Sunday, April 05, 2009


Well, I decided to weigh in on several topics over at the Springfield News Leader Forums.

First was the opinion piece entitled "No radicals among Ron Paul backers".

I didn't think it appropriate for anonymous individuals to slander a whole group of people with no refutation. Honestly, they currently still don't have anything to say in response to a well reasoned line of questions. I hope the conversation turns to more rational terms, but I somehow doubt it.

Next, I commented on the piece entitled "Aggressive believers not an issue locally", which is a weak response to a piece in the past of an atheist bemoaning the religious people in the are.

Honestly, atheists and agnostics tend to be extremely intolerant of people with beliefs other than their own. It's comical that they have that complaint about religions. One commenter brought up the freedom we need in Education. I spoke more extensively on that topic.

After that, I offered my thoughts on the purpose of government when it comes to protecting life on the piece "Take a pill, don't take unintended lives".

I think that many people confuse the Pro-Life / Pro-Abortion issue. One of the first ways they confuse it is calling one side Pro-Choice instead of Pro-Abortion. The next thing that is done to cloud the issue, is arguing from a moral viewpoint. Morality isn't something the Government can enshrine. The first amendment protects individuals Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness explicitly when it comes to Speech and Religion.

Finally, I challenged Len Eagleburger on his fear mongering in the piece, "Vote for candidates with experience"

I do not think he actually makes a case for his candidates in his piece. He only casts shadows of doubt without basis. I presented some of the campaign promises of the group I support, Donegan, Ibarra, Martz, and Ellison (DIME). We'll see if he joins me in discussion, or remains in his fear mongering state.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Blogger Jack said...

Speaking in generalities, I find that religious persons tend to be the most intolerant of all. That includes persons of my own religion, Christianity.

I only know a few Buddhists, but this above generality does not tend to fit them. Again, just speaking in generalities.

In all, humans are intolerant of anything/anyone that is different than they are. It's a bad trait we have, but it is part of our nature.

In my experience I have found that most atheists/agnostics are very tolerant of all kinds of persons (minorities, disabilities, women, gay/lesbian/trans, culture, religion).

That is, until those agnostics/atheists run into people who are very intolerant of others. Then we see an anger toward those who are close-minded. That's just my experience. Who can say if my experience can be applied in different parts of the country/world?

I try hard to be inclusive of all persons, but it's hard when we have nuts out there like the "God Hates Fags" so called pastor. I forget his name, or Pat Robertson who blames Hurricane Katrina on gays, or the Baptist "pastor" from Everton who is always blathering in the paper about how our problems are all because of God's anger against us over abortion or some nonsense.

Let me tell you something that I find hysterical. I crack up when I see people like Rush Limbaugh or other ultra-intolerant people complain about someone being intolerant of them or their beliefs. Something about the pot and kettle that just makes me laugh.

To be fair the political spectrum, I also tend to feel that Jesse Jackson is pretty intolerant.

Wow. I didn't meant to write that much. Sorry, buddy. Good to hear from you. Been a while. Hope all is well. Come to another Blogger's hang out sometime.

I'll tolerate you. :-)

8:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home