-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
____/ Snit on Saturday 02 Jul 2011 02:55 : \____
> Homer stated in post n572e8-pvc.ln1@xxxxxxxxxx on 7/1/11 6:00 PM:
>
>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>> ____/ Homer on Friday 01 Jul 2011 21:30 : \____
>>>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>>>> ____/ Homer on Friday 01 Jul 2011 20:28 : \____
>>
>>> A lot of people in the US are in fact offended by the revisionism
>>
>> Except it isn't revisionism, so your point is invalid.
>>
>> Two different authors can write two entirely different, yet factually
>> correct, articles on the same subject, where each article is slanted to
>> favour the author's viewpoint.
>>
>> So what you actually mean to say is that (a lot of?) people in the US
>> are offended by (a lot of?) other people's opinions.
>>
>> Thankfully.
>>
>> The alternative would be a world full of clones who all think alike.
>> That brings us into Barry Schwartz territory, and I think I've already
>> made my views on that subject very clear.
>
> You made up a bunch of claims about Schwartz's views - and when you were
> asked to actually quote him claiming what you attributed to him you failed.
> Even worse, I was able to quote things from him which were contrary to your
> claims.
>
>>> rather than what is true.
>>
>> Your /opinion/ of what is true.
>>
>> I think I've also made my views on subjectivism very clear.
>
> But some things are not subjective: for example, you simply made up claims
> about Schwartz's views. Flat out made them up. This is not subjective -
> this is an objective fact.
>
>>> Just as we dislike Microsoft rewriting history about its crimes
>>
>> There's a vast difference between Microsoft contradicting court records
>> and a Christian contradicting the Big Bang Theory. How many people do
>> you know who were present during the Big Bang?
Why appeal to the "Big Bang" defence? We're not talking about astrophysics.
> Irrelevant. Heck, were you *at* any of the relevant court cases?
>
>> Moreover, how many people have suffered because someone refused to
>> believe in the Big Bang, compared to those who were forced into
>> bankruptcy because of Microsoft's underhand dealings?
>
> The question is not about suffering because someone does not believe in the
> big bang theory. The question is suffering because kids are being taught
> religious mythology as though it were in the same category as science.
>
>>> those whose ancestors were brutally abused and murdered do not like to
>>> see history rewritten.
>>
>> One doesn't need to be a Christian to abuse and murder people, or revise
>> history. Take the Nazi Party and Holocaust denialists, for example.
>
> Do you believe the Holocaust deniers should have their views taught in
> history... as the history.
>
>> But in this case I think you're grossly overstating the nature and
>> significance of this "revisionism".
>
> You picked a great example of revisionism: the Holocaust deniers. Complete
> revisionism of history.
>
> And you *support* teaching alternate views, eh?
>
> ...
>>>> Well then they should make their own textbooks and quit whining. It's
>>>> their choice to rely on a Christian stronghold for textbooks, after
>>>> all. States too incompetent to write their own textbooks should
>>>> really pause to consider the irony of criticising others' textbooks.
>>>
>>> Part of the revisionism is that the US was built on religious values
>>> when in fact the very opposite is true. This is a Trojan horse for
>>> eradication of free-thinkers and the defence they find in the
>>> Constitution. They are the largest growing group of this kind and
>>> there are attempts to impede this awakening which would make people
>>> more civilised.
>>
>> A fascinating opinion, but it doesn't actually address the point I made.
>> These "free-thinkers" are presumably free to write their own textbooks,
>> if they can't stand the religious overtones of others'.
>
> Irrelevant to the point made about Texas and text books. Again: it is not
> the states who make the text books.
>
>>>>> Chuck Norris and other misguided minions
>>>>
>>>> It's his choice, so labelling him a "misguided minion" is rather
>>>> petty.
>>>
>>> Did you see what he labels people who don't have the same beliefs as
>>> him?
>>
>> Doesn't he just roundhouse-kick them into submission?
>>
>> I've seen him label atheism as "a formidable foe", which it clearly is,
>> especially with so many militant atheists hell-bent on the eradication
>> of Christianity.
>
> Can you quote some doing that?
>
> ...
>>> Look it up, it has been shown and documented.
>>
>> AFAICT what has been "shown and documented" is Christian publishers
>> submitting material for evaluation to the Texas state board of
>> education, and apparently it was rejected, thus proving the impartiality
>> of that board. Presumably if "they" can submit something of sufficient
>> merit then it'll be accepted by that board.
>
> OK, so you do not know much about the topic. Fine. Not surprising, either.
> Here are some things about the Texas board of Education:
>
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html>
> -----
> After three days of turbulent meetings, the Texas Board of
> Education on Friday approved a social studies curriculum that
> will put a conservative stamp on history and economics
> textbooks, stressing the superiority of American capitalism,
> questioning the Founding Fathers commitment to a purely
> secular government and presenting Republican political
> philosophies in a more positive light.
> -----
>
> <https://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2010/09/23/texas-thinks-textbooks-
> are-anti-christian/>
> -----
> The Texas State Board of Education  following a long
> history of throwing itself into Âculture war issues  is set
> to vote Friday on a resolution calling on textbook publishers
> to limit what they print about Islam in world history books.
> -----
>
> And that was with a few seconds of searching. And a video for you:
>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqUls9xlQFE>
>
> Please try to understand this issue a bit more before insisting you are
> right. Thanks!
>
>> In any case, the worst case scenario is that a handful of textbooks of a
>> Christian orientation are distributed and used by Christians in a
>> predominantly Christian state.
>
> What? Where do you come up with this? Really... where? What makes other
> student's immune from these books? And how? Do different students even in
> the same class get different books in your world?
This actually leads to another issue caused by theism, which is a segregation among
schools that turns into alienation and division in society as children grow
up. The competing theories of science are not nearly as divisive, so even if
children have beliefs in different (but somewhat similar) theories they
don't need to escape to another "faith school".
>> Not exactly the end of the world ... unless you're a militant atheist,
>> of course.
>
> Please try to understand the issue you are arguing against. Please!
>
>>> It's like those drones Microsoft sent to send for voting in favour of
>>> OOXML. These are pawns.
>>
>> Hardly. The ISO DIS 29500 voting process was corrupted by Microsoft
>> bribing largely disinterested parties to vote in favour of OOXML, and
>> thus it wasn't really a "vote" at all - Microsoft simply bought the
>> result. OTOH I doubt very much if anyone campaigning for Christianity
>> in Texas is disinterested or even /needs/ to be bribed, so any "vote" in
>> favour of it is bound to be genuine, even if you strongly disagree with
>> that "vote".
>
> Ah... votes in things you care about are fixed... but in things you do not
> care about they are not. Great theory you have there!
>
>>>> So how many children do you have, then?
>>>
>>> None, but you and I were both kids many moons ago.
>>
>> So you admit you're unqualified to judge what's best for children?
>
> What? OK, so based on your view, people on the school board in Texas must
> have kids to know what is good for kids... right?
>
> LOL! You are so bizarre in your "thinking".
>
>>>>> Not only are they not professionally qualified but they also think
>>>>> there was a Great Flood and other such lunacy.
>>>>
>>>> There's certainly a great flood of lunacy, although most of it seems
>>>> to be coming from frothing anti-religious militant atheists, AFAICT.
>>>
>>> Lunacy? No. Who are those "militant atheists" you refer to?
>>
>> Well apparently you, for one, given your persistent and belligerently
>> anti-religious rant in this thread.
>
> Such as? None. Not at all.
>
>> Personally I'm disinclined to attack those who do no demonstrable harm,
>> but apparently not everyone feels the same way.
>
> Yet you do so all the time... showing you are a hypocrite.
To clarify (as I did earlier), I am not for the elimination of religions. They
have tremendous historical importance and they can be taught in school, in
culture/history classes (and all the major religions can be taught, not
one).
- --
~~ Best of wishes
Dr. Roy S. Schestowitz (Ph.D. Medical Biophysics), Imaging Researcher
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux administration | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Editor @ http://techrights.org & Broadcaster @ http://bytesmedia.co.uk/
GPL-licensed 3-D Othello @ http://othellomaster.com
Non-profit search engine proposal @ http://iuron.com
Contact E-mail address (direct): s at schestowitz dot com
Contact Internet phone (SIP): schestowitz@xxxxxxxxx (24/7)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAk4OzZMACgkQU4xAY3RXLo5TNgCfSr/5vXY3IXbWmTkJHAYsMsVM
fEMAnR2W/z84/yUlU+rxwpsWlRixzQIc
=5n+i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
