A very Ugly Question

 

An ugly question is a question that some will hate you over. Just because you asked it, no matter the truth of  the question. This is a question whose answer is also ugly.
______________________________________________________________

Racism.

The ultimate evidence of racism, would be searching out members of another race for assault, murder, and especially rape, a crime of dominance and humiliation.

When white people commit violent crimes, rape, murder and assault. How often do they choose black victims? We are bigots are we not? Crimes of violence against a hated race should be a common thing. It certainly was once before.  80 years ago, in days of lynchings, those crimes were obviously racist. But it seems today when white people are violent, they to it to blacks only 2.4 percent of the time. Blacks on the other hand, they choose white victims more than half the time.

In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man. Black woman were far safer with a white men than with black men.  And that was not an unusual year.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Can you put a good spin on these statistic?

Is racism really mostly a white problem?

 

@TheTheologiansCafe , You asked for me to re do this one here it is. 

 

The State

 

Long ago it was a common belief that the king (the state), as God’s chosen authority on earth. Was personally responsible for the welfare of his people. If life was good, it was because the King was good. All good things in life were directly related to him. If your crop was a bad one, it was not so much because you planted at the wrong time, or did not put in the effort necessary to bring in the harvest before the rains came. No it was all about the providence of God, by way of the King . All good and all bad was the doing of the King. He was given the credit. Needless to say the system tended to keep the average person in poverty. A citizen really had little reason to work harder than he needed to in order to just maintain his life. The king would likely just take more of what he harvested anyway. And the land was all the King’s in the end.

Two Scottish brothers decided they did not agree with a life of serving a king, and the many wars that Clan loyalty demanded of them. So they left Scotland. The fact that their clan had just lost such a war, had much to do with this sudden hatred of the system. They sold themselves as indentured servants to make passage to a new land. That land was America. Those two men basically lived as slaves in order to someday be free of the system of kings and clans. They wanted to be truly free. Their sons were later to fight in the revolutionary war. They had inherited their fathers hate of being owned by the King.

That is my heritage and those are my ancestors. And I do understand the hate of being owned by the state. That hate has been passed down to me. Rather remarkable considering the ages that have passed. That heritage is the reason that the following quote is a favorite of mine.

 

 ”A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have”

 

Think about it, the state, the government, the king, its all the same thing. The only thing that is different are the people. When you depend on the government, it becomes your master.

 

 

My most Controversial Opinion

The opinion I have that causes the most arguments is.

I do not believe in staying quiet in order to keep the peace.

I speak up when someone in “polite” company makes an ignorant statement about others. No I don’t stay quiet when you insult my faith, or maybe even someone else’s. Call someones faith a fairly tale, and you better be ready to explain why you are the fount of such wisdom. Prove it in other words. If you can’t prove it, and no one can, then you are just spouting your own little fairytale.

Call someone an idiot, and be prepared to prove that you have done more than them, that you are even slightly more intelligent than they are. “What successful business did you ever run”? “. What was your GPA? And that was an ivy league collage you went to right?”.

Why is it considered impolite, to confront the ignorant bores who insist on spouting such tripe?

And despite my conservative politics, and hate for the murder of the unborn, I am very much a feminist. Do not denigrate woman around me. Or even let me hear about it latter. I will not be nice about it. And why should I be nice, when you insult me?

Is is impolite to confront that big mouthed bore, the one we all know, who likes to spout their ignorant opinions?

Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

“Bush did it too and you did not say anything then”

Strangely people think that if they can show that a person making an argument has ever been wrong on another subject, that their argument has successfully been countered. It is called (in English) the You Too personal attack.

Its a fallacy because at most you might prove the person making a claim is a bit hypocritical. But their argument likely is still true. If a murderer is a witness to another murderers crime, does that mean the second murder did not happen?

The “You Too Fallacy”(Ad Hominem Tu Quoque) is very popular on Xanga and in politics in general, look for it and ignore it. When in reply to a argument all someone does is attack the person making the argument, and not addressing the argument itself. They are trying to divert the argument away from the facts. Likely because they have lost the argument if they stick to the facts. One would think that if you could prove the statement wrong. Then you would do that, before you would make a personal attack, that was unrelated to the argument.

Obama has been 5 years in office, his party had total legislative control for the two years before that. They had almost dictatorial control for two of Obama’s five years, and have controlled two out of three of the law making branches of our nation for rest of Obama’s presidency. In the five years under our current administration, an administration that had greater political power than I have ever seen in my lifetime. Our nation is being bankrupted by record setting spending. As a solution to this Obama and his party keep proposing budgets that will never balance the budget. Well on the rare occasions they even propose a budget that is.

This is where I’m supposed to ask a question, so here it is.

 

Can you justify making an argument that diverts from the point that was made. Making the argument about the person making the argument, instead of what they were talking about?

 

Can you defend the mess the Obama admiration is making of this nation without diverting from the subject?

 

 

She Is Just A Child

If a 13 year old girl has a problem, does she need the help or permission of an adult or is she mature enough to make these decisions?

And should there be laws against her actions if she wants …

 

To get a job.

To buy and take Midol at school?

To eat only candy and ice cream?

To stop going to school?

To smoke cigarettes?

To smoke weed?

To drink beer?

To to have sex?

To have sex with an 18 year old guy?

To buy birth control that has no bad side effects (condoms)?

To buy plan B birth control with a lot of bad side defects?

To buy the birth control pills?

To have an abortion?

To own a gun?

To sign sign a contract?

To vote?

To enlist in the military?

For a parent to say this child is not under my control and I have no responsibly for her, or her actions?

 

What are the limits on a child of only 13 years old?

 

 

Supernatural Synchronicity

 

There was a seemingly supernatural synchronicity between the two of us once. But that has ended in a way that makes me wonder if I am the only one who even remembers it? It was all strange, miraculous really. The sort of thing that leaves you knowing that it will always be life changing. It certainly could never be forgotten, hell it saved her life, how do you forget that?

When atheists tell me (and I heard it a lot from them), if God would only show me, tell me, prove to me that he exists, then I will believe in him.This was the sort of thing they were talking about. No one was left not knowing that it could only have been God. If not God then a person who has never had any signs of supernatural abilities before. She had them for a few weeks. I do not see that thought as being something that would not also shatter the beliefs of a secular materialist. But now I know why miraculous things are so rarely done. They can be put out of your minds, forgotten and dismissed as unimportant. Maybe they are not rare things at all, just forgotten and not spoken of.

Did it ever happen? It is almost like I was the only one there now. Will I also forget in the next few years? Is this the way of most little miracles. From unexplainable foreknowledge, past knowledge, and visions of present happenings a 1000 miles a way. From an unnatural synchronicity of minds. All that ends with a very natural messed up internet sync between two accounts.

Maybe it was just a good dream and soon to be forgotten.

Balancing on the edge

 

 

 

 

______________________________________________________

 

 

 

Once I wrote that the worst advice you would every hear was to “follow your heart”. There was much talk in the comments of a balance in your life. You need to care for yourself as well. Doing what you want to do is not inherently a bad thing.

I can’t say I disagree with that idea, but I have never even seen a life so lived for others, that they lost themselves. Not doing what you want to do with your life, because you are so into helping others.Is that really so wide spread a practice that we need to worry about it?

Or is telling someone to “follow their heart” about like saying. “Drink when you are thirsty”, or “breath when you need air”. Not that the advice is bad, so much as it is unneeded 99.9% of the time.

Do we really need to be telling people, that they need to be more self centered?

In the comments in that other entry, we talked of a need to love yourself and all that. Maybe I have been living in the twilight zone, but I see a lot of self-centered living out there. Self-centered lives are the norm. I see very little selflessness out in the world. Where is anyone seeing this extreme selflessness that so many are so worried about? There was Mother Theresa but her type is rare to say the least. Oh and would anyone say she lived a bad life?

Be honest with yourself, do you really need to be more self-centered than you already are? Do any of us need to stop thinking so much of others?

Are we spending to much of our hearts and souls on things like charity, duty, and honor?

 

 

Circular Reasoning: Atheists

 

What is circular reasoning?

Example #1:

1. The Bible says it is the Word of God.
2. God only tells the truth.
3. Therefore, the Bible is entirely true.

Example #2:

1. There is no God.
2.  Miracles are the supernatural work of God.
3. Therefore, miracles are impossible.
4. The Bible contains reports of miracles.
5. Therefore, the Bible contains legendary material or historical misrepresentations.
6. Therefore, the Bible cannot be trusted.
7. Therefore, there is no evidence for God.
8. Therefore, there is no God.

Example #3:

1. There is no God.
2. Therefore, God can not personally reveal His existence to people.
3. When people say they are having experiences of God, this experience can be explained as having a naturalistic cause.
4. Therefore, people do not have experiences of God.
5. Therefore, testimonies of God’s existence do not prove that God exists.
6. Therefore, God does not exist.

Here is my favorite Example #4:

1. Evangelical Christians are controlled by irrational thoughts.
2. Therefore, they are no longer able to reason.
3. Therefore, their beliefs are not based on reason.
4. Therefore, we can reject their beliefs as false.
5. Therefore, their belief in the existence of heaven and hell is irrational.
6. Therefore, evangelical Christians are controlled by irrational thoughts.

 

Do you guys have any examples of circular reasoning?

 

Someone just said the atheists do not use the arguments I put forward. Lets stay with my last one. You tell me what the difference is between what these well know atheists said and the examples of circular reasoning I gave.

 

“It is time we recognized that this spirit of mutual inquiry, which is the foundation of all real science, is the very antithesis of religious faith.” Sam Harris

 

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.” Richard Dawkins

 

Atheism equals reason!

Religion equals unreason!”

Why is atheism true?

Because it is reasonable.

Why is it reasonable?

Because it isn’t faith.

What happens if you reject faith?

You think atheism is true.

 

Now that is a beautiful circle is it not?

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Malaysians

 

Somehow I have managed to have been on Xanga since 2006 and still not fully understand who the “The Malaysians” on Xanga really are?

And what the hell is the controversy with them?

Please explain it to me?  I cant be the only person who has been left ignorant by all this.

 

In my case I seem to have been labeled an anti Malaysian by at least one of “The Malaysians”.

 

I do realize that being one of “The Malaysians” has little to do with them being from Malaysia.