Oh and I’d like to add to the list:
law of attraction
chakras
It reminds me of:
Condescending prick.
Oh the condescending pricks!
Atheists are worse (never thought is say that) than theists!
Problem with you is you talk as if you know somethimg… you only know what you’ve been told… try thinking for yourself. Try unplugging.
I’m not looking for a feel good anything. You however are a cold condescending twat
Condescending??? Lol. There is a whole community of people who believe where I directed you. They also are “awake” and “know stuff” and have a low level of evidence (usually personal) to support one another.
Can’t help that you can’t back up your assertions… that’s your problem. It’s called research and sourcing materials…
3 Likes
Oh good, I wasn’t sure that was fully coming across in my post.
@Wagyers11, I should’ve realise the 11 was your age. All the clues were there.
Well I guess that’s what I get for trying to reason with a superstitious illiterate moronic keyboard warrior, with a chip on his shoulder.
I guess no good deed goes unpunished.
Time you left now champ, the nurse will be cutting your food for you.
Well I’m not going to lie to you, that’s disconcerting. What with your posts being crazier than a dozen hamsters on speed, in a small cage.
It’s a shame you don’t know somethimg (sic), then we wouldn’t have been wasting our time on an illiterate batshit crazy lunatic peddling astrology, and the kind of ludicrous dietary advice one would expect from someone who runs away from black cats, and thinks a cool fashion accessory is a hat fashioned from tin foil.
I never thought I’d say this, but try not thinking for yourself, you’re simply not equipped for it champ.
Bye then, it’s been emotional. Do give our best to Elvis when you next see him.
1 Like
Fucking hell Shelley. I just allowed a lump of lamington to get caught in my throat reading that and had to swallow a large glass of a cab merlot grenache to clear it. My new Step One underpants are quite ruined. https://stepone.life/
I’m going to jump in here, for two reasons. First, because the argument with Wagyers11 is getting boring. He is a troll and we’re feeding his sad addiction. Second, because whilst my previous answer gave a reason not to burn books, it did not address the morality question. So here goes.
Book burning is not a moral question. There is nothing immoral about burning a book, holy or otherwise, but doing so betrays the mind of the man with the torch.
People who burn books, do so because they fear what is in them. Even their hatred is driven by fear and for good reason. Words are generated by ideas and ideas are the enemy of tyrants, be they political or religious. Tyrants must have orthodoxy and can never allow freedom of thought, because it spells their end. Any book that does not reinforce their power is a direct threat.
1 Like
I broadly agree, though I’d assumed that we were talking about whether the principle of burning books was wrong or bad, rather than the simple act of setting fire to a single book, or even several books.
The reason I thought it was wrong is because, like you, I felt the person doing it was attempting to censor an idea they didn’t like or feared. It has always struck me as a act of violent censorship.
1 Like
Or a dozen guinea pigs. Here goes the dozen guinea pigs.
May I reply with a quote from a german writer and poet who lived in the first half of the 19th century? He was named Heinrich Heine, and his quote is engraved in Berlin Bebel Platz, where in May 1933 the Nazi student organization burned tons of books considered hostile to the ideas of the regime.
Wherever they burn books, in the end will also burn human beings." - Heinrich Heine (on your left).
In any historical era and in any part of the world, the burning of books and the destruction of cultural symbols (I think recently of the Buddha statues in the Bamyan valley in Afghanistan destroyed by the Taliban) have always been accompanied by barbarism and intolerance.
2 Likes
Sorry to be noodge, but I don’t speak or read German.
Book publishers and booksellers and these days, second hand book dealers, burn perhaps millions of books a year. Morally wrong? Of course not, with the understanding that those are commercial decision, not ideological .
IMO it is morally wrong to burn or repress a book/ film /play because of the ideas it contains. We had print and film censorship in Australia until the 1970’s. Pornography was banned any form. That included ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’, and any book by the Marquis De Sade. Pretty sure “Mein Kampf” and “The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion” were also banned on political/moral grounds.
Catholic schools were vigilant against anything even slightly sexual even by implication. Eg we had a special censored version of “Hamlet”
Even to day it is my understanding that many US school boards ban books accepted by the rest of the community, such as "Catcher In The Rye’’
Here in Oz a catholic cleric/teacher had all copies of Harry Potter removed from the school library because “the spells work”. (I can’t help but wonder how he knows)
It is my position is that censorship is denial of free speech.
It was Heinrich Heine who said: “Wherever they burn books, in the end will also burn human beings.” (is that what your plaque says?)
German language? Me neither, but the replying to your last question I say YES, it’s Heinrich Heine.
The longer sentence on your right remind us what happened there:
“In the middle of this square, on may 10th 1933, nazist students burned hundreds of books by…”
They burned books by Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, Bertold Brecht, Joseph Roth and many others author.
My position about censorship it’s the same. Knowing books like Mein Kampf, for example, can help us understand the cultural background in which the modern and unfortunately widespread neo-Nazi movements are born and spread.
Burning books it’s not just morally wrong, but even culturally wrong. I think it is also something that goes in the opposite direction with respect to understanding the topics covered in the books in question.
To develop a critical conscience it is necessary to know different points of view, even the ones we like least.
I know abouth Catcher In The Rye by Salinger and Harry Potter, but I didn’t know about Hamlet.
But do you know who which is the most sensational case of censorship ever made in the history of literature?
Of course we are talking about the Catholic Church. It was able to censor even the Old Testament, cutting off part of the first commandment. This is necessary to justify the prevailing spread of Christian symbols with which the Church makes a lot of money. Marketing matters.
This part, which can also be found in Deuteronomy, 5 7-10, is not taught. It is systematically canceled from catechism, from masses, and from the lesson of religion in schools (It happens in Italy, I swear on my head). This gives us the measure of the intellectual dishonesty on which the Catholic Church is founded.
Talking about these things in the presence of a man on the cross dripping with blood, or doing it at the foot of the statue of any blonde and seductive Maria, would be counterproductive for business reasons.
But Catholics don’t like to read the Bible…
1 Like
Specifically? Probably Lady Chatterley’s Lover
I didn’t know that and I was brought up Catholic. Pretty sure we were taught the no other gods bit***
Among the two greatest tricks all Christian churches have perpetrated are:
Ignoring Jesus’ claim that he did not come to change the law.
Matthew 5:18 “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (KJV)
Paul of Tarsus was allowed to abolish/ignore the ritual commandments in the 613 commandments/mitzvot which make up the Law [of Moses] The rest they simply ignored.
Paul invented the religion we call christianity by allowing gentiles to join. Had that not happened, the sect would have faded into a well deserved obscurity.
The other major con job was convincing the ignorant that Jesus met the criteria for the Messiah. He did not . Don’t believe me.? Have a look at some actual Jewish prophesy . Among other things, you will find: The Messiah is to be a warrior king in the Davidic tradition. He is most definitely not divine. He will not die young. He will bring an era of world peace for all of humanity, not just the Jews .
The discipline of apologetics was invented to get around embarrassing facts such as the ones I’ve mentioned.
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
I suspect that has been omitted because it shows quite clearly that Judaism was polytheistic at that time. In fact recent archaeology has shown at least part of the Israelite population remained polytheistic as late as the third century bce. I think that’s about is about 1000 years after the alleged Exodus. (Judaism claims the Exodus occurred during the reign of Ramses the Great, but there is no consensus)
1 Like
Well there’s the “out and out” censorship and then the tons of “self” and the hidden “workarounds” - women writing under a male pseudonym.
Perhaps the pachyderm in the auditorium is that even today few [male] members of any of the Abrahamic faiths refuse to concede those faiths are and have always been acutely patriarchal.
Feminism has made a good start, but only a start imo. .
In some countries, incredible progress.
For myself, the ability to drive, own property, be an heir, vote, access to education and job opportunities, bodily autonomy - these are being sought and hopefully legally gained (eventually throughout the world).
Respect or value? How could that ever be legislated? Some have earned their remembrance in history through the worst of societal inequality, and other women, given the most advantageous opportunities and societal acceptance have earned their “vicitimhood”.
Only in some, but generally not as much as people like to think.
—and there’s the rub. Until such things are simply part of our culture*** neither equality nor equity for women will be fully realised, imo
(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((9))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
***I use the term ‘culture’ in a broad academic sense, as being “that which we take for granted”. These are not things of which we are usually consciously aware.
Equally, racism will exist as long as a person’s sex/ assumed race/ colour is used as anything other than in a descriptive sense. (imo)
1 Like
Here’s the 10 commandments in Italy
That Saint Paul is the true founder of the Catholic religion is true. Another responsible for the spread of the Catholic religion was the Roman Emperor Constantine.
Hahahaha…
Wrong set. Nope. They don’t read their bible!