I was thinking something similar right before reading your post, daytonsdarwin. Conservative is a good example of that old adage, "can't see the forest for the trees". He's so busy nitpicking scripture that he can't seem to feel or practice what that scripture is teaching: to feel compassion for others and to treat them as you would like to be treated. It seems so simple, yet so many people of various faiths get bogged down in the particulars as they totally lose sight of the core message, just as Karen Armstrong was saying.
The Dalai Lama has expressed the opinion that we need to move away from religion and toward a more universal ethic of compassion, one that unites rather than divides. I don't see us making much progress toward creating a better, more just world until we do exactly that.
On yesterday's thread MtJohn, Alprova, and I all found ourselves debating around the issue of compassion, or the 'Ethic of Reciprocity', known in Christianity as the 'Golden Rule'. Although we were talking with different people about two different topics, compassion was the core issue. This morning I stumbled across this great little TED Talk by Karen Armstrong, a noted religious historian. I've read a couple of her books and, although our conclusions about the existence of a god (or gods) are not the same, I respect her very much. Whether you are liberal or conservative, religious or not, I think you'll feel this is ten minutes of your time well spent. Happy Sunday - enjoy!
Karen Armstrong: Let's revive the Golden Rule
Thanks, Al. :-)
"Now that truly hurt but I know you didn't really mean it that way ... LMFaO!"
No, I meant it exactly that way.
"...it only matters where the low-information person and voter get theirs. Since they are the ones you can manipulate by providing them access to the message you want them to receive."
Paranoid much? The right's conspiracy theories are becoming very tiresome. The "low information voter" is often someone who gets most or all of their 'news' from Fox - that is their choice. In "the information age", ignorance is largely a choice as well. We all have access to most of the same information; it's up to us to pick and choose wisely. We can sit mindlessly in front of 'American Idol' and 'Jersey Shore'; we can poison our minds with blogs spouting xenophobic rhetoric and wild conspiracy theories; or we can take advantage of the fact that knowledge is increasingly becoming democratized, available to more people than ever before. Choices have consequences....
"A person is a fool to let special interest groups pressure them into self-censorship."
It isn't a matter of self-censorship, it's a matter of caring about the feelings of others. I don't want want to hurt people; if I do it unintentionally (and I'm sure I occasionally do), I care about that, too. I can imagine what it might feel like to have a developmentally disabled child and hear someone throwing around the word "retard" - I never want to make someone feel like that. If compassion made one a fool (it doesn't!), I would carry the label gladly.
My one caveat: if someone shows nothing but cruelty toward others, then I no longer care if hearing the truth about what I think of their behavior "hurts" them.... but I still won't be nasty about it.
Btw... Tu-quoque, I don't think badly of most of the people on this forum that have religious or political views that are different than mine. Sometimes they even help me see another perspective and understand things a little better. (True, that's rare the way conversations tend to take a downward spiral around here!) I just don't think highly of you because of your extreme nastiness. I just can't imagine what could make a person so hateful. The venom that comes through your every post is palpable; I feel like I need a shower after I read them....
Dude, yes, I saw that. I had a hard time keeping my food down.....
Yes, I knew I would get that type of response. Wouldn't want to listen to someone who actually studies the subject as his life's work, would we? An "elitist academic"! Better we should listen to.... You? Now I'm laughing!
As for your other post.... well, it just doesn't make sense. No, I don't engage in name-calling. I wouldn't even call you an insulting name, especially if that name denigrates and is likely to hurt someone else. But I will say what I think, and I do think that you are callous and without class. Do I think that I act better than that and feel emotions that are better than that toward other people? Yes.
On Sarah Palin's use of the phrase:
“This is racial code language that harkens back to 1930s radio, from the era of Amos and Andy,” said Hasan Kwame Jeffries, a professor of African-American History at Ohio State University.
“It brings out the worst of Jim Crowism and the portrayal of Black buffoonery,” Jeffries said. “She is asking people to dismiss Obama’s foreign policy with regard to Libya because it comes from a Black man. This is powerfully coded. Is there no end to this kind of thinking?”
tu_quoque (unlike you, I don't feel the need to put others down by giving them an insulting name): I don't use Wikipedia for those very reasons, but apparently you do, despite being aware of its inherent problems. I did double check my information before I posted; I don't like to just "run off at the mouth", as jesse likes to phrase it. I checked two academic reference sources, not open to being "altered" by the public.. The etymology of a word often does follow it throughout its history and continue to flavor it with a certain connotation.
I think that the best measures of whether or not a word or phrase is "offensive" is to ask the group of people who we think might be offended by it. I suggest an experiment: why don't you and jesse go into a bar that is frequented by a primarily African-American clientele (otherwise known simply as "Americans"). Tell someone there (for my amusement, let's make it a large, muscular man whose had a few too many drinks) that they are "shucking and jiving". Let's see what happens..... (pastey white backside hitting the floor in 3.... 2.... )
The fact that you continually use the word "retard" as an insult tells us everything we need to know about your character. You are hardly someone to be explaining how words are simply twisted out of context. You have no compassion and no class.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with "grammar", patriot1.