Random thoughts about whatever

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Life is disturbing but if you lie about being elected into it by default of others ... maybe you can build a bullying party!

I've often wondered about birth in a Christian family that hates intelligence and the love thereof ... leading to a great evil feeling about philosophy (defined in some circles and love of knowledge and wisdom). That's the round tuit question ...
 
Luce....I don't think Christian families hate intelligence! (I can imagine a few comebacks from some of the posters on this site!)
 
Nancy said:
Luce....I don't think Christian families hate intelligence! (I can imagine a few comebacks from some of the posters on this site!)
Click to expand...
I don't think he was generalizing from his wording (ie. he didn't say all Christian families hate intelligence), but there certainly is a (small) subset of Christianity that comes across that way with their anti-science, anti-scholarly theology, anti-anything that doesn't fit their worldview approach.
 
You're right Mendalla, but I personally know the other kind...intelligent and inquiring. Yet, so many people tend to jump to the image Luce and you are describing. I feel there is a tendency to caricature Christians, and perhaps that is just as narrow-minded.
 
When we allow the caricatures to get the most media attention, it is hard to diminish the stereotypes. The parents who disown their coming out of the closet child, it gets more attention than the many parents who are supportive of their children. I believe most Christians are supportive of immigrants and refugees. The few who energetically oppose them get more attention. It is important to the right wing media to establish self centeredness as the social norm because we are programmed to want to be like other people, to fit in.
 
jimkenney12 said:
When we allow the caricatures to get the most media attention, it is hard to diminish the stereotypes. The parents who disown their coming out of the closet child, it gets more attention than the many parents who are supportive of their children. I believe most Christians are supportive of immigrants and refugees. The few who energetically oppose them get more attention. It is important to the right wing media to establish self centeredness as the social norm because we are programmed to want to be like other people, to fit in.
Click to expand...
In reverse....sometimes it's the minority that has it right....so in my opinion, we must be diligent in our analysis.
 
The abstract is all those caricatures and images as flames in the psyche that may pop up as 9 MU' cis along with 3 faiths controlling fate and psyches ensure as fools gold pyrites ... kind of ironic things ... as hammered into another string ... on thin sabers ... swords of penetrating nature ...

May be however a departing thought ... just can't cut it with overwhelming desires to shaft something ... heart would knot ... mental entanglement as feline struggle ... fey streaks ... almost nothing to them!
 
Nancy said:
You're right Mendalla, but I personally know the other kind...intelligent and inquiring. Yet, so many people tend to jump to the image Luce and you are describing. I feel there is a tendency to caricature Christians, and perhaps that is just as narrow-minded.
Click to expand...
There is and I try as much as anyone to snuff it out but some people just like to deal in easy stereotypes.

jimkenney12 said:
When we allow the caricatures to get the most media attention, it is hard to diminish the stereotypes. The parents who disown their coming out of the closet child, it gets more attention than the many parents who are supportive of their children. I believe most Christians are supportive of immigrants and refugees. The few who energetically oppose them get more attention. It is important to the right wing media to establish self centeredness as the social norm because we are programmed to want to be like other people, to fit in.
Click to expand...
Yep. Let's just not forget that Christians can be as bad for indulging stereotypes as anyone. Liberal Christians buy into the stereotypes of conservative ones and vice versa. And they all buy into stereotypes of the non-religious or of other religions. Stereotyping is a human problem, not something "they" do, and we are all both perpetrators and victims at times, I would suggest.
 
Mendalla said:
There is and I try as much as anyone to snuff it out but some people just like to deal in easy stereotypes.


Yep. Let's just not forget that Christians can be as bad for indulging stereotypes as anyone. Liberal Christians buy into the stereotypes of conservative ones and vice versa. And they all buy into stereotypes of the non-religious or of other religions. Stereotyping is a human problem, not something "they" do, and we are all both perpetrators and victims at times, I would suggest.
Click to expand...


Then, that great 3rd Aye ... Ayemon ...
 
Waterfall said:
In reverse....sometimes it's the minority that has it right....so in my opinion, we must be diligent in our analysis.
Click to expand...
It all depends on what getting it right means. To me, getting it right means choosing the most loving option.
 
Actually it often means making very hard calls as there are usually many people and their needs and vulnerabilities that might be at stake.

For example many foreign students in Canada are sponsored by their governments because their countries need them to be able to apply what they will learn in their country. They come here, study, and come to deeply desire staying in Canada, often falling in love with someone here. Which is more loving? Making them return home or letting them stay here. Hi
 
I do believe that loving and caring for intelligence is of some benefit in the balancing of the fissure ... that may appear like a stone grail on a leash ... somewhat restrained emotions? Some other mystics would cut it all loose as emotional rationale ...
 
jimkenney12 said:
Actually it often means making very hard calls as there are usually many people and their needs and vulnerabilities that might be at stake.

For example many foreign students in Canada are sponsored by their governments because their countries need them to be able to apply what they will learn in their country. They come here, study, and come to deeply desire staying in Canada, often falling in love with someone here. Which is more loving? Making them return home or letting them stay here. Hi
Click to expand...
I would say it has to be decided on an individual basis.
Remember Churchills decision to not let the enemy know they had deciphered their code by letting a town get bombed even though he wasnt quite sure it would be Coventry? Still not sure how I feel about that one.
 
Intellect up against power and the consequences of knowing something can turn a person into a bipolar nightmare ... a 2 pilloried item of owl with a duo ... in the pecking range!
 
Just thinking about courts and government. They’re not even as independent of each other as we think they are, here. Not only do court decisions influence policy, but politicians influence court decisions (and sometimes do it by influencing public opinion first).

With the MAiD laws, public opinion was clearly influenced before it went to court - and the UN CRPD a critical international human rights instrument intended to prevent laws passing that endanger disabled people - was ignored. Public opinion that is discriminatory against a protected group, and puts them in danger, should never be held above human rights considerations precisely because we know that public opinion when misguided can be dangerous. That’s why we ratified the UNCRPD. It wasn’t supposed to be some patronizing token gesture that means nothing, to make us look good for hosting the Paralympics. The timing to ratify it was chosen then but there are important reasons for it that have a historical basis. Lawyers for the euthenasia lobby got around our own Charter by arguing that the right of disabled people to commit suicide was an imperative, which placed that imperative above our right to live - and is something the UNCRPD should’ve guided them not to do but the courts didn’t abide it.
 
Last edited:
Also just because something is legal does not make it ok. The Nazi’s Akton T4 progrom was “legal” at the time. Residential schools were “legal”. Involuntary sterilization of Indigenous people and disabled people used to be “legal”. So people who participated were “law abiding” then. That’s why there are UN human rights instruments now that are supposed to keep “legal” processes and policies in check.
 
Imagine insane intellectual suicide and how it came gently into place for the purpose and reasons of escapism ... regarding how powers ruin themselves!

It is said all things are affiliated and connected ... and thus many points sink from those tin the industrialized dash to consume all physical resources ... and then the immortal immaterial can retreat in great humus ... they will say; "no chit" ... look at what happened without a bit of a clue!

How the great dark power created satyr and crisis ... as a bump in the quantum fabric ... if only by chance ... Einstein identified dimples! Pock holes in the infinite ...

In the dark side these may pop up as stars of an unspecified order ... many even quintessence's order ... a fifth please? Don't lie, cheat, etc.

Few adhered to the concept ... as they wished to be #1 God ... which few realized did not exist in reductionist theory! It just cannot stand alone by laws of auto numbs! There the feeling departed for the brute phase ... abstract sentient? Relax it is just word ... few believe in just things when leaning on the essence ... may be in the bottom of the cups ... dregs or drag?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top