Happy Thanksgiving Everyone chat & forums.

Posted In Forum:

Home

MyForums

Show ALL Forums

Author

Thread: Happy Thanksgiving Everyone

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1 (view)

Happy Thanksgiving Everyone Posted: 11/25/2009 10:30:41 PM
I've been rather scarce around here of late, and that's likely to continue as other interests have taken precedence. But I miss all my buds here and wish you all a happy T-day in whatever way you celebrate and show your gratitude. I'm grateful to you all for being on line. Y'all helped me get through school and the adjustment back into real life. I'm thankful for you! If y'all want to see what strange turns my mind has been taking lately, you can search for AceOfSpace at hubpages.com.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 46 (view)

Captivating qualities? Posted: 11/13/2009 12:48:37 PM
Thanks for checking, GG. I'm taking a chill pill on forums for a while. I'm good. It's just hard to get into debate mode right now. Carry on!

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 651 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/5/2009 5:06:40 AM
and why do you scare little kids?" For the record and to be absolutely clear: I am not "asking you why you do it." I am telling you that it is morally wrong and to stop doing it. There is a time when a child is ready to deal with the bad news portion of your good news story. Prior to that, you are needlessly terrorizing them.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 93 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/5/2009 4:59:54 AM
The main--really the only--purpose of a corporation is to make as much profit as it can, within the limits of the law. I don't know what you mean by "Friedman economics," and I wonder if you do. Your conjecture that it somehow caused the current recession is irrelevant to anything I said. Funny, whenever the topic of taxation comes up, it turns out that the purpose of corporations is to provide jobs, and taxation takes money away from that. I've got no problem with investors making sustained profit over time, but that's a different revenue model than extracting the maximum amount in the shortest time from local communities that are then left high and dry. Retirement funds, who are the major institutional investors, just might prefer investing in businesses with a longer-term perspective.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1869 (view)

Could it be any more negative? Posted: 11/4/2009 11:26:27 AM
Some reading's slow going just because the subject's difficult--but sometimes, it's just because it's gibberish. Ain't that the truth! I had to get wired in expresso and high as a kite to figure out that a lot of it was simply bullshit--but not all. The problem is that capitalism contains both elements--the genuine promise of the greatest freedom and prosperity possible, and the threat of eternal and abject oppression. Managing industrial capacity is a tricky problem that confronts us all. Still, on the whole, I'd rather have the problems that come with it than the problems we had before we figured out as much as we have. If I ever do try to dispute these people point by point, I guarantee you I'll be using the Cliff's Notes version some other poor slob had to prepare. I'm with you on that. They do a pretty good job of filtering out the obfuscation and getting to the point. You should read two different ones though, because sometimes the editors get the sense of things wrong. One thing Communists like those from the Frankfurt School disguise well--and which wouldn't do their case any good if someone pointed it out--is the oppressive, totalitarian nature of the society they're peddling. Their cleverness is in painting it out as just the opposite. No problem. Just keep pointing that out. If your message is: Capitalism good, everything else bad, you're going to lose the argument. But if your message is, Capitalism ain't perfect, but it has the best shot of getting it right, you will be golden. Why? Because that's an honest position. If you start trying to out-talk these masters of subversive rhetoric, they will eat your lunch. That's what they do for a living. So if there is any hint of disingenuousness in your argument people will go with whichever liar is more skillful. Why do you think that socialism has reached the level of acceptance that it has? Reminds me of a joke: Do you know what the difference is between a software salesman and a used car salesman? The used car salesman knows when he is lying.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1867 (view)

Could it be any more negative? Posted: 11/4/2009 8:41:39 AM
And of course, I don't agree that the "critiques" of people like Marcuse raise genuine problems. I see them as fundamentally destructive--I don't think they're genuine attempts to solve anything, except that they see destroying the advanced world as the final solution to something they hate. Sort of like Islamic jihadists with a much more polished and worldly veneer. I don't doubt that your ride has been challenging. You're an accomplished man with strong principles and a willingness to work hard. That kind of character doesn't come easily. It has to be built. One thing that your experience had that the experience of others appears to lack is the promise of results for working hard and building character. For women, ethnic minorities, and gays, that promise simply wasn't there--at least not in their perception. Whether or not you personally see the critiques of Marcuse et. al. as genuine, those who experience America as something of a sham do see them as genuine, and you need to have an answer if you want your vision to prevail. Part of your answer is the perfidy of the Frankfurt school, but that is only part of it. You also need a point-by-point refutation of their major arguments. It's one thing to call them lying bastards. It's another to point up the lies. The best refutation I can think of is the progress we have made. I often tell my liberal friends that the best thing I like about conservatives is this: Once they recognize what the right thing is to do, they just do it. I don't often talk about the things I admire in conservatism. Hard to do when my viewpoint is constantly being slammed and baited. But that is one thing I really do admire about y'all.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 69 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/4/2009 8:28:33 AM
Rather than being survivors those of us who speak out and learn no longer see ourselves as survivors. We are thrivers. I am grateful for the experiences that honed me into the person I am today. I Thrive today. I was not the victim ... I was the one who experienced the events and grew from them. Those that were wrong are no less wrong for the fact that I was not their victim. The fact that I have learned to thrive is not to their credit. Well said! Mind if I try that viewpoint on for myself?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 607 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/4/2009 7:42:31 AM
So, GG, How has the quality of your life changed since you chose to believe?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 63 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/4/2009 7:38:58 AM
I don't know all of the reasons behind it, but it's hard to deny that the two income family has made it a lot more difficult to live on just one income. That's not progress in my opinion Nor in mine. But when the fundamental model around which society is organized proves to be both unsustainable and unworkable, people will break out of it however they can. Doesn't mean they'll construct something better. Now, before y'all get your panties in a bunch about how the only alternative to strong nuclear families is a totalitarian state, there is another. Extended families and village-scale communities were what we evolved with. That is the model of social organization that we instinctively know. It is a model that has worked for millenia. 30-year-old women in isolation cannot be expected to successfully pass on traditional values when left home alone with the kids all day. Many can do it, but you can't _expect_ it. Basing your entire society on an assumption like that is stupid. 30-year-olds need guidance from older, more experienced people who know them, love them, and understand what's likely to be coming up for them and their kids. The advent of the 'burbs as they are physically configured is just as large a contributor to the breakdown of our society as the insidious machinations of the commies. It is a cheap immitation of the yeoman farmer model of Jeffersonian democracy that was the original plan for our nation.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 56 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 10:38:24 PM
But oh, no--they have to have their stupid gas-guzzler and live 50 miles out of town, all to have their absurd water-wasting lawn! They willfully refuse to live as we know is best for them! Well, if they won't do it voluntarily, it's up to us to make sure they do what they should! Just 'cuz the burbs aren't sustainable as they are currently configured doesn't mean they can't be updated. I have no interest in forcing people to live where they don't want to, just as I have no interest in bamboozling people into thinking they can live well in the suburbs on their own. Some can. Most can't. I know what you mean about the planning orthodoxy, but my point is that the model we actually follow was articulated by somebody--somebody conservative. It is an engineered model.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 55 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 10:32:47 PM
Yep. There is a difference between a victim and a survivors. What allows many victims the opportunity to transform themselves into survivors is the ability to speak out about what happened to them and take steps to ensure that it doesn't happen to others.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1863 (view)

Could it be any more negative? Posted: 11/3/2009 4:29:31 PM
You might want to watch that video, which from everything I know is dead accurate. I did. That was my response after it finished. Marcuse, and the others and what their purpose was--nothing less than the destruction of America, which they hated. But that is not mine and I love America. Where else on Earth could you find a Jewish lawyer standing up for the free speech rights of a Nazi hate group and winning? I don't feel any need to answer their "critique," any more than I feel a need to dispute the notions Hitler put forth in Mein Kampf. If someone had debunked Mein Kampf early on it would have saved the world a lot of grief. It's because I hate tyranny that I hate the ideas of the so-called New Left--the ideas behind various ethnic or women's studies programs, environmentalism as a religion, statism, redistribution of wealth, transnationalism and the abandonment of sovereignty, the assertion of any supposed individual right," no matter the cost to everyone else's rights, and so on. What's insidious about these things is their appeal to fair-minded people. After all, when the causes they supposedly advance are so good and nice, how can their purpose be harmful? I understand this. I think we just disagree on how to deal with it. You say dismiss 'em. I say debunk 'em. If that's the crux of our disagreement, we aren't so far apart. Incidentally, I don't buy your claim that America is a repressive place that's failed to live up to the promises of its Constitution. I hate to sound trite, but of course you wouldn't in your position as a privileged white male. For you and those like you, it's been great! This is far and away the closest approximation to a completely just system of laws and rights that any country has ever seen. I agree with this. It is one of the few countries in which formerly oppressed people have a real shot at equality and prosperity. We have an awful lot to be proud of. Malicious though their intent may be, addressing whatever substance those criticisms contain, in a way that is consistent with our founding principles, can only make us stronger. It's when we compromise those principles that things get dicey. If there's some part of the Constitution you think is being routinely disregarded to oppress anyone, it's odd the scholars who study it don't say so. Which ones? The ones who work for the establishment or the ones who the establishment routinely dismisses? The real threat to freedom comes from the continued growth in the power of the "federal" government. I guarantee you that violates the very heart of our Constitution of limited and enumerated powers. To some extent I agree with this. Nevertheless, we need a federal government that is capable of regulating interstate commerce, and that means it has to be strong enough to break any corporation that would use its market power to trample the rights of individuals. You and I both know that such things happen in other countries where the central government is weak or corrupt. The people who claim to be so concerned about the erosion of personal rights are the same ones supporting the frontal assault on the basis of ALL our rights. If all you do is dismiss as treasonous the ideas you don't like, instead of answering the critiques with solutions that address the genuine problems they raise, you throw the baby out with the bathwater. You lose the opportunity to deflate them forever. The right response to Marcuse & company isn't to call them commies and ignore what they have to say. Sure they're commies, but if you do that you abandon all those who feel disenfranchised to them. Unless you can offer another avenue that has legs, their choices are to remain disenfranchise or affiliate with the commies. Which would you prefer?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 52 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 4:04:53 PM
Who, for example? Social engineering is the very opposite of what conservatives favor. Well, the conservative ones don't call themselves social engineers. They call themselves developers, and their objective is to figure out how to extract as much capital gain from a given acreage as possible regardless of the long-term viability of their developments. Some are more ethical than others, or else they realize that they will be able to realize a higher gain if they include facilities for services and amenities like schools, parks, and so on, in order to sell potential buyers on the idea of functioning communities--whether those communities actually function all that well in practice or not. Others have to be forced to include those those facilities as conditions of their permits. But they all follow a similar blueprint of how communities should be organized and built. That blueprint is based on a specific model of social organization. And that model is a conservative one. Is it the best model? Is it the only model that could be functional? From what I've observed, it takes at least 3 adults to manage a single family home such homes are currently configured. The women's liberation movement came about, in large part, because women in these homes were socially isolated. Sure, they were very comfortable prisons in some ways, but they were prisons just the same. If my fate was to tend to one of those things for the rest of my life, I'd go out, get a job, and tell the idiot who thinks he can keep me there to go F himself.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 592 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 3:48:22 PM
As Jack pointed out - it's possible to be both. So THAT's my problem!

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 591 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 1:56:09 PM
I would rather err on the side of saying there IS a God and find out after I die that I was wrong than to err by saying there is NO God and find out after I die that there is. The rewards for being right are so awesome and the potential consequences for being wrong too great to risk. Exactly. That's not faith, it's fear. I wouldn't want anyone aligned with me who as just hedging their bets. I know it's more than that for you. I'm just pointing out that this argument is an appeal to superstition, not faith. If Christ's resurrection meant anything, it means that we do not have to placate God in any way, shape, or form. We don't have to sell our soul to some idea of God that some so-called authority is asking us to buy.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 590 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 1:53:14 PM
Reading through the past few pages seems to say to me that the logic is that if there is no God, then there also is no sin (ie: no judge of right and wrong). (Is that true?) What a brilliant way to bring the discussion back on track. God or no God, there certainly is ample evidence of evil and human lapses. The question is, how do we recognize them, deal with the damage done, and prevent further damage?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 44 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 8:58:03 AM
You've got a good head on your shoulders, fz. This is the part the that the Social Engineers don't want to accept. Which ones? The ones who advoated the melting pot in which every American would renounce their backgrounds and become homogenized? Or the ones who advocate the tossed salad model, where we all complement each other? My point? There are conservative social engineers too.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 577 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 8:53:10 AM
If you are truly interested in knowing, the science of ID looks at all of the different sciences, not just biology, to find pieces to the puzzle. I have no doubt that people who feel compelled to prove a factual basis for the Bible can muster up all sorts of convincing arguments and plausible explanations. I also have no doubt that the experimental method will eventually uncover natural mechanisms that account for all of that evidence with fewer assumptions. The only historical fact that matters to Christianity is a one-time singular event that science could not have predicted and cannot account for. That event is the basis of your faith. The rest of it is just rationalizations after the fact. In my view, none of those rationalizations are necessary. The only thing I look for is the quality of your lives. When I see agitated people aggressively putting forward delusional stories about an imminent and violent end, which they fortunately, will escape, and when I see them bamboozling little kids with fear tactics, and when I see them going to any lengths to undermine our finest accomplishment as human beings--our recognition of the scientific method as a reliable method for validating what we know, it does not give me much confidence. When I see people walking in grace, living in peace, ministering to others without thought of reward--not even the "reward" of their conversion--it makes me want what they have. And dammit, I do want that. You have no idea how much. But if I have to trade in my mind and my soul--if I have to sacrifice essential parts of my being like my sexuality--in order to get it, then it appears to me that I would then be living a lie. I am who and how I am. If God accepts me as I am, fine. But if God wants me to edit myself in some way in order to qualify for His love, what sort of a love is that?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 574 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 8:28:30 AM
The evidence of God is found in both spiritual and physical things. What physical evidence do you have that can't also be interpreted as either a misunderstanding of fact or superstition? Evidence that isn't measurable or repeatable isn't evidence. It's coincidence. I don't deny the existence of little miracles. They happen every day, and they are indications that a person is in the spiritual flow. But whether that is through the operation of God or intuition is a matter of debate. You take it on faith or you don't.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 573 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 8:25:48 AM
Yeah, well. I think you'd be mistaken about the "yellow" part. Nothing cowardly about walking away from a needless fight. I can't talk you out of your enmity, even though I do think it is somewhat misplaced.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 570 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 8:22:58 AM
eally? Do you believe each of those who died at Jonestown or Waco believed Jones and Koresh were the messiah? I sure don't. It's possible that the Apostles were bamboozled cult members, but unlike Koresh and some of these others, the story Jesus told made sense.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 42 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 8:18:04 AM
What if what you found as abuse when you were little when it comes to this spirituality is based on certain things that happened to you... your, or your parents choices.... and for you to think that by you discouraging other to go through the same thing.... thinking you are keeping them from being abused... in fact is just you keeping them from doing what's best for them? Maybe it's just me, but I cannot see how terrorizing children, or giving them the impression that their emerging sexuality will lead to the destruction of their soul, could ever be a good thing. If you want to try justifying such abuse as "for their own good," good luck with that. The abuse is allowing yourself as an adult to let it hurt you for what ever the reason. This is like telling someone who has lost an arm to get get their damned shoes tied already.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 568 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 7:43:25 AM
Nobody has proven God exists... some (a few) have made a case for the notion that we can't prove He doesn't. This is how I see it. Unlike the ether--the medium through which light was thought to travel, it is not true that no measurable evidence means God doesn't exist. We didn't have dedicated testimony of principled martyrs attesting to the existence of the ether. We didn't have the evidence of lives changed for the better among those who attribute their reformation to their faith. All of that that testimony stands against the lack of scientific evidence. If God is supernatural there can never be any physical evidence that would ever be predictive, so looking to science to establish the existence of God is looking in the wrong place. God must be taken on faith, and that is the entire point. So, my Christian friends, you might as well let go of the idea that you'll ever be able to prove it through science. The chinks in evolutionary theory will eventually be ironed out and we will have a complete explanation of how speciation occurs without any direct intervention by anyone. But you don't need that anyway. You only need a scientific justification if you're going to continue making the absurd claim that every word of the Bible is factually true. However, you don't need to make that claim. All you need, indeed, all that the Apostles had, was the words of Jesus that they remembered hearing and the testimony of those who saw Him after His resurrection. The rest of it is just an overlay of nonsense put forward by politicians who came later. I can accept the possibility of your claims about the resurrection because of the testimony of the Apostles. Miracles do appear to occur on occasion, human logic has its limits, and there is simply no explanation for their martyrdom unless they truly believed what they claimed to have seen. But as for the rest of it? There's so much superstitous and prejudiced nonsense embedded in your doctrines that it's a wonder you haven't driven off everyone. Good grief! Where do people get this stuff? You cannot use science, or any physical evidence, to prove the existence of God or the validity of the Bible. The only proof unbelievers need is that of your fidelity--your ability to continue living in grace and growing in gratitude regardless of how many portions of the Bible turn out to be just stories. There is one story in there that is essential, and it is too profound and compelling to be dismissed.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1858 (view)

Could it be any more negative? Posted: 11/3/2009 7:22:49 AM
All I can say about critical theory is this: if there is anything to the criticism, we have two options. We can grow up, or we can fall back. But once our shortcomings as a society have been uncovered, we can no longer pretend they don't exist. If we have been bamboozled into going along with being ripped off, it's better that we know it so that we can put a stop to it. We don't have to blindly follow the destructive agenda of those who inform us, though our rage might well lead us to overreact at first. So I read, and make sure I understand people like Marcuse and Habermas because that is what an informed citizen does. Freedom of thought and freedom of speech mean we have to respond to the valid criticisms of our enemies. If Marxists recruit the oppressed, or use the plight of the oppressed to recruit the young and naive as their "agents of change," then we'd better make sure that the rights of those people, in particular, are protected. We can then point to our efforts to do so and say, "look," bourgeois capitalism works better for you, and for them, than anything else out there. Check it out for yourselves and see. We might not be perfect, but we are serious about justice and equality--far more so than Marxists who are trying to bamboozle you. It really isn't just a smokescreen to cover our greed. I saw this most clearly when I worked for Disney. Their commitment to safety is real. It is a point of honor with them. Disneyland is not only the Happiest Place on Earth, it is also he safest place on Earth. Guests don't think much about it, but every cast member (employee) is constantly on the lookout for hazards, lost kids, and mechanical problems, and they'll shut the whole park down on a moment's notice, if necessary, to make sure that guests don't get hurt. I came away from there with a tremendous amount of respect for their stance. Nevertheless, there is no organization on Earth that is more capitalistic than Disney. If blacks, gays, sexually curious youth, and others in our culture sensed that same commitment to the protection of their rights, Marxists would have nothing to hook them with. If you want cultural Marxism to go away, do what the Constitution promised. To the extent that Marxism flourishes here, it is an indication of the extent to which that promise is not being kept. Rather than get caught up in a pointless debate between the Christian fundies and the Marxist fundies, I'm going to stick with the concept of rights and work my way through all of the contradictions in our society with that as my measure. That s how liberals evaluate the claims and counterclaims of extremists on both sides. I have no interest in living in a Christian theocracy. I have no interest in living in a Marxist dictatorship. Niether of those is what America is about. America, for me, is about living in freedom and respecting the rights of others. It seems to me that you can't really have one without the other. So, when capitalists use the means of production to extract a disproportionate amount of wealth from the labor of their neighbors and then use that wealth to undermine the ability of those neighbors to advocate for themselves, I can't really fault those who will use any means at their disposal to bring that ongoing theft to an end. If you saw it that way, what would you do? I know that you _don't_ see it that way. But don't get all defensive on me and dodge the question by telling me how misguided that viewpoint is. That will not address the issue and you will not be able to answer the critiques in any credible way unless you answer the question. If you saw things that way, what would you do about it? To the extent that capitalism adds value, which it does, and fairly distributes the wealth it creates based on performance and the value of each individual's contribution--which it does to a far greater extent than other economic systems, it will thrive in the face of any critique no matter how subversive or insidious. But if y'all keep propping up those aspects of our culture that institutionalize inequality, you will be every bit as responsible for the demise of our culture as those who are actively working to bring it down.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 563 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 6:16:30 AM
Actually, based on my experience with the individual in person, there's very little he says here that he wouldn't say to your face. But when you see the look on his face, you realize that it's really just mischief. When you see the delight in his face when _you_ laugh, you'll both be laughing the entire time. It's only when you lash out at him for having baited you at all that he lashes back. Yes, there are times when he could be a better sport in here considering the extent to which he likes to start controversies, but I can think of far worse faults. At least he isn't boring. I'm actually surprised people read any of my stuff. Talk about longwinded blather!!!! Here's why I respect PN: Even when things get superheated like they just did, he does his best to keep is criticisms on the beliefs and ideas he finds objectionable. Lately he's been doing a better job of that than I have been. Yes, he's clever enough to really make a person feel like shit for believing as they do, but if we can' t take a ribbing for what we stand for, we probably need to examine our attachment to it anyway. For myself, I'm finding that tit for tat doesn't work. It only sets a bad precedent. For all I know y'all read and respond to my stuff just to watch the token liberal dance, but if I'm going to dance, I'm going to dance my own dance--not Rush's. Y'all will just have to sit there and observe it in wonder and amazement, just like PN. How the hell does he get you to bite so hard so often?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 560 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/3/2009 12:06:26 AM
Yep, it's a big if. So, the bottom line for me is that we still can't be sure that we're utterly superior. However, as long as we've figured out how to keep the bears and big cats from eating us, I don't think we need to be. I think we can take a respectable and respectful place within this world while we're here, even if we aren't of it. We can be good guests on our sojourn here. Do we really have to own it all?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 39 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/3/2009 12:03:46 AM
I have noticed that some people tend to get better with age, while others tend to get worse. I have a goal for my old age. I want to love this world and everyone in it so intensely that my body simply cannot contain that much energy and fries out completely. I hope to evaporate all at once in a cloud of smoke. What a way to go!

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 558 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 11:55:17 PM
They might not need 'em. Water is a much better medium for long-range communication, and they've got built-in sonar.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 556 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 11:47:59 PM
You could be right, or it could simply be that we don't have the tools yet to accurately assess the way animals process information. We certainly don't know enough about dolphins to make any sort of blanket judgment about them and their capacity for abstraction or projection.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 8 (view)

Captivating qualities? Posted: 11/2/2009 11:42:53 PM
Ace I couldn't have even answered that question if it weren't for someone I just ran across yesterday, because it's been like 30+ years since I've felt it at first sight. Physically she has a body that is perfectly perportioned, natural red hair and aging wrinkles that are perfectly aligned with eyes set just so...unbelievable...then add to it her similar strong personality traits Dude! I'm not much of a C&W fan, but I do love that song by Lee Ann Womak: I hope you dance!!!

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 554 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 11:34:46 PM
Since the topic of shunning has come up, perhaps we should discuss it. I was just wondering myself the extent to which important information for me might come in unpleasant packaging and what to do about it. To what extent am I willing to see through the packaging to the valuable truth that might be lurking underneath? Do I have the courage and patience to wade through the derision directed at me to see what might be being offered me? Or, am I too caught up in the pretty picture I have of myself to recognize the truth of who I am? Will I shoot the messenger and shun the message? Or can I relax a little bit, see the message for what it is and the messenger as a fallible and indoctrinated human being just like me, albeit with different instructions about what to think? After all, teaching us what to think was the predominant mode and purpose of our education, but it in Sunday School or in public school. On the other hand, abusive bullshit is what it is, and there is no point in me paying any attention to it or investing any energy whatsoever in responding to it. There are times when shunning is appropriate. The truth is that we can all get triggered into negative places where it feels like we're once again being abused and helpless. And when we get there it is awfully hard to remember that we are adults now, we don't have to take any of that stuff any more--especially not when it's being patronizingly positioned as "for our own good." And, we certainly don't have to defend ourselves when we realize we've lapsed into a mode that we consider beneath us. All we have to do is step back and resume functioning like adults. Simple, but not always easy. PN is a provocateur. That doesn't make him bad. Match is a lawyer. Well, I suppose that might (just kidding you Match). I give GG all kinds of hell and he comes back just fine. I think I'm rougher on him than just about anybody else I've ever worked over. If anyone has a right to be pissed, it's him. Boomer's doing her best to live up to her ideals. That can be tough with a brat like PN around--but he's such a great brat! These forums would be dead as a doornail if you had to rely on me to liven things up. So let's just chill, remember who we are, where we are, and why we're here. It's supposed to be fun, gang. A bit of mirth at one another's expense is great, but when it's coming from a place of infantile rage, we're really off track and it stops being fun. I can't be 100% sure about this, but I think the days are over when the mods would take a thread down just because it was fun. I sure hope so. But if things get so heated that all we wind up doing is abusing each other in the name of our respective positions, somebody ought to shut it down. Who needs it?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 553 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 11:14:38 PM
She can and does express her own original thoughts. I'm sure given time and practice she could produce some very interesting reading. Our differences are a matter of degree, not of kind.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 37 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/2/2009 11:08:58 PM
They tend to feel their victim status gives them a license to hurt other people. Yes. That unresolved rage can create a sense of entitlement and urgency that is very inappropriate in an adult. Some people go on taking it out on others. Some go on taking it out on themselves. Some do both. There is a difference between acknowledging what went wrong and getting on as best one can, vs. using what went wrong as an excuse to stop doing one's best. Nevertheless, the things that went wrong can be a limiting factor in a person's success, which is why I'm still working on my social skills at my age. For those who consider themselves survivors of spiritual abuse, speaking out about it is something they do to help stop such abuse from being carried out against the next generation. If that puts you off, you'll just have to be put off I guess. But I hope you have better sense than that.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 541 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 5:46:13 PM
Well, show me an animal who can type a message on a keyboard, send it over the internet and read the reply. From Wikipedia, but there are other sources you might consider more reliable: Koko (born July 4, 1971) is a lowland gorilla who, according to Francine 'Penny' Patterson, is able to understand more than 1,000 signs based on American Sign Language,[1] and understand approximately 2,000 words of spoken English.[2] She has lived most of her life in Woodside, California, although a move to a sanctuary in Maui, Hawaii has been planned since the 1990s. The last presentation I went to about Koko indicated that not only could she manipulate icons on a computer screen according to their meaning, but she was teaching other gorillas to do so as well.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1 (view)

Captivating qualities? Posted: 11/2/2009 1:16:32 PM
I'm wondering what qualities people find most captivating in potential partners. I'm not just talking about looks, but what's behind the looks. I'm also not talking about what we're looking for. I'm talking about the things that take us so thoroughly by surprise when we find them that we are instantly captivated. Hotness is an obvious example but I think it's overdone. I have been even more floored by a look of patience and grace on the part of a woman of quality. A look like that can make me wish I had the privilege of working hard for the rest of my life to keep her happy. So there are two qualities: White heat and bright light from within. What other qualities would tempt you to turn your life upside down in order to be with someone?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 530 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 1:00:39 PM
I often wonder if God regrets not giving the big brains to cats. Why He picked monkeys like us is certainly beyond me!

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 27 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/2/2009 12:59:02 PM
Right on JD. Nice when it gets real in here. My sense of humor is pretty bad overall. Nobody gets my jokes unless I make them about myself. So that's what I do--make fun of how badly I fear I must be coming across right then. Those jokes hit every time and soften everyone up, 'cuz everyone else is afraid of coming across badly too. I just wasn't on my game the other night. It's a game I'm just learning now (you can teach an old dog new tricks), but with a bit more practice I'm going to be great in any social gathering whether I know anyone there or not. I've seen you in a couple of different contexts. In the bar situation, you were stiff as a board. I would have joked around with you, but I got a "back off" vibe from your body language. At the party, you seemed a lot more comfortable and very approachable. You were the first one to give me shit about being the token liberal as I recall. When you're on, you're great. I really wouldn't worry about it if I were you. Tall, rugged, and fun. You could say _any_ stupid thing and get away with it. Don't you know that?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 527 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 12:33:44 PM
Man, however, created in the image of God, has a conscience to know right from wrong and protects the inherent worth of a human being. We are far superior to the animals in every way. I'm not so sure we can afford to be so smug. We appear to have some distinct advantages when it comes to our ability to adapt by changing our environment. However, those traits could, left unchecked, lead to our undoing. We depend on the environment that supports us a lot more directly than we depend on God.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 519 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 11:38:30 AM
Evolution is not considered to be an accident as much as adaptation. Survival of the fittest means that an animal coherently made a choice to change it's survival strategy and then a permanent adaptaition ensued. There's nothing accidental about it. Actually, this isn't quite right. Adaptation comes from two sources. One is the normal genetic variablility that occurs within species. Different traits within the same genome are better adapted to specific environmental circumstances. Individuals with those traits fit better, thrive, and produce offspring. Those expressing the same adaptive traits also thrive; others are progressively culled through predation or other challenges so that the specie adapts to the environment. The other is mutation. This is when the genetic code is somehow changed. The change could come from radiation, viral manipulation, or some other source. Mutation is thought to be a factor in species divergence, though the mechanism of divergence is the weakest link in the evolutionary theory. Scientists don't have a very strong explanation for, say, the difference in the number of chomosomes between species in the same kingdom. Species operating in an environment also change the environment. Adaptation isn't a one-way street. Because the success of one specie has ramifications all through its immediate vicinity, characteristics that allowed it to flourish can later cause it to perish. Thus, genetic variability confers an even stronger survival advantage than the most successful individual adaptive traits. And that is one reason why populations always contain a mix of traits. In both cases, given the age of the Earth, there has been sufficient time for all of the species we have evidence of to have evolved on the basis of those two mechanisms alone: adaptation and speciation. We don't have a clear picture of how speciation works, but we also have no evidence yet that it could _not_ have happened in the natural order of things. Just because we can't quite see that order doesn't mean it isn't there. Of course, understanding the how doesn't explain the why. That's where faith comes in. Why does it all play out this way, from Big Bang to the absurdity of Tele-Evangelism? I certainly hope Somebody is amused by it all. On the whole it is certainly quite impressive.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 509 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 8:33:29 AM
Why is murder considered the worst crime? Because there is no way to make restitution. And also, because death is the thing we most fear. We fear it so much that we will poison the minds of our children before we will face up to the reality of it. Some of us will send our kids off to be suicide bombers to defend the story that gives us the comforting idea of a merciful God who will grant us our wishes in the afterlife.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 508 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 8:31:39 AM
If you can't do that, you really can't understand God. God is so far beyond my ability to understand that I wouldn't even presume to try. All I want to know, really, is what the hell I'm doing in this crazy world and what I'm supposed to accomplish or experience while I'm here. Why do alcoholics alienate themselves from family and friends? Because they make themselves inaccessible. Because they are afraid and the alcohol numbs out the pain. The pain of existential fear and alienation is so overwhelming that they'd sacrifice anything to avoid feeling it. And why not, if they're truly alone in this world anyway--as they fear?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 21 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/2/2009 8:22:59 AM
When I was a kid, my family moved twice. The first time we moved, I got picked on by the other kids in the neighborhood. There was this one kid who was just awful. Always threatening to beat me up even though he was smaller than me. I asked my Dad about it and he said I'd have to fight him, and what I should do was rub his face in the dirt once I got him down. Well, I didn't like it. I thought it was just stupid, but I didn't want to get picked on any more so one day I called his bluff and we had our fight. I did what my Dad said--rubbed his face in the dirt and told him not to mess with me any more. From that day forward that kid was my biggest fan, and soon thereafter the alpha girl on the block picked me to be her boyfriend. When we moved the second time, I thought I knew better. I didn't like fighting. I didn't like having to fight, and so when the kids in the new town picked on me, I took it. What I didn't realize was that those kids were sizing me up to see if I was a coward or not. Because I wouldn't put my body in the line to prove myself to them, they saw me as a coward. But did I really owe them that? More than philandering, more than grifting, more than anything else, what people cannot abide is cowardice. It is all too easy to ascribe that failing to people whose ways are different than one's own. Having the courage and presence of mind to make a joke in a tense situation can lighten the load for everyone.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 505 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 7:55:50 AM
According to the Buddha, the cause of suffering in this life is attachment. I'm not sure I agree entirely, but I do know that when I can detach and let things be I experience relief. For me, it comes down to fear. If I have something good and I'm afraid of losing it, I suffer. If I lack something, fear I won't get it, and worse, fear the consequences if I don't get it in time, I suffer. If I suffer deeply enough, rage kicks in and then others might suffer too if only by having to watch my struggles. Boomer, a while back I argued against your claim that the Constitution derived from Christian principles. I want to clarify that thought. I credit Christianity with providing enough freedom from fear for people of good will to engage in the kind of philosophical inquiry that led to the Renaissance and eventually, to the Constitution. When people have something they can turn to that provides genuine reassurance, they can take intellectual risks that they otherwise would not. The idea that Christ saved us so that we now have nothing to fear is a powerful one. I don't know of any other religious message that has that kind of immediacy. The idea that we are called to do good in this world out of gratitude for God's grace is also powerful. It also has an immediacy that is hard to deny. I don't think y'all need the "fire and brimstone" scare tactics. Living in a state of alienation and fear is quite hellish enough. All you have to say to someone who's ready is, "you don't have to live like that any more." Christ died to set you free. You can walk among us in bliss and be the person you were always meant to be. God loves you. We love you. Join us in freedom." Honestly, the rest of it is just hogwash, and at some level I think you know it. The good news for you is that the rest of it is entirely unnecessary. The core of the message is solid enough that you could dump the rest of it entirely and the message will still carry, because freedom and acceptance are the two things people want most. Look at all the ways people sell themselves out to get them--from subscribing to insane cults to destroying themselves with drugs (when they conclude they'll never get them). You have no need to spook little kids in order to get them to join up. The fact that some of you do that leads me to question the faith of those who do. Those kids will be ready to understand the truth in God's time, won't they? So why do some of you feel so damned compelled to **** with their heads?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 17 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/2/2009 6:47:50 AM
Mz, Join the club. I just turned 52 and I can't remember going through an entire day feeling like I belong in this world or among these people--any people. You know what? I suspect that most people feel this way a good portion of the time, which is why we all huddle together when we find a few people who scare us less badly than others. Sucks. I guess that's one reason why I would like to be able to bridge gaps and get along with people who are different from me, even if they seem alien on the surface. Who isn't an alien in my world?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 503 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 6:36:04 AM
Rococo, I am familiar with Matthew Fox, though I have never explored his work. By your description, what he says makes a lot more sense to me than other stories I've heard. Boomer, I don't know where the evil in this world comes from, but I do know my heart. What I want most, and most deeply, is the peace and joy of communion with the Divine for all sentient beings. Of course, there are also many times during the day when I just want what I want. I can get impulsive and take advantage. Is that evil? I think it depends on how far I'm willing to take it--though once I'm clear that someone's liable to get hurt it gives me pause. Still, I think that the only times I've ever done major or lasting harm were when I acted out of fear. I suspect that fear accounts for the greater part of evil in this world. It appears to me that those who are committed to evil have decided to manage their fear by forcing others to feel it for them. If the purpose of your faith is to account for fear and free people from it at an existential level, I cannot think of anything higher or any finer cause. That is something that I truly love about Chistianity, the Gospel, and the mission of Christians whose faith appears to be true.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 502 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/2/2009 6:23:07 AM
When you don't like what someone has to say, you try to get them kicked off the forums. Then why don't you do us all a favor and just go? Easy does it, gang. Yes, our friend does like to tweak people and sometimes it can sting pretty badly. Fortunately, he hasn't pointed that thing at me. There are some around here whom we all might dearly love to send packing. However, all of our points of view are important. If some of us have a style that is irritating at times, that doesn't mean they don't have a piece of the truth.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 13 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/1/2009 10:05:01 PM
Ethnicity was a factor, but it's really just about insularity in general. I've seen the same thing happen when everyone was of the same race but had different political viewpoints, were dressed differently, or were just there as part of different groups. Let's face it. It's just easier to hang with people who are familiar than it is to reach out. But everyone loses out when we do that.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 487 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/1/2009 5:36:00 PM
I am willing to accept that evolution isn't completely proven. As far as an agency behind the scenes goes, for purposes of assessing fact and predicting the behavior of phenomena it is problematic. It's fine as long as it remains behind the scenes, but when you start invoking God to wave off further inquiry, it's a problem. Statements of fact are backed up by evidence as well as a credible explanation that accounts for those facts with the fewest assumptions. Statements of belief are backed up by convincing logic. They need not be factual to be believed. <div class="quote">Honestly, do you think satan or his cohorts would take God seriously without the threat and promise of hell, the lake of fire or whatever you want to call eternal punishment? Those beings who you claim are in active war against God will get the consequences they get. But how does condemning an innocent civilian like Eve to the same punishment as those who duped her remotely resemble justice or the judgement of a God who has any shred of compassion? And what about the rest of us, who as far as we knew, did _nothing_ except find ourselves born in human flesh? Your religion is based on guilt by association. It is a logical fallacy. I'm sorry, I can't buy it. You're going to have to do better than that. And, at some level I think you know it.

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 486 (view)

Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin Posted: 11/1/2009 5:28:32 PM
For simply existing and finding oneself in the human condition?

AceOfSpace

Joined: 5/28/2007

Msg: 1 (view)

Why people stick with their own Posted: 11/1/2009 5:27:34 PM
I've been going out a lot lately, and have noticed that people tend to stick with their own. This is less true in Northern CA than it is in SoCal, but in SoCal, it's the norm. I never understood it until last night. So I'm in this club where a friend of mine is performing. I don't know anyone else there. I don't even know her friends. I get there early, and there is a group of people of a different ethnicity than me. I go get some food from the restaurant associated with the club, and they comment on it because I was the first one to do that. We got to talking. When they all get up to dance and I joined them. While it was hip hop, it was fun. Evetually they all sat down and I did too. So far so good. In a little while, the DJ switches to salsa, and one of the women in the group invites me to dance. I protest that I don't know salsa and she said not to worry about it, but it's clear she's good and I'm a beginner. So I got embarrassed and intimidated, and backed off. That's when it started to go wrong. I had also gotten myself some water, and they asked me to get them some too. I said sure, which was a big mistake. I should have joked: "What do I look like, a waiter? Do you see a name tag here?" But I blew it. The water was an issue because the bartender didn't want to give it to me. He wanted to sell me bottles and wouldn't just pour. So it took some doing, but by the time I got the water they were impatient and, I realized, had lost respect for me. So I again backed off. I counted two strikes. By this time, my friend arrived and introduced me to her friends. We got into conversation and related comfortably, and I noticed that the group that I'd served was looking uptight. It was a wierd scene in there anyway. If there's anything more pointless than nightclub politics I don't know what it could possibly be. But there it was. The more uptight they looked, the less inclined I was to approach them again, and since I was having a good time, I saw no need to go over to them and get swatted for my trouble--like I got swatted for bringing them the water. Nah, I just figured I was out. No the swat wasn't major, and for all I know they were looking for me to swat right back, but that's a cultural difference that I wasn't prepared to handle. In hindsight I recognize that I could have made a joke about that too, but strike 3 was me getting too uptight to think tactically in the situation. Note to self--make a joke about it whenever I feel uncomfortable for any reason. I obviously wasn't able to do that last night, and eventually the other group left. It didn't look like they were having much fun, but me "snubbing" them to hang out with people who look more like me didn't help matters. So I can't **** about other people doing that any more. When I get uncomfortable I do the very same thing. It does suck though. For everyone. We all would have had a much better time if I'd been able to bridge the gap.

Show ALL Forums