Comments on: Stupidity + Politics + Religion http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:20:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: skippy http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-461676 Tue, 04 Dec 2007 03:07:57 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-461676 fercryininthesink, it's just a joke, folks! albeit a snarky and snide one, but the malice behind it is miniscule compared to the malice behind the creationists' desire to indoctrinate the whole country into their beliefs. anyway, if you loved moonbat's geometrical analysis of id, you'll love the title of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Idiots-Understanding-Intelligent-Design/dp/1592575552/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&#38;s=books&#38;qid=1196645177&#38;sr=8-1" rel="nofollow">this book</a>. fercryininthesink, it’s just a joke, folks! albeit a snarky and snide one, but the malice behind it is miniscule compared to the malice behind the creationists’ desire to indoctrinate the whole country into their beliefs.

anyway, if you loved moonbat’s geometrical analysis of id, you’ll love the title of this book.

]]> by: joanr16 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456846 Sat, 01 Dec 2007 02:17:28 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456846 <i>I think, joanr16, that “Intelligent Design” and “teaching Intelligent Design as science” are essentially the same concept.</i> Only if you allow the Religious Right, who employ the former phrase as code for the latter one, to dictate your vocabulary. In the U.S. it's still true that most people who hold the <i>personal spiritual belief</i> of "intelligent design" do <i>not</i> support the teaching of that personal belief in our schools. Intellectual shortcuts, obfuscation and misuse of language are the current tricks of the Right. Let's be clear and correct, if only to piss them off. Having said that, I still "get" the diagram, and think it's mostly true. I think, joanr16, that “Intelligent Design” and “teaching Intelligent Design as science” are essentially the same concept.

Only if you allow the Religious Right, who employ the former phrase as code for the latter one, to dictate your vocabulary. In the U.S. it’s still true that most people who hold the personal spiritual belief of “intelligent design” do not support the teaching of that personal belief in our schools.

Intellectual shortcuts, obfuscation and misuse of language are the current tricks of the Right. Let’s be clear and correct, if only to piss them off.

Having said that, I still “get” the diagram, and think it’s mostly true.

]]> by: grannyeagle http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456522 Sat, 01 Dec 2007 00:16:36 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456522 OK, moonbat, thanks for the example from Wikipedia. Now, I sort of get how each circle is supposed to relate to every other circle. I too am visual but I like things like mandalas or the symbol of the Tao. Something happens to my subconscious with them. I can't just look at a diagram without having to figure it out. Strains my brain. Makes me tired. Think I will go take a nap. OK, moonbat, thanks for the example from Wikipedia. Now, I sort of get how each circle is supposed to relate to every other circle. I too am visual but I like things like mandalas or the symbol of the Tao. Something happens to my subconscious with them. I can’t just look at a diagram without having to figure it out. Strains my brain. Makes me tired. Think I will go take a nap.

]]> by: Sachem http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456480 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:43:01 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456480 PBS recently aired an excellent NOVA on an intelligent design case in PA. It can be seen online <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. PBS recently aired an excellent NOVA on an intelligent design case in PA. It can be seen online here.

]]> by: Swami http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456453 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:27:59 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456453 <i>What is it that links the Dark Ages to Politics exactly? </i> In todays political arena it would be the Republican candidates. They might have better teeth than their predecessors, and aren't wearing robes, but their mindsets and reasoning are exactly the same as the authorities of the dark ages. Guiliani and Romney wouldn't hesitate to re-introduce the strappado for the interrogation of infidels or terror suspects. And Huckabee is off on a God serving tangent just like Torquemada of old. None of them are playing with a full deck. What is it that links the Dark Ages to Politics exactly?

In todays political arena it would be the Republican candidates. They might have better teeth than their predecessors, and aren’t wearing robes, but their mindsets and reasoning are exactly the same as the authorities of the dark ages. Guiliani and Romney wouldn’t hesitate to re-introduce the strappado for the interrogation of infidels or terror suspects. And Huckabee is off on a God serving tangent just like Torquemada of old. None of them are playing with a full deck.

]]> by: Ian http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456292 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:47:17 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456292 I think, joanr16, that "Intelligent Design" and "teaching Intelligent Design as science" are essentially the same concept. Nobody independently came up with ID as a serious alternative to evolution. It was always meant to be a trojan horse for creationism. Oppponents of teaching creationism in school were extremely successful, because it is blatantly nothing but christian religious doctrine. ID was designed to be able to still say "god-did-it" without being obviously christian. -me I think, joanr16, that “Intelligent Design” and “teaching Intelligent Design as science” are essentially the same concept.

Nobody independently came up with ID as a serious alternative to evolution. It was always meant to be a trojan horse for creationism. Oppponents of teaching creationism in school were extremely successful, because it is blatantly nothing but christian religious doctrine. ID was designed to be able to still say “god-did-it” without being obviously christian.

-me

]]> by: erinyes http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456291 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 21:44:22 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456291 Ha! I don't need no stinkin' picture, I caught the reptilian "debate" the night before last. (nice job anywho, MB) Please make one correction, the intersection between insanity and religion = fundamentalism. Big difference between crazy and stupid.(ie: Pat Robertson, the bunch at TBN) Ha!
I don’t need no stinkin’ picture, I caught the reptilian “debate” the night before last. (nice job anywho, MB)
Please make one correction, the intersection between insanity and religion = fundamentalism. Big difference between crazy and stupid.(ie: Pat Robertson, the bunch at TBN)

]]> by: moonbat http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456127 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 19:35:28 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-456127 I've had a bit of time to think about this diagram after posting it. While it isn't perfect, and has shortcomings as well as bias, I feel it still conveys a certain amount of truth, and manages to present it in a succinct, clever, and to me, funny way. Critics are right, this isn't up to the usual standard of careful exposition found on this blog, but I found it amusing enough and truthful enough - despite the shortcomings - to post it anyway. As for grannyeagle's comment #3, I'm a visual thinker - show me a picture - I'd never make it as a lawyer - and so part of this diagram's charm is the way it expresses a lot with very little. I ate up Venn diagrams when they were taught to me in grade school. This <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venn_diagram#Examples" rel="nofollow">simple example from wikipedia</a> might help those who are unfamiliar with this way of expressing information. I’ve had a bit of time to think about this diagram after posting it. While it isn’t perfect, and has shortcomings as well as bias, I feel it still conveys a certain amount of truth, and manages to present it in a succinct, clever, and to me, funny way. Critics are right, this isn’t up to the usual standard of careful exposition found on this blog, but I found it amusing enough and truthful enough - despite the shortcomings - to post it anyway.

As for grannyeagle’s comment #3, I’m a visual thinker - show me a picture - I’d never make it as a lawyer - and so part of this diagram’s charm is the way it expresses a lot with very little. I ate up Venn diagrams when they were taught to me in grade school. This simple example from wikipedia might help those who are unfamiliar with this way of expressing information.

]]> by: joanr16 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-455903 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 18:31:04 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-455903 I think the confusion comes from the centerpiece "Intelligent Design" standing for the clumsier, but more accurate, label: "Teaching Intelligent Design As Science." Intelligent Design is a personal spiritual belief. It arises from faith, not science. Republicans and fundamentalists, with their Dark Ages mentality, are putting forth the lie that it is science, and insisting that it be taught in public schools. (And Chris: Religion married to Politics yielded the Dark Ages. I mean, really.) The overall design might make more sense if the centerpiece, rather than "Intelligent Design," read "George W. Bush." Any more, he's not so much a person as a horribly failed concept. I think the confusion comes from the centerpiece “Intelligent Design” standing for the clumsier, but more accurate, label: “Teaching Intelligent Design As Science.”

Intelligent Design is a personal spiritual belief. It arises from faith, not science. Republicans and fundamentalists, with their Dark Ages mentality, are putting forth the lie that it is science, and insisting that it be taught in public schools.

(And Chris: Religion married to Politics yielded the Dark Ages. I mean, really.)

The overall design might make more sense if the centerpiece, rather than “Intelligent Design,” read “George W. Bush.” Any more, he’s not so much a person as a horribly failed concept.

]]> by: Chief http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-455547 Fri, 30 Nov 2007 16:23:41 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/11/30/stupidity-politics-religion/#comment-455547 As opposed to previous commenters - I GET IT. It meets all of my definitions of Mannichean thinking. Bravo Zulu, moonbat. As opposed to previous commenters - I GET IT. It meets all of my definitions of Mannichean thinking.

Bravo Zulu, moonbat.

]]>