|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Non Right-Wing Creationism?
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
On a recent thread about Wiki, and in particular the annoying "conservapedia" site, it occured to me that (to most people) if you are interested in researching creation science, that must mean you're a republican who supports free-trade capitalism and the death penalty.
I have noticed a similar thing with liberalism. You can't be anti-racist without being socialist, pro-abortion, an advocate of gay rights and religious pluralism. And this always seems to go hand in hand with a low view of Holy Scripture and Tradition.
This polarisation of the two sides seems to be more acute across the pond, and much less so in the eastern churches. But does it have to be this way?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
No it doesn't, and I'd venture to suggest that it isn't generally as polarised as it might appear from what gets written about these things - and that there's probably a lot more nuance on the ground, even in the most conservative of circles.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
As an American left-wing evangelical with some strongly held conservative beliefs and some strongly held liberal beliefs I would say the apparent divide is real in general-- I have trouble finding fellow evangelicals who share my views on gay marriage, inerrancy, or creationism, as well as finding fellow lefties who share my views on biblical inspiration or abortion. And that can feel isolating. But it helps to remember that we're speaking in broad generalities, and there are others who straddle the divide in one way or another.
[ 16. September 2012, 14:57: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Them's the breaks Mark.
One cannot take an anti-racist position in society, publically, politically and be anti-gay rights or anti-abortion. (I find anti-racism problematic as it offers no love to racists. Christians should be at the forefront of loving the pathetic EDL and the nasty NF.)
The church is doomed in opposing gay marriage and abortion and rightly so. The arguments against gay marriage, especially by the Pope and even the great and good John Sentamu are some of the most bizarre I've ever heard: we'll become extinct apparently. What an absurd excuse for incoherence. The church must find the way of love. Of understanding. Regardless of its 'beliefs'.
Seriously, what did, would, will Jesus do ?
What IS He doing to advance His Kingdom ?
What is He FOR ?
As for the OP, to be an adult YECist is to be a damnationist without exception in my experience. Is to be blind to denying Christ while projecting that on others.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
One cannot take an anti-racist position in society, publically, politically and be anti-gay rights or anti-abortion.
George Galloway does. So does the Pope. You mentioned Sentamu yourself. There are a lot of them about.
[ 16. September 2012, 15:01: Message edited by: ken ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Exactly Ken. Anti is incoherent. Is the sound of one hand clapping. So GG is anti-abortion ? He CAN'T be anti-gay rights, surely ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Exactly Ken. Anti is incoherent. Is the sound of one hand clapping. So GG is anti-abortion ? He CAN'T be anti-gay rights, surely ?
If it helps to get elected, I'm sure he is.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
William Jennings Bryan, the two-time US presidential candidate who later who prosected Scopes, was on the left of pretty much any issue of the Progressive Era, from supporting woman suffrage to opposing his own country's imperialist adventures during the Spanish-American War.
H.L. Mencken, who could probably best be described as a Nietzschean libertarian, ridiculed Bryan mercilessly, both for his fundamentalist Christian theology and his pro-underdog politics.
And I don't know whether Hare Krishnas count as the left(they're certainly not associated with social conservativism, in any case), but they have their own version of scientific creationism. Unlike the Christian variety, the HKs think that the world is much OLDER than mainstream science claims. Both schools agree that man has been around right from the start.
I used to participate on a message board where followers of Michael Cremo would team up with Christian fundamentalists to be battle against evolutionists. Never took much part in those debates myself.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
William Jennings Bryan, the two-time US presidential candidate who later who prosected Scopes
Should read " who later prosecuted Scopes".
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
In the United Sates there are forces that cause political fusion. It used to be that the two parties were coalitions and you could find people who hold a mixture of positions on various topics The Republican party has been "purifying" itself to require agreement on all positions to be a leader. This has happened to a lesser extent to the Democrats; they are busy poaching centrist Republican exiles.
However there are changes in the mix. The lead racists in the US used to be anti-negro, anti-semitic, anti-catholic, anti-gay and anti-immigrant.
They have dropped some of the overt racism and joined with the Catholics (who have always been anti-racist and pro-immigrant) and the Orthodox Jews to be anti-gay and anti-abortion. The spectrum of positions that you're asking for are filtered into a coalition, but the coalition changes position.
Creationism sits a little to the outside of this mix. It's brought in as a political dog whistle to rally the troops, along with anti-climate warming, but there's a small percentage of true believers who outside the politics.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
So GG is anti-abortion ? He CAN'T be anti-gay rights, surely ?
If it helps to get elected, I'm sure he is.
George Galloway's votes come mostly from inner city Muslim areas, so his left-wing views have to take that context into consideration.
It's been said quite a lot recently that the left-wing consensus has been undermined by issues that are problematic if championed at the same time: e.g. anti-racism and anti-sexism can clash if, say, championing women's rights means condemning the practices of a particular (and probably underpriviged) religio-ethnic minority community. Banning the hijab divides left-wingers. And the 'white' feminist movement has often been criticised for its blind spot when it comes to black and brown women, or indeed, just poor women in general.
As for evangelicals, surely, they're such a broad church in the UK that it's hard to make generalisations about their political behaviour? When the Olympic torch was passing near a local park, a group of anti-abortionist campaigners were taking advantage of the crowd to hand out leaflets. I don't know which church(es) they were from, but in my experience this issue doesn't normally to invigorate British evangelicals very much. It's like a specialism, a niche area of concern, for a certain few.
Maybe it's the case that some British Christians pay lip-service to certain 'right-wing values', but only a small number of them will choose to promote those views in the public square. Or, since life is short and British churches have so many challenges, they'll focus on one or two issues to the exclusion of others.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lothiriel
Shipmate
# 15561
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
On a recent thread about Wiki, and in particular the annoying "conservapedia" site, it occured to me that (to most people) if you are interested in researching creation science, that must mean you're a republican who supports free-trade capitalism and the death penalty.
I have noticed a similar thing with liberalism. You can't be anti-racist without being socialist, pro-abortion, an advocate of gay rights and religious pluralism. And this always seems to go hand in hand with a low view of Holy Scripture and Tradition.
No, it doesn't have to be this way -- this is a sweeping generalization that is simply not true. I, for example, am anti-racist, pro-choice, in favour of full equal civil rights for all sexual orientations, and tolerant of everyone's right to worship, or not, as they choose.
But I am by no means a socialist and I possess a high view of Scripture (though not to the point of literalism and inerrantism) and a high Christology.
And there are lots of other people in the world who don't neatly fit into these labels. Which is why I avoid using "liberal" and "conservative", "left" and "right" in any discussion. It's important to engage with people and ideas, not with stereotypes.
I'm reminded of a conversation on another forum a few years back, with a young fundamentalist, Republican-voting American woman who was having trouble with the notion of Christian environmentalism. In her mind, environmentalism was inseparable from socialism and atheism, because in her political realm, this was how it was always characterized, in order to denigrate it and set it against the "righteous" forces of capitalism. The rigid political lines laid down for her didn't allow for people who saw in the Genesis story of creation a call for humans to care for the earth tenderly, as stewards of God's own handiwork. But when the argument was framed outside of political labels and rhetoric and within the context of a faithful reading of Scripture, she began to see how a Christian could be an environmentalist.
--------------------
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea. St-Exupery
my blog
Posts: 538 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
One cannot take an anti-racist position in society, publically, politically and be anti-gay rights or anti-abortion.
George Galloway does. So does the Pope. You mentioned Sentamu yourself. There are a lot of them about.
Ah George! - you've gotta love him haven't you?
@Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard - let's minimise this - let's leave out the gay stuff and just consider 2 things:
Who says you can't be anti-abortion and anti racist?
Certainly from some of the media propoganda you might think so. It is widely reported that George (whom I always thought would be a lefty atheist) is most likely a muslim convert. If this is true, then you wouldn't expect him to be anything else would you?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Oh you can, it just doesn't make any sense. Being anti anything doesn't really. Nor being pro as a euphemism. Anti-racism hates the sin and usually the sinner. Anti-abortion effectively does for all concerned. ALL. So I suppose they are consistent, yes. And no, we can't leave out the gay stuff. That's the same too.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sebby
Shipmate
# 15147
|
Posted
There are porbably people of left and right who believe in creationism - amazingly in 2012.
--------------------
sebhyatt
Posts: 1340 | From: yorks | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
I don't believe that sebby. Find me a leftist who does. A sane one.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fletcher christian
Mutinous Seadog
# 13919
|
Posted
Oh goody, is this the thread where we get to blow your silly stereotypes clean out of the water? Oh wait, we've done that already, haven't we.....like.....dozens of times already
--------------------
'God is love insaturable, love impossible to describe'
Staretz Silouan
Posts: 5235 | From: a prefecture | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
I don't believe that sebby. Find me a leftist who does. A sane one.
Well, earlier, I mentioned William Jennings Bryan, who seems to have been an overall sane man, if you read up on his history.
Of course, it's possible that you're formulating it as "believing in creationism, in and of itself = insane". In which case, you could just as easily write: "Find me a conservative who believes in creationism. A sane one". And then disqualify any creationist conservative, the same way that you want us to disqualify creationist leftists.
[ 16. September 2012, 23:43: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I think I'll give this thread a few more hours to see whether you can find a serious discussion in it somewhere. Right now, it looks like a vehicle for seeing just how many Dead Horses you can mention in a Purgatory thread because "we're not actually discussing them, are we?". Plus some fairly random - and pretty binary - consideration of stereotypes (I'm with fletcher christian on that).
Where's the beef, Shipmates?
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
On a recent thread about Wiki, and in particular the annoying "conservapedia" site, it occured to me that (to most people) if you are interested in researching creation science, that must mean you're a republican who supports free-trade capitalism and the death penalty.
I have noticed a similar thing with liberalism. You can't be anti-racist without being socialist, pro-abortion, an advocate of gay rights and religious pluralism. And this always seems to go hand in hand with a low view of Holy Scripture and Tradition.
This polarisation of the two sides seems to be more acute across the pond, and much less so in the eastern churches. But does it have to be this way?
That only meant you've bought into the two-party us vs. them bullshit. Most people agree with some things in one party's platform and some things in another's platform (and perhaps some things that neither party advocates). That's why some Catholics are Republicans because they prefer the Republican focus on cultural issues, and others are Democrats because they feel that Democratic policies are more just for the poor and marginalized.
You're unlikely to find a party that is exactly to your liking, although I think there are some who conform their views to the party of their choosing over time. For example, I've recently heard an evangelical radio program put forth, in addition to creation science nonsense, the idea that global warming can't be real because it is godless folly to suggest that we have the power to alter the environment. That plays right into the Republican relative lack of concern for the environment that spurs them to try to discredit the scientific community.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
He's been dead for 87 years Stetson.
And I'm a creationist by definition as I'm not a materialist.
'oo yoo talkin' too Mister Christian ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
... You can't be anti-racist without being socialist, pro-abortion, an advocate of gay rights and religious pluralism. And this always seems to go hand in hand with a low view of Holy Scripture and Tradition.
Mary Midgely somewhere ("Beast & Man" I think) points out that anti-discrimination arguments tend to have the same form. The arguments used against slavery (they think like us, suffer like us etc) were very similar to those used to challenge discrimination against women, gays, animals etc. It doesn't seem too surprising in that case that liberalism in one area shouldn't be linked to the same stance in other areas.
The socialism point seems less clear. Being against politically institutionalized descrimination could be a stance of some UK Tories and some socialists, not to mention anarchists, social democrats etc. I'd say social liberals tend to fit into more than one political category.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
As I said, and judging by some of the locations of people who comment, it does seem to me to be more of a 'cross the pond thing.
That said, as I'm interested in ID and Creation Science, I'll browse some of the sites wherever I come across them. However, obviously some discernment is needed with American sites.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
Who says you can't be anti-abortion and anti racist?
No-one. And lots of people are both atthe same time. That's the official position of just about every Christian church in the world. And most Muslims as well. And lots of other people.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
As I said, and judging by some of the locations of people who comment, it does seem to me to be more of a 'cross the pond thing.
That said, as I'm interested in ID and Creation Science, I'll browse some of the sites wherever I come across them. However, obviously some discernment is needed with American sites.
Here across the pond, I know a handful of people who are not politically right-wing but are skeptical about general theories of evolution. You could dream up any combination of political positions and find someone who holds that set of views.
They are rare, though. In the United States the young earth creationist viewpoint overwhelming appeals to people who distrust social change broadly. Speaking necessarily in generalities, the idea is that the rise in divorce and children born out of marriage, the increased crime rate, the complication of gender roles and the coarseness of modern culture all find their basis in a lack of faith, and this lack of faith is supposedly brought on by scientific ideas.
That's a viewpoint that is overwhelmingly conservative. The way two-party politics are arranged, cultural conservatives find themselves in bed with supply-side economists and national security hawks. 50 years ago the cultural conservatives were Democrats.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
This is very tied into the American right's anti-intellectualism (sometimes I do miss William F. Buckley). From today's New York Times:
quote:
At the Values Voter Summit this weekend, Rick Santorum said that social conservatives would “never have the elite smart people on our side.” He also ruled out anyone who dedicates her life to teaching and research: “our colleges and universities, they’re not going to be on our side.”
Mr. Santorum offered this prediction not in sorrow, but as a point of pride. Because smart, educated types “believe they should have the power to tell you what to do,” whereas values voters “will always be sustained through two institutions, the church and the family”—meaning they think the church and the family should have the power to tell you what to do.
Social conservatives have given up on smart people (Mr. Santorum said it, not me).
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
One cannot take an anti-racist position in society, publically, politically and be anti-gay rights or anti-abortion.
George Galloway does. So does the Pope. You mentioned Sentamu yourself. There are a lot of them about.
Ah George! - you've gotta love him haven't you?
@Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard - let's minimise this - let's leave out the gay stuff and just consider 2 things:
Who says you can't be anti-abortion and anti racist?
Certainly from some of the media propaganda you might think so. It is widely reported that George (whom I always thought would be a lefty atheist) is most likely a muslim convert. If this is true, then you wouldn't expect him to be anything else would you?
It is all more nuanced than these absolutes.
I oppose gay marriage because i think LGBT people can do better than copy patriarchal straight marriage. LGBTs can model non-patriarchal relationships.
I an 'anti' abortion - heck, is there anyone who is 'pro' abortion? People don't choose to havbe an abortion in order to exercise some sort of choice. They do ity because the state won't support them if they keep their babies. So I support the right to choose as a lesser of two evils - but it is still an evil.
I am anti-racist and socialist.
I do not fit into the categories of the OP. Nor, I expect, do most people.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
...People don't choose to have an abortion in order to exercise some sort of choice. They do it because the state won't support them if they keep their babies. So I support the right to choose as a lesser of two evils - but it is still an evil.
Hmmmm... I'm glad you mentioned that - but wouldn't a third (and better) option be for the state to start supporting them? This was the case in the UK until the abortion legislation was passed - then all the state care homes closed, and support was left to voluntary charities. That's why the "right to choose" in reality, more often than not, can have only one outcome.
So, if gay/lesbian rights advocates would divorce themselves from the idea that they also have to be "pro-choice" I might have more time for them - but not until.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Sorry ? You can't be a pluralist why ? Russian memes eh ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
I don't much like the us v them, creationism v evolution, pro v ant anything . Living in Canada I see a lot of US broadcasting and it all makes that rather boring. The idea if you don't agree with the speaker you are a bad person . Doesn't make sense to me . Especially if the person speaking is a Christian. I mean where is the love thy neighbour in all this ? And some neighbours are true & utter prats but then we acn all be true & utter prats at times .
So love your neighbours & if you are an evolutionist look at the stars & ask is this an accident ? ![[Smile]](smile.gif) ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif) ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Sorry ? You can't be a pluralist why ? Russian memes eh ?
What do you mean?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Do you know what you mean ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Do you know what you mean ?
No, let's go back - I mentioned pluralism in an earlier post, but I didn't even say whether it was good or bad. And I'm English, not Russian.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Ah, but you have anti-pluralistic Russian memes, as you've demonstrated elsewhere. That's why Sir Isaiah Berlin was so glad to become British after his experience of the revolutionary strangling at birth of pluralism in Russia.
God bless Mr. Medvedev.
You can't tolerate gay rights because you'd have to tolerate abortion ? Or is it the other way round ?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
This is very tied into the American right's anti-intellectualism (sometimes I do miss William F. Buckley).
The apologist for segregation known for such classics of the white supremacist genre as "Why the South Must Prevail"? This guy?
While I appreciate that putting an intellectual veneer on racism may make it more palatable, that's not really a good thing.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Ah, but you have anti-pluralistic Russian memes, as you've demonstrated elsewhere. That's why Sir Isaiah Berlin was so glad to become British after his experience of the revolutionary strangling at birth of pluralism in Russia.
God bless Mr. Medvedev.
You can't tolerate gay rights because you'd have to tolerate abortion ? Or is it the other way round ?
I need to get to bed!
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Me too Mark. N'nite, Martin
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
And here I thought I was going to find a shrink-wrap new brand of creationism on this thread.
Ah shoulda knowed better.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
At the Values Voter Summit this weekend, Rick Santorum said that social conservatives would “never have the elite smart people on our side.”
Heh. Populists always have to walk a fine line between lionizing their audience, and insulting them.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
This is very tied into the American right's anti-intellectualism (sometimes I do miss William F. Buckley).
The apologist for segregation known for such classics of the white supremacist genre as "Why the South Must Prevail"? This guy?
While I appreciate that putting an intellectual veneer on racism may make it more palatable, that's not really a good thing.
I once owned a collection of essays by Buckley. The back cover featured what was meant to be a laudatory quote from Evelyn Waugh...
"At his best, he reminds me of Belloc. At his second best, of Randolph Churchill".
Suffice to say, I don't think that quote meant what the editor seemed to think it meant.
[ 18. September 2012, 00:33: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
On the issue of racism and YEC, during the nineteenth century, here in Australia as well as in America, there were examples of Darwinian "progressives" who came up with various theories as regards what stages different "races" had reached in the evolutionary march from animals to human beings.
They were opposed by what we could anachronistically call fundamentalists, who took their stand on Paul's "one blood" in Acts 17:26.
I am not YEC myself, so I am not mentioning this in order to surreptitiously push any anti-Darwin agenda.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
This is very tied into the American right's anti-intellectualism (sometimes I do miss William F. Buckley).
The apologist for segregation known for such classics of the white supremacist genre as "Why the South Must Prevail"? This guy?
While I appreciate that putting an intellectual veneer on racism may make it more palatable, that's not really a good thing.
To give Buckley his due, he did acknowledge the error (much later, maybe too much). And at least he engaged with left-wing intellectuals on equal terms, rather than dismissing them as "effete snobs." He tried to bring serious intellectual content to conservatism. He wasn't entirely successful, because conservatism is kind of vacuous to start with (see the chapter on Buckley in Corey Robin's The Reactionary Mind, where he's quoted as complaining of the dullness of conservative thought "It's like sex--just the same thing over and over" (misquotation from memory)). I'm not a fan, but he was better than Santorum, Ryan, or anybody else the right has to offer these days.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
[To give Buckley his due, he did acknowledge the error (much later, maybe too much). And at least he engaged with left-wing intellectuals on equal terms, rather than dismissing them as "effete snobs." He tried to bring serious intellectual content to conservatism.
Much later Buckley moved on to proposing that Gay men with AIDS should be tattooed with a warning on the buttocks to prevent the spread of AIDS.
I don't miss him at all.
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
On the issue of racism and YEC, during the nineteenth century, here in Australia as well as in America, there were examples of Darwinian "progressives" who came up with various theories as regards what stages different "races" had reached in the evolutionary march from animals to human beings.
They were opposed by what we could anachronistically call fundamentalists, who took their stand on Paul's "one blood" in Acts 17:26.
I am not YEC myself, so I am not mentioning this in order to surreptitiously push any anti-Darwin agenda.
Just to pick up on one point - to my mind you don't have to be YEC (Young Earth Creationist) to believe in creationism do you? Then again, if you are not a YEC, does this mean you have to believe in evolution (macro and micro)?
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
And here I thought I was going to find a shrink-wrap new brand of creationism on this thread.
Ah shoulda knowed better.
('scuse double post)
That's what I'm looking for - not necessarily a new brand, but one which isn't wrapped up with right wing politics.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
To give Buckley his due, he did acknowledge the error (much later, maybe too much). And at least he engaged with left-wing intellectuals on equal terms, rather than dismissing them as "effete snobs."
The guy who called Gore Vidal a "queer" on national television and threatened to assault him? ("Now listen you queer, quit calling me a crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in the goddamn face and you'll stay plastered.") That guy?
[ 18. September 2012, 14:07: Message edited by: Crœsos ]
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
I don't much like the us v them, creationism v evolution, pro v ant anything
I would agree, except for what some arguments represent. YEC represents a fundamental failure in an educational system. Forget the specific target of evolution, it exposes a a failure to reason, a failure of understanding and most importantly; a failure of critical thinking. Not understanding the science is bad, yes, but abandoning of a reasoned approach is so much worse.
Whether or not your god created everything is a separate issue.
If your holy book can stand no challenge, it is worthless.
If you do not question your faith, you do not truly have faith.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lothiriel
Shipmate
# 15561
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
I don't much like the us v them, creationism v evolution, pro v ant anything
I would agree, except for what some arguments represent. YEC represents a fundamental failure in an educational system. Forget the specific target of evolution, it exposes a a failure to reason, a failure of understanding and most importantly; a failure of critical thinking. Not understanding the science is bad, yes, but abandoning of a reasoned approach is so much worse.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Just to pick up on one point - to my mind you don't have to be YEC (Young Earth Creationist) to believe in creationism do you? Then again, if you are not a YEC, does this mean you have to believe in evolution (macro and micro)?
and
quote:
That's what I'm looking for - not necessarily a new brand, but one which isn't wrapped up with right wing politics.
I'd be interested to see this thread reincarnated in Dead Horses, so that we can actually discuss the topic. It seems to be adding a twist to the usual YEC vs evolution debate: are there other options?
--------------------
If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea. St-Exupery
my blog
Posts: 538 | From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
...People don't choose to have an abortion in order to exercise some sort of choice. They do it because the state won't support them if they keep their babies. So I support the right to choose as a lesser of two evils - but it is still an evil.
Hmmmm... I'm glad you mentioned that - but wouldn't a third (and better) option be for the state to start supporting them? This was the case in the UK until the abortion legislation was passed - then all the state care homes closed, and support was left to voluntary charities. That's why the "right to choose" in reality, more often than not, can have only one outcome.
Yes, I agree. I used to belong to 'Life' and they started to fund homes for unmarried mothers who wanted to keep their babies.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
Would it be pushing the thread over the fence into the deceased horses' pasture to ask for a definition of "Creationist/Creationism" that apparently doesn't exclude the operation of evolution through natural selection and a scientific understanding of geological evidence and astrophysics? I wouldn't ever call myself a "Creationist", despite being a theist who sees all of spacetime and everything comprehended within it as ultimately emanating from the energies of a God who is at once transcendent and immanent. How is the unqualified use of the terms "Creationism/Creationist" being used in some of the foregoing posts?
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
