Re: MD Individuals and Collectives

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Wed Sep 21 2005 - 11:57:48 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD The intelligence fallacy (was Rhetoric)"

    Arlo:

    Love your rants. Please let me know when you find in the Bible that Jesus
    carried a weapon to force his moral views on others.

    Platt
    .

    > [Case to Platt]
    > Once again I see a disconnect between a party that espouses religious
    > values then twists them into something unrecognizable.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > Of course. Although it is more a deliberate manipulation, or pandering to,
    > "religion" with the sole aim of garnishing the vote-power.
    >
    > You'll always find the ones who shout "Jesus!" the loudest to give them
    > power of another's life are the one's who completely ignore it when it
    > comes to parting them from their wealth.
    >
    > We must stop abortion, but once children are born we can neglect them like
    > good Christo-Republicrats. We must stop euthanasia, but leave the sick and
    > infirmed who are without means of payment to die in squalor. We must
    > crusade against gay marriage because Jesus condemned it, but at the same
    > time we can drive by homeless people in our Lexuses (Lexi?) and Buicks
    > content in the good old "Gods and Clods" reasoning that the poor deserve to
    > be poor, the homeless deserve to be homeless, and the hungry deserve to be
    > hungry. After all, we are better than them. To have some moral compulsion
    > shoved in our faces about feeding the poor, why that's anti-American,
    > Marxist gulagagging*. Buuuuuut... that won't stop us from feeling good
    > about how "moral" we are, will it?
    >
    > *Gulagagging. A play on "lollygagging", think of it is "gulag" plus the
    > repetitive "gagging" of us with propaganda laden fear tactics.
    >
    > At any rate, back to the point. The party faithful, I believe, don't even
    > really partake of such sanctimonious hypocracy. They don't try to convince
    > themselves they are devoutly religious, indeed, they use it only when it
    > serves them. Like Platt. Who has stated in this forum that "until the MOQ
    > is accepted, we should rely on Judeo-Christian morality" (not exact, and I
    > think to be fair he included "common law"). So here's a guy who is
    > admittedly not a devout Christian, who holds no qualms about flying the JC
    > banner to support his belief that gays should not be allowed to marry, for
    > example. And yet when pressed to the "inconvient rest of the Bible", you
    > know, the part about loving thy neighbor, and all that Marxist jazz, he
    > says that, well, there are certain parts that should not be used. Certain
    > parts?! That's bloody well 98% of the book!
    >
    > Point, the rallying cry is not out of admiration or devotion to the words
    > of Jesus, or the message of the religion, it is to use certain parts to
    > mobilize religious citizens into voting for a party that is most assuredly
    > NOT the party Jesus would join (which would likely be the Socialist Workers
    > Party, Carpentry Division...).
    >
    > In the meantime, however, the Lexuses and Buicks keep driving by. Blasted
    > poor. Why did God even bother to make such wretched creatures.
    >
    > Arlo

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 22 2005 - 03:04:35 BST