jump to navigation

Quotes October 28, 2009

Posted by Who? in History, Life, Philosophy, religion, Science.
Tags: , , ,
3 comments

‘There is frequently more to be learned from the unexpected questions of a child than the discourses of men, who talk in a road, according to the notions they have borrowed and the prejudices of their education.’

John Locke

‘You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions.’

Mahfouz Naguib

‘To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science.’

Albert Einstein

‘Millions saw the apple fall, but Newton was the one who asked why.’

Bernard Mannes Baruch

I’m still trying to wrap my head around this next one-

‘Man’s “progress” is but a gradual discovery that his questions have no meaning.’

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Advertisements

Retards, Hookers and Society September 30, 2009

Posted by Who? in News, Politics, religion.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

There have been a lot of stories in the news lately re: prostitution – Everett coffee stand bust, Lakewood coffee stand bust, etc.  The latest out of Lakewood troubles me though.  Seems that the girls are sharing trade secrets and playing a crafty entrapment card; ie “If you’re not a cop, touch my tra-la-la.   Article here.

And here is the troubling part, the Assistant PoChi is asking the Council for a new ordinance that would allow officers to arrest/cite women for prostitution/soliciting sex for asking that question.  This is a problem.  Generally it is not a sound policy to arrest, cite and try a citizen/hooker for a crime that they have not committed.   As much as it may be a prereq, the statement above is not soliciting sex for money.

One of my professors used to say that “hard cases make bad law” and this is a perfect example.  Should we keep pretending that arresting women for prostitution works?  Or should we reevaluate our strategy?

Furthermore…we need to back this train way back up…do we want cops requesting changes to laws?  In theory, citizens elect representatives to make those kinds of decisions for them.  Cops proposing laws is backwards.  They take an oath to uphold the law not to influence or create the law.  Now that I think about it, this issue is just as big, if not bigger, than the prostitution element.

I wonder if people will ever figure these kinds of issues out.  Prosti, weed, assisted-suicide…We should have the right to regulated choices as long as they don’t hurt other people.

You know what is really retarded about the current approach towards prostitution?  It creates a downward spiral and ultimately promotes it.  When a woman gets charged with or convicted of prostitution, that shows up on her record.  If she wanted to try to change her life and get a 9-5  job, she has to explain that.  Think about how hard it would be for a woman in that socio-economic position to overcome the shame and then explain that in an interview – I think there is a movie with Charlize Theron that plays out that scenario.  The current model pushes them to society’s margin where drugs, pimps, crime and violence reign supreme and hold them prisoner.  Citing women for prostitution does nothing to fix the underlying problem.

Legalize. Regulate. Tax.

I’m tired of ranting about retardation.

Update 10/7/09- The City Council passed the change with a 6-0 vote and acknowledged that they are in “uncharted territory”.  The article includes more of the details (they need circumstantial evidence as well) which is good but I’m still not sure how I feel about this.

Quote of the Day: Palin September 16, 2008

Posted by Who? in Election 2008, Politics, Random, religion.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Saw this gem over at Mudflats

“Munger also asked Palin if she truly believed in the End of Days, the doomsday scenario when the Messiah will return. “She looked in my eyes and said, ‘Yes, I think I will see Jesus come back to earth in my lifetime.’

Blink.  Blink. Uuuuh.  Dinosaurs too huh?  Blink.  Blink.

More Palin craziness here, here and here—or just scroll down.

Ohhhh Ca-Na-Daaaaa.  Our home and na-tive laaaaaand!

The Mars Hill/Driscoll Refutation Series: #2- “Church Needs Dudes” video September 15, 2008

Posted by Who? in Random, religion.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Came across this video today.  It perfectly highlights a couple of the topics discussed in the last post in this series and illuminates another method in Driscoll’s multi-faceted approach– capitalizing on modern distribution medium in the form of Internet videos.  The video provides an excellent window into the mind, views and goals of Mark Driscoll.

Listen to what he is saying- both explicitly and implicitly.  He is slamming the modern Christian man- calling them “chickified”.  Aside from it being a generalization, I actually agree with him here.  When I picture the “average Christian guy”, I think of an excessively nice, “yes dear”, passive, accountant-type in khaki Dockers and a short sleeve shirt with a tie. 

This is the Insider Effect at work- “If you’re with us, you are not chickified”.  Explicitly he is saying the Christian male has become a sissy.  But implicitly he is saying, if you listen to me and come to my church you are not a sissy and you are on the inside.  Take a second to think about the psychology behind that!  Also, keep in mind that I agree with the MESSAGE- what I want to shed light on is the METHOD. 

In this video we again see the edgy brand/image in his delivery.  The hair, the black shirt, the jewelry.  Driscoll is selling a new brand, HIS brand, and he is actively recruiting those that he believe will shape the future: young men.

At the end of the video, he states, flat out, that he is after the young men because if you control them- you control everything.  “If you get the young men, you win the war.”–direct quote.  He is selling an extreme message in an aggressive and effective manner.

Now here comes an interesting chain of thought- I agree with some of what he says in this video; mainly that you do don’t have to be a wuss to be a good man.  Where I get off the bus is when Christianity and the Bible is used as a source of authority to sell this viewpoint.   Driscoll’s opinion and view is that Jesus, David, John the Baptist and Elijah were a particular type of man AND HE USES THIS AS A SOURCE OF AUTHORITY TO SUPPORT HIS VIEW.  He uses his interpretation of the Bible to authenticate his opinion of what the Christian man should be…what his brand of Christianity is.

The message, logic and reasoning of being a strong, positive, good man stands on its own.

Why can’t we just promote men being strong, positive, good men without bringing religious interpretation into the equation?  Why is an interpretive biblical reference necessary to convince followers that being a strong, positive, good man is a good idea?  Because people don’t think- they have to be told and the Bible has been positioned as a telling authority.  In a later post, I will address the power of interpretation and how that plays into Biblical interpretation and attempts to draw authority from such.

Driscoll says this: “I think Jesus, David and John the Baptist were strong men.  You should be a strong, good man.  You don’t have to be chickified to be a good man.”

I say this: “You should be a strong, good man.  You don’t have to be chickified to be a good man.”

Being a good man is a universal truth- it stands on its own.

You want more? How about the 10 Commandments-

The first 5 commandments are just rules to preserve the religion itself but the second 5, (6-10) are universal truths: honor your father and mother, do not murder, commit adultery, steal, lie or covet.  Don’t those stand by on their own?

Isn’t it possible that Moses went up that mountain and carved these basic, universal truths into stone but knew that in order to convince the non-thinking masses- he would have to supplement their power with a little mysticism?  Thomas Jefferson was of the opinion that the teachings of Jesus were, at their core, an enlightened set of morals.  Strip away all the mysticism of Jesus and what do you have?  A universal truth…do unto others.