Youch
-
Posts
6,005 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Youch
-
-
On Wednesday, December 07, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
religion is largely about making magic -- Not logic.
Isn't it more about belief?
I've not ever heard religiosity being about logic or magic. To me, such descriptors are meant to dismiss.
-
6 hours ago, mererdog said:
Zen is largely anti-rational. The koans are designed to change the way people problem-solve, getting them to adopt a more intuitive and less thoughtful approach. Of course, Zen is also largely experiential, so those benefits are supposed to come as a result of rigorous meditation, with the koans acting as a sort of checksum to keep you on the right path. As such, the point is not to try to understand the meaning of the words, but to follow the words down the rabbit hole....
At least, that is how it has been explained to me...
Thx.
I find the quote to be, to/for me, a nice reminder to bring some important things into focus and proper perspective. Regardless of station or position, in the end life is broken down into simple acts.
-
When hungry, eat. When tired, sleep.
I think it's a zen thing about living in the moment, and the awareness thereof.
-
More completely, "Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water."
Thoughts?
-
On Saturday, October 29, 2016 at 11:14 AM, cuchulain said:
Why is the truth often perceived as politically incorrect?
Because it is a threat to those who dismiss it as such.
-
On Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 9:43 AM, mererdog said:
I think your definition is flawed because, based on it, lightning was once supernatural.
No, it just used to be something unexplained. It was always natural.
I believe religion was born from our early naivete as a means to explain the world around us.
-
Nice to see you and others still here.
-
Titles are how some people accessorize themselves. Some consider titles the same as accomplishments. I think the best of the ordained did it as a means to an end. I'm not sure I fit into any of those boxes, as I've never told anyone ("risk"), nor have I ever used it.
-
Hello! Is this still an active forum?
It's been several years!
-
I never said I was an expert in the Muslim world. But, apparently, you and I have seen different Muslims, and, therefore, garner different results.
I've fought terrorists, and I've had moving discussions with our translators. I've seen good people as well as bad come out of that world. You'll never be able to convince me that they're all bad.
I don't get this info from the media, I go out and get it myself.
That's what you don't understand, Youch. And I don't think you ever will.
Since you know nothing of the Muslims I've met, known and "seen," your point is absurd. But, since you say that we've "seen" different Muslims, do explain their utter lack of intolerance and opposition to the greater jihad of their faith?? Please and thank you, as finding such a kernel of evidence would be very welcomed.
Did I ever attempt to "convince you" "they're all bad?" I'm beginning to think you do not read with the intent to understand.
Please provide the avenue to chose to "go out and get info" yourself?!?!? I think that would be interesting. (B.S., of course, but lets go with it....)
You make a claim of something I don't understand, while not specifically identifying that certain something, then project your desire of stupidity upon me by asserting, as many good liberals do, that any contrary thought must somehow be faulty and lacking.
Pre tell, what is it I don't understand? I lay open and exposed to all comers...bring it on. What am I missing, he/she/it?
-
I find it distressing that when I felt moved to look up 'bigoted' online, it's defined as 'utterly intolerant of any opinion that differs from one's own'.
Perhaps Youch should find this distressing as well.
Not because I'm calling Youch names or anything, but because it was Youch himself who made me feel moved to look it up in the first place.
Please calm yourself, Youch.
You had to look it up? And that was "distressing?" Really???
Israelites already know the definition, and their level of "distress" is likely 9 to the umpteenth power compared to such an effort of looking up a common word.
Instead of "feeling" I think what this discussion warrants is more thinking. And many a great thinker lurks the halls of this forum. Wish more would post.
-
What??? Why are you dragging Atheism into this?
Many of my responses to him are for him.
First of all, the entire subject is that Muslims themselves are not the issue. Radicals are. You're the one missing the point.
I fail to see how I've proven myself "intolerant." By the very definition of the word, the fact that I don't blame Muslims as a whole for the actions of a few proves I AM the tolerant one. You, on the other hand, seem to be very "intolerant" of anyone who doesn't share your opinion, as well as of Muslims themselves.
Because the Israelite Jews and the Muslims of the Middle East have been fighting over what they both call the Promised Land of their respective religions since time immemorial. You forget that Israel wants to wipe Muslims out too.
And because of that, you will never know peace, or tolerance, or anything remotely good. Why are you even one this site?
He didn't say anything about avoiding the truth. In fact, he DID say that it is there, and that we're trying to focus on the good, not the bad. Again, your need to be absolutely correct about this is, as Edward said, very annoying.
Seeing as you're the one who's not listening to reason, yeah, "forced down our throats" is pretty accurate.
As to my "debate style," since you don't have one, I'm fairly certain that you have no right to judge mine. But you're going to, as always, just another internet bully who can't seem to understand that his insults and lack of understanding are simply not wanted.
The topic of this particular discussion is "Understanding Islam-Worth the Effort." Let's stick to that, shall we? If you don't WANT to understand, Youch, that's your prerogative, but don't force those of us who DO want to understand to your way of thinking. It's not going to work.
Oh groan.....
Just what is it am I not understanding? You're not an expert on the muslim world, haven't even been there and apparently have no idea what is going on there. Want proof of my contention? To wit: you say "Israel wants to wipe out Muslims, too." I added the comma. You have not a shred of evidence of this lie. It does not matter that Israel is simply trying to defend itself, does not matter that that they have no jihad and have made endless consessions....all that matters, it seems, is anti-Semitism and arguing with me.
If the question is, should we understand Islam? Well, yes...but not through the news media and youtube or whatever sources most people use.....how and why is the obvious? Most people, it seems, don't understand the desperate plight of Israel (or the regional history)....the mainstream media has proven themselves anti-Semitic in their ardent support of Hamas, and more to MY point, our own President, in the span of a few years, as switched sides from being historically a defender of our democratic friend in the region to being a blatant critic of their actions to defend themselves. So, wanting to "understand" a religion that, at it's core advocates a jihad against infidels might be worth while if said effort lead to truth rather than appeasement or excuses.
This is not finger pointing. It is simply a general statement of fact. Take it as you will. Or not. I think it will make some of you feel better to simply argue against my post, so in this way, I am promoting world peace.
-
I would like to hear everyone's opinion on whether they believe they are responsible for their thoughts and dreams.
Many times it seems as if just random stuff starts entering my mind, and I wonder about the origins of thoughts and dreams and emotions. Some times the thoughts are of the most vile and evil nature and I question if whether these thoughts are creations of my own mind or are they being projected into it from some external source. On the other side of the coin there are times when information enters our minds that we have no reasonable explanation for being aware of.
So my question is should we be held responsible for traffic that passes through our awareness in our waking and dreaming states or should our responsiblities rely on how much focus we place upon individual thought forms?
I don't believe you've posted on this site since I proved you wrong about universal energy. This is unfortunate, as you are/were one of my favorite people here.
Yes, of course what happens in your brain belongs to you and you alone. To attempt to blame anything else is a farce, legally and rationally.
-
So many important topics dry up once the original and emotional explosion cedes to rational thinking.
-
Not particularly.
Are you programmed to take an unpleasant truth and force it down our throats?
Yes and no.
I cannot avoid the truth and speaking it.
That you consider a post on a forum on the internet as somehow being "FORCED DOWN YOUR THROAT" is particularly odd.
That you find truth to be "unpleasant" is your problem, not mine.
-
I don't believe in tellimg our children it is not ok to smoke while the parents smokes like a chimney . I think putting braces on teeth or dying their hair is against god we are ruining the image of him and i strongly believe in values and respect should be no#1 Taught amd pre k should be banded
lordie
1. I noticed your rotating star. Prior to you, only two of us (Qyros and myself) had such a device here.
2. Each parent should decide those things for themselves. Not schools. Not government. But we don't live in that society anymore, now do we???
-
I have never claimed to be a socialist. I have admitted that socialism is not, for me, a bogey man that sends shivers down my spine, but a system of economics that has merit in some situations. Just the same view I have toward capitalism.
The purpose of welfare was to create a safety net for those who found themselves in need. But, as it is a compromise with other interests, it has been mis directed. That isn't an uncommon outcome in out system of laws. It has been stripped down to be sub subsistence support, with little to no provision for rebuilding the capacity for recipients to help themselves. That would require more funding. I think progressives would be happy to provide that funding and build a system that moves people off the welfare roles. I think conservatives work very hard to prevent it from being built. I don't think that is because conservatives want to make people dependent, just that they often aren't imaginative enough to see another system than the one they have.
Yes, you have claimed it. Maybe you didn't mean it, but I remember it.
And the fact that you find kinship between two vastly opposing economic philosophies is evidence that you understand neither, or advocate one over the other and are lying about it just as the President and his acolytes do over and over again to achieve their ideological agenda.
Your lack of understanding of what conservative principles mean easily underscores and explains all of your posts, and also explains how and why you don't get so much that has been posted here and elsewhere.
Explaining it all for the umpteenth time will no good, obviously.....
-
not really a fair request. Open hostility is required for a group to gain prominence in the western psyche.
Spoken like an atheist. Or someone who has not a clue about the importance of freedom. Or an ostrich.
no, I mean the arab world. And to a lesser extent the persians.. The further you get from the region, the less likely a muslim is dedicated to the eradication of the jewish state. Nomads see their nomadic routes as their homelands, so that point is kinda weak..
So you speak from the perspective of Saudi Arabia and Iran?
Dude, seriously, you know naught of what you speak....
Youch...
Whatever need you possess to be absolutely correct about the negatiives of Islam or the world are not helping anybody.
Just because we don't wish to think about it doesn't mean we don't believe it exists.
Truth always helps, Mr. Edward. Are you programmed to avoid it?
-
“If in thirst you drink water from a cup, you see God in it. Those who are not in love with God will see only their own faces in it.” ~ Rumi
And some, like me, only see water in a cup. Truth. Fact. What is.
The dude who lives across from me is Islamic. He is a founding member of a new and local Islamic Center in my area. He is kind to me and shares outgrown kids clothing with my wife for my two crumb snatchers. Nice man. Our world views, in some ways, CANNOT be farther apart. And I remember this always.
-
kinda sad when you copy and endorse your own posts.. but, lets have at this..
More significantly, the last part. The idea that welfare is about creating dependency. Now, I agree, to some extent, that this is what it is doing. Probably for different reasons than you think.. but to claim it is the intent seems to beg some extraordinary evidence.
I tend to think it is a side effect of some very capitalist impulses that are at work in welfare design. For example, it is possible for the poor to get subsidies for rental costs, but not for mortgage costs. This is a system designed to move government money into the hands of those who already own real wealth in property. It appeals to those who think that welfare should be about keeping people afloat, but only barely so, as it doesn't help them get out of the debt traps.
No, reiterating my previous point is to underscore it. "Sad" is defending and excusing and advocating the welfare state.
If buying votes, thus creating dependents, ISN'T the purpose of welfare, then what is?? You honestly think politicians give a monkey's knuckle about your family or plight? Of course not. Your family and plight is YOUR business, but your vote, your sustained vote, now THAT is their business.
Why is this not obvious to you? Oh, that's right, you've already, here on this forum, admitted you are a socialist. Which means your allegiance isn't to my freedom, but to the power of the state.
This makes you a danger to my family.
-
Israel is a bit of a touch point, in that it represents the very thing that the arab world is most upset about, European and western intervention into the middle east. The fairly wide spread feeling that Israel shouldn't be there is based, in part, on the fact that it was created out of whole cloth by outsiders without input from locals. Yes, Israel had once been on the site, but it had been gone for a long time. It is my opinion that it should not have been re established, at least not there. But it was, and I don't advocate eliminating it now. However, that particular issue is ripe with problems that are probably best left to another thread.
However, the Muslim world is much bigger than the middle east, so narrowing you focus to it is going to give you an incomplete picture of Islam. That and the fact that you have approached it primarily from a single vantage point, a military vantage point.. might be biasing your understanding.
A bit of a touch point?????? What are you describing, some emotional work-place misunderstanding???
"Arab" world? I think you mean Muslim or Islamic.
"Outsiders?" Who might be the insiders?? Recall from our expansive grasp of history. Only nomads existed in the region known today as Palestine and Jerusalem remained Jewish through most of modern history.
Your point FAILS MISERABLY at getting to the important issue....terrorism and hatred and state-sponsored genocide. Bigotry and hatred and state-sponsored terrorism, and regional state policy demands the elimination of Israel, Jews and by extension, the West. Conversion or elimination. And by you IGNORING that fact in an attempt to EXCUSE the behavior of terrorists, only underlines your "biasing your understanding." Your attempt to blur who the aggressors are doesn't wash with me.
Tell us, wise one, what is the "complete picture of Islam??" That is a rhetorical question, as you've already painted yourself into a corner here.
-
Otherwise, WISHING they were peaceful isn't going to render anything positive.
Nor do I think will you, with this level of negativity.
I apologize for the above observation, but the earlier point I was trying to make is only that both the Middle-East and its people suffer scaring through both their hate and centuries of unresolved conflicts. It is for this reason alone that I can agree with your assertion that those from that region are almost always out for blood. I do not, however, agree with your contention that the Muslim citizens of Paris, Canada, or the United States feel the same way.
It's possible that the attitudes of the Middle East might have a long enough reach to spread their message of hate and allow people like yourself to sustain such an opinion, but that's all I think it is. I have a need and a Hope to believe the best of people. Rather than arguing with us over whether or not the same can be said of Muslims, maybe you should examne why you're unable to do it yourself.
If you don't agree with my contention of Paris, perhaps change the channel and see/hear what is going on there.....MASSIVE anti-Semitic rallies and violent outbursts coming from the growing Islamic communities there. And, pray tell, provide a list of prominent, mainstream Islamic groups/communities here in the U.S. that have expressed outrage against Hamas, Hezbollah, and the like... it is non-existent. So, while I understand the hesitancy to agree with me, you may find it hard to disagree with the facts. Just gotta catch up on those facts. Seriously...check it out and come on back....
-
Different. But relevant. And both sides are guilty.
We're in big trouble folks. But most people don't give a rusty nickel. Apathy and ignorance are likely the biggest and primary root causes.
-
Nobody here or elsewhere relevant has advocated the elimination of a certain level of social safety net.
That said, I should not have to pay for the misfortunes of others. Family should, friends should, local charity should, local religious organizations should (gasp!), and communities should. But I should NOT. I do NOT want you subsidizing my family, and nor should I subsidize your/yours.
But that isn't even the issue. The Federal Government, or most specifically the Progressive/Liberal movement, cares not AT ALL about you; they/it cares only about growing their power, the size of government. Aside from the oppressive nature of dependency, THAT is the issue about welfare......all you others who distract and pretend that it's about people are missing the entire issue and have fallen instead for the emotional propaganda. Federal functionaries far removed from your best interests care naught for your plight. If I've not been clear, or if you disagree, let's discuss.....
I agree that it SHOULD be the responsibility of family, local government (city, county) and religious groups to provide the charity necessary to cover for the misfortunes of others. All to often and more and more each day, many families are saying, "Screw it. It is not my job to take care of my immediate family, much less mom and dad when they can't hold their water anymore." Even the more affluent families treat their children's school as a day care and abdicate all responsibility for them. There is much that SHOULD be. There is very little that IS.
With a very watery eye, I have to agree with you..." There is much that SHOULD be. There is very little that IS." ....how we turn the corner to IS is the responsibility of everyone...not just those who think they are not involved in someone else's misfortune. The bottom line in this emerging global community is everyone is effected by everybody else.
Yeah, it sounds like the "hippie"mantra of the 60's, but the more headlines I read, the more it looks to me that we are all our brother's keeper...all 7+ billion of us. I could list many things from the environment, to food shortages to climate changes that metes this out...but I'm sure everyone here is well aware of the things that makes us all one brotherhood of man under one sun on one planet.
Blessings of Peace,
I always like your posts.
It seems to me that you wish life and nature were something different than it is. And by extension, somehow self-serving functionaries far removed from our lives can/could/should "do something about that." And of course, that is a pile of mule fritters.
People don't always take care of themselves or their families. And sometimes, crap happens. That is what IS. Government mandates (which can only be carved out of the hide of individual freedom) cannot change that. It will only lead to oppression and dependency and the ruination of the greatest social contract ever devised. We are well on our way down that sad path. That is why I consider the progressive philosophy to be a danger to me, my family and the society I love and defend.
A FAR more natural way of looking at all this, which is supported 100% by the Constitution on one hand and the economic philosophy of free markets on the other, is that everyone should pursue their own best interests. Equality does NOT mean equal outcomes....which is contrary to the philosophy of our current and disastrous President.
Pope Francis quote
in Interpath Dialogue, Universal Virtues and Values
Posted
The Pope is a socialist. To me, that discredits him in all ways. Just as with state-run news, at some point you just gotta stop listening. For the former, this is unfortunate....for the latter, good riddance!!