School Shooting in Connecticut

it's womb envy

  On 12/24/2012 at 4:16 PM, lumpenprol said:

see, you have to let me give the easy answers, I can't be all encey n' stuff.

 

Maybe he was a former member of watmm and used to be a happy wanker but it all went downhill after the nice tits thread got deleted...

lol

  On 12/24/2012 at 4:05 PM, lumpenprol said:

Maybe we lost the future savior of IDM too soon...perhaps what he needed most was a copy of FL...

I like where this is going.

  On 12/23/2012 at 10:35 PM, goDel said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 4:52 PM, encey said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 12:43 PM, goDel said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 10:55 AM, compson said:

bullshit

 

Compy, have you actually tried to read it, or do you think that by reading some quotes you can get the gist of the entire piece?

 

Frum explains it enough in the intro. If you don't like the piece that's fine and all. I think the author has clearly done some soul searching and came with a lot of interesting insights.

 

 

  Quote

What goes through the mind of a school shooter? In the past days, we've all asked that question. The following is one attempt at answer. It was sent to me by a young person living in an East Coast metropolitan area. I am satisfied that the autobiographical facts described are true to the teller's memory and experience. The story is troubling, but important to consider. For reader ease, I have broken the essay into three parts. I am glad to report that the author is now personally stable, a college graduate, and gainfully employed.

 

While you're at it read "Letter From a Birmingham Jail"

 

I'm not sure why you think a letter from MLK is relevant in this context. If it's about what could drive a man into violence, I'd say the position of a black man pre 1960's is completely different to that of a so-called 'A. Lanza'. This hasn't got much to do with segregation based on beliefs or race, or the isolation of a group of people. It's about some individual whose mind is distorted by his own beliefs because of being isolated. And whose distorted beliefs causes to be even more isolated, resulting in some negative feedback loop. Regardless of the system, or the society.

 

But I'm sure I haven't understood your point.

 

Yeah it was from a tangent about religion's power to mobilize large numbers of people for social and political change.

  On 12/26/2012 at 5:18 PM, encey said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 10:35 PM, goDel said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 4:52 PM, encey said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 12:43 PM, goDel said:

  On 12/23/2012 at 10:55 AM, compson said:

bullshit

 

Compy, have you actually tried to read it, or do you think that by reading some quotes you can get the gist of the entire piece?

 

Frum explains it enough in the intro. If you don't like the piece that's fine and all. I think the author has clearly done some soul searching and came with a lot of interesting insights.

 

 

  Quote

What goes through the mind of a school shooter? In the past days, we've all asked that question. The following is one attempt at answer. It was sent to me by a young person living in an East Coast metropolitan area. I am satisfied that the autobiographical facts described are true to the teller's memory and experience. The story is troubling, but important to consider. For reader ease, I have broken the essay into three parts. I am glad to report that the author is now personally stable, a college graduate, and gainfully employed.

 

While you're at it read "Letter From a Birmingham Jail"

 

I'm not sure why you think a letter from MLK is relevant in this context. If it's about what could drive a man into violence, I'd say the position of a black man pre 1960's is completely different to that of a so-called 'A. Lanza'. This hasn't got much to do with segregation based on beliefs or race, or the isolation of a group of people. It's about some individual whose mind is distorted by his own beliefs because of being isolated. And whose distorted beliefs causes to be even more isolated, resulting in some negative feedback loop. Regardless of the system, or the society.

 

But I'm sure I haven't understood your point.

 

Yeah it was from a tangent about religion's power to mobilize large numbers of people for social and political change.

 

a power absolutely any other organization or community has.

The KKK has power to mobilize large numbers of people for social and political change. Same with other hate groups.

The power to organize to force social change does not immediately rectify all the immense evils conducted under its umbrella for millenia. I like MLK because he's an example of it working; I think think of about a hundred or more other examples of when it doesn't.

im definitely a cynic here, no argument against that.

but if you are saying the church has its merits because it can organize for potentially "moral" changes in society, that's a bit of a slippery slope, innit?

  Quote

a power absolutely any other organization or community has.

to what degree ? what organizations arrange and explain the world like religion does ? that's the source of its power i think.

every organization is predicated upon some explanation or theory of natural order/proceedings...government, local community, family, sexuality, science, etc. etc.

If you are saying that religion attempts to address this in a far larger scope, I suppose I would agree with that. But that makes it no more righteous or exceptional, and the exponential need to explain all matters via simple dogmatic means usually ends up creating more catastrophic problems than it solves.

MLK most famous speech "I have a dream" isn't even remotely religious

And I think suggesting MLK's influence was more sourced from religion than equality/injustice does a disservice to his message. It was a message that speaks to all people.

There's a lot more to MLK than "the guy that made that speech".

His speeches against the Vietnam War IMHO are his best:

[youtubehd]b80Bsw0UG-U[/youtubehd]

I personally think him and Malcolm had a lot of views in common....but MLK was very wary of social stigma.

Agreed, but that speech wasn't just a speech. It was one of the greatest speeches in American history in terms of its impact on our culture.

im also going to add that one of the reasons i remotely tolerated religious organization was because of their influence on great thinkers and scientists within their own right.

but the ones with serious breakthroughs were often ones in rebellion or rejection of the organized dogmas of organized religion: Kierkegaard, Spinoza, Augustine, etc. etc. Shit even Pope Gregory the Great had a number of plots against him from within the Cardinals due to his ideological reformism.\

So i guess im trying to say that I tolerate and even admire some religious figures if they use it for inspiration, but not definition, i.e.-without religion, X would have never Y. its specious reasoning at best.

but anyway everyone is probably tired as hell of me talkin about this shit so ill stop here.

  On 12/26/2012 at 6:29 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

every organization is predicated upon some explanation or theory of natural order/proceedings...government, local community, family, sexuality, science, etc. etc.

 

If you are saying that religion attempts to address this in a far larger scope, I suppose I would agree with that. But that makes it no more righteous or exceptional, and the exponential need to explain all matters via simple dogmatic means usually ends up creating more catastrophic problems than it solves.

it's exceptional in its organizational power, not some supposed inherent benevolence or something like that

  On 12/26/2012 at 6:42 PM, eugene said:

  On 12/26/2012 at 6:29 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

every organization is predicated upon some explanation or theory of natural order/proceedings...government, local community, family, sexuality, science, etc. etc.

 

If you are saying that religion attempts to address this in a far larger scope, I suppose I would agree with that. But that makes it no more righteous or exceptional, and the exponential need to explain all matters via simple dogmatic means usually ends up creating more catastrophic problems than it solves.

it's exceptional in its organizational power, not some supposed inherent benevolence or something like that

but thats exactly my point, its supposed inherent benevolence is the organizational power behind it.

edit: ok seriously im gonna stop now. PM me if anyone wants to talk further.

well yes, this attribute in particular and in general religions' scope puts it on different level than just some random organization.

Just to be clear: My point wasn't to argue that the church is good just because it can mobilize lots of people for social change. I was responding to an argument that the church is bad just because it can mobilize lots of people for destructive and hateful ends; and my response was that this neglects the examples of its power to do the opposite. I also argued that if your principle is that we should abolish all large and powerful organizations just because they can bring about bad things, you are committing yourself to do away with too many institutions and social practices.

I think GIllette is right that MLK's message was not directed solely to Christians and was inclusive. But that doesn't mean his message did not have Christian content or inspiration. He quotes scripture in the text of the speech itself!

  On 12/26/2012 at 7:21 PM, encey said:

Just to be clear: My point wasn't to argue that the church is good just because it can mobilize lots of people for social change. I was responding to an argument that the church is bad just because it can mobilize lots of people for destructive and hateful ends; and my response was that this neglects the examples of its power to do the opposite. I also argued that if your principle is that we should abolish all large and powerful organizations just because they can bring about bad things, you are committing yourself to do away with too many institutions and social practices.

 

I think GIllette is right that MLK's message was not directed solely to Christians and was inclusive. But that doesn't mean his message did not have Christian content or inspiration. He quotes scripture in the text of the speech itself!

I think we are in general agreement, I just think as time goes on and science explains more and more about reality, these organizations use destructive and hateful ends to continue their relevancy. They know and fear their power dwindling across the board. Traditions are dissolving into history and those with the more extreme and passionate belief that humanity will face dire consequences from God if this is not reversed does lead to radical, hateful, and violent attitudes. They believe they are acting morally, which is how sensible/rational human beings can do and say evil and hateful things towards other.

The argument that gays are not "natural" for example. As if nature is not evolving and changing.

Another example would be WATMM and how it disrespects individuals who are not in line with the established opinions, personalities, music tastes of the group. New people changing the way people might perceive what WATMM is about. If you are not with us you are against us. Conformism and surrendering to the old establishment.

I'm in total agreement that the argument against gay marriage on account of 'human nature' is stupid, an example of misunderstanding the virtue of love at the center of Christian morality -- but who am I to argue with the Pope!

The Pope hates existentialists!

*sucks a dick*

  On 12/26/2012 at 7:45 PM, compson said:

Another example would be WATMM and how it disrespects individuals who are not in line with the established opinions, personalities, music tastes of the group. New people changing the way people might perceive what WATMM is about. If you are not with us you are against us. Conformism and surrendering to the old establishment.

Everyone's just expressing their opinion.

It might get heated, but that's the extent of what's going on.

  On 12/26/2012 at 9:20 PM, LimpyLoo said:

  On 12/26/2012 at 7:45 PM, compson said:

Another example would be WATMM and how it disrespects individuals who are not in line with the established opinions, personalities, music tastes of the group. New people changing the way people might perceive what WATMM is about. If you are not with us you are against us. Conformism and surrendering to the old establishment.

 

Everyone's just expressing their opinion.

 

It might get heated, but that's the extent of what's going on.

Ignoring things you don't like is more productive. Especially in a format such as the message board. You can ignore users or not read their posts.

  On 12/26/2012 at 9:26 PM, compson said:

  On 12/26/2012 at 9:20 PM, LimpyLoo said:

  On 12/26/2012 at 7:45 PM, compson said:

Another example would be WATMM and how it disrespects individuals who are not in line with the established opinions, personalities, music tastes of the group. New people changing the way people might perceive what WATMM is about. If you are not with us you are against us. Conformism and surrendering to the old establishment.

 

Everyone's just expressing their opinion.

 

It might get heated, but that's the extent of what's going on.

 

Ignoring things you don't like is more productive. Especially in a format such as the message board. You can ignore users or not read their posts.

tbh I need to work on that....ive admittedly been a bit to sensitive about this stuff and should loosen up.

  On 12/26/2012 at 9:26 PM, compson said:

Ignoring things you don't like is more productive. Especially in a format such as the message board. You can ignore users or not read their posts.

Speak for yourself.

im sick of watmms hivemind u cant have ur own opinion without someone jumping on your head as if it was a ripe watermelon! its like, i really like skrillex and im sick of you fucking people saying he isnt very good he is teh saviour of EDM (sort of like the next step after IDM)

  On 12/27/2012 at 2:55 PM, RichieBees said:

im sick of watmms hivemind u cant have ur own opinion without someone jumping on your head as if it was a ripe watermelon! its like, i really like skrillex and im sick of you fucking people saying he isnt very good he is teh saviour of EDM (sort of like the next step after IDM)

you honestly got old with this about 30 or 40 posts ago. give it a rest.