yayyyyyy God

[Kanada Kev]

bradm ... beautifully summed up. Thank you.

And while I agree with you that government is a special group, I do not agree with you in saying they are representative of society. In fact, through secularism, they are the furthest thing from being representative. The only groups getting represented by them are atheists.

WHAT? Come on now. You have to be kidding me. They are a group of individuals that represent the citizens of this country. They come from all sorts of racial/ethnic/religious/etc backgrounds. How are they NOT representative???

I ask then, not that we erect a gigantic cross on top of parliament hill, but that we seek some kind of middle ground, where things like license plates are deemed okay to depict the virgin mary, or the star of David, or whatever it is a person wants. They are license plates!! And then i would hope that one day, people won't feel the need to express their own fears or insecurities over what should be to them, such a trivial thing.

Everyone has the right to plaster whatever they want on their car. Let the INDIVIDUAL deal with it. Why should the gov't (the owner of the plates) get involved at all?

Hell, I remember getting in SHIT being in a friend's car and he had put a GD dancing bear sticker on top of the "crown" between the two sets of letters/numbers on his Ontario plate.

People have the freedom to express whatever they want. I want the gov't to deal with more pertinent issues, so simply leave all that at the door, please.

[Birdy]

Hey now, I'm asking the government to NOT be involved in the whole issue, not the other way around my friend. I agree wholeheartedly, they have much more pertinent things to involve themselves with rather than policing dead jesus on a license plate. A license plate that, for all intensive purposes, I'd say I own and pay for every September... and pay 1000x more than what it's actually worth.

People certainly don't have the freedom to express whatever they want. It seems to me this license plate company has been up and pumping out images for plates for a little bit, before this recent controversy over it's 'new designs'. So really, when the license plates had pictures of a sunset on a beach, all was cool. And only when Jesus popped up on the plates did the whole issue of government ownership come about. Come on now? No. Come on now.

Your analysis of representation reminds me of those people who say 'i'm not a racist, i have black people for friends', after they crack a derogatory joke. It is your actions that make you what you are. How is a Muslim MP representing his people when Muslims have to fight for a place to pray in our universities? They're not.

[hamilton]

And while I agree with you that government is a special group, I do not agree with you in saying they are representative of society. In fact, through secularism, they are the furthest thing from being representative. The only groups getting represented by them are atheists.

I don't think a straight line can be drawn between secularism and atheism.

[bradm]

And while I agree with you that government is a special group, I do not agree with you in saying they are representative of society. In fact, through secularism, they are the furthest thing from being representative. The only groups getting represented by them are atheists

I can phrase it differently: government is a special group, in that it functions to represent the society that elected it (i.e., the society that grants it special authorities). What the government does, it does in the name of the society it represents. Whether the policies that a particular elected government implements match (i.e., are representative of) the desires of a particular demographic (or group of demographics) doesn't change the fact that the government functions to implement society's will. Anything that a government does in a society necessarily includes the weight of its influence and authority in that society.

Aloha,

Brad

[Birdy]

Brad, I appreciate that you are patiently trying to make me see the light , but I suppose my side in this exists to question this function of government as unnecessary/wrong. I'm of the camp that subscribes to the definition of secularism that beseeches government to treat all religions equally and for the most part, believe government has given up on this (probably due to it's difficulty) and has adopted a false secularism, where it does not treat all religions equally, it avoids religion altogether. It is one thing to say express yourself!, it is another to say, express yourself here, but not there, there, but not here. Do you know what I mean? Sometimes I wonder if I'm crazy for wanting people to have the right to express themselves both in a private and public setting, but i really do believe it is the only vehicle for true representation.

And in it's true representation, again, i do believe people will come to a greater understanding and acceptance of those who are different. Not to go back to my Footloose reference, but i do believe people have the tendency to avoid understanding, because they think they already know. This whole Yayyyyy god thread can probably serve as reference point to that. It's like growing up and having your parents tell you not to do something (based on their experience), but you think you know and you do it anyway, only to come to the realization afterward that your parents were indeed right all along. It is so easy for us to judge religious folk as crazy (they worship WHAT!? What's God!? Where is he!? Bring me to him!), or for us to confuse Islam with terrorists, or for Jews to hate Catholics, etc. It's because there is no understanding of the other and due to this false secularism, there exists no desire or push to ever facilitate such an understanding.

I don't draw a direct relation between government and atheists, it is more like a default arrangement born out of this all.

[bradm]

I'm of the camp that subscribes to the definition of secularism that beseeches government to treat all religions equally and for the most part, believe government has given up on this (probably due to it's difficulty) and has adopted a false secularism, where it does not treat all religions equally, it avoids religion altogether.

Government does treat all religions equally: all of them are avoided altogether. As soon as you have government "treat" (in the sense of not avoiding) a particular religion (or set of religions), it necessarily avoids altogether all the other religions it's not treating, and that is unequal.

Aloha,

Brad

[Birdy]

Right, hence '(probably due to it's difficulty)'.

I'm not saying this an easy task to conquer, but I believe it is one we should seek to figure out a way to conquer, for the reasons I expressed above. It's like when you identify something as a problem, and then avoid dealing with it. The problem doesn't go away, and 9 times out of 10 only becomes greater.

[SaggyBalls]

Not that I want to (or specifically DON'T want to) see religious images on our license plates, but this is about FLORIDA license plates. It seems strange to me that the FL DMV is dragging their feet about this.

It would be a lot easier to make graphics for the major religious groups (from the census information) as well as a 'freedom of choice' (to match the 'right to life' plate) and if they really wanted to get around this, they could have a self-submitted license plate graphic that the DMV has the ultimate right to refuse no ifs, ands, or buts that the owner would have to sign for.

No more license plate debate, no more confusion...

...I guess the logical next step would then be license plates for every established community service group, like the freemasons, shriners, etc.

"I ask then, not that we erect a gigantic cross on top of parliament hill, but that we seek some kind of middle ground, where things like license plates are deemed okay to depict the virgin mary, or the star of David, or whatever it is a person wants. They are license plates!! And then i would hope that one day, people won't feel the need to express their own fears or insecurities over what should be to them, such a trivial thing."

-Birdy

If the real threat of the KKK demanding their own graphic were to exist, then why not erect a giant cross on parliament hill, and if the KKK lights it on fire, we would then nab them for being a terrorist organization (unless they already are labelled as such...which IMO they should) which would rule them out.

"I'm not saying this an easy task to conquer, but I believe it is one we should seek to figure out a way to conquer, for the reasons I expressed above. It's like when you identify something as a problem, and then avoid dealing with it. The problem doesn't go away, and 9 times out of 10 only becomes greater."

-Birdy

It seems a bit funny to me that this kind of discussion turns to church vs. state or religious debate since my natural reflex is to find ways to include everyone so as to avoid an unnecessary religious debate - where either side asserts that it is correct instead of finding a way to work together.

Not that this forum necessarily represents THAT, although if it didn't get to an aside on government representation & secularims/atheism, and if bradM wouldn't have summed it all up so neatly it might have.

[Birdy]

if either side is to work together, both sides need to recognize there is a need to work together.

in my mind, this discussion of government representation, secularism and atheism isn't an aside.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Guest

[d_rawk]

I don't feel much need for government to meddle in my faith. (And I'm one of those weird lefty tinkerers, who likes to have government meddle in everything)

I don't draw a direct relation between government and atheists, it is more like a default arrangement born out of this all.

I think I see what you are saying here, but I really don't think it is necessary for 'government' to have a position on matters of private experience and taste. (Holy heck, how in the world did I become the libertarian? That's supposed to be your gig) The individuals who comprise government can and do hold and often share their individual opinions regarding religious matters. The collective whole, however, has (or should not have) no official position on matters of individual faith. Because it is made up of people with all sorts of different beliefs, charged with the task of representing people with all sorts of different beliefs.

I might have a bit of a Jesus fetish, but I don't expect that anyone else should. And I really don't require validation from my elected official to make it ok.

[Kanada Kev]

[Birdy]

Hehehe, the applause and the ‘great job’s coming from the fans is funny.

I think I see what you are saying here, but I really don't think it is necessary for 'government' to have a position on matters of private experience and taste. (Holy heck, how in the world did I become the libertarian? That's supposed to be your gig) The individuals who comprise government can and do hold and often share their individual opinions regarding religious matters. The collective whole, however, has (or should not have) no official position on matters of individual faith. Because it is made up of people with all sorts of different beliefs, charged with the task of representing people with all sorts of different beliefs.

I might have a bit of a Jesus fetish, but I don't expect that anyone else should. And I really don't require validation from my elected official to make it ok.

I hear what you’re saying. We’re both taking a bit of a libertarian stance on this one… if you can imagine. Mine because people want and continually try to express their religious selves in the public arena. This license plate issue is just one of many that has popped up over the years and populated this thread with discussions of secularism, and has tied up courts with constitutional debates.

Should that not serve as an indicator of public will?

But to be truthful, I don’t even know what it is that I’m seeking here. Perhaps i’m a bit of an idealist in that I envision a parliament hill full of monuments and shrines, kind of set up like a farmer’s market for people to wade through and taste-test. Maybe i just want to promote a greater understanding of one another and think the vehicle of the collective whole best suited for that job.

Because really, if i never walked up to that Indian lady all those years ago at Covenant Garden Market in London and tasted her butter chicken, i probably wouldn’t have enjoyed Indian food all these years.

Ahh, well. I’m off to the beach.

[Kanada Kev]

Red State: Jesus Would Have Approved Waterboarding

http://www.librarygrape.com/2009/05/red-state-jesus-would-have-approved.html

[SaggyBalls]

Perhaps i’m a bit of an idealist in that I envision a parliament hill full of monuments and shrines, kind of set up like a farmer’s market for people to wade through and taste-test. Maybe i just want to promote a greater understanding of one another and think the vehicle of the collective whole best suited for that job.

Because really, if i never walked up to that Indian lady all those years ago at Covenant Garden Market in London and tasted her butter chicken, i probably wouldn’t have enjoyed Indian food all these years.

Sometimes your posts make me feel warm and fuzzy, and it's taken me this long to figure out what about it didn't sit well with me. Maybe the butter chicken lady was what did it for me, maybe the inclusion...

...but I don't think Parliament Hill is a good place for this culture market.

Ottawa is a good choice for this kind of cultural celebration, but this kind of thing would be great in many cities.

Any visibile celebration not restricted to a festival or event would keep any positive sentiment around for longer than a weekend.

What could be far more powerful would be a far-reaching cultural celebration that aligns with the essence of the founding and initial struggle of this great nation, as unity between people is always stronger when there is unity and continuity between past and present.

...bearing in mind that Precluding religion from any celebration of life and would be like precluding Atheism and Agnosticism from a debate on freedom.

[Kanada Kev]

[phishtaper]

"Who the hell do you think you are, you homosexual you?!"

"Look, I'm just telling you that your shawl collar isn't terribly flattering, Ma'am."

[SaggyBalls]

Fuck, Sarah Palin sure packed on the pounds.

[Kanada Kev]

Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage to Everyone Else

[Birdy]

Sometimes your posts make me feel warm and fuzzy, and it's taken me this long to figure out what about it didn't sit well with me. Maybe the butter chicken lady was what did it for me, maybe the inclusion...

...but I don't think Parliament Hill is a good place for this culture market.

Ottawa is a good choice for this kind of cultural celebration, but this kind of thing would be great in many cities.

Any visibile celebration not restricted to a festival or event would keep any positive sentiment around for longer than a weekend.

What could be far more powerful would be a far-reaching cultural celebration that aligns with the essence of the founding and initial struggle of this great nation, as unity between people is always stronger when there is unity and continuity between past and present.

...bearing in mind that Precluding religion from any celebration of life and would be like precluding Atheism and Agnosticism from a debate on freedom.

Sorry, i didn't even see this!

I know my verbiage is strong at times and comes across as insufferable, leading others to think conversing with me is akin to banging their own heads on a brick wall , but i'd like to put it out there that i know this, and i know that i don't know it all. Really (and this may seem surprising to some) i do learn from you all, and adapt my thoughts based on what you all share. So thanks for that.

Warm and fuzzy? That's my thing.

And I couldn't agree with you more on what could be far more powerful. But in a baby nation of immigrants, it's been a struggle to come up with the common ground for everyone to share and identify with, in order to celebrate. It's why we see those Canadian heritage commercials of little Molly O'Brien landing in Quebec and keeping her Irish roots. Or why so many Canadian historians fuss over the notion of a national identity and why each year the CBC produces some appalling statistic of how little Canadians know of their history. And they're shocked?

I've always thought the key was celebrating our diversity and that's why images of a farmer's market on parliament hill danced through my head. But i also know, i'm very much a dreamer - and sometimes an idealist, and you all brought me back down to what 'can' be done, rather than the distant pipe dream that was suited for another place at another time. It's all good.

What 'can' be done is practicing what we preach and hoping it rubs off on others. That's where I'm at.

[Thorgnor]

But in a baby nation of immigrants, it's been a struggle to come up with the common ground for everyone to share and identify with, in order to celebrate. It's why we see those Canadian heritage commercials of little Molly O'Brien landing in Quebec and keeping her Irish roots. Or why so many Canadian historians fuss over the notion of a national identity and why each year the CBC produces some appalling statistic of how little Canadians know of their history. And they're shocked?

Sorry to be picky, but a good part of the problem imo is the idea that this is an immigrant nation and not a nation of conquorors and conquored, immigrant AND aboriginal, "Home AND Native Land". This is more than just an immigrant nation, and more than half the "Aboriginal" peoples of Canada live in cities so to say they aren't here is to say we don't see them, which is justified by those same commercials. Or by the ones where its funny and ok to misunderstand Natives and insist that you're right (I'm thinking the Canada heritage commercial where the priest interprets the name of Canada to mean the whole area... you know the one).

I guess it could be read/seen/interpreted to say that authority figures are stupid, but it hasn't changed the way people approach Native relations, and it creates a fiction of unity between the guy who speaks up and the average joe canadian with native canada that doesn't really exist.

In a way it even re-enacts their oppression by insisting that the outside interpretation is the right one to this day...

bad commercials

rant day, sorry

[Birdy]

I'm kind of a case in point to what you're saying then. For an instant upon first reading this, i thought to defend myself and drudge up the definition of a nation state and talk about confederation and go down that route, but then i thought fuck definitions, he's right.

I don't mean to be exlusionary or to erase or negate a history. And I'm not looking for a scape goat when I say that perhaps part of the problem is we have too many histories to actually form A history. Too many histories that are so NEW. Aboriginals being conquered by immigrants, French vs English, Germans and Ukranians losing voting rights in WW1, Japanese getting shipped to internment camps during WWII, first, second and third-generation immigrants who still identify as Chinese-Canadian, German-Canadian, Indo-Canadian, or Japanese-Canadian - something always preceding 'Canadian'. Aboriginals who only gained the right to cast a vote in 1960. 1960!! Each has a story far different from the other - and for years now we have collectively rejoiced in how non-collective we are.

So i hear what you're saying and totally agree. I think it's sad. I don't know though if i can lay blame or accuse someone of oppression for not getting it. The issue is really a bit of a nightmare to get around - and so perhaps people are just floundering along the way.

[phishtaper]

I know my verbiage is strong at times and comes across as insufferable, leading others to think conversing with me is akin to banging their own heads on a brick wall

QFT

[Birdy]

zing! hahaha :susel:

[phishtaper]

god visited me this past weekend. i posted all about it here. all the answers to life's questions. the light. the spirit. the devil. everything. was really quite remarkable and worthy of worldwide attention.

but alas, interweb demons went and wiped it all away with this jambands server crash. oh well.

[Thorgnor]

Just like after dmt eh?