Re: FW: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] interesting article from a former Bush supporter

[Rick <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

> Mike Miller wrote:
> > I'm sure I can find a web site with a movie, but if you would like to 
> > tell us about it, go ahead.  It doesn't bother me much.  I probably 
> > wouldn't really enjoy watching a film of a vasectomy either, but I don't 
> > oppose vasectomies.  You don't like the scissors in the head idea, but 
> > what will they do if that becomes illegal?  Simply suction the fetus 
> > out?  Will they use a more dangerous procedure?  Or will babies suddenly 
> > be born happy and healthy in a sunny, smiley world?

The primary reason I support choice but I'm opposed to partial birth 
abortions is because, barring the rare instance that it's required for 
the health or survival of the mother, there is absolutely *no* reason 
for it to occur that late in a pregnancy.

> > I wouldn't say 95%, but I like to see agreement with Jon because he is a 
> > very smart, well-educated and thoughtful guy.  Stephen is too, but 
> > Stephen is very committed to his religious views and all of our 
> > disagreements derive from that.


> > I would characterize the "out of touch" crowd as those who take Bush's 
> > side on every issue always.  They just don't care what he does, they 
> > don't care what people say about him, they are full-on Bush supporters 
> > to the end.  That, in my book, is out of touch.

You are just as guilty of this sort of behavior regarding Clinton, but 
that topic's been done to death.

> > I should add that every person I've met who qualifies as "out of touch" 
> > is also Christian and supporting Bush largely because of a shared 
> > Christian worldview.  I think Christian ethics are mostly good, but I 
> > have a big problem with imposing religion on others, with using the 
> > state to promote religion, and with religious mysticism.  Something like 
> > 44% of Americans believe that Jesus will return and the world will end 
> > within the next 50 years.  So, how can we talk to these people about the 
> > national debt and social security?  We need to encourage them to snap 
> > out of it!  Bush is playing to their religious commitment and using it 
> > to rob them blind.

So that means, since I'm an atheist, I'm not out of touch, just stupid?

Frankly, I agree with you on the promotion of religion by the state, but 
that doesn't mean that everyone should be able to turn all of society on 
it's head because they're "offended".

Oddly enough, I had one of these exact discussion yesterday over lunch 
with one of my coworkers. I was trying to establish exactly what the 
criteria would be to prove to him, conclusively, that God doesn't exist. 
Let's suffice it to say that the criteria is not currently achievable by 
either science or philosophy and involves both n-dimensional space and a 
sheep...

However, I think it's safe to say that there is very little "snapping 
out of it" once a person has accepted the belief that God exists. The 
belief itself is both self-reinforcing, self-perpetuating and obviously 
very addictive. Perhaps you should approach it from that angle...as an 
addiction. Even a cold, clinical approach would be less offensive than 
your constant implications that everyone else is a retard.

> > Mike

Rick

--
We simply can't idiot-proof everything. Sometimes the idiots just have 
to suffer and die.
--http://www.overheardintheoffice.com/

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion