Posts by sachae grey
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
ah, fug ye, i aint stoned, ya dumnmy, i just got a whole lot to unpack
& please don't stone me unduly with yr rock-hard pointey stoney stuff.please!
Coherence is a similar value to competence, in which membas of a certain community see that u can do something...
the topics here wld seem, potentially at least, to be pretty damn hugewhy prematurely shove them into a compeutent?
-
so, like, if you're invited down to the world's flashest new frozen embryo bank, and yr peepers alight on a a particularly gleamsome little pencil-point of a thing, and yr guide sez, oh those, well those are just ostriches, and you ask, how do you know that, and, what knowledge do u have that diffrentiated these little f**kers from those that are plainly pencilled-in as human, what's going on here? Is it just that we know where they came from, or is there something there that is fuckin' precious? Hey, sometimes the gradeschool approach to wishing to be present not only at the scene of conception, but present at the possibility of conceiving a scene at all, is the best way to pro-seed!
-
Tess, do ytou really *believe* that we got here by means of diplomacy and "interfaith efforts"?"
no, we got here by the wholly violent means of bringing buried difference to the surface through warfare, where it may only begin to be treated by this thing we call democracy
-
Joe, that was just pathetic - and i hope yr ashamed of yourself.
there is no misery here. there is just disgust for unexamined resentful structures.. -
Tess, 'interfaith' is yucky and just sounds like plain bad intercourse.
'Portant thing to remember is FIRST CONTACTS made by one religion with another - CRIKEY FLIPPIN DICKSTAR MATE! IMAGINE that FIRST ENCOUNTER!what these first contacts change irrevocably above all is the present & active relation WITHIN each community between its mimesis - ie deisre by another's eye, or pre-eminent characteristic of the human - and transcendence, the ability to defer this always mimetic conflict by means of a more beautiful and more desirable sign!
so there
-
and here's what our mark had to say - thru fictional laughing-gear, about this business of yer "own conscience"
So we poked along back home, and I warn't feeling so brash as I was before, but kind of ornery, and humble, and to blame, somehow -- though I hadn't done nothing. But that's always the way; it don't make no difference whether you do right or wrong, a person's conscience ain't got no sense, and just goes for him anyway. If I had a yaller dog that didn't know no more than a person's conscience does I would pison him. It takes up more room than all the rest of a person's insides, and yet ain't no good, nohow. Tom Sawyer he says the same.
-
what amazes me most about the bulk of this blog is that folks seem more pressingly concerned with fantasizing about being returned to what they most fondly imagine as some sort of catholic 'theocracy', rather than the fresh exercise of what degrees of freedom they do most certainly possess, and how to exercise these
to put it rather boldly: to attampt to evacuate the cognitive content of religion, that first science & founding condition of what it is to be human, is to abort the very substance of personhood and all who sail within her..
-
supertstition dear Giovanni sir is manifestly NOT "harmless" What a reckless statement that is! In grade school i was 'certified' for my crippling superstition! Upon leaving school i found myself holed up in the vancouver airport for three entire weeks, unable to move in case i read another 'sign'.. Your tone evinces the presence of brute cynicism as bulwark of your being...
-
i will not deny it - i get really pissed when people blithely, even daftly refer to 'religion' in the same breath 'as superstition'.. What kind of Schmoe don't understand the difference yet between these? Superstition is when one sets peculiar store in the significance of certain minor acts, such as breaking a mirror or when one reads a personal significance into occurrences that just isn't 'there'...
now what anyone would want to conflate such afflictions with what simply amounts to the orginary human science, ie religion or the culturally-specific recollection of the event that made us human, is quite beyond me..
(unless the very act of doing so is itself to superstitiously 'ward off' serious thought!)
-
"whatever force is legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn child."
have we already slid past what we believe in relation to this statement or what?