wat0n wrote:
...Besides, there have been atheists in the US Congress anyway.
I went down that list and found one guy that was openly atheist while he was in Congress.
And he ain't there now...
So what I said stands.
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
wat0n wrote:
...Besides, there have been atheists in the US Congress anyway.
late wrote:1) That's a new one to me. You just said religious bigotry is determined by race... Or something like that?
2) As an atheist, I can tell you there is very real prejudice against non-believers. If you lost both your hands, you could still count all the admitted atheists in Congress with your fingers...
That is typically a Right wing line of thought that leads to a desire to alter the government from secular, to sectarian.
This is not a good idea.
Verv wrote:
These can easily be thought of as their own promotion of 'cultural genocide' as any child who is from a conservative Evangelical, Orthodox, Catholic, Muslim, or Mormon home will surely be hearing two very different messages and seeing two very different norms at school and at home.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Let us take a stroll down history lane.
In Canada, one of the first things that Canada did in order to destroy Indigenous cultures was allow the near eradication of bison from the plains. This forced Indigenous communities to starve, and thereby relocate to reserves, where the government promised them (and then deprived them of) food.
Was a similar tactic used against conservative Christians recently?
In the early 1800s, there were an estimated 30 million bison on the Great Plains.[1] However, the lucrative robe trade accelerated overhunting of the plains bison by indigenous groups and white settlers alike. The bison on the western plains were last to be affected by white American expansionism, but by the 1850s even those herds were diminished.[2] Westward migration of domesticated animals and people destroyed grazing grounds, and drought and new diseases exacerbated the decline.[3] The plight of the bison was largely seen as the superiority of man over nature until the early 19th century.[4] Historian Andrew Isenberg argues that the rise of capitalist ideology drove indigenous and white hunters alike to compete for every last animal, and that a multitude of factors – disease, drought, westward expansion, commercialization and industrialization of hunting, colonialism, and the introduction of domestic animals from Europe – caused the near-extinction of the bison.[5] Others point out that the bison depletion was a problem of the tragedy of the commons, the opposite of capitalism: The bison were communal property, not private property, therefore they were abused and squandered for short-term gain that ultimately caused long-term problems as no one person or group was responsible for maintaining a healthy population.[6]
Federal government wildlife policy evolved from preservation of wilderness to utilitarian, scientific conservation and management of bison populations. The goals of these policies often contradicted themselves, aiming to simultaneously preserve wildlife, promote recreation, commercialize the bison, and assert state control over Aboriginal Canadians.
late wrote:Schools teach science, not kook.
They also want kids to play nice, so hell and brimfire speeches are less than welcome.
Now if they had roasted you on a spit and fed you to the kids, that might be genocidal.
Verv wrote:Uh huh.
You would actually be misunderstanding Christianity if you thought that people spoke of fire & brimstone for any other purpose.
We were just discussing this.
You might want to argue with @Pants-of-dog about how cultural genocide is not genocide.
Verv wrote:There's a lot of people who say that the policies were deliberately to attack the natives, and there are quotes out there to back it up, but the decline of the Buffalo seems inevitable.
History of Bison conservation in Canada
The same article states that, funny enough, that
It is almost like there is literally no way for some people to analyze history without it being about the evils of white people asserting control and dominance over the native population. And, they are not wrong, because the motivations of most people in history is power, it is not wrong to analyze every move as an attempt to amplify or preserve one's power.
The history of Europe is the history of what particular groups of white people will do to other particular groups of white people to maintain or amplify their own power. So, it is not particularly damning if the same thing is done by whites abroad -- it's what whites do to each other.
And it is what the people of all races do within their own races, as well. Some even perhaps made incessant warfare spiritual and planned. This is reminiscent of the seasonal warfare that often could occur between native tribes in the North, where the goal was never extermination but just asserting dominance and gaining certain rites to hunting ground, and even initiating their braves into manhood. In cultures like the Asmat, perhaps they controlled their population by forcing men to take heads to earn their spot in the tribe. It'd be an easy way to keep the population strong and the numbers down for the whole region to force males into warfare to earn the right to live out their days and procreate -- indeed, one could even see how surplus males are a grave problem in any population, and why the Lion kills all of the young males when it takes over a new pride.
Verv wrote:
Uh huh.
late wrote:Creationism was designed to sneak religion into public school.
The courts rejected it emphatically.
This reflects the intent of the Founding Fathers that the country be secular.
If you have a problem with that, the remedy is private school.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Why are you mentioning all of this? Is there an argument you wish to make?
And, you are unable to find an example of Christians being oppressed in the same way.
Verv wrote:I am just offering my thoughts & comments on the Buffalo and colonialism, as they intersect with racism. I am posting my opinions freely on a political forum.
I do not expect you to interact with them productively, as you simply do not cover anything that you cannot defend. It's fine.
Well, sure, if you believe the theory that the Ukraine was a largely religious & rebellious Soviet republic, the Holodomor could be thought of as being an anti-Christian starvation based genocide. Of course, the motives were more political than religious, but it is impossible to think of Ukrainian dissidents as not having at least very strong CHristian contingencies. Let's not forget that something like 300,000 clergy were killed by the Soviets, after all.
Interesting thing -- yesterday marks the 6th anniversary of the 21 Martyrs of Libya!
20 Egyptian Coptic Christians and a Ghanaian Christian had their heads cut off on a beach in Libya (presumarbly near Sirte) while praising God.
Christians face martyrdom at the hands of others to this day -- I would not say genocide, but it is certainly true that the Christians of places like Nineveh in Iraq/Syria are not doing so well.
Meanwhile, in Canada, it would be completely absurd to say that Indigenous Peoples are subjected to being beheaded in groups or having their places of worship bombed.
Verv wrote:
This is completely wrong
Pants-of-dog wrote:An opinion is not an argument.
So these examples of bigotry against Christians do not happen anymore, is what you are saying.
and they never happened in North America.
late wrote:You wish.
I may have gotten the label wrong, but I got the legal part right:
https://ncse.ngo/ten-major-court-cases- ... reationism
Btw, philosophy classes don't teach religion. I've had 4 of them.
Not that any accredited school would do it, but include one word of religion and it stops being a science class. Check my link.
Verv wrote:Sure!
Oh, so we are only talking about North America? I think this is artificially restricting the scope of the discussion.
We have gained a lot from talking about Canada, surely, but it is time for the debate to grow a bit, even if it is just to contextualize Canada.
You know, one of the 21 martyrs was from Ghana, and I have long thought that if Ghana and Canada came together as Ghanada, it would be beneficial to both societies.
It is impossible to have a full understanding of philosophy without understanding God's role in philosophical systems.
Usually, the first thing high school philosophy introduction courses do after covering guys like Heraclitus is talk about Plato's Cave, and then Aristotle, at which point it's impossible to talk about philosophy without discussing theories of God like the Prime Mover.
--
Include one word of religion and it stops being a science class? I do not really understand how that would work at all.
It just sounds like you really hate religion and would be forced into a rage if someone dared to mention something about the supernatural amongst the natural., even though this would only be in passing. Yet, I cannot imagine someone talking about biological differences between the genders without shoehorning some platitudes about equality, or talking about sexual reproduction without having a Hooman Rights Campaigner inform us of the wonders of gender & sexuality beyond the binary or something.
Pants-of-dog wrote:As far as I can tell, this post has nothing to do with racism, which os the thread topic.
Please let me know if you wish to discuss racism. Thank you.
Verv wrote:Oh, so we are only talking about North America? I think this is artificially restricting the scope of the discussion.
We have gained a lot from talking about Canada, surely, but it is time for the debate to grow a bit, even if it is just to contextualize Canada.
You know, one of the 21 martyrs was from Ghana, and I have long thought that if Ghana and Canada came together as Ghanada, it would be beneficial to both societies.
And Canada had state control, while these terrorists do not. So, another major difference.
Well here is how this is going to work Skinster. […]