portrait of an enemy

[Diogenes]

That does not mean that all of those that dont join are in disagreement, but I think that a good part of them are.

No matter what population you look at, the vast majority just wants to get by and does not want to risk their lives and those of their families for a battle that they have very little chance of winning.

They will rather decide to sit it out and hope for better times.

That was my point. Sorry I wasn't clearer.

In a Christian Country (as our friends tell us at every turn) those who disagree should be left alone. And it doesn't matter what they disagree about. Jesus never said Lord it over (subjugate) people. He said - entice them.

And that is true as far as I can tell. Zealots do not listen to reason though. They listen to what THEY think should be done. At some point it just becomes a pissing contest between wills, and they feel like they have to win it.

Christianity is non-intuitive and very contrary to normal human nature. (Which is to hit and impose rather than turn the other cheek and entice.) It only works properly when it is implemented properly.

It's actually a fiendishly clever and diabolic system. The designers did an excellent job of creating a very durable meme.

The most Christian Christians I ever met (while working at a defense contractor) practiced Judaism. It was interesting discussing their Passover services with them. They felt that to properly get in touch with Jesus they had to practice His religion. That attitude has a LOT to commend it IMO.

As it started out that way, what can be wrong with going back to basics?

Judaism has very strict rules against proselytizing. You can't just want to become a Jew. You have to want it bad because we are told to discourage those who want to join at every turn. We must tell them all the disadvantages. First and always. It is not a club. It is serious business. What does that get us? People will not be joining because every one else is doing it. Thus we get strong adherents because it is what they want mind, body, and soul. Strength vs mass.

Such a methodology separates the wheat from the chaff.

[AcesHigh]

Truly, I dont think christianism is all that better. Western society is better, EXACTLY because it was able to free itself from the clutches of religion, partially at least.


Of course, many fundamentalist christians think the way to fight fundamentalist muslins is to give more power to christianism in western societies. Imho, it would be like jumping from the frying pan to the fire.


anyway, I see some people here might like this song... well, as long as they dont consider heavy metal as a devil thing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhhDbaah9DQ

it has some pretty exciting lines for any true islam hating christian!

"For Christendom's sake, we'll take our revenge
On the pagans from out of the east
We Christians are coming, with swords held on high
United by faith and the cause
The Saracen heathen will soon taste our steel
Our standards will rise 'cross the land"

"We carry the sign of the cross
Warlords of England, Knights of the Realm
Spilling their blood in the sand
Crusader, crusader, the legend is born
The future will honour your deeds"

[AcesHigh]

Anyone can convert. The rule is that they must be discouraged. The First Mate is a convert. I told her I would be willing to raise children Buddhist or Jewish but I was not going to become a Christian. She was not too happy with being a Christian and thought hat culturally children in America would have the hardest time as Buddhists so Jewish it was.

no atheist option? Oh wait, kids would probably have an even harder time being atheists in the US.

it seems even believing in the science of evolution and a 15 billion years old universe is starting to give you a hard time in the US.

[MSimon]

Anyone can convert. The rule is that they must be discouraged. The First Mate is a convert. I told her I would be willing to raise children Buddhist or Jewish but I was not going to become a Christian. She was not too happy with being a Christian and thought hat culturally children in America would have the hardest time as Buddhists so Jewish it was.

no atheist option? Oh wait, kids would probably have an even harder time being atheists in the US.

it seems even believing in the science of evolution and a 15 billion years old universe is starting to give you a hard time in the US.

Jewish atheism is a respected position at least to some extent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_atheism

Christian atheism is of course a contradiction in terms.

I of course have no need for belief in God. He talks to me every day. I have heard the soundless sound that fills the universe - twice. But I don't talk about it much. First off I'm not interested in the attention. And second off I didn't want to get the "crazy" reputation. As an old man I no longer care about either.

BTW the advice I have gotten is universally good (the best was - Start a family) so I am not worried that it is some dark spirit advising me.

The thing I like most about Jews is that they are not big on persecuting people for their own good. I don't know where Christians picked that up from because I can't find it in the teachings of Jesus. Quite the opposite in fact.

I can "feel" the Force. From my studies I'm told it is most likely a mild form of schizophrenia. My studies also indicate it is quite helpful to scientists and engineers.

I do believe that most people could feel/hear if they quieted down all the internal noise that fills their systems. The Buddhists among others teach that. My favorite is the Zens. But I also like the 'Gita. "Get up and fight" in the don't give in to depression sense.

The system of Ouspensky's "Fourth Way" is also helpful if you filter out a lot of the weirdness. A system called "Arica" has done a pretty good job of that.

Anyway I have studied and practiced a lot of different religious/esoteric systems. Excepting Christianity and Islam. I consider both to be defective. Neither is big on allowing/helping adherents find their own way. Both are looking for armies. Not healthy.

[AcesHigh]

well, although there are plenty of atheist jews (including Isaac Asimov), I dont see much sense in that. Yes, jews identify themselves as a tribe/ethnicity more than a religion. But is that real? I suppose some 50% of jews have such dilluted bloodlines that their genetic links to the original tribes are as strong as their genetic links to Genghis Khan...

[AcesHigh]

err... what you mean with "feel the force"? What force? Strong nuclear force? Magnetic fields?

Do you at least propose any theory for HOW you do it? (not that I believe in it. I do believe in the power of the human mind to invent and believe in stuff, however. I also believe that you have a good scientific intuition, and you think its this "force" that helps you.

Either way, feel absolutely free to believe in this kind of stuff. I am skeptical, but I have nothing against it. As long as it doesnt turn into organized religion

[MSimon]

well, although there are plenty of atheist jews (including Isaac Asimov), I dont see much sense in that. Yes, jews identify themselves as a tribe/ethnicity more than a religion. But is that real? I suppose some 50% of jews have such dilluted bloodlines that their genetic links to the original tribes are as strong as their genetic links to Genghis Khan...

It is not the bloodlines that are diluted if you go by genetics.

None of the major religions can give a direct experience of "God" (what ever that is) without many decades of preparation. These days there is not time enough for it. There is no idle season for practice.

From what I saw in the 60s the churches were terrified that people might reach the revalatory state by other than approved methods. What might have re-invigorated the churches if incorporated by them has given way to a sterile church. Without revelation a rich society cannot maintain any kind of religion. We see the youth falling away for material or social "justice" pursuits and there is no herald of the coming truth teller.

I used to read reports in the 60s of a state of oneness (considered in the past a religious state) provided by substances. All the churches said it was fake. But I wonder. IMO brain chemistry is brain chemistry how ever acquired. Whether vigils (Zen), fasting, or taking a pill.

The dryness (sterility) of the leaders has led to a sterility of the followers and all that is left are the rules. The very thing Jesus came to temper or end. Jesus said it is not rules but the opening of the heart that was important. My study of Kundalini and the Kaballlah says there are several other centers that need attention. But an opening of the heart (particularly important in the story off Moses) seems to be neglected for Inquisitions of various sorts. An opening of the heart would be a start in order to replace the hardness of heart we see in almost ALL the churches. Love one another seems to have been replaced by "who can we punish today". It will not end well if there is a just God (which has been my experience). And hardness of heart was the chief complaint against the Pharaoh. A very old problem.

[seedload]

well, although there are plenty of atheist jews (including Isaac Asimov), I dont see much sense in that. Yes, jews identify themselves as a tribe/ethnicity more than a religion. But is that real? I suppose some 50% of jews have such dilluted bloodlines that their genetic links to the original tribes are as strong as their genetic links to Genghis Khan...

It is not the bloodlines that are diluted if you go by genetics.

None of the major religions can give a direct experience of "God" (what ever that is) without many decades of preparation. These days there is not time enough for it. There is no idle season for practice.

From what I saw in the 60s the churches were terrified that people might reach the revalatory state by other than approved methods. What might have re-invigorated the churches if incorporated by them has given way to a sterile church. Without revelation a rich society cannot maintain any kind of religion. We see the youth falling away for material or social "justice" pursuits and there is no herald of the coming truth teller.

I used to read reports in the 60s of a state of oneness (considered in the past a religious state) provided by substances. All the churches said it was fake. But I wonder. IMO brain chemistry is brain chemistry how ever acquired. Whether vigils (Zen), fasting, or taking a pill.

The dryness (sterility) of the leaders has led to a sterility of the followers and all that is left are the rules. The very thing Jesus came to temper or end. Jesus said it is not rules but the opening of the heart that was important. My study of Kundalini and the Kaballlah says there are several other centers that need attention. But an opening of the heart (particularly important in the story off Moses) seems to be neglected for Inquisitions of various sorts. An opening of the heart would be a start in order to replace the hardness of heart we see in almost ALL the churches. Love one another seems to have been replaced by "who can we punish today". It will not end well if there is a just God (which has been my experience). And hardness of heart was the chief complaint against the Pharaoh. A very old problem.

I am not a church goer myself, but the very religious people that I know are some of the most loving, caring, and forgiving people I have ever met. The idea that they have a "hardness of heart" is completely alien to my experience. On the other hand, the addicts that I have known are some of the most selfish, ignorant, and intolerable people I have ever met. Funny that some of the latter, who get sober, often join the former.

Not that I am surprised that you would turn to a drugs are better than faith argument. Drugs are apparently better than everything. I really think that you were more effective when you were arguing for drug legalization rather than for drug use.

Just sayin'

[AcesHigh]

just to take part in the drug topic. I smoked pot. Once. Because of a girl I was attracted too. She was very hot, and she smoked pot once in a while, so I went along. Then later she started with some spiritual exoteric new age crap, and my inner atheist/skeptic realized I wouldnt be able to stand her talk for more than 5 minutes.

unlike Clinton, I inhaled. It sucked. I hate smoke. I rather eat a chocolate bar or drink coffee. Yes, once in a while I like writing in short sentences.

[MSimon]

On the other hand, the addicts that I have known are some of the most selfish, ignorant, and intolerable people I have ever met.

You ought to study the behavior of persecuted minorities. The behavior you describe is more a function of persecution and scarcity than abundance.

We had lots of addicts in Nantucket in the 1800s. And yet it was described as a pleasant society. How did that happen?

Stone, ed., Letters, p. 160: "A singular custom prevails here among the women, at which I was greatly surprised and am really at a loss how to account for the original cause that has introduced in this primitive society so remarkable a fashion, or rather so extraordinary a want. They have adopted these many years the Asiatic custom of taking a dose of opium every morning, and so deeply rooted is it that they would be at a loss how to live without this indulgence; they would rather be deprived of any necessary than forego their favorite luxury. This is much more prevailing among the women than the men, few of the latter having caught the contagion, though the sheriff, whom I may call the first person in the island, who is an eminent physician beside and whom I had the pleasure of being well acquainted with, has for many years submitted to this custom. He takes three grains of it every day after breakfast, with the effects of which, he often told me, he was not able to transact any business. It is hard to conceive how a people always happy and healthy, in consequence of the exercise and labour they undergo, never oppressed with the vapours of idleness, yet should want the fictitious effects of opium to preserve that cheerfulness to which their temperance, their climate, their happy situation, so justly entitle them. But where is the society perfectly free from error or folly; the least imperfect is undoubtedly that where the greatest good preponderates; and agreeable to this rule, I can truly say, that I never was acquainted with a less vicious or more harmless one."

http://revolution.h-net.msu.edu/threads/crevecoeur.html

Most of the bad behaviors ascribed to drugs are caused by prohibition.

[MSimon]

I do understand the problem. Most people are not interested in studying the prohibited drugs. They are then left with DEA propaganda. And the purpose of the DEA is to keep the fear up so their iron rice bowls remain filled.

Funny that so many who understand how government really works forget it all when their fears are activated.

I'm on an anti-prohibitionist list (mostly lefties) and try to tell them that the way government works in the Prohibition realm is the same way it works in the economic realm and you will see a LOT of screaming. I almost got kicked off the list for that one.

It seems that politics makes people deaf, dumb, and blind.

Government’s Greatest Trick - Making you a slave to your fears.

[seedload]

On the other hand, the addicts that I have known are some of the most selfish, ignorant, and intolerable people I have ever met.

You ought to study the behavior of persecuted minorities. The behavior you describe is more a function of persecution and scarcity than abundance.

We had lots of addicts in Nantucket in the 1800s. And yet it was described as a pleasant society. How did that happen?

Stone, ed., Letters, p. 160: "A singular custom prevails here among the women, at which I was greatly surprised and am really at a loss how to account for the original cause that has introduced in this primitive society so remarkable a fashion, or rather so extraordinary a want. They have adopted these many years the Asiatic custom of taking a dose of opium every morning, and so deeply rooted is it that they would be at a loss how to live without this indulgence; they would rather be deprived of any necessary than forego their favorite luxury. This is much more prevailing among the women than the men, few of the latter having caught the contagion, though the sheriff, whom I may call the first person in the island, who is an eminent physician beside and whom I had the pleasure of being well acquainted with, has for many years submitted to this custom. He takes three grains of it every day after breakfast, with the effects of which, he often told me, he was not able to transact any business. It is hard to conceive how a people always happy and healthy, in consequence of the exercise and labour they undergo, never oppressed with the vapours of idleness, yet should want the fictitious effects of opium to preserve that cheerfulness to which their temperance, their climate, their happy situation, so justly entitle them. But where is the society perfectly free from error or folly; the least imperfect is undoubtedly that where the greatest good preponderates; and agreeable to this rule, I can truly say, that I never was acquainted with a less vicious or more harmless one."

http://revolution.h-net.msu.edu/threads/crevecoeur.html

Most of the bad behaviors ascribed to drugs are caused by prohibition.

Any website that can't be read until you highlight the text in order to look at the negative image should never be considered a proper source. But, I can see how some obscure historic reference to one guy kinda liking a group of drugged out people might be considered as convincing evidence that addicts have bad behaviors solely because of prohibition. Strike that. I can't actually see that at all.

Regardless, your argument reads like an appeal for societal enabling in the name of addict docility. I'm not buying it in principle or in practice despite any archaic quotes you may pull out.

[MSimon]

Regardless, your argument reads like an appeal for societal enabling in the name of addict docility. I'm not buying it in principle or in practice despite any archaic quotes you may pull out.

Well it is an indication of why nothing was done about the "problem" for hundreds of years (before 1914). If you have a better explanation of the above fact I'd like to hear it. So far no one on this board (or anywhere else for that matter) has been able to explain it. Perhaps you will be the first.

This historian has looked at why the change in attitude around 1914 and he comes up with racism - straight up.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

The talk was given before a group of judges and later the FBI. The drug laws at their inception were a covert way of punishing disfavored minorities. They still work that way.

[MSimon]

seedload,

Funny. You don't seem to have that attitude towards water addicts or food addicts or air addicts. Perhaps it is because you share their addiction.

Our society these days seems to have a lot of people looking for reasons to hate and punish. It will not end well.

And I'm sure you can find "science" that will back up your "reasons". The Nazis were very scientific that way too. Not to worry. The "science" and "reasons" are in the process of falling apart. Your view of the world will one day seem as quaint and as disgusting as the views of the Nazis. My condolences.

All our religions (in America - for the most part) preach mercy. And yet significant parts of our community claiming adherence to the religions of mercy are having none of it. They reject their own God. And if you believe the testimony handed down God has a way of punishing such people. I do hope you get the mercy you have been unwilling to show others.

[GIThruster]

seedload,

Funny. You don't seem to have that attitude towards water addicts or food addicts or air addicts. Perhaps it is because you share their addiction.

Sounding more and more diagnosable each day, Simon. You need to see a doctor and take an MMPI. You're losing your grip on reality.