This week's Round Up is hosted by Reepicheep's Coracle.
Friday Hodgepodge - *Three Things* *1*. *To drink or not to drink?* That is the question Stone's Full Circle Ale presents to me: Stone Brewing is breaking new ground by becom...
14 hours ago
All You Need to Know for the Last Four Episodes (of LOST)
EXCERPTS: Locke was a sucker because he bought into Jacob’s game hook, line, and sinker the same way Jack currently is. You see, Jacob creates the same (false) dichotomy that Lindelof explicated in the quote in the introduction. He makes it seem as if you believe in him, or the world will be evil--as without him there is nothing. The problem with that position is it’s observationally false and metaphysically dishonest.
Nothingingness doesn’t mean there is nothing; it means there’s nothing more. Observationally, there is something. We see it around us every day. It’s called existence. Metaphysically, what that means is the meaning of our lives is to live them. It’s a really simple idea, I know, but one we never hear. Why is that? Because people like Jacob perform a metaphysical conceit on us. They tell us the searching for “the meaning of life” will never be complete because there must be more than existence, there must be more than us. They then subtly twist this statement and tell us, if there is something more, that is what’s really important, and thus what is and what we know is nothing. Notice how Jacob does the same in his conversation with Richard in “Ab Aeterno.” He essentially convinces Richard “if you don’t choose me, evil will corrupt everyone” or, in other words, “if you don’t choose my something, everyone will become nothing as their souls will be lost to sin.” It’s a very deft rhetorical tactic, except that it's not true . . .
* * *
Before you can properly exist in the world, you must accept that the world exists independently, that you can understand it, and then attempt to understand it. Only when you do that can you begin to properly be self-interested because you have a proper sense of context in order to differentiate yourself from the rest of the world in order to best understand yourself.
Conventionally, most people believe that morality can only be based in religious faith and that in a world without God no principles of right and wrong could exist. Related to this, philosophers have long held that no objective, fact-based, rational code of values is possible.
Regarding both points, this talk shows that the exact opposite is true. The purpose of morality is to guide human life on earth and religion is utterly incapable of it. Flourishing life requires a code of secularism, rationality, egoism and freedom. Religious faith clashes with every principle of a proper moral code, and, as such, has led, and can only lead, to hell on earth.
Amid the intellectually hollow group-think of today’s rivaling political parties, there exists an opportunity as well as a desperate need: questioning minds are starved for answers grounded in objective, independently observable evidence. This need became palpable as multitudes of indignant Americans spoke out in furious (but, for the most part, intellectually empty) protest against the passage of the health care law. If those enraged Americans would speak out, not in blind fury, but in clear-sighted, solidly reasoned intellectual protest against the health care law and all it implies, they would be unstoppable—for they would have no real opposition.
Regarding "Tea totaled: Militia idea good way to lose support” (Our Views, April 15): The Oklahoman’s position on the formation of a militia in Oklahoma is right on. This is a bad idea. Most Oklahomans are pretty conservative in our political views and we’d like to see federal spending lowered and the erosion of our rights ended, but advocating the taking of arms against the government at this time is ridiculous. We still have the right to speak freely. We also have the right to vote. That scares politicians more than does a loaded firearm.
Bill Garrison, Tuttle
Grove tea partiers focus on freedom
(EXCERPT) Tables filled with political material lined the lawn as chants of "USA, USA” reverberated through the crowd. Homemade signs opposing taxes and spending, health care legislation, President Barack Obama, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid shared space with the umbrellas.
Glenn and Polly Sharp, of Grove, said the American people have lost confidence in a government they said is taxing and spending its citizens into poverty.
"This tea party is not Republican or Democrat,” Glenn Sharp said. "It’s about everyday citizens, the people that walk down Main Street in Grove, Tulsa or Oklahoma City.”
Mike Kurtz, whose group USAPatriots sponsored the Expo Square event, said his organization’s priority is bringing Christian morals to government. One of Thursday night’s featured speakers was Rick Scarborough, a self-described “Christocrat” best known for his book “In the Defense of Mixing Church and State” (and no relation of ex-Congressman/TV host Joe Scarborough).
The Rev. Paul Blair, pastor of Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, said he brought two busloads of his congregation who typically would be worshipping at Wednesday night services.
"We’re having church at the Capitol tonight," Blair said.
"We need to regain the vision of ourselves held by the American Founders. We need to stand up, and assert ourselves as autonomous moral beings, with the right to our own life, liberty and the pursuit of our own happiness. We need to reject the claim that we are weak and dependent beggars, and to assert our own competence to run our own lives.More John Lewis
It is going to take as great a commitment to destroy this cancer as it took to build it. We’re going to have to be strong, we’re going to have to be independent in our thinking, and we are going to have to reject handouts when they are offered to us. And we’re going to have to speak out."
The government has, once again, become a ruling aristocracy, set up as our masters, disposing of our lives. . . .
This is an attempt to seize your life, to destroy your sense of self as an independent human being, and to replace it with a being with no self-esteem and no capacity for individual action — a being doomed to beg for sustenance from an all-powerful ruling elite.