuck things up too because of course they would, and they do. Problem is it's nearly impossibe to get elected to anything in this country if you're willing to stand up and admit publicly that you're an atheist. So the overwhelming majority of our US legislators have always been religious to some degree or else they're "in the closet" so to speak.

 

 

3 hours ago, KillaKukumba said:

I listen to everything you post because a good friend accepts others faults and failings while not judging. (except where I said that your music was terrible, that was definitely judging, but my silly cows said such judgement was justified!)

I find thaf first sentence hard to believe. But if the cows say it's justified then who am I to argue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

What's the other half going to be about? Fluff pieces? Metal maybe? Your own cooking blog?

I've spent a lifetime trying not to be overly concerned about politics. Aware, but not obsessed. I've definitely never been one of those political junkies. But with the heightened levels of divisiveness and absolute insanity in my country these days it's become really hard to ignore what's going on in the world and just carry on like it doesn't really matter and everything's fine. 

Actually I would like to have my own food vlog, why not? As for Journalism maybe the John Oliver approach… only with jokes that are actually funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RelentlessOblivion said:

Actually I would like to have my own food vlog, why not? As for Journalism maybe the John Oliver approach… only with jokes that are actually funny.

I like John Oliver but I haven't watched him in quite awhile. He somehow misses being brilliant even though I've always found a good percentage of his jokes to be funny. Maybe it's the topics he picks? Something's just a little off there and I can't quite put my finger on what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

I find thaf first sentence hard to believe. But if the cows say it's justified then who am I to argue?

I find it extremely easy to believe. But that's okay because it just shows that while weboth come from different cultures we can still get along even when the other person is wrong. If only the rest of the world was so civil!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s the existential dread that comes with a lot of his stories as of late, but that is the case with a lot of political commentary these days it’s a lot harder to be funny when the actions of the people you are talking about have more in common with satire than anything you could ever write. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Sounds to me like you're rationalizing.

Rationalizing what?...that our leaders are going to make decisions for this country that I won't always personally like? That isn't rationalization, that's a fact. I never said morality was the sole providence of the religious nor did I say religious people make decisions without being influenced by their religion...what I said was literally the exact opposite of that. That was my entire point. That someone doesn't have to be a religious extremist to arrive at a certain decision that's going to put a bug up your ass, so why does it fucking matter HOW they arrive at a decision? Why does it matter if the person who wants to do away with abortion is a religious fundy or simply a person whose own morality leads them to believe it's wrong. The answer is it doesn't...because the problem isn't that they're religious, the problem is that they want to do away with abortion.

You keep saying that you'd be perfectly accepting of a decision if it was a consensus, and not "the minority" pushing their beliefs on you, and I call bullshit. Seventy-five percent of this country identifies as religious. Are you seriously going to tell me that if the majority of them decided that they were cool with prayer in the school, that you wouldn't be angry at religious people for pushing their views on you? Yeah...pull the other one. It's irrelevant though, because the country doesn't run on a majority consensus anyway. Not in the way you're talking about. Nothing is as simple as which side has more "yeses" when it comes to deciding the direction of our country. Why exactly do you think politicians are so obsessed with demographics? If it was as simple as following the majority, our country would have cracked down on illegal immigration years ago. The truth is you're whole life in this country is constantly determined by people who are influenced by some minority grouping, and overall you're okay with that.

So understand this. I'm not defending religious crazies, and I'm not saying you have to like religion. What I'm telling you is that focusing on religion is not seeing the forest for the trees. If you're going to be pissed off, be pissed off for the right thing. Not everyone who supports stopping abortion, or birth control, or whatever else you can come up with is religious. The truth is, you can't say with absolute certainty that they're even the majority within those groups. So focusing all this, whatever it is, on religious people doesn't make any damn sense. You're not mad at them for being religious. You're mad at them for working things and getting an outcome that you feel is wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SurgicalBrute said:

Rationalizing what?...that our leaders are going to make decisions for this country that I won't always personally like? That isn't rationalization, that's a fact. I never said morality was the sole providence of the religious nor did I say religious people make decisions without being influenced by their religion...what I said was literally the exact opposite of that. That was my entire point. That someone doesn't have to be a religious extremist to arrive at a certain decision that's going to put a bug up your ass, so why does it fucking matter HOW they arrive at a decision? Why does it matter if the person who wants to do away with abortion is a religious fundy or simply a person whose own morality leads them to believe it's wrong. The answer is it doesn't...because the problem isn't that they're religious, the problem is that they want to do away with abortion.

You keep saying that you'd be perfectly accepting of a decision if it was a consensus, and not "the minority" pushing their beliefs on you, and I call bullshit. Seventy-five percent of this country identifies as religious. Are you seriously going to tell me that if the majority of them decided that they were cool with prayer in the school, that you wouldn't be angry at religious people for pushing their views on you? Right...pull the other one. It's irrelevant though, because the country doesn't run on a majority consensus anyway. Not in the way you're talking about. Nothing is as simple as which side has more "yeses" when it comes to deciding the direction of our country. Why exactly do you think politicians are so obsessed with demographics? If it was as simple as following the majority, our country would have also cracked down on illegal immigration years ago. The truth is you're whole life in this country is constantly determined by people who are influenced by some minority grouping, and overall you're okay with that.

So understand this. I'm not defending religious crazies, and I'm not saying you have to like religion. What I'm telling you is that focusing on religion is not seeing the forest for the trees. Not everyone who supports stopping abortion, or birth control, or whatever else you can come up with is religious. The truth is, you can't say with absolute certainty that they're even the majority within those groups. So focusing all this, whatever it is, on religious people doesn't make any damn sense. You're not mad at them for being religious. You're mad at them for working things and getting an outcome that you feel is wrong.

 

 

I've gotta say your last post here was a bit out of character for you as you're usually pretty coherent and make a good bit of sense. I found some of what you wrote hard to follow as most of your refutations didn't quite line up with what I was saying. Words have specific meanings and in a debate these matter. I found your logic to be as twisted as you've tried to twist and misrepresent my words. Frankly, I find this subtle strawmanning to be beneath you. At times it almost seemed as if you hadn't even read my posts.

Now I get that you apparently disagree with much of what I said, but I don't believe for a minute that you can't understand what I'm saying because we both know you're smarter than that. You're a college graduate FFS. I don't feel there's much to be gained by simply repeating or rephrasing everything I've already written if you're just gonna twist everything I've said around on me and spit back your version of what you've decided I really meant, or what you say I'm really mad about.

But I do need to rebut one of your statements: "Not everyone who supports stopping abortion, or birth control, or whatever else you can come up with is religious." Wrong. This is what I meant when I said it sounds like you're trying to rationalize that it's not just the religious zealots who are driving this insanity. You say you're not defending religious crazies, and maybe you didn't think you were defending them. But yet there you go trying to deflect the blame away from them and project it outward to be placed on or at least shared by others. Could this be because you don't want all  your average everyday religious people to be tainted by the actions of, and have to share the blame with the zealots and nutters maybe? Your entire "How can we be sure their motivations were religious?" line of reasoning as well as the "why does it fucking matter HOW they arrive at a decision?" is simply disingenuous.

I don't know how you want to define or clarify the word "supports" in your statement that I've quoted and underlined in the paragraph above, but MY point is that basically everyone who is actively trying to take all of our rights away on these 'morality' issues or 'religious' issues or 'lifestyle' issues or 'personal freedoms' issues or whatever you'd like to call them, is being driven by and acting on religious motives. There's no refuting that. If you can't see that having our rights and personal liberties taken away all stems from religious objections then you must have your head in the sand. It also seems to be to some extent motivated by the lust for power and control, but that's all but inseparable from religion as the Christian religion has always been about power & control. The two have gone hand in hand for over 2,000 years.

Now I suppose there could in fact be as you claim some individuals in this country who might not be particularly worried about or in favor of protecting abortion rights for women, and who also aren't religious. I haven't run any polls on this but I'd think the number would be very minimal. Negligible even. But if there are any folks like this out there I can assure you that they aren't the ones who are working tirelessly and incessantly to take all of our rights away and control our personal lives. I've never in my life seen an anti-abortion activist or far right-wing politician in this country who wasn't proud to be a complete and utter religious moron, have you? They wear their religious zealotry with pride like a badge of ignorance alerting sane people to steer clear.

74% of Americans may self-identify as being under the banner of some religion or another, but 61% of us think abortion should be "legal in all or most cases" with only 37% who think it should be "illegal in all or most cases." That's a significant majority. In the Senate 60% is called a supermajority. So that's the minority rule I'm talking about in all these backwards thinking states that have passed these idiotic restrictive abortion laws so quickly. I understand that we have a representative democracy and not a direct democracy. We don't put every issue to a nationwide or statewide vote, we let our elected representatives handle it. But to go against such a significant majority that's been shown time and time again in poll after poll after poll for decades now I feel is just wrong. Indefensible.

Fact is most Americans don't want this. Even most self-described religious people such as Catholics for example and including even you it seems, as you've already stated for the record that you don't agree with making abortion illegal. This tells me that at least it's not all 'religious' people who are actively trying to attack us, it's basically the tight-ass evangelicals who take their stupid bible very seriously & literally, and other religious conservative zealots from the bible belt who make up that hard core ignorant and intolerant third of the country. And those are the ones I have a problem with, especially when they manage to find their way into positions of power & authority.

I'm sure you must have heard about the recent case of the 10 year old girl who was raped and became pregnant and had to cross state lines to Indiana for her abortion because Ohio where she lives had recently enacted a 'heartbeat law' which outlaws the practice of abortion after 6 weeks, and the poor kid was 3 days past the cutoff. Bizarrely the Indiana AG even went after the Indiana doctor who'd performed this medical 'procedure' (it's literally just a pill taken orally up to the first 10 weeks) even though it was perfectly legal in Indiana. It needs to be said that a 10 year old's body is not yet prepared to handle childbirth so to force this little girl to carry her rape baby to term would have likely killed her. These people are fucking sick and should not be trusted with positions of authority. Not to be a hypocrite and impose my personal beliefs on anyone else, but if a story like this doesn't make your blood boil then I'm sorry but there's really gotta be something wrong with you.

I really don't care what anyone might choose to believe unless & until they're trying to push their beliefs onto the rest of us and attempting to use them as justification to take our rights and personal liberties away. My main issue here is our personal rights, liberties and freedoms being trampled on, not so much religion itself. It's the corruption and weaponization of religion for nefarious purposes I take issue with. Or maybe I should say I have an issue with religion if and when it infiltrates our government and then impacts our rights and liberties. Now I'm not really sure because I'm just a dumb ole atheist, but I thought your Christian religion was supposed to be about love and forgiveness and kindness and do unto others, not power and control and punishment and retribution. 

I don't look at most people who might happen to identify as 'religious' as the enemy. Live and let live, just don't fuck with me and I won't fuck with you. But I would definitely like to see the power taken out of the hands of the insane right-wing religious zealots who are sanctimoniouly working hard to try and take everyone else's rights away on the basis of their own personal wacky religious beliefs. Because that's crossing the line. Your rights end where my rights begin. Keep your nutty fucking beliefs to yourself. Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state gives us all the right not to be forced to live under oppressive Christian rule. Unless you have a different interpretation you'd like to share. 

I mean how would you feel if Orthodox Jews who represent less than 1% of the population were to somehow get a law passed forbidding us all from driving our motor vehicles or from conducting any business on Saturdays because it's their Sabbath, or from keeping meat & dairy in the same fridge or from eating bacon because they believe violating any of their 613 commandments is a sin? They'd only be trying to keep us all from sinning. You'd probably think that was pretty crazy, right? Because it would be the minority forcing their religious beliefs onto the majority. Beliefs that have absolutely no bearing on the majority of us who aren't Orthodox Jews and have no reason to care about their silly doctrine. It wouldn't so much be the outcome that you'd be objecting to but more that you'd take issue with the fact that as a minority you wouldn't recognize their supposed authority to make any laws like that for all the rest of us to live by in the first place.

So my problem is not simply with outcomes I don't like as you keep insisting. That's overly simplistic. (Obviously I do have some problem with outcomes I don't like because by definition I don't like them. But I can usually force myself (never said perfectly happy) to accept them when it's evident that a clear majority of people do support them) No, my real problem here is that it's not even remotely within the purviews of our federal, state or local governments to be legislating away our rights to reproductive care including abortion, ob/gyn care and birth control. Absolutely and unequivocally none of their damned business. Passing laws that deal with these types of issues intended to restrict our personal liberties is egregiously overstepping the bounds of their authority. They have absolutely no right to control or regulate our personal & private doctor/patient interactions, or our sexual behavior, or to censor music, arts, literature or speech that they don't like, or to prohibit things like selling alcohol or working on the sabbath, or to ban textbooks or to replace science in schools with religious fairy tales or to institute a daily prayer, or to outlaw whatever else these religious numb nuts might decide to deem objectionable next. This goes far beyond abortion.

The fact that these types of 'morality' issues are even still up for debate and 'on the line' here in 2022 is insane. They're certainly doing their best to drag us all back into the dark ages. You'd think it was 1722. This was never intended to be the role of our government to enforce religious doctrine. We've been too complacent in watching this become more and more of a problem and thinking we didn't need to worry because surely it would somehow just fix itsellf on its own. How far could these freaks push their religious nonsense if we don't stand up to them? If left unchecked could we one day end up with the Christian version of Sharia law in this country? I mean that literally, that was not hyperbole. It's what that hard core ignorant third of the country really wants and I think this is exactly where we are headed: the Christian Taliban. God help us all.

These religious morons in positions of power and authority need to be rooted out, put down and squashed right now. At least until they can learn to stay in their lane and keep their religious noses out of our private lives. But we all know they'd never be able to do that, they just can't help themselves. So let's just get rid of them. This includes those fuckwits on the SC as well as all the state legislators in the various red states who have moved so quickly and efficiently to oppress their constituents by outlawing abortion. Because if we sit back and do nothing then who knows what they'll try to outlaw next?

 

A bar chart showing a modest gender gap in views of whether abortion should be legal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Whitenoise says a lot of words, none of which contain the phrase "Fair enough Surge, I see where you're coming from"

Honestly not sure how what I'm saying is all that damn complicated, but here, I've brought visual aids because I knew this was going to continue being a thing.

Point #1

2006368163_Point1.jpg.9abb322d540caeef72028c7368c5135a.jpg

This is where we started. You don't like religious people because you feel they're forcing their beliefs on you and everyone else despite being in the minority. I get it.

 

 

Point #2

195603292_Point2.jpg.ace2a9b7d4c688165db48b865f66037d.jpg

The problem is, you're wrong laying this exclusively at the feet of religious people, like they're the only ones involved. Yes, there are people who want abortion repealed because it's against their religion. There are also people who want federal protection repealed because they thinks it's a state issue. There are people who want it repealed because they think Roe vs Wade is a case of legislating from the bench, and want it done correctly. Hell, some people wanted it repealed just to give progressive lunatics a kick in the teeth. Additionally, the pro-abortion people aren't a monolith either...they all have different ideas about what they want when it's legal. This is my entire point. This is literally what I've been saying from the start. It's not like I'm speaking Swahili here.

 

Point #3

49066579_Point3.jpg.644d7d8aacd71536e369ec0c26683790.jpg

Roe vs Wade wasn't overturned because of those damn religious people, even though they played their part in it. It was overturned because Dem or Rep, politicians always do shit along party lines to benefit their own constituents, whatever the majority of the country may want. So while roughly 58% of the country didn't want it overturned, approximately 58% of the republican party did want it gone*. So the party played a long game, maneuvered their judges into the Supreme Court, and pulled the trigger when things were aligned their way. Now if you want to keep focusing exclusively on religious crazies, as though the Republican party wouldn't still be the Republican party without them, be my guest...either way, I'm out of this conversation

 

* https://news.gallup.com/poll/393275/steady-americans-not-roe-wade-overturned.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/23/2022 at 4:10 PM, Terrorvision13 said:

i was a newborn when it happened so i was kinda just sat there mr whippy ice cream shitting in my nappy whilst the church did its jazz. when i got a bit older, around 5 to 6 years old my nan made me go to church with her, i sorta just sat there, my intrest was more in the little bars of cheese the nice old ladies would bring for all the kids at sunday school. then i started arsing around a bit, once i got asked "when should a child attend a funeral" at sunday school and i said "when they are dead"....i genuinely didnt think about the question-

everyone was talking about forgiveness whilst i was positioning two mini mannequins in the back storage room to look like they were wanking each other off. 

i would show upto church in an AC DC t shirt at about 9 years old. at this point i was here for fun, i never looked into it but at 11 i read the bible and tried to be an actual christian. much like your first girlfriend, my relationship with god lasted a week and seriously fizzled out towards the end. lets just say, god left his underwear on the bathroom floor way way too much. it didnt work out. he was a more stairway to heaven kinda guy. i was highway to hell. 

Re your baptism. Now I understand. You had as much choice as my son  had when he got baptised. We won't force him to go when he's older. I stopped going for decades. 

That's another one. Talking about forgiveness is easy. Practicing it is much harder. Re the mannequin and the acdc t shirt. I guess that was you saying. This ain't for me man😉.

My last vicar was a big motorhead fan which I thought was cool. Out of interest what's your favourite metal album cover with a religious aspect to it. Mine is spiritual healing by death. What a cover. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/8/2022 at 10:21 PM, blaaacdoommmmfan said:

Re your baptism. Now I understand. You had as much choice as my son  had when he got baptised. We won't force him to go when he's older. I stopped going for decades. 

That's another one. Talking about forgiveness is easy. Practicing it is much harder. Re the mannequin and the acdc t shirt. I guess that was you saying. This ain't for me man😉.

My last vicar was a big motorhead fan which I thought was cool. Out of interest what's your favourite metal album cover with a religious aspect to it. Mine is spiritual healing by death. What a cover. 

honestly i would go for slayers repentless, the atmosphere is just so dark and its a really awesome piece of artwork

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An infant is christened, not Baptized. Well I was born into a heathen hippy setting then christened at about 5 years old, then hoping for some kind of 'spiritual goodie' for an adult, or perhaps expecting an initiation into adulthood was baptized sometime in my mid teens. Infant or child christenings are not baptism, but baptism is nothing so it doesn't matter. The problem with baptism is that it is sold as something but in reality it is nothing, and it is no initiation into adulthood. 

As for the Roe vs Wade nothing, well perhaps it is something. Why would any libertarian support federal authority? If constitutional law can break down federal law this is awesome, celebrate, push for more freedom. The South Was Right. Break away from federal authority altogether. Admittedly I don't know what I am talking about. I am aware that I am an idiot. Whatever. But if the Supreme court ruled tomorrow that drug wars are unconstitutional would the left whine about that? Has a new precedent not been set? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sardonicist said:

An infant is christened, not Baptized. Well I was born into a heathen hippy setting then christened at about 5 years old, then hoping for some kind of 'spiritual goodie' for an adult, or perhaps expecting an initiation into adulthood was baptized sometime in my mid teens. Infant or child christenings are not baptism, but baptism is nothing so it doesn't matter. The problem with baptism is that it is sold as something but in reality it is nothing, and it is no initiation into adulthood. 

As for the Roe vs Wade nothing, well perhaps it is something. Why would any libertarian support federal authority? If constitutional law can break down federal law this is awesome, celebrate, push for more freedom. The South Was Right. Break away from federal authority altogether. Admittedly I don't know what I am talking about. I am aware that I am an idiot. Whatever. But if the Supreme court ruled tomorrow that drug wars are unconstitutional would the left whine about that? Has a new precedent not been set? 

R v W was not limiting our personal freedoms, it was prohibiting the individual states from making laws to limit our personal freedoms. Now that it's been overturned some states have aready put laws in place severely limiting personal freedoms. And people are already dying because of this, so I'd say it's definitely something, not nothing.

As far as the south breaking away from US federal authority is concerned, that might sound good to you on the surface Luxi, but like everything else it's a bit more complicated than that. Because once they'd broken away, then what? They would only be setting up their own new more oppressive southern federal authority. So then what would be gained? Nothing! People in the south would then have less freedoms as being in the "bible belt" the religious nuts would undoubtedly be in control. A scary thought for any halfway intelligent free thinkers living in the south, and they'd all have to get their asses out of there asap before it was too late and they were stuck down there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 11 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 1 reply
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 1 reply
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...