Old Fashioned

I think what FG is getting at is that many of the ideals of the old days were actually pretty harsh and damaging and I have to agree with that to an extent. I'm sure society viewed slave ownership etc as being natural and just at some point in history. It was not viewed with the horror it would be viewed in today. Look at NYC in the early 1900's when it was immagration central to the Italians, the Irish, the English... it was segregated and violent due to class structures and belief in stereotypes etc. Of course living conditions had something to do with the overall sanity of people then but the point is still valid.

As a whole, humanity is further along than it was 20 or a hundred or a thousand years ago. In the current strife of the world many nations have come together in horror at an act propagated by people with largely "old fashioned" beliefs. A century ago the death of a few thousand people in an act of war would not have garnered the attention that it did in the now.

As usual, Master Toose, your arguments are rational and thought out.

That may very well be...but if that's true, then I think there's a difference between what he's getting at, and what he said. And that's one of the things I'm on about. The other being a clear implication that religion is to blame for a fair amount of this, of course...but that's another matter.

Why thank you good sir.. as are yours.


Defense of religion is one of your favorite causes. I respect that to a great degree, however, I think you let it cloud your perceptions of the overall point at times. The religious aspect was a small part of FG's argument. The part of his article I had a small problem with was that he treated evolution as fact... we shall have to reign him in on that...but that's another thread...

I respectfully disagree.

I don't deny that defense of religion is one of my favorite topics. Debunking of Atheistic claims (there's a subtle difference between the two) is near behind, but I think we all know which will likely hold the top spot for the rest of m ydays.

I do know I have the tendency you speak of...no doubt. I read his article several times over, though, and I simply cannot deny that I see it to be about religion far more than he will admit to. I have no problem talking about the other aspects of it, but it's the implication that religion is a big part of this problem he speaks of that I have a beef with. Well, that and his apparently loose usage of "old fashioned." At your recommendation, however (you know I respect your opinion immensely), I'll try to see more clearly.

Don't get me wrong...
I enjoy reading your views on religion. You are certainly more knowledgeable on the subject than anyone I have ever run across (your respect of opinion is most assuredly shared).

I guess the religious aspects of his arguments passed me by as they weren't something that jumped out at me (not being as knowledgeable on the subject). He did present a plethora of topics that I did feel more at home about answering.

I just ate Sonic for lunch and it's amazing how different their burgers taste than Wendy's etc. I wonder what bearing the region from which the cow is harvested has upon the taste of it's flesh... hmmm?

I've never tried Sonic's. Do they stack up with the big boys?

FYI, for ya'll in this thread, in case ye haven't seen it:
http://www.movieforums.net/showthread.php?threadid=3008

Sonic is almost exactly like Dairy Queen in burger taste. God I sound like the Galloping Gourmet of fast food.

First of all, I want to apologize to Yoda for being so insulting earlier. I have no excuse, but if I come up with a good one, I'll use it! I'm sorry, Chris.

Well slavery was pretty common in Europe, and Europeans came over to this continent, eventually creating the United States (with the help of slaves, of course). I wouldn't say I put the sole responsibility of slaves in America on America. Blaming all slavery in the world on America would be extraordinarily ignorant, in my opinion.



I used to live in NYC and noticed a little racism against whites, but noticed a higher amount of disgust for that racism amongst African Americans. I certainly hope that hasn't changed too much.

As far as how bad reverse racism is perceived, I mostly agree. We obviously need to work to irradicate all racism; however, I think you would admit that whites being much larger in number than blacks in this country, and having much more power, makes white on black racism more powerful than black on white racism. I think that is one legitimate reason for the different outlook on the two types of racism. Having said that, we should still try to treat all racism with the same amount of intolerance, in my opinion.

I don't say that, but every single instinct CAN be overcome by us. Are they usually? No. But if you choose to refrain from having any sex, you CAN do it. If you choose to refrain from eating, you CAN. No other animal on this planet can do that.


I'm helping to raise an 11 year-old girl. The most incredible thing I've ever played a part in.

I think it would be a good question directed at you as well, Chris.

Absolutely. Once puberty starts, boys begin to produce more testosterone than girls, and girls begin to produce more estrogen than boys. The natural physical differnces start to get huge.

You haven't noticed how much more into sports girls are now, or that they are competing with boys MUCH more than they did say 50 years ago? That is society at work, not nature. Toys are a big part, but a girl can play with the same kind of toys a boy plays with, and still get much less encouragement to play sports by people she meets, tv shows and movies she watches, etc. Nice anecdote, but the girl I am helping to raise is the best running back in her intergender football league. As she gets older, the natural differences will get bigger and she will not be able to dominate like that.


Well, as I indicated, I believe we have made huge strides already. I hope we keep it up.

__________________
One of the biggest myths told is that being intelligent is the absence of the ability to do stupid things.

It's no sweat -- I could use a few lessons in charm school myself. No hard feelings?

Agreed...it has more potential oppression...however, I think we have enough people in power who are vehemently against that sort of thing to protect people from it for the time being. That said, I think we can all agree it's a matter of principle. I can definitely tell you that, in some of the neighborhoods I've grown up in, black-on-white racism is common and hardly looked down upon at all, unfortunately.

Absolutely. I'm in a (somewhat) similar situation. I'm helping to raise children that are not my own. Five of them, in fact. It's rather hectic. It's good, though, as I've got three girls, two boys, and pretty much every age group represented all at once (1 and a half, 4, 6, 9, 11).

That's not to say someone not raising children cannot speak about such things. I'm a firm believer in the concept that experience helps, but is not always required, as I refuse to believe that valid opinions cannot be potentially formed from simply sitting back and thinking. Not to say this applies to all situations, of course.

Not at all.

I think we are in complete agreement here. Sometimes you really can't understand certain things unti you experience them, but I would say that that is usually not the case, and that no one's opinion on a subject is completely invalid simply due to lack of experience.

All right now...

I wasn't trying to devalue your opinion by asking that. I just wanted to get a handle on where you were coming from.


About the slavery thing.
Obviously it's atrocious and I wouldn't defend the parties that participated, however, I think blame lies on BOTH the buyer and the SELLER of the slaves. Slaveowners definitely are at fault, but so are the people (often their own blood and kin) who sold them into slavery. It was a supply and demand issue, traded in flesh, where both the supply side and the demand side should be held responsible.


I would admit that, you are right. I do see examples of racism all around me though. Take Black Entertainment Television (BET) as an example. For blacks being so sensitive to lines being drawn it amazes me that the lines are ok as long as they're drawn from the right side. I've heard black opinion on this channel, I've heard that many don't support it yadda, yadda, yadda. The fact remains that it is meant to be entertainment that is targeted toward black people to the exclusion of other races. If this is not an example of divisiveness I fail to see what is.

Hey, C... we could go to charm school together!

Absolutely. You'll get no argument from me.

I've never particularly cared for the existence of shows or channels that are purposefully all black, especially when blacks are very much represented on the issue. For example, I actually saw an African American sports award show on TV a few years ago. Huh? Blacks aren't given enough recognition in sports? Ok...

Right. Do you agree that this kind of thing is divisive? I truly think no one would say a word if "Japanese Entertainment Channel" popped up somewhere... or "Indian E.C" etc, etc... try "White Entertainment Channel" and there would be an absolute sh*tstorm of outcry. I'm not trying to be petty...it really doesn't bother me much and I even watch some of the comedy shows on that channel...it just seems hypocritical to cry racism while the BET is playing in the background.

Pretty divisive, yeah. I can certainly understand it when people think their race is completely unrepresented and do a show to try to even things out a bit, but some of this stuff seems ridiculous to me.

All this aside...

Why did you say the human race is 6000 years old? Is this an arbitrary number or if not what do you base it on?

It's just what I hear from a lot of young world creationists.

Where does that leave Cro-Magnon? Or neanderthal for that matter? Do they argue against the validity of carbon dating? Or that modern man is a descendent of either of them?

I don't know about all of them, but many of them do.

Interesting...

Maybe they're saying that man in the image of god began at 'enlightenment' or something. I know we have artifacts from cultures prior to the Egyptians...about 4000bc. I guess that would put it at around 6000 years ago.

Firegod, I feel that some of what you are saying is correct. We should always look at the person not what color their skin is or by what creed they are from. As well as fell that everyone should be given the same oppurtunity to be as successful as they can be under the same covering. However your comment we have a long way to go, I think we have gone to far in many cases. It is my belief that God created man in his image, and out of man God created woman. I would agree God never intended on us treating one another so, but that is a whole other discussion. I feel first that if men were doing what they were suppose to, then women would not be forced to be in a position God never intended for them. Am I saying that women are weak, not in anyway, my mother was one of the strongest women I know, and she was forced into taking on many roles that frankly I feel should have been handled by the man in her life. To say religon has caused us to not advance as quickly as we could, remember the country your living in, look at the money you spend each day, "IN GOD WE TRUST", I say to take belief in God out of the picture is to allow chaos to rule, a nation that you say allows religon to inhibit our growth, I say remove God from our foundation, and you remove the very thing that moves us to be better people.