Posted on 03/09/2006 6:55:14 PM PST by Greg o the Navy
The real conflict here is that I realize that in a pluralistic society composed of competing interests, I'm not going to get everything I want every single time, and it would be really quite unreasonable for me to expect that I would. You, on the other hand, think that society is rightfully yours to do with what you will, and anyone who disagrees is expected to simply give up and get out of your way. And if they don't, if they have the nerve to actively oppose you, you reserve unto yourself the right to whine like a schoolboy about unjust oppression, how unfair it is that you're being victimized by a cruel world that refuses to cater to your every whim.
It's not about right and wrong - I see right and wrong as well as you do. What I don't see is your right to have your way on every occasion, lest you burst into tears at the horrible thought of being denied something you really, really want. Call yourself a victim if you like, tell us all how heavy your shackles of oppression are, but don't be surprised when a lot of folks start thinking you simply need to grow up.
That's a great cartoon!
You had to go back to May of 2005 to find something to slam Dave with? And to what purpose? And how did you happen to find this so quickly? Does this contribute anything positive to the evolution/ID/creation debate? Does it contribute to reasonable dialog? Does this foster good feelings between creationists and evolutionists? What's the point of doing this then?
Dave, Dave, Dave... where do you get the idea that evolution is based on supernatural means?
Isn't that incredible!!! Yet you stated it very well. Using the random interactions, there is definitely a probability attached to your example and it is not zero.
and, the funny thing: any *alternative* outcome of all those factors has *precisely* the same probability as the one outcome set which actually comes to pass.
I believe this is analogous to the so-called "thermodynamic miracle". We don't notice them, because *everything* qualifies as such.
Well, you know what to do, then - do what they did, and rise up. Rise up, and violently throw off your cruel oppressors, and then you can implement whatever Reconstructionist government you think will abide by your wishes for a non-oppressive society. Break the shackles that force you to pay for programs you don't like.
But of course you won't, because for all your blathering, your situation isn't like theirs. Not really much like theirs at all. You don't really know what oppression is, to tell the truth, as evidenced by the fact that you think you can ever escape being taxed for things you'd rather not pay for, in any sort of society. I hate to break it to you, but no matter what system you implement, sooner or later, you're going to pay for things you don't like, and your naive faith otherwise is almost touching in a way.
I certainly am not in the league of "super-brainy." I'll grudgingly accept the label 'Darwinist,' but only if you will grant that it does not conflict with my Christian profession.
threat number two [feeding dissidents to the lions] did not work in suppressing the Christian faith, and that the pagan religion of those who issued it has been dead for centuries.
Your point here is altogether obscure to me. Your itemised 'Threat 1' (withholding payment of taxes) attracts severe penalties wherever there is a state capable of enforcing them; this is applied to all who are liable to taxation, not any one subset by religious persuasion. In any event, it has no moral equivalence to the capital penalty of Threat 2.
I hope you are not arguing that classical paganism became extinct because it was insufficently zealous in persecuting dissidents? The best estimate I can find (derived from Gibbon) for the total number of early Christians who suffered death at the hands of the Roman state is circa 1,500 (about 150 annually over a decade), a melancholy figure representing a lamentable episode (and as you note, a wholly ineffective measure).
As a Christian, I am haunted by an even more lamentable number, or would be, if I could establish it more accurately. And that number would be the answer to a third question that could be added to your quiz of the day, to wit:
(3) What is the total number of Christians who have been put to death by other Christians over matters of religious doctrinal disputes?
Yes! and if random, the outcomes are all equally likely.
I agree with much of your point, there is certainly a need to reform how education is financed here (it is broadly similar, I believe, to the situation in the US).
But who determines what is 'unreasonable'? We have a dreadful 'nanny state' here at present
Well, this is a magic land of wishes, where Democrats and Labourites are never really elected, and hence we don't ever have to worry about them defining our beliefs as unreasonable.
O brave new world! How utterly splendid!
See those Jihadists over there?
Abracadabra!....POOF!
Magically vanished in a puff of blue smoke!
Wish I could live in this world ... :-)
Any similarity to the real world is purely delusional ;)
Because I don't accuse people of things without being able to back up what I say.
Does this contribute anything positive to the evolution/ID/creation debate? Does it contribute to reasonable dialog? Does this foster good feelings between creationists and evolutionists?
Maybe you should ask those who accuse evolutionists of being enablers of child abuse. You don't seem to be upset at that at all; your objection is not the vile accusation was made in the first place, but that I remembered it.
I don't have particularly good feelings about creationists, and I won't pretend I do. I've been smeared by creationists as a liberal, nazi, etc. far too many times for that. Even beyond the personal stuff, I despise creationists in general for their anti-intellectualism, their pride in their own ignorance, and their negligent attitudes to the truth.
Indeed, for it won't appear for a few hundred years.
Festival-of-whining-schoolboys-bursting-into-tears placemarker.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.