View Thread

Atheists Today » Easy Reading » The Rant Room
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
Miss-placed passions
I consider myself an intellectual, I pride myself on reviewing the challenges of life through the rational reasoned approach that so few seem to care for.

My passion is placed in those subjects and areas that I believe are the most important to us as a species and morally actionable creatures. I, as many here, am passionate about the role religion plays in our civilizations, and, again as many here, I am disgusted when the fantasies of one group becomes the rule by which all others are measured.

I cannot painlessly understand why others are not passionate about this and other things. Why are people so quick to drown their minds with passion for sports teams when their governments are driving them into slavery?

I think worst of all, what I hate most about it is, when a conversation does arrive at anything that matters, people will try their hardest to avoid saying anything, or refuse to let go of their flawed logic - and the result, I am looked upon as crazed, overzealous and even boring for having an opinion that is not mainstream and that is defensible. A phrase that is pain to my ears is 'lets agree to disagree' - no, no I will not accept that you are in any way entitled to believe a falsehood as long as it has even the smallest adverse effect upon others.

If I chose to defend myself at that point I have crossed a line to join the ranks of any dictator you care to mention, I have stopped discussing something and have begun to demand that they accept everything I am saying, so they say. Yet they do not offer any reason as to why they hold their opinions, what conclusions they have drawn from the evidence they have reviewed. At some point, it was decided that accepting anything and calling it your opinion elevates the idea to a position unrivalled by any other thought.

Why is this? Why have intelligent people (that must be in numbers greater than those that have been seen) let others become drones to which ever propaganda machine happens to have the power at that point in that place?

Freedoms have limits, in physics we often call these constraints on the system. Within this universe, gravity interacts with all, you can freely chose to ignore it but doing so can leave you with many a broken bone. And the same is true of survival of species, of achieving a harmonious society - as sweet as it may be to irrationally hold onto the most sparcliest of heart warmers, certain ideas, certain views of the world can only end in pain.

So where does this idea of 'every thought it sacred' come from, and why is there so little interest in things that actually matter?
You've heard the phrase, that goes something like, 'If you aren't outraged you should be'?

Apathy is widespread, infecting people of all intellectual (and other) status.

But I think in some cases, like with religion, it's even encouraged, preferred, by some. How often do we hear people question why anyone who doesn't like religion and doesn't believe in any gods would bother talking about those things? Never mind what else there could be that would be of concern or interest, it only matters that if you don't believe you don't need to talk about or question it.

It's easy for people to be 'passionate' from a spectator's point of view - like with sports. People like easy, not too challenged - mentally or otherwise. That's safe and neutral - it's the following the herd, not making waves comfort zone. Sitting in front of the tube, or in the bleachers, and watching the game can be as mindless as watching anything on t.v. or napping on the couch all afternoon. And why put out the effort and have the risk involved of thinking, for oneself, of having discussions and debates when one can be so content with the church and government making the important decisions?

Government and other institutions have taught people to be so laid back that they are lying down, spread eagle ready to be brutally fucked.

The unfolding of events is the same over and over again, but the mass movement against it only comes after the damage has been done.

The Digital Economy Bill has been passed through both houses to become law, yet noone has the slightest idea as to how it is going to be enforced. It is what the Bill can allow which is scary.

That recent video post from Wikileaks, the murder of some Iraqi civilians, was not supposed to be shown to the public and under this bill websites like Wikileaks could be banned outright (as China does). The Bill also contains clauses that will enable the government to ban any website they believe has the potential to break a copyright law.

Guilty on a whim. There is no outline of appeal in the Bill, no procedure documented for reimbursement. The whole thing is a two finger salute to the freedoms of internet users.

It was hailed by big entertainment industries as a protection for artists and their products, yet in its initial stages the Bill contained a clause which would rip the property of photographers from their hands and give it to big business

Check this out also http://www.gillia...iefing.pdf

This pdf explains how the DEB slips in a censorship clause.

"A new clause 116B confers on the Secretary of State the power to authorise a licensing body to
grant copyright licences to publish/broadcast/perform/copy/adapt published works regardless of
whether any of the people for whom it acts as the agreed agent owns the copyright..."

Does that not make you feel sick?

And what will it do to musicians who have not been in the lime light for a year or so. Radio and TV tend to repeat songs that are newly released, you can hear the same song 3 or 4 times in an hour on many of them (probably more, not listened to the radio for that long for a while), under this bill, websites such as youtube would not risk putting videos up that contain music that has not been created by the video poster. This would mean that, the channel for stumbling upon old songs, and hence going on to purchase them (as I have done with a some older bands) has been cut away.

The artist is royally shafted, under the guise of protection of their works.

I worry about this country.
11 Obligations to limit internet access
After section 124G of the Communications Act 2003 insert—
“124H Obligations to limit internet access
(1) The Secretary of State may at any time by order impose a technical
obligation on internet service providers if the Secretary of State
considers it appropriate in view of—
(a) an assessment carried out or steps taken by OFCOM under
section 124G; or
(b ) any other consideration.
(2) An order under this section must specify the date from which the
technical obligation is to have effect, or provide for it to be specified.
(3) The order may also specify—
(a) the criteria for taking the technical measure concerned against a
(b ) the steps to be taken as part of the measure and when they are
to be taken.”

The SoS could at any point, ban someone from the internet without an explaination of why he/she has done so.
Edited by Theory_Execution on 04/10/2010 07:01
Politicians have always been able to count on the vast majority of people simply not caring about any single issue. They routinely sneak things into bills whose full consequences are only realized much later by an apathetic public.

Most people simply believe whatever they hear from a few trusted sources. If some commentator they like tells them a particular thing is true they will usually defend it from that point on regardless of how much or little they actually know about the subject.
The more it happens, it seem bloody revolution is the only option that will make people stand up and listen.
Sadly, some people only believe what they want to believe. I used to beat my head against a wall trying to get people like the Tea Party members and die hear religious zealots to listen to reason, proof, logic, facts, truth and solid evidence. It finally dawned on me that I would never turn these people because they wanted to believe in the lies because the lies suited them. Those lies fed their own misguided beliefs and longings. I actually believe that there are a good number of these people who know that they are wrong but are going to continue their complete denial because they find comfort in the fantasy those lies support.
One member of parliament commented, that in his 8 or so years of service that this bill was the most detailed and complex he had ever seen, and it was rushed through the process with a pitiful number of politicians present.

http://www.youtub...S4hdGzZ9XA at 0:28 second in.
Theory_Execution wrote:
The more it happens, it seem bloody revolution is the only option that will make people stand up and listen.

The problems with revolution is that the vast majority of people think that once the status quo is toppled that the revolution is done. Then they wander off and end up leaving leadership in the hands of the small core of people who are most motivated to stick around. It's not until that point that people find out what the real motivations of the people who lead a revolt really are.
Very true, seeker. One can see it has happened in history over and over again. It also happens with nonviolent political movements. People think "We won!" and leave it to the professionals, thinking that it's all settled. It never is.
"If I owned both Hell and Texas, I'd live in Hell and rent out Texas." - General Sheridan
We are adrift on an ocean of shit in a whirlwind of fire.

We just have to play the waiting game over here now, see what the consequences are. I do know this however, in the general election that is coming up I intend to spoil my ballot.
Jump to Forum:

Similar Threads

Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Don't miss out on the bidding!!! The Lounge 4 01/19/2010 13:55
I will miss you The Rant Room 25 05/15/2009 20:21