smittyoneeach's Journal: Chilling, Given the Truthiness

But, hey, Progress:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM

Funny

[BarbaraHudson]

Only watched the first minute, but that "what is three plus 3" politically correct answer is a hoot.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Oh, it's nasty.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

It gets much, much worse.

Re:

[BarbaraHudson]

Then I guess I'll have to make a point of watching all of it :-)

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

How much is 3 x 3? Gender Equality.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I'm too diversity challenged even to understand how the q/a was formulated. I blame the asbestos-laden lead paint chips in my un-pasteurized milk as a child.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

The video comments on the Progressive degeneracy that is the flip side of the coin that is being exchanged in Paris at the moment. Right up there with the abortion, your marriage variations, and global warming. Your falsehoods and bigotries cannot die quickly enough, nor, sadly, with minimal casualties.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

You yourself like to bemoan the decay nearly as much as you fanatically defend the context in which the entropy grows. Because #Winning, I guess.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Oh, I'm confident your buddies in charge will do precisely that.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Merely mirroring your material.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

"Playing the bouncy ball"? Tell me something. The sound of your condescension: does it reach your ears?

My evangelism is with a different crowd, where there is still hope.

To. What. Teleological. Point. Please.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Externalize. Their. Personal. Failures.

Is that it? You're going with that? This is the end of the matter? "Internalize your fallibility"?
Wow, the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, yet I somehow never knew. Thanks, bruh.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

"Blow you away"
I'm (generally) on course, making way, and have a working existential model that helps me navigate.
You seem to encourage a rejection of everything I know, a tossing of the engines, a leaving of the rudder, a rejection of the compass, to be blown away by the wind. . .somewhere. But you can't say where.
You may be way too "smaht" for me, or something.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Can you describe in what way you claim actual "detachment"?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Look, your chums can't prioritize funding all of the entitlement programs That You Earned! and ignore the world situation forever.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

"We" elected Obama, either in the sense of commission or omission. Feel free to consider offering a humble, honest analysis that spreads the blame all around.
I think it's an 80/20 problem, or so. We can and should pillory the nitwits in office for the 20% they own. But don't fail to credit the context.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Well, let's explore your new 'denial' allegation. Is the 'denial' driven by the 'bigotry', or the reverse?
And, have you ever thought of making swastikas of the crap you're emitting? #AskingForAMissouStudent.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Seriously, I have no idea what it is you think I'm doing that is any different from what you're doing.
Other than, when queried for the ground truth of human existence, you suddenly turn into an ersatz Zen peddler.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Evidence? Of what? What teleological purpose in life do you prize so highly, sir?
And what unambiguous evidence do you say I reject?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Purpose is not necessary. In nature there is none.

How is this any less an assertion than any for which you deride me?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

My "prize"? A peaceful life and death.

Why bother living?

What's yours?

"Well done, thou good and faithful servant."

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

How do you quantify the superiority of living over not-living?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Oh, come on. You have plenty of certainty to expound upon from you materialist vantage, don't you? Existence is just a meaning-free, transient collision of molecules, no?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Your mere insistence is not good enough.

Ah, but yours: now there is a trump card.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

Your mere insistence is not good enough.

Careful, there. After I said that to him too many times, he stopped talking to me altogether. He doesn't like being asked to show support for anything.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I do get bored with the asymmetric calls for proof, yes.

"Emergence"

[smittyoneeach]

What is this thing?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Well, we have a shiny new word from you, "Emergence", but, as yet, no backup.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

OK, you're making it up.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Wait, are you trying to offer yet another ersatz "Christianity lite" here?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

If I claimed to be something that you strongly suspected I could not support, would you not call for proof? You made an outlandish claim about yourself, and I asked you to support it. Unsurprisingly, you were unable to support it.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

OK, you're not making it up.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

might be a little of your Christ

Best not taken by half measures, the Truth.

your Christianity voodoo and hatred...

Again, I am stunned at the content you find in my positive effort to express Divine love as best I can. But I don't think you bound by any need for accuracy, so go ahead.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Which purportedly outlandish claim was this?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

Your outlandish claim was of being less married to the GOP than I to the democrats. I challenged that claim by asking you to show a case where you ever criticized a sitting POTUS from the GOP, as I have criticized President Lawnchair many times during his administration. You have so far shown exactly zero examples of you doing that.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Oh. That. Can I just concede to you whatever point you think you're making, to whomever you think excited thereby, if it makes you feel better about yourself?
Which of the Tres Commies on the Iowa stage Saturday are you going to support? Rhode Island Red on the Far Left, Her Majesty at Center Left, Or Martin of the Mallet on the Left? I concede I thought that the woodenness of the Mallet on the Left was more pathetic than terrifying, living across the river from the Peoples' Republic of Maryland as I do.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

So, where do we go from here?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Divine love does not accept non-love. Agape the unconditional love, is that of the creator for the creation. When the creation, of its free will, rebels (e.g. Adam & Eve in the garden) the creator has to deploy a work-around to reconcile the rebellion to the perfection of the creator. That reconciliation, properly understood, requires rejection of rebellion.
Attempting to inject the rebellion into the perfection of the creator would, itself, be an act of rebellion.
God is light. Think of how much the li

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I do not seek to embarrass you or otherwise harm your ego. Indeed I am giving you a chance to prove me wrong. Do you have something that you can share to show that your statement is somehow a reflection of reality? Otherwise it seems you just keep hitting reply because you really thoroughly enjoy typing...

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

'Harm' would be linked to concern somewhere.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I'm explaining the truth to you. Your rejection thereof is a function of your liberty, which at no point is abridged.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Tore the wall down years ago, to my joy.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

Is that not exactly what you were projecting with your previous spiel of

Can I just concede to you whatever point you think you're making, to whomever you think excited thereby, if it makes you feel better about yourself?

I'm not seeking to injure you or make myself somehow "better". I just want to try to reintroduce you to reality.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

No you're not. You're preaching Christian scripture, demanding conformity.

No, I'm not. I'm relating what is true to you, in response to dialogue. Your acts of omission/commission therewith are on you.

Calling it "rebellion" is like saying blacks are "rebelling" against being white and thus are condemned sinners.

No, it's not. Unless the one is somehow God, you're explicitly bearing false witness here. You seem untroubled by the act.

You remained so obsessed on "orifices", like that's all there is.

As with you being you when your information is complete (conception), the inarguable fact that the anus is part of the digestive system and not the reproductive system remains a point of departure. Once these lies become "acceptable", entire monuments to falsehood

"reality"

[smittyoneeach]

Do you, or do you not, subscribe to the idea of objective truth?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I believe truth can be objective. You have not shown that to be part of your philosophy lately. You certainly can't say that many of your recent claims have had any kind of objectivity to them.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

So, there is an absolute truth, irrespective of whether anyone at an time is connected thereto?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

There are some absolute facts. Some you accept, and others you do not. Some you see as just obstacles to you aims.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

How does one interpret your waffling on the question?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

There are, indeed, some absolute facts. I wish you would try using them sometime in your comments.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

So, you reject the idea of an absolute truth?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

Are you talking about a single absolute truth or an infinite number of individual absolute truths? When you say "an idea of an absolute truth" you seem to be setting up for another religious argument.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I'm asking whether you think such is possible/exists. Like absolute zero. It seemed, earlier in the thread, that you were leaning 'Yes', but now you behave as though channeling your inner POOTUS.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I've seen you bring up this "absolute truth" business before as a segue to you giving a lecture on your faith. Your god is the same god that is in the Koran, as is your Jesus. It would seem they are both asleep at the wheel currently.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Well, if you reject the concept, how do you hold to there being any sort of "reality"? As a philosophical point, it seems kind of foundational.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

The main thing I am rejecting here is the notion that your favorite parts of an old book are somehow automatically "absolute truth" because you like them, in spite of the fact that they contradict other parts you don't like, or the fact that we have huge problems with the authenticity of pretty much everything in said book.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Can you be honest about how you are diverging from the basic question of whether you subscribe to the idea of an absolute truth here?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

an absolute truth

By an absolute truth, do you mean there is only one? Or can there be many? Can there be an infinite number of absolute truths?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

How many absolute zeros are there?

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

I do wonder if I should be cheering the Caliphate on. If we're going to do away with good Christian Tolerance because we don't like God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit telling us what to do, then the Justice of Allah cutting the hands off of thieves and beheading heretics and abortionists is likely what we deserve.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I wouldn't cheer them on. As a thought experiment, I'd love to hear the conversations in the alternate future where the Caliphate achieves its goals, and all the idiots who have abetted them by commission or omission get to eat the fruit of their idiocy.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I'm guessing by your generally mercenary attitude that you'll have no difficulty affecting a superficial Muslim conversion when needful. But I may be misjudging you.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Will you accept my hope that those with moral fiber preserve the country, so that you need never be put to the test?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I get kinda amused at your capacity to sound so certain that ""morality" is derived from human culture". Did we also derive the universe, and, if so, from what?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

emergence of "morality"

OK, we've built this up to a three word phrase. Groovy.
But don't forget to explain why a morality is a requirement in, what I expect you will reveal, is a teleological desert.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Oh, right. We now call our shaman "Anthropologists" and you're just recycling the new myths. Because #RefereedJournal

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

A refereed journal is one of those publishing places where, more often than it should, the scientific method perishes.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

That's an interesting arbitrary imposition of morality against the arbitrary imposition of morality.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Hey--it's OK when fustakrakich does it. He's "just observing" and stuff. Somehow. OK, I think it's hooey, too.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

only trying to prevent the imposition of yours on people who don't want it.

Really? This justifies the name-calling because I'm incapable of acceding to a false definition of "equality"? Browbeating in the name of Social Justice, are you? I think you may just be a bigot, but by all means permit dissent and prove me wrong.

The thing is, nobody should be expected to listen to those who refuse to obey their own rules.

It kinda looks like you cheerfully break your tolerance precepts in my case.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

The contradictions flow and shape shift like the Northern Lights.

You cite contradictions as though they exist, in contradiction with reality. Good post-modern show, old yob.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Creates a new dogma in the service of attempting to eliminate dogma. It's the basic paradox at the center of moral relativism.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Which in and of itself is an imposition of morality. You consider the imposition of morality to be so evil that you're willing to impose YOUR morality on others.

Your judgment that others are bigots is in and of itself an imposition of morality.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

"Is it "name calling" if I call you a 'white guy'? No more than "bigot"."

Which in and of itself is an imposition of morality.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

No no no: he gave himself a pass, and stuff.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

You. Must. Conform. Non-conformity == bigotry, or something.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Deny your Northern Light simile? One must admit that it showed relatively more thought than you usually bring.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Contemporary Lefty tripe, mostly.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Your support for our ongoing national holocaust is a prominent, shameful example.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

It's a perverse realm in which you operate where telling the truth about a holocaust is "vilifying women".
In a sane realm, the act of using women as sperm receptacles, then slaughtering the offspring would be seen as "vilification", and then some.
Lord, have mercy on all the evildoers in question.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Well, considering the huge logical hole in your own lesser evil game, that's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

The self-defeating dogma of "There are no true dogmas".

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Yes, in fact, it is an imposition.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Sweet, sweet moral relativism.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Whatevs

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Only if you stipulate first that you absolutely never do the same.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

OK, now that there's two of us, where do we go?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Preach? Heaven forbid I preach other than Christ crucified. But you may have a variant definition of 'preach'.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

First of all, I want peace.
Second of all, I want an actual strategy. An overarching, realistic statement of goals across the diplomatic, informational, economic, and, yes, military (DIME) levers of power showing the 5 Ws of what we're trying to accomplish, as an end state, in conjunction with the regional powers.
Then, maybe, in accordance with the second point, some kinetic involvement.
But I have no confidence in your interest in an actual exchange on the topic.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Which makes you just an alternate evilbot.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Exactly. Moral relativism makes no sense.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

How about you name the strategy, Mr. Big Britches?
I lay out a general framework, and you mount up your Greyhound Bus and start doing doughnuts on me.
Pound sand.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

You offer nothing whatsoever but heckling. Offer something substantial, and then I'll elaborate.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

But making a Jew eat pigs is most certainly an imposition, which is what the sexual revolutionists have been attempting to do for 40 years.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

There is an objective morality that is not a human invention- but is in fact quite human. It is written in your DNA.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Opposing life is evil- which is what your addiction to drugs does directly. As does abortion, divorce, contraception, and homosexuality. That's what I mean by real morality is built into your DNA.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Well, you certainly "flung [your]self upon [your] horse and rode madly off in all directions [online-literature.com]" that time.
Welcome to foreign policy, where everyone thinks they have a clean sheet of paper and then get whacked by all of human history, written or otherwise.
You can't be isolationist; you can't be neo-con: you have to find some way to surf the chaos in between.
What I think you want to do is (a) have some principles, and (b) adhere to them. Your boy W had a couple of decent ideas [nssarchive.us]. I'll buy the argument that the

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

. . .all of which is why so many just nod patiently and then ignore the Moebius strip that is political discourse.
I happen to think that, if we don't manage to boot Big HAL Skynet Brother and kill ourselves, technology (could) eventually walk back some of the centralization of power that is at the heart of the overall woe. A small number of people really like to boss others around. A hefty chunk of people don't mind being bossed around. It's the folk in the middle who crave liberty that are at risk.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Yep.