homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | Register | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home

This thread has been moved to Dead Horses.    
 - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Community discussion   » Purgatory   » Hostility to Traditional Christians on the Ship (Page 6)

 
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Hostility to Traditional Christians on the Ship
Marvin the Martian

Interplanetary
# 4360

 - Posted      Profile for Marvin the Martian     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Believe in a religion I find offensive and disgusting. That's absolutely your right. But that doesn't extend as far as you having the right to organise civil society to fit your norms and beliefs.

Whereas you have the right to organise civil society to fit your norms and beliefs because... what, exactly?

What's so special about you that means you get to decide what civil society should look like while those who disagree should just shut up and accept it?

--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar

Posts: 29952 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175

 - Posted      Profile for Gottschalk   Email Gottschalk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
"But that doesn't extend as far as you having the right to organise civil society to fit your norms and beliefs."

It is perhaps not a right, but very often a fact. Civil society, and the state, is not as neutral as you'd think it is.

I would argue that as the 20th century unfolded, and because of historical situations, the state came to be associated with ends and purposes that were not strictly political. Oakeshott more eloquently expressed this when he drew a distinction between civil association and enterprise association.

One of the reasons for my disaffection with modern politics and the state is precisely because it seems to confuse the two and reinforces strong centralised, inhumane government. And the second one is the lack of proper concern for subsidiarity and local government - which for far too long has been and continues to be the preserve of party stooges or nationalistic nutters, or in a few cases still, of the local grandees.

--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax

Posts: 145 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
One of the reasons for my disaffection with modern politics and the state is precisely because it seems to confuse the two and reinforces strong centralised, inhumane government. And the second one is the lack of proper concern for subsidiarity and local government - which for far too long has been and continues to be the preserve of party stooges or nationalistic nutters, or in a few cases still, of the local grandees.

Very much the point made in this recent TV programme which suggested that, at least in local government, a true an-archy would be much better. It is though, I feel, a rose-tinted view.
Posts: 9476 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175

 - Posted      Profile for Gottschalk   Email Gottschalk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
One of the reasons for my disaffection with modern politics and the state is precisely because it seems to confuse the two and reinforces strong centralised, inhumane government. And the second one is the lack of proper concern for subsidiarity and local government - which for far too long has been and continues to be the preserve of party stooges or nationalistic nutters, or in a few cases still, of the local grandees.

Very much the point made in this recent TV programme which suggested that, at least in local government, a true an-archy would be much better. It is though, I feel, a rose-tinted view.
Thank you for the programme. I will watch it later. Romanticism, especially when allied to activism, can be dangerous.

Or rather I've shifted the ground of action to conversation with people in daily life, with my students, etc.

--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax

Posts: 145 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
=Whereas you have the right to organise civil society to fit your norms and beliefs because... what, exactly?

It isn't organised to fit my norms and beliefs. I happen to believe various things about the way society is organised are wrong. But, in general, I support the idea that civil society needs to take account of the needs of everyone, not any one particular group.

quote:
What's so special about you that means you get to decide what civil society should look like while those who disagree should just shut up and accept it?
I absolutely don't decide what civil society looks like. I want to live in a society that takes account of how I want to live my life and part of the cost of that is that I have to allow it to take account of others wish to do things I might not like.

How else could it work?

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376

 - Posted      Profile for Forthview   Email Forthview   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I find the following mildly amusing in the discussions about the meaning of words and the meaning of parts of words.
A word which is often used for heterosexuals in these discussions is 'straight'.
Now if something is not 'straight' would it then be 'bent' or 'crooked' ?
Does the word 'straight' suggest that this way is the correct way ?
Of course I accept that meanings of words can change over time,sometimes on transfer from one language to another.The German word 'selig' (blessed) has become 'silly' in English

I'm very much a 'traditionalist' in matters of language.I hate to see 'publically' for 'publicly' or 'alternately' for 'alternatively'

However I have to accept that language moves on,just as ideas about what is morally right or morally wrong.

And yet we have the question ,does God move along with us or is it that we come to understand the eternal truths (whatever they may be) in different ways ?

Posts: 3414 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
And 'silly' used to mean happy in English. I remember that 'silly sheep' is found in some English poems, but can't find one. Maybe Shakespeare.

And of course, 'sick' means both ill and cool today, at least, in parts of London.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9707 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
hatless

Shipmate
# 3365

 - Posted      Profile for hatless   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Language suggests that right is right, as in being right handed is correct. Left handedness is sinister, cack-handed (is cack here shit?) and wrong. Wrong as in wriggle, writhe, wrangle, wreathe and all those other non-straight wr words. Including write, of course.

Language is very interesting, and it probably does carry the traces of how people used to think.

--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form

Posts: 4507 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
Hmmm. I think there's a LOT of fear in homophobia in particular. There certainly is in Islamophobia.

And that's why some people latch on to complaints about these words - because people do ascribe them to fear.

Calling someone, or some thing "sexist" is a statement of fact. Are you acting in a way that discriminates on the grounds of sex? That'll be sexist, then. It says nothing about your motives for being sexist - merely that your actions are sexist.

If you take Martin's usage here, calling someone "homophobic" or "islamophobic" does impute motive. Apparently, Martin's use of the word homophobic carries the message that you're biased against gay people because you're scared of them. When you start imputing motives to people, you both make them very defensive, and also open yourself up to a much greater chance of being wrong.

Saying that someone discriminates against gay people is a question of fact. It's fairly easy to agree with the person in question that yes, they do wish to prevent same-sex couples from having the rights that mixed-sex couples have. Once you start telling them why they think that, you're almost guaranteed a shouting match.

Posts: 4897 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
And 'silly' used to mean happy in English. I remember that 'silly sheep' is found in some English poems, but can't find one. Maybe Shakespeare.

When we set up a charity to oversee Christian social action in Ipswich, we called it "Selig (Suffolk)". This was a direct reference to the still-used phrase "Silly Suffolk" in which "silly" means "blessed".
Posts: 9476 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Language suggests that right is right, as in being right handed is correct. Left handedness is sinister, cack-handed (is cack here shit?) and wrong. Wrong as in wriggle, writhe, wrangle, wreathe and all those other non-straight wr words. Including write, of course.

Language is very interesting, and it probably does carry the traces of how people used to think.

Yes, it appears that right (opposite of left) was first used in the 12 century and derived from the word meaning correct. Apparently the older word was swiþra which meant stronger.

So I suppose that suggests a change in thinking:
This is my stronger arm
This is my correct arm
This is my right arm

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
Civil society, and the state, is not as neutral as you'd think it is.

Society and the state are what we let them be. If one does not actively participate, one is party to the things one like least, not elevated above them.
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Very much the point made in this recent TV programme which suggested that, at least in local government, a true an-archy would be much better. It is though, I feel, a rose-tinted view.

Haven't yet watched it. However, anarchy can only exist in a bubble or in isolation. Given sufficient population, which we have in abundance, order is needed. And it will happen regardless.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Language suggests that right is right, as in being right handed is correct. Left handedness is sinister, cack-handed (is cack here shit?) and wrong. Wrong as in wriggle, writhe, wrangle, wreathe and all those other non-straight wr words. Including write, of course.

Language is very interesting, and it probably does carry the traces of how people used to think.

Yes, it appears that right (opposite of left) was first used in the 12 century and derived from the word meaning correct. Apparently the older word was swiþra which meant stronger.

So I suppose that suggests a change in thinking:
This is my stronger arm
This is my correct arm
This is my right arm

Aided by the significantly greater percentage of right-handed people.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
And 'silly' used to mean happy in English. I remember that 'silly sheep' is found in some English poems, but can't find one. Maybe Shakespeare.

When we set up a charity to oversee Christian social action in Ipswich, we called it "Selig (Suffolk)". This was a direct reference to the still-used phrase "Silly Suffolk" in which "silly" means "blessed".
Great example. You do find old forms still extant in local use, or dialect of course.

"Ah, what a life were this! how sweet! how lovely!
Gives not the hawthorn-bush a sweeter shade
To shepherds looking on their silly sheep."

Henry VI.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9707 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:

Can I think something is wrong without it disgusting me?

Sure. I think Hindus are wrong. I don't think they're disgusting.

Conversely, I think prawns are disgusting, but I don't think they're wrong.

Posts: 4897 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Aided by the significantly greater percentage of right-handed people.

I wonder how much of a deal right and left-handedness was before most people could write or did dexterous things.

I'd imagine that one needed everyone firing their bows with the same arm or attacking with the same swordarm.

On the other hand, I guess we've been sewing and making things for a long time..

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
hatless

Shipmate
# 3365

 - Posted      Profile for hatless   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Language suggests that right is right, as in being right handed is correct. Left handedness is sinister, cack-handed (is cack here shit?) and wrong. Wrong as in wriggle, writhe, wrangle, wreathe and all those other non-straight wr words. Including write, of course.

Language is very interesting, and it probably does carry the traces of how people used to think.

Yes, it appears that right (opposite of left) was first used in the 12 century and derived from the word meaning correct. Apparently the older word was swiþra which meant stronger.

So I suppose that suggests a change in thinking:
This is my stronger arm
This is my correct arm
This is my right arm

It's a depressing change. How we do love to say that something of other is the correct, or proper, or right way to do something, and having labelled it right, insist on it. But maybe we are improving.

--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form

Posts: 4507 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Oh yeah, I've just realised that God's right hand is the important one.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gottschalk
Shipmate
# 13175

 - Posted      Profile for Gottschalk   Email Gottschalk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:

Can I think something is wrong without it disgusting me?

Sure. I think Hindus are wrong. I don't think they're disgusting.

Conversely, I think prawns are disgusting, but I don't think they're wrong.

Exactly. I find avocadoes disgusting but they are not "wrong", nor is eating them wrong.

--------------------
Gottschalk
Ad bellum exit Ajax

Posts: 145 | From: The Kingdom of Fife | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

Conversely, I think prawns are disgusting, but I don't think they're wrong.

Except that they are wrong.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Oh yeah, I've just realised that God's right hand is the important one.

Also "Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing" assumes that your right hand does good things and your left hand would stop it from doing them if it found out. [Ultra confused]

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2885 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:

Can I think something is wrong without it disgusting me?

Sure. I think Hindus are wrong. I don't think they're disgusting.

Conversely, I think prawns are disgusting, but I don't think they're wrong.

Exactly. I find avocadoes disgusting but they are not "wrong", nor is eating them wrong.
Except for millennials who ought to be saving up for deposits on houses? [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2885 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
The historic Nonconformist view is exactly that: that in a secular society everyone should be free to practice their religion and make their opinions known (provided they don't lead to violence etc.) There is no monopoly of one religion by the State, which has to listen to those opinions and aim to bring about a consensus.

I remember reading about John Bunyan (who paradoxically seems to be remembered as a Baptist but seems more like a Congregationist..) who was imprisoned for preaching without a license or something. He'd been in a long-running dispute with local Quakers via a series of pamphlets. Views ran hot with either side accusing the other of being heretics.

But in the end he made bail and left the prison. The money was put up by... the Quakers.

Yes. And no doubt they all went right back to disagreeing with one another. This is an awesome example of the attitude I'd like to see.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19995 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Yes. And no doubt they all went right back to disagreeing with one another. This is an awesome example of the attitude I'd like to see.

I'm not sure what happened afterwards. It must be confusing when people you think are the antichrist jump you from prison.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504

 - Posted      Profile for goperryrevs   Author's homepage   Email goperryrevs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Yes. And no doubt they all went right back to disagreeing with one another. This is an awesome example of the attitude I'd like to see.

This is one of my favourite theological books. It exemplifies how to disagree properly.

--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch

Posts: 2077 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

But in the end he made bail and left the prison. The money was put up by... the Quakers.

Ficklepedia suggests that, after his 12 years in prison, he was released by King's declaration.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Yes. And no doubt they all went right back to disagreeing with one another. This is an awesome example of the attitude I'd like to see.

I'm not sure what happened afterwards. It must be confusing when people you think are the antichrist jump you from prison.
I don't know. I was brought up to believe that was the proper thing to do--you help your opposition to get out of whatever mud puddle they've fallen into, and then you resume the fight. If it's you, you accept the help thankfully and graciously, inquire whether there's anything you can do for them at this time, and then plunge back into the fray.

It's just decency.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19995 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
This is one of my favourite theological books. It exemplifies how to disagree properly.

Looks well worth reading (I've got quite a lot of time for Borg even though I fundamentally disagree with a lot of what he says. In fact I'm planning to get his final book, which only came out in paperback this week). Possibly another in similar genre was this.
Posts: 9476 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
There is however a notable exception: posts from a conservative perspective that are well-reasoned, coherent, and polite. These simply tend to be ignored altogether, and I find that troubling.

This is one of the mechanisms which makes it so hard to debate when in hostile territory online. If someone with an outside opinion makes a good point it quickly vanishes without note.
You say this, but I have my doubts. I think there is some confirmation bias happening.
Sometimes posts are missed, especially posts by new or infrequent posters, but by others as well.
Apologies for name-checking Lamb Chopped again, but her posts are reasoned, considered and polite. (mostly) and she is not ignored. We have a few others as well.
There might be some of the mechanism you describe at work. If one agrees with a post, little work is needed to do so. If a rude post is made, again, easy to shout at. If a post is made that one disagrees with but is made at a high level of argument, it is more difficult and will naturally limit posters.
This is not the same as not responding to reasoned difference.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Ficklepedia suggests that, after his 12 years in prison, he was released by King's declaration.

The story is a bit more complicated than I remembered, but the Quakers helped Bunyan and others get released as part of the "Quaker Pardon" of 1672.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10325 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:

Apologies for name-checking Lamb Chopped again, but her posts are reasoned, considered and polite. (mostly) and she is not ignored. We have a few others as well.

Errr--thank you so much, but the truth is, I often am. Thus the considered over-use of "fucking," noted by somebody upthread. Also the sprinkled references to Trump (blecch). It's a deliberate tactic to get noticed and hopefully responded to, since the atmosphere on so many subjects has become so shrill.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19995 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I thought that everybody is ignored on the internet. In fact, forums are not really for communication, are they? Well, fortunately, I love reading my own posts. What could be more satisfying? Such wise words.

--------------------
the main fear that flat-earthers face is sphere itself.

Posts: 9707 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
There are some who will overreact and over-associate. I see this when there are disagreements, but not strictly limited to a left/right divide.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I thought that everybody is ignored on the internet. In fact, forums are not really for communication, are they? Well, fortunately, I love reading my own posts. What could be more satisfying? Such wise words.

heheheheh. [Overused]

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19995 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I'm quite impressed with the recent posts in this thread.

A word about - phobia. It does actually mean irrational or instinctive fear. And there's the rub. Labelling someone as, for example, homophobic, is saying that you perceive they are not rational and are governed by feelings of fear.

Phobia as a standalone word does have that meaning. Phobia as a combining form does not. Else you must think, as noted above, that the hydrophobic end of a molecule literally fears water. Which is plainly absurd. Words and suffixes move beyond their etymology. To treat the "phobia" in "homophobia" as "fear" is to commit the composition fallacy.

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I've always been baffled by this lust for truth among the religious - why not just say that it works for me?

I think it's a primitive, an axiom. I don't have a reason for thinking that there is objective truth, or if there is some reason it's buried deep in my childhood. I have always thought or suspected so, long before I became a Christian. Oh, and "lust" here is a weasel word that has insulting connotations.

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
So whilst I am certain that Hindus, for example, are wrong about their beliefs, I recognize that I can't demonstrate that in an objective fashion, and that they are perfectly entitled to think that they are right.

Are they? Were Nazis perfectly entitled to their opinions about the Jews? Were the Turks perfectly entitled to their opinions about the Armenians? If not, how is this different to the Hindus' treatment of the untouchables?

quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I am serious. Find me an instance. Where have I suggested that anybody be treated as a second class citizen? Anybody at all. Surely you can find an instance, me being so inflammatory and all. Surely in all these years you can find one.

And this is one of the things I appreciate about Lamb Chopped. Although I find her beliefs about many things wrong, I have not found her generally abusive.

quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
There is however a notable exception: posts from a conservative perspective that are well-reasoned, coherent, and polite. These simply tend to be ignored altogether, and I find that troubling.

This is one of the mechanisms which makes it so hard to debate when in hostile territory online. If someone with an outside opinion makes a good point it quickly vanishes without note. If someone in the majority does the same, it gets echoed and amplified with a stream of "Great point! Answer that!" comments or upvotes.
I, as an Orthodox Christian, have often found this to be true here. I will post something on a thread and have it completely ignored. If you (generic you) think it's wrong at least give me the courtesy of saying how.

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
However, anarchy can only exist in a bubble or in isolation. Given sufficient population, which we have in abundance, order is needed. And it will happen regardless.

Yes. Anarchy quickly resolves into rule by the ruthless -- whoever is willing to seize power by whatever means.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63202 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I'm quite impressed with the recent posts in this thread.

A word about - phobia. It does actually mean irrational or instinctive fear. And there's the rub. Labelling someone as, for example, homophobic, is saying that you perceive they are not rational and are governed by feelings of fear.

Phobia as a standalone word does have that meaning. Phobia as a combining form does not. Else you must think, as noted above, that the hydrophobic end of a molecule literally fears water. Which is plainly absurd. Words and suffixes move beyond their etymology. To treat the "phobia" in "homophobia" as "fear" is to commit the composition fallacy.

Quite right about hydrophobic, and also about the limits to etymology. But water molecules are not sentient. What I think may be going on in some minds (certainly in mine) is what I would call the portmanteau effect. Phobia has clear "baggage" as a word or a part of a word. I reckon that will transfer across in the use of homophobia as a label.

As always, you have a precise point, but I'm not sure there is composition fallacy involved in its use here on the Ship. A quick squint at DH threads does at least hint that a number of posters see homophobes as a) irrational and b) fearful about sex (even their own sexuality). Like all generalisations, such impressions cannot be right all the time about everyone.

Speaking as someone who thinks the argument has already been won.

(I'm also conscious as a Host of the dangers of embarking on DH-related themes here.)

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 20933 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433

 - Posted      Profile for Zappa   Email Zappa   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
[Tangent, probably]
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
Language suggests that right is right, as in being right handed is correct. Left handedness is sinister, cack-handed (is cack here shit?) and wrong. Wrong as in wriggle, writhe, wrangle, wreathe and all those other non-straight wr words. Including write, of course.

Language is very interesting, and it probably does carry the traces of how people used to think.

Yes, it appears that right (opposite of left) was first used in the 12 century and derived from the word meaning correct. Apparently the older word was swiþra which meant stronger.

So I suppose that suggests a change in thinking:
This is my stronger arm
This is my correct arm
This is my right arm

All of which was very apparent to me when I moved to the State of Victoria, Australia, where the police motto, emblazoned on all their cars, was "Uphold the Right" (though inexplicably in French, which I won't post here [Biased] ). As a neophyte lefty* there was no ambiguity as to their meaning - or the bigotry and corruption that went with it.


*Now I guess I'm an oldophyte (?veteriyte?) lefty, though like DocTor clearly a traditional Christian one.

--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/

Posts: 18788 | From: scarily close to 40° | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433

 - Posted      Profile for Zappa   Email Zappa   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Gottschalk:
I find avocadoes disgusting but they are not "wrong", nor is eating them wrong.

So are. So is. [Disappointed]

--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/

Posts: 18788 | From: scarily close to 40° | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
However, anarchy can only exist in a bubble or in isolation. Given sufficient population, which we have in abundance, order is needed.

Certainly the people who provide order in our communities will tell us so. Fortunately, they're willing to shoulder the burden of imposing it on the rest of us.

Anarchism may be mistaken. That doesn't mean anarchism is an unprincipled position. An anarchist who refuses to vote isn't supporting the status quo any more than a Green Party voter where the Green Party have no realistic chance of getting in.

For that matter, it's a mistake to identify all engagement with society with engagement with the state. Authoritarian governments tend to want to identify the two. But a society in which public participation is limited to the state is an atrophied society.

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10419 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757

 - Posted      Profile for Ricardus   Author's homepage   Email Ricardus   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
What I think may be going on in some minds (certainly in mine) is what I would call the portmanteau effect. Phobia has clear "baggage" as a word or a part of a word. I reckon that will transfer across in the use of homophobia as a label.

I think it makes a difference that -phobia is a productive affix, that is, I can easily add it to new words and you will know what I mean by it. So if I made up a word like book-phobic or sock-phobic then you will interpret that as fear of books or socks. Yes there are exceptions such as hydrophobic but they have to be learnt as exceptions.

Some people, I think, really are homophobic in that homosexuality genuinely does bring out a visceral disgust in them. But for other people, the belief that gay sex is a sin doesn't arise from any strong visceral feeling but is the consequence of their beliefs about other stuff. I think the overuse of the word 'homophobia' tends to obscure this distinction.

--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)

Posts: 7178 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
However, anarchy can only exist in a bubble or in isolation. Given sufficient population, which we have in abundance, order is needed.

Certainly the people who provide order in our communities will tell us so. Fortunately, they're willing to shoulder the burden of imposing it on the rest of us.

Anarchism may be mistaken. That doesn't mean anarchism is an unprincipled position. An anarchist who refuses to vote isn't supporting the status quo any more than a Green Party voter where the Green Party have no realistic chance of getting in.

For that matter, it's a mistake to identify all engagement with society with engagement with the state. Authoritarian governments tend to want to identify the two. But a society in which public participation is limited to the state is an atrophied society.

We are the state. It operates at our forbearance. Principled support isn't voting for the hopeless, it is working to make that choice viable. Lack of participation rarely conveys one's principal. It merely assures those in power that you don't matter.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
An anarchist who refuses to vote isn't supporting the status quo any more than a Green Party voter where the Green Party have no realistic chance of getting in.

Not so.

A green party voter signifies by his vote that he is concerned with environmental issues (and implicitly that either he doesn't care which of the man parties
wins the election or that he lives in a safe seat). When the votes are tabulated, the support for Green candidates will be obvious to see, and may cause the other parties to adopt more environmentally-friendly policies in order to appeal to that section of the population. So he has some hope hat his vote (and the votes of people like him) will help to advance his goals.

An anarchist who doesn't vote on principle is indistinguishable from the lazy person next door who can't be bothered. His lack of vote does nothing to advance anarchy as a cause.

Posts: 4897 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
A green party voter signifies by his vote that he is concerned with environmental issues (and implicitly that either he doesn't care which of the man parties
wins the election or that he lives in a safe seat). When the votes are tabulated, the support for Green candidates will be obvious to see, and may cause the other parties to adopt more environmentally-friendly policies in order to appeal to that section of the population. So he has some hope hat his vote (and the votes of people like him) will help to advance his goals.

If there are significant other Green voters.

--------------------
So goodnight moon, I want the sun
If it's not here soon, I might be done
No it won't be too soon 'til I say goodnight moon

- A. N. Parsley, D. Mcvinni

Posts: 17098 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
A green party voter signifies by his vote that he is concerned with environmental issues (and implicitly that either he doesn't care which of the main parties wins the election or that he lives in a safe seat). When the votes are tabulated, the support for Green candidates will be obvious to see, and may cause the other parties to adopt more environmentally-friendly policies in order to appeal to that section of the population. So he has some hope hat his vote (and the votes of people like him) will help to advance his goals.

Let's see how that would work in the United States. The Democrats lose the election to the Republicans in part because the lefty vote is splintered. They look at the Greens votes and say, "Let's adopt some of their planks." They do so. In the next election the Greens voter, following decades of lefty precedent, makes the perfect the enemy of the good and votes Green instead of Democrat. The Democrats lose. Say the Democrats adopt even more of the Green platform. Lather rinse repeat. Finally the Democrats say, "We're never going to get those people on board anyway. Fuck 'em" and move back to the center.

--------------------
“Religion doesn't fuck up people, people fuck up religion.”—lilBuddha

Posts: 63202 | From: Ecotopia | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Host
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:

Some people, I think, really are homophobic in that homosexuality genuinely does bring out a visceral disgust in them. But for other people, the belief that gay sex is a sin doesn't arise from any strong visceral feeling but is the consequence of their beliefs about other stuff. I think the overuse of the word 'homophobia' tends to obscure this distinction.

Pretty much how I see it.

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 20933 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
You are, like some others on this thread, asking to be allowed to say shitty things about your fellow human beings without having shitty things said to you in return. You want to be treated as a human being even when you are in the very act of advocating that some people be treated as less human than others.

Oh, I am, am I? Tell me. Over the last fifteen years, when and where exactly have you heard me saying "shitty things about my fellow human beings" and "advocating that some people be treated as less human than others? Give me chapter and verse. Where have you seen this behavior in me? Against whom?

Have I denigrated ...

Anyone who holds that women may not be ordained or that gay people may not be married is assigning large groups of people to second-class status as human beings.

quote:
I'd also appreciate an apology for the slur on my motives.
Not gonna happen.

quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
I'm Roman Catholic and my perception is that there seems to be less willingness from posters to accept that people may hold nuanced positions on controversial topics.

[Followed by thoughtful discussion of his stance on gay marriage.]

So, on balance, yes I'd say there is less initial assumption of good faith, there is more open hostility and there is less apparent acceptance of nuanced positions. Instead there seems to be a line of debate that is intended to drive those with nuanced positions to agree or disagree with a black or white scenario, so as to be able to put them in a box as good guys or bad guys.

Nuanced positions are good things in some ways. They mean that someone has really sat down and thought about something, and they may mean that someone has moved away from a less considered stance.

The thing is, nuanced positions on controversial topics don't tend to do much for the lives of people directly affected. An individual Catholic's nuanced positions on topics such as women's ordination, same-sex marriage, and abortion don't mean that women can get nuanced ordinations in the Catholic Church, that gay people can get nuanced weddings, that women in west Texas can get nuanced abortions. Whether someone is ordained, gets married, or has an abortion --these are all yes-or-no, black-or-white things.

And consider whether it's okay for someone to have a nuanced position on interracial marriage.

Posts: 24429 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564

 - Posted      Profile for Leorning Cniht   Email Leorning Cniht   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
If there are significant other Green voters.

Well, yeah. If you're the only person that expresses concern about a particular topic, you're unlikely to get anyone to pay attention to you.

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Let's see how that would work in the United States. The Democrats lose the election to the Republicans in part because the lefty vote is splintered. [..]

So let's look at a crucial phrase from my post:

quote:
(and implicitly that either he doesn't care which of the main parties wins the election or that he lives in a safe seat)
Your green voter is a moron. If he lives in a possible swing state, he should put his mark by the name with a D after it. The Democrats and Republicans are a long way apart on environmental issues, and if you vote for perfection ahead of practicality, you are quite explicitly saying that you don't care whether the D or R gets it.

If he lives in California, or Illinois, or some other deep blue state, he can vote green to send his message without placing anything at risk.

(Although in US politics I could argue that perhaps the right tactic for environmentally-concerned people is to form a Democratic Green Caucus, and run Green Caucus candidates in Democratic primaries.)

Posts: 4897 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
RuthW: Stop screwing around with the "anyone" statements. I asked you specifically if you had heard me, personally, denigrating any human group on the Ship. Have you?

Or do you look at my group membership and immediately consign me to a barrel of assholes? In which case I think you make my point for me about hostility to traditional Christians.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 19995 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Moo

Ship's tough old bird
# 107

 - Posted      Profile for Moo   Email Moo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief
Phobia as a standalone word does have that meaning. Phobia as a combining form does not. Else you must think, as noted above, that the hydrophobic end of a molecule literally fears water. Which is plainly absurd.

AIUI 'hydrophobia' was coined to describe the behavior of people suffering from rabies, who are desperately thirsty, but cannot swallow. They become very upset at the sight of water.

Moo

--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.

Posts: 20256 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Louise
Shipmate
# 30

 - Posted      Profile for Louise   Email Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Tangent/ That's the older usage of homophobia focusing on the the original coinage. It's main modern usage is as the common word for anti-gay prejudice, equivalent to sexism and racism, hence Oxford Living Dictionaries gives


quote:
homophobia Dislike of or prejudice against homosexual people.

Quoting the first three example sentences gives:

quote:
‘It was a time of rampant discrimination, racism, homophobia and sexism.’
‘Unfortunately, society as a whole is still homophobic and there is homophobia in the Church.’
‘She is hardly the first woman to battle sexism and homophobia in the ring.’

The other meaning hasn't completely gone but it's not the usual one these days.

--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.

Posts: 6906 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 
 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
Check out Reform magazine
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
  ship of fools