The Tyranny of Cliches: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas.

[OmaHusker]

Nice read covering a variety of topics. Here's an excerpt.

If you’re looking for a book about politics that isn’t just a regurgitation of things you already know or so topical that you can throw it out in a couple of years, I would not hesitate to recommend “The Tyranny of Cliches” to you. It covers timeless subject matter, the research is outstanding, and Goldberg’s a clever writer who keeps the book moving.

What follows is a slightly edited transcript of our conversation.

You know Glenn Reynolds makes a good point when he says the people who say they’re spiritual, but not religious are basically giving license to their instincts. They’re basically saying that if it feels good do it. I want to pursue my own gut desires or sexual desires and religion works exactly the opposite way. Religion serves to constrain the excesses of human nature, to make us better than just animals walking upright.

And every so often you find in popular culture this whole idea that spirituality is something to extol and explore and celebrate and it’s wonderful and karma and crystals and reincarnation and all these wonderful things that are in tune with nature. At the same time, the same people who buy all this stuff say, “Oh, I don’t understand why those Catholics are so superstitious. I don’t understand why those Christians believe that crazy stuff.” What’s so infuriating about it is that Christianity and certainly Judaism has spent a long time thinking through spirituality and trying to codify it and understand it and channel it to make men better than they were born to be. Yet, there is a smug, self-satisfaction among the champions of spirituality who think that all of these people who came before them and dedicated their lives to thinking these issues through were idiots. They think they can figure it all out if they just sit in a yoga position.

Right Wing News

[RedPhoenix]

I'm traveling. Could someone post what must be posted for me please.

[redmachine]

It is a little weird how people explain themselves to be "spiritual" and yet claim not to be religious.

Though, I'm not sure that situation is relegated to only liberals.

[Red Dead Redemption]

I'm traveling. Could someone post what must be posted for me please.

Nice drive by post.

[SamBass]

Ted Haggerd and Jerry Falwell vs Desmond Tutu and Albert Schweitzer.........
One requires control, obedience and fear of God, the other promotes understanding, love of God and striving to realize the God in us. One emphasizes the God in the clouds the other, the living presence of God in man's heart as their is no seperation between the creator and his creation.

[Huskers57]

Desmond Tutu

ah never mind...I have been having a great quote/statement about Tutu for a few months now and I want to use it here....never mind.

[Prairie Sage1]

There is a difference between discipline and obedience.

Blind acceptance of dogma is a very dangerous thing.

Being spiritual vs religious. It's something I've said many times. I view many religions as having as many negative aspects as positive. At the very least, history teaches that many people have been killed in "the name of God" as religious wars were fought over centuries. I know, hate the sin not the sinner, but churches are full of sinners who have no intention of repenting or seeking forgiveness. They hide behind a "religion."

The quotes at the start of the thread just look to me like another person who has stopped thinking for himself and let others do the hard work of deciding what's right and what's wrong. Just codify it. Problem is, it's codified and you still don't pay attention to parts of it.

[ChitownHusker]

There are certainly people out there who take "being spiritual" very seriously and struggle to act in a manner consistent with their ethical view. For such people, "being spiritual" actually means something, and I respect it.

There are others I have met who claim to be "a spiritual person" for which that claim is nothing more than an excuse as to why they don't go to church any longer. It's a copout. There is no question that Goldberg's stereotype about "spiritual people" is right with respect to some people. But, as with all stereotypes, it's not always accurate, and it is nothing more than a vehicle to put a broad group of people into a neat box and judge them all.

Some people are "spiritual" because it is a cop out. Other people, like Prairie Sage's and Sambass's posts above me, are spiritual because that worldview best reflects their own outlook on the world. I think it's always best to take each person individually on their merits.

[Showman]

I notice he forgot to mention the many centuries of work on explaining faith and the universe that Muslims have done, too.

[Big Red Rick]

I notice he forgot to mention the many centuries of work on explaining faith and the universe that Muslims have done, too.

Well, here. Let me fill in that blank.

9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

sura 9:5

[Showman]

Well, here. Let me fill in that blank.

9:5 Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

sura 9:5

Good thing there's no crazy, violent language in the Bible or Torah to be cherry picked.

[ChitownHusker]

Good thing there's no crazy, violent language in the Bible or Torah to be cherry picked.

I know, right? Glad we dodged that bullet.

[Big Red Rick]

Good thing there's no crazy, violent language in the Bible or Torah to be cherry picked.

I know, right? Glad we dodged that bullet.

Happy to reasonably review any passages from those works that are convert-or-die orders similar to this one.

Please provide links. TIA

[ChitownHusker]

Happy to reasonably review any passages from those works that are convert-or-die orders similar to this one.

Please provide links. TIA

Please read Leviticus chapter 20 -- the death penalty is imposed for, among other things, homosexuality, cursing your parents, sex during menstruation, and being a mystic.

Now before you say -- none of those say "convert or die" -- that's true, but that's not the point. The point is that you can cherry-pick passages from any religion to make it look hateful and evil, if that is your agenda. But Islam is a religion of peace just like Christianity and Judaism, and a comprehensive reading of the Koran reflects that reality.

[OldRedWood]

Please read Leviticus chapter 20 -- the death penalty is imposed for, among other things, homosexuality, cursing your parents, sex during menstruation, and being a mystic.

Now before you say -- none of those say "convert or die" -- that's true, but that's not the point. The point is that you can cherry-pick passages from any religion to make it look hateful and evil, if that is your agenda. But Islam is a religion of peace just like Christianity and Judaism, and a comprehensive reading of the Koran reflects that reality.

Actually Chi, you don't even have to cherry pick passages from the various "holy books." All you have to do is read history. As Deng Xiaoping was fond of saying...Seek truth from facts. As you well know, some of the most heinous acts in the history of humanity have been perpetrated on behalf of one religion or another...maybe except for Buddhism, which doesn't exactly believe in god.

All the rest is revisionist nonsense.

[ChitownHusker]

Actually Chi, you don't even have to cherry pick passages from the various "holy books." All you have to do is read history. As Deng Xiaoping was fond of saying...Seek truth from facts. As you well know, some of the most heinous acts in the history of humanity have been perpetrated on behalf of one religion or another...maybe except for Buddhism, which doesn't exactly believe in god.

All the rest is revisionist nonsense.

Two flaws in your argument:

First, although I will concede that religion has many times in history has been the stated reason for war, far more often than not that reason was pretextual. In other words, religion simply provided cover or justification for a war that was for geopolitical reasons such as regional domination or a fight for contested resources. Stated another way, had the concept of religion never existed, the vast majority of wars and violent conflicts in our history still would have been fought.

Second, while focusing on only the bad done in the name of religion, you ignore the countless and immeasurable acts of good that have be committed in the name of religion. Contrary to the wars discussed above, many of these countless acts of kindness and generosity would never have taken place but for religious belief.

[OldRedWood]

Two flaws in your argument:

First, although I will concede that religion has many times in history has been the stated reason for war, far more often than not that reason was pretextual. In other words, religion simply provided cover or justification for a war that was for geopolitical reasons such as regional domination or a fight for contested resources. Stated another way, had the concept of religion never existed, the vast majority of wars and violent conflicts in our history still would have been fought.

Second, while focusing on only the bad done in the name of religion, you ignore the countless and immeasurable acts of good that have be committed in the name of religion. Contrary to the wars discussed above, many of these countless acts of kindness and generosity would never have taken place but for religious belief.

I'm not talking just about war, about which you do have a point. But since you brought it up, there is the sacrifice of humans in the early religions, complete with extractions of beating hearts. Now, before I go any further, I just want to say that it is my belief that all the "religious" folks now, would have been in the front row and cheering loudly for the priests had they been alive during these times. This has been the way of humans throughout history. Your proposition that the vast majority of wars would still have been fought...maybe, except for those whose religious leaders "sanctioned" them. This was, after all, how Islam was spread and, uh, also the catholic faith in central and South America and other places around the world. After all, Mohammed was the most successful person in the history of the world, since he succeeded on both the spiritual and temporal levels. It was win/win for religion and politics...a great circle jerk, with the holy books offering the "sanction."

I have always thought that religion did about as much good as they did damage...and that seems to be enough for billions of people, so who am I to argue.