tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post5050710797834900231..comments2024-03-18T21:33:35.309-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Devil and His Chaotic Minions (11.30.11)Gagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-39591509292913623452008-11-18T11:31:00.000-08:002008-11-18T11:31:00.000-08:00Ray, I’d be much more surprised to see you ask an ...Ray, I’d be much more surprised to see you ask an intelligent question, one that actually sought an answer and pre-supposed a depth of truth which it could potentially be answered from. <BR/><BR/>You aren’t ever going to surprise me in that way, are you Ray?<BR/><BR/>Don’t bother, it’s a rhetorical question.<BR/><BR/>Still, I shouldn’t get too upset, after all who’s the bigger fool, the fool who behaves foolishly, or the one who continues to ask him why?<BR/><BR/>Yeah, that’s a rhetorical question too.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-35804825786445672202008-11-18T10:43:00.000-08:002008-11-18T10:43:00.000-08:00Van, you'd be surprised how many of my questions a...Van, you'd be surprised how many of my questions are rhetorical. Of course, since it's impossible that I could have any depth, they must therefore not be, right?Ray Ingleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16290483120987779339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-29183414383051191502008-11-18T09:26:00.000-08:002008-11-18T09:26:00.000-08:00Ray said " Okay, so as long as it's not called mar...Ray said " Okay, so as long as it's not called marriage, you've got no problem with 'civil unions' or whatever?"<BR/><I>I've</I> got a problem with it, it creeps me out big time... but I don't have the <I>right</I> to prevent others from entering (ahem) into it.<BR/><BR/>"It's just the name that holds the power, right?""<BR/><BR/>Ray, respectfully, peddle your crap elsewhere. The word, the concept "Marriage" <I>means</I> something, misusing it, especially in a legal manner, abuses and damages that meaning. If you can't grasp that, go somewhere and thumb through your Hume and Wittgenstein to your heart’s content, preferably in private, where you won't sicken people who can see what it is you are doing.<BR/><BR/>(Deleted, had part of previous comment on bottom)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-50941284580364769412008-11-18T09:24:00.000-08:002008-11-18T09:24:00.000-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-47119553835793142432008-11-18T07:55:00.000-08:002008-11-18T07:55:00.000-08:00Is self satisfaction worth the price of ignorance?...Is self satisfaction worth the price of ignorance?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-34935214143397964102008-11-18T06:57:00.000-08:002008-11-18T06:57:00.000-08:00Van - Okay, so as long as it's not called marriage...Van - Okay, so as long as it's not <I>called</I> marriage, you've got no problem with 'civil unions' or whatever? It's just the <I>name</I> that holds the power, right?Ray Ingleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16290483120987779339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-22655720653059141282008-11-18T06:02:00.000-08:002008-11-18T06:02:00.000-08:00Ray said "...not one with a specific answer to the...Ray said "...not one with a specific answer to the specific questions that were asked in the very first comment."<BR/><BR/>That was, specifically because they weren't worth responding to.<BR/><BR/>"From a purely legal standpoint, 'marriage' offers things like medical visitati..."<BR/><BR/>Ray, first, with the exception of property and testimony (which are very much implied by the original understanding of Marriage "one flesh..." etc), Marriage itself doesn't offer those 'benefits'. Regulatory agencies, bureaucratic policies and quasi-gov't org's, have however recognized that due to the unique partnership that is marriage, it is logical to extend such benefits to a persons spouse. But they have nothing to do with Marriage itself, only its implications.<BR/><BR/>If you want to a new legal partnership, that will command all of the same 'benefits' (wow, isn't that a good horizontal reason for getting hitched?! Wuv at first bite!) you get to define it however the hell you want to. And what you demonstrate, specifically, is that you don't want to extend Marriage to homosexuals, you want to give them a convenient way to get the same goodies that married people enjoy, and do it without having to define your own terms first - nothing leftist about that. <BR/><BR/>Run for congress on that platform Ray, as Ximeze's video points out, there are plenty of people who'll vote for you.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-86566534620541602862008-11-18T05:42:00.000-08:002008-11-18T05:42:00.000-08:00Ximeze,Good video link, thanks, I don't think I've...Ximeze,<BR/>Good video link, thanks, I don't think I've been this depressed in... decades. I'm going back to sleep now... why should everyone else get to sleep my life away but me?<BR/><BR/>(yeah, yeah, I know, but... sheesh)Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-7457022442673869102008-11-18T05:39:00.000-08:002008-11-18T05:39:00.000-08:00Funny, everyone seems to want to talk in generalit...Funny, everyone seems to want to talk in generalities. 58 comments so far and not one with a specific answer to the specific questions that were asked in the very first comment.<BR/><BR/>From a purely legal standpoint, 'marriage' offers things like medical visitation, durable power of attorney, immunity from being compelled to testify against one's spouse, holding property as tenants by the entirety, family leave benefits, and so forth.<BR/><BR/>Let's assume that we don't call it 'marriage' we just have 'civil unions', as Van prefers. Fine. What would be the legal differences, if any, between 'marriages' and 'civil unions'? Would one have rights the other wouldn't?Ray Ingleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16290483120987779339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-66529344358773477762008-11-17T23:41:00.000-08:002008-11-17T23:41:00.000-08:00"On Election day twelve Obama voters were intervie..."On Election day twelve Obama voters were interviewed extensively right after they voted to learn how the news media impacted their knowledge of what occurred during the campaign. These voters were chosen for their apparent intelligence/verbal abilities and willingness to express their opinions to a large audience. The rather shocking video below seeks to provide some insight into which information broke through the news media clutter and which did not." <BR/><BR/>OMG<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://howobamagotelected.com/" REL="nofollow">How Obama Got Elected</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-42807055713317218932008-11-17T20:33:00.000-08:002008-11-17T20:33:00.000-08:00Dangit, where'd my link go?Here, again.Dangit, where'd my link go?<BR/><A HREF="http://jadedhaven.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/cleopatras-cat/" REL="nofollow">Here</A>, again.juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-406538087487725572008-11-17T20:32:00.000-08:002008-11-17T20:32:00.000-08:00Going back to this:"The take-away point is that th...Going back to this:<BR/><BR/>"The take-away point is that the chaos engendered by feminism and other postmodern idiolatries has hardly been "liberating." Rather, in taking a wrecking ball to the nonlocal celestial hierarchy, it has "ironically" reduced human beings to a state of pure animality in their mating habits. Ladies, be careful what you whine for."<BR/><BR/>Here's another post that seems apropos (strong, or rather <I>descriptive</I> language warning, for the easily offended)juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-71094119299792412012008-11-17T18:55:00.000-08:002008-11-17T18:55:00.000-08:00Why shore , Slim. Hell, these days enny two fags k...Why shore , Slim. Hell, these days enny two fags kin git therselves hitched, so why's not you'n yer sis? But ya probly got to go to maschewsits or canada to git 'er done.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-85543656804755162162008-11-17T17:30:00.000-08:002008-11-17T17:30:00.000-08:00Let's say I get a hankerin' after my sister and go...Let's say I get a hankerin' after my sister and go get myself a visacktommy. Can me and her get us a marriage license?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-29638943281320179772008-11-17T16:45:00.000-08:002008-11-17T16:45:00.000-08:00The insistence among leftist judges that they defi...The insistence among leftist judges that they define what marriage is is similar to the "official" Christian church in China, in which the state defines what it means to be a Christian.<BR/>This is one indication of the new dispensation we are living under. Marriage as an immemorial tradition obviously predates the state. And there isn't even a legal issue here. <BR/>Marriage is the union of a man and a woman by definition. It is beyond absurd for a court to decide that it has the power to change the definition. You can call your cat a dog, but it isn't going to bark or fetch your slippers. <BR/>Over the last forty years we have been changed from citizens into subjects. <BR/>Stories in the MSM about gangs of homosexuals invading, desecrating and vandalizing churches and church property are treated as civil rights demonstrations and completely legitimate.<BR/>This is another straw in the wind; does anyone doubt which way the wind is blowing?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-21171823297843533022008-11-17T15:55:00.000-08:002008-11-17T15:55:00.000-08:00"(I actually prefer the word "disorder," since cha..."(I actually prefer the word "disorder," since chaos now has a scientific meaning; from the perspective of chaos theory, processes that look chaotic may exhibit extremely deep order, but that's the topic for another post. We'll just stick with "chaos" in its colloquial sense.)"<BR/><BR/>When I see 'chaos' and disorder, I look for disintegration, or misintegration. Usually you'll find a case of equivocation involved as well, such as with Marriage; leaving aside the Vertical aspect (actually this is the method <I>for</I> leaving aside the Vertical aspect, but that also is a separate post),<BR/><BR/>- Misintegration would be such as attempting to redefine a proper Marriage based upon non-essential attributes (hmm wonder if this would be possible if Aristotle were still taught? I'm betting... No) as 'a loving partnership between two consenting adults', rather than a 'union of man and women for life'.<BR/><BR/>- Disintegration would be attempting to redefine a proper intimate relationship away from Marriage, and instead as being any co-habitation between a between man and women for as long as it feels good, based upon non-essential attributes (yeah... still no Aristotle... ) such as 'a mutually supportive relationship', rather than 'union of man and women for life'.<BR/><BR/>Both work to destroy the fact of not only Marriage, but of all intimate relationships between men and women, women & men, men & men, women & women, family, and the final aim of society itself. As one small example of the wider effect, in the 16th & 17th centuries it was very common for one man to speak of his love for another, in the assurance that it would be understood to refer to it's highest and purest meaning, and would never be interpreted in a sexual context. With our 'liberated' times, that is nearly impossible, and we are usually left with a nod and a punch in the arm, and relationships and a culture that much more impoverished. <BR/><BR/>Or of course, try singing "...now we don our gay apparel..." without an abundance of acidic winks and grins.<BR/><BR/>Without clear customs, definitions and boundaries, hierarchy is brought lower and all understanding is diminished.Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-49555178106815557852008-11-17T15:46:00.000-08:002008-11-17T15:46:00.000-08:00Happy Gene Clark's Birthday!-fellow Kansas City So...Happy Gene Clark's Birthday!<BR/>-fellow Kansas City Southern Boy GE<BR/>[our hometown; my family was pals w/ the owners of said RailRoad]gehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02015936407999495181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-37446056236171362262008-11-17T15:16:00.000-08:002008-11-17T15:16:00.000-08:00Enjoy! - thanks, I did. That's more Olberman than ...Enjoy! - thanks, I did. That's more Olberman than I've seen, well, <I>ever</I>. I'm just glad he was saying "Sir" and not "Madam." :)juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-46770039222228227002008-11-17T15:05:00.000-08:002008-11-17T15:05:00.000-08:00Privateering is a tough business.No one is hiring....Privateering is a tough business.<BR/>No one is hiring. <BR/>We need bailed out or we will lose our jobs and the stock market will fall.<BR/>It's really in everyone's best interest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-75971421976889903802008-11-17T14:59:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:59:00.000-08:00Let's sue gay activists for using "hate speech". W...Let's sue gay activists for using "hate speech". We have a right not to be offended.<BR/>Privateers are a persecuted minority!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-41785109631524554952008-11-17T14:56:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:56:00.000-08:00Hey, I know, let's just redefine anything we want....Hey, I know, let's just redefine anything we want.<BR/><BR/>Oh wait, the Left already does that. No wonder they are incoherent.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-14840142085517604162008-11-17T14:46:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:46:00.000-08:00“…just wait until we've had "homosexual m...“…just wait until we've had "homosexual marriage" for a generation or two. When I say that civilization cannot survive the metaphysical chaos this will enshrine, I am not being polemical. I mean it quite literally and dispassionately. This is what happens when human sexuality is reduced to a purely horizontal category.”<BR/><BR/>Being that our civilization is Judeo-Christian based, our definition of marriage as between one man and one woman is biblically based. In that same Bible, God makes it painfully clear what He thinks of deviations from that order. Sodom and Gomorrah come to mind (Gen 18 & 19) - to mention just one form of deviation.<BR/><BR/>As a reflection of God's own nature, marriage is best when focused outward (for God’s glory) rather than centered inward (for our comfort). A high calling, I know, but there it is.NoMohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100042056270224683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-28781391921481805262008-11-17T14:39:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:39:00.000-08:00Thanks fra. William of Ockham, say, how'd you lose...Thanks fra. William of Ockham, say, how'd you lose all those fingertips?Van Harveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08470413719262297062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-19701950817806843722008-11-17T14:20:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:20:00.000-08:00Re secular licenses: follow the money.As soon as s...Re secular licenses: follow the money.<BR/>As soon as some genius figured out that regular, never-ending ability to collect fees was involved, licenses became manditory for everyone. It's called revenue enhancement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-40910129311084215802008-11-17T14:17:00.000-08:002008-11-17T14:17:00.000-08:00Speaking of demons, sometimes it's best to mock th...Speaking of demons, sometimes it's best to mock them...<BR/><BR/>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaJLbJDuAcAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com