Well......
Forced Worship
- Thread starter anomaly
- Start date
Well......
I can't tell if this was directed at me or anomoly, so I'll address it as if it were directed at me.
Why are you soooo mad? Why are you attacking me and not solely my point? Again, this is a philosophical error called an "ad hominem" attack. It doesn't help your point at all. I'm not a parent, by the way. So I didn't force anyone to go.
They force their kids to go because they love them and think it's best for them. That's their belief. So, if that is their belief, why shouldn't they make them go? You're basically saying that a parent (keep in mind what they think about heaven/hell/eternity) shouldn't make the child go? Shouldn't try to keep the child out of hell (again, I'm just saying that is what they think will happen). When someone has an argument, put yourself in their position before you judge them.
If they really believe that child has to be in church or burn for all eternity, of course they make them go. I'm not making a judgment either way on this; I'm simply saying the choice only makes sense because of their "starting point."
No, they shouldn't. They make a choice that is not theirs to make. Based on highly subjective grounds, at that. That people need to be protected from themselves is one of the basic arguments for totalitarianism. I'm sure those parents wouldn't be too happy if the state decided that religion is bad and that no one is allowed to believe in God anymore, yet the same argument applies.
I'm only suggesting they have the right while the child is, in fact, a child. Not an adult. 18+ means the parents have no authority over the child. Until then, though, they do. It doesn't mean the parent can do anything (because obviously we have laws to protect children). Totalitarianism effects the decisions of adults. Also, the children aren't forced to believe in God. No one can force that. Even if a child is forced to pray, read, sing, etc. So their not making that choice for a child.
ChefChiTown
The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
I think it's perfectly acceptable if parents expose their children to religion, but I think it's wrong for parents to force their children to think a certain way.
My parents took me to church when I was younger and when I said I didn't want to go anymore, they didn't make me.
My parents took me to church when I was younger and when I said I didn't want to go anymore, they didn't make me.
They may have the legal right. But, as far as I am concerned, they don't have the moral right.
Oh, they have the right to. Ironically, that doesn't make it right.
See, what a child experiences is going to carry over into the adult years. You can do pretty much anything to a person given unrestricted control over him or her for 18 years, even more so if the person in question is a child. That you have no official authority once the child is past 18 means nothing if you can freely brainwash it prior to that.
Have you read Freud? Granted, I didn't really like him much, but a child in that environment would basically be screwed (in the contextual sense) according to him.
Okay, I can accept that. I realize being forced makes some bitter towards religion, but at the same time, some convert. I had a professor in college that told us that his parents made him go to church on Halloween and of course he wanted to go trick or treating. He converted that night and its the most important thing to him in his whole life. The issue is quite complicated. There are a lot of ramifications either way. I respected that professor only secondarily to my father. There are some people who are fanatics and are hateful with religion and then there are some who are the kindest people you've ever met. So again, I just don't think religion is a simple neat equation like "religion = evil". The simple love black and white because they understand it. Life is gray.
I can agree with that. They should encourage their child to attend a "liberal arts" university. That will do the trick, certainly.
I was forced by a school teacher to praise the values of environmentalism like it was a religion.
Does that count?
Is that a good enough reason to hate environmentalists?
Does that count?
Is that a good enough reason to hate environmentalists?
I do not understand why more people are unable see that. We have planet full people dividing themselves and killing each other over something that no one can prove is fact.:yinyang:
Indeed. If you examine history and look at the absolutely incredible numbers of people who've been killed in the name of some fictional deity, it is just astounding.
I don't disagree with that.
I went thru the same thing with my mother. We went to sunday school, morning service and evening service on sunday. And had to go to service on friday night sometimes. One summer she signed me and my brother up to Vacation Bible school. 4 days of week for a month and a half of what you had to listen to during sunday school.
When I turned 17, I told her when I turn 18 I will be moving out and not going to church again. She quit forcing me after getting advise from the others in her church.
Never been back. She still nags me to go and i'am 37 now.
True.
Peace.
I'd just like to add, organized religion as a concept is not unique. There are several similar social structures (nationalism being one notable). The benefit is that you get a sense of belonging, and by extension some form of happiness. The drawback is that by forming the group to which you belong, you're also in a way isolating yourself from those who are not part of the group. I would even say this is required to get that sense of belonging. You get an "us" and a "them", and that's where the problems start. Where you have distinct factions with beliefs that does not match, you get friction. Where you have friction, things will eventually escalate, and depending on the scope, you'll have anything from an angry glare to a nuclear war.
Parents tend to enforce views, direct or indirect ...
Many are taught from the standpoint of "law," and you cannot question them.
Like the time I finally corrected my biology that it was the "Theory of Evolution."
He was going off on some others who said they had other beliefs to explain the omissions in the Theory, which he said was wrong.
He tgeb went off on me like I was some Bible Thumper when I was not, and I found later I wasn't far off from the county's lessons.
It clearly said that the "Theory of Evolution" would only be taught because it was backed by Scientific Theory with some Empirical Evidence.
I utterly agreed with that, but stated that it does not explain everything, hence why people look elsewhere, even if the state cannot teach that and there is no "proof" of anything else either.
Indirectly many experiences shape your views.
To an engineer (I didn't realize this when I was young, but I quickly did late high school through early college), memorizing math formulas is the most wasteful detail.
Engineers are not taught formulas, they are taught how to come up with a system of equations, commonly systems of differential and integral calculus equations that describe interactions.
Most commonly used calculus formulas are merely pre-derived/simplified coordinate/reference changes (trignometric/spherical) as well as common transforms (Laplace, Fourier, some non-linear ideals, etc...).
Anyone who thinks engineering is about memorizing formulas obviously never had engineering courses -- technology, yes, not engineering.
As such, the older I got, the more insulted I was at being forced to memorize all sorts of things that are mere reference, not teaching you how to think.
I've had this debate with every educator I've met, and they have always agreed in the end.
One thing I love about my wife is that she shares this view, that memorization is just wrong.
Ironically, all of these teach talents, enough that I shocked everyone once when I sung to my wife (to be at the time) -- no one though I sang at all, and thought my voice was shit.
Trust me, I practiced and practiced and practiced for 4 months to get not only my confidence up, but to learn what tones and variations I could and could not do.
I can give seminars and speeches to 10,000+ people without breaking a sweat, but singing, oh boy, that was tough!
I would love to take singing classes to improve, I think I have potential, but I just don't have time -- I could have exponentially saved years by learning as a kid.
I don't dance worth shit despite having ballet and tap, although I'm sure both helped my balance, which helped me with baseball, football, wrestling and running.
He did this because he was teaching me discipline and how to be responsible, including doing things I didn't want to or see a need for.
Many things I do not use today, many not even remotely, but they are part of my life.
Indirectly many experiences shape your views.
You have to stop and realize the intention of people, not necessarily their end-actions that may look like completely different.
Not to be "nice" or otherwise "conform."
But it's how you eventually get them to realize it's not something that applies to you.
Too often kids just "rebel" against parents, instead of questioning their parents in a civilized manner, or calmly refusing to do something with an intelligent reason when parents fail to listen.
Trust me, I learned this at age 15, and it worked very, very well.
My mother would not listen at times, not stop to realize that ...
A) I understood she wanted me to do something because she loved and cared for me, because ...
B) She thought it was the "right thing to do" and I "need to do it," but ...
C) I did not find it remotely applicable for myself, and possibly even wrong, but ...
D) Not because I was "lazy" or "rebelous" or "wrong." Futhermore ...
E) I didn't go to my dad to get approval either, I rarely circumvented my mother by using my dad (with one exception, below).
It wasn't until I was 24 and married my wife that my mother finally realized my values had been very sound since I was 15.
Before then, I just had to "manage" her, realizing that getting madeand upset with her wasn't going to help.
I could only change how what she did affected me, and if it was out of misguided love, I should be mad, but I didn't need to do it.
I was grounded half of my high school life, literally grounded for about half the school year and half of the summer.
Only when my mother would deny me various "lifetime moments," I reserved those few times I would go to my dad.
Like grounding me from working out, going to practice, wearing my contacts and forcing me to wear my glasses (yeah, she did that twice) and my homecoming/proms.
Understand these were using things I paid for with my own money working for my father quite a lot (about 30 hours/week) throughout high school.
As you are forced to go to school to learn countless things that are a point of view, even if sufficiently proved, are often useless directly.
Many are taught from the standpoint of "law," and you cannot question them.
Like the time I finally corrected my biology that it was the "Theory of Evolution."
He was going off on some others who said they had other beliefs to explain the omissions in the Theory, which he said was wrong.
He tgeb went off on me like I was some Bible Thumper when I was not, and I found later I wasn't far off from the county's lessons.
It clearly said that the "Theory of Evolution" would only be taught because it was backed by Scientific Theory with some Empirical Evidence.
I utterly agreed with that, but stated that it does not explain everything, hence why people look elsewhere, even if the state cannot teach that and there is no "proof" of anything else either.
Indirectly many experiences shape your views.
My teachers and parents made me memorize many things, not just poetry, but math formulas.
To an engineer (I didn't realize this when I was young, but I quickly did late high school through early college), memorizing math formulas is the most wasteful detail.
Engineers are not taught formulas, they are taught how to come up with a system of equations, commonly systems of differential and integral calculus equations that describe interactions.
Most commonly used calculus formulas are merely pre-derived/simplified coordinate/reference changes (trignometric/spherical) as well as common transforms (Laplace, Fourier, some non-linear ideals, etc...).
Anyone who thinks engineering is about memorizing formulas obviously never had engineering courses -- technology, yes, not engineering.
As such, the older I got, the more insulted I was at being forced to memorize all sorts of things that are mere reference, not teaching you how to think.
I've had this debate with every educator I've met, and they have always agreed in the end.
One thing I love about my wife is that she shares this view, that memorization is just wrong.
My parents made me take tap and ballet, and denied me from being in the school choir.
Ironically, all of these teach talents, enough that I shocked everyone once when I sung to my wife (to be at the time) -- no one though I sang at all, and thought my voice was shit.
Trust me, I practiced and practiced and practiced for 4 months to get not only my confidence up, but to learn what tones and variations I could and could not do.
I can give seminars and speeches to 10,000+ people without breaking a sweat, but singing, oh boy, that was tough!
I would love to take singing classes to improve, I think I have potential, but I just don't have time -- I could have exponentially saved years by learning as a kid.
I don't dance worth shit despite having ballet and tap, although I'm sure both helped my balance, which helped me with baseball, football, wrestling and running.
My father made me help with the family business, didn't pay me my worth, made me do some useless choirs (I'm not talking the additional, useful ones), etc...
He did this because he was teaching me discipline and how to be responsible, including doing things I didn't want to or see a need for.
Many things I do not use today, many not even remotely, but they are part of my life.
Indirectly many experiences shape your views.
But he didn't, he wanted you to believe in God because -- from his perspective -- he cared about you.
You have to stop and realize the intention of people, not necessarily their end-actions that may look like completely different.
Not to be "nice" or otherwise "conform."
But it's how you eventually get them to realize it's not something that applies to you.
Too often kids just "rebel" against parents, instead of questioning their parents in a civilized manner, or calmly refusing to do something with an intelligent reason when parents fail to listen.
Trust me, I learned this at age 15, and it worked very, very well.
My mother would not listen at times, not stop to realize that ...
A) I understood she wanted me to do something because she loved and cared for me, because ...
B) She thought it was the "right thing to do" and I "need to do it," but ...
C) I did not find it remotely applicable for myself, and possibly even wrong, but ...
D) Not because I was "lazy" or "rebelous" or "wrong." Futhermore ...
E) I didn't go to my dad to get approval either, I rarely circumvented my mother by using my dad (with one exception, below).
It wasn't until I was 24 and married my wife that my mother finally realized my values had been very sound since I was 15.
Before then, I just had to "manage" her, realizing that getting madeand upset with her wasn't going to help.
I could only change how what she did affected me, and if it was out of misguided love, I should be mad, but I didn't need to do it.
I was grounded half of my high school life, literally grounded for about half the school year and half of the summer.
Only when my mother would deny me various "lifetime moments," I reserved those few times I would go to my dad.
Like grounding me from working out, going to practice, wearing my contacts and forcing me to wear my glasses (yeah, she did that twice) and my homecoming/proms.
Understand these were using things I paid for with my own money working for my father quite a lot (about 30 hours/week) throughout high school.
Teachers can do this as well ...
I got detention for a full week for questioning -- and I mean questioning with respect -- why I got an 0 for using civil engineering/surveying nomenclature on map instead of 360 degrees for bearings by a physics teacher.
This was my favorite class, and I like the teacher, but he went off on me, and it was totally undeserved.
I didn't back down, and we went at it for 20 minutes, each time I said, "I will redo my assignment, you can still give me a 0, but what I used was not wrong, and I ask you to research instead of rebuking me."
Eventually he sent me to the office for "yelling at him" (when it was vice-versa), I literally think it was absolute pride.
It wasn't that I was a jerk at all, I literally went to him and said, "I'm sorry, I've just done a lot of maps with my dad, a civil engineer, and I used surveying nomenclature. I would like to redo this for partial credit."
He rebuked me instead, saying he had never heard of it, not realizing that my use of N/S-E/W on hemi/quads was how common, official plats are done in the US.
He literally embarrassed the fuck out of me after I repeated that I wasn't making it up, drawing it on the board and the entire class got a laugh out of it, ending with the rhetorical question, "has anyone seen this before? I think not."
He didn't like my use of trignometry and differential/integral calculus in class either, often to derive the common, simple, 1-dimensional algebraic formulas I didn't want to memorize (I hate memorization).
So he used it to say I just make shit up and try to "act smart."
That's when I didn't back down and told him I didn't deserve that, and it was pure attitude that I didn't deserve.
It was one thing for him to think me wrong, another to attempt to embarrass me in front of the class, which would only serve to be an embarrassment to him in the end.
Yes, I could be a real prick if you wanted to test my integrity, that was what finally got me to "stand up."
He went at me for 20 minutes, bringing up everything I did, calling me a show-off, and that I was continually wrong anyway.
I didn't get pissed, I wrote a letter instead.
I wrote a letter to the local state Board of Professional Engineers, asking them to confirm my usage was "Best Common Practice."
The nice PE who wrote back, just as I started in my letter, and I'll never forget this sequence of statements ... (paraphrased, with "X" for me) ... the basic statements were (again, it's been a bit, but this was all he covered -- I wish I still had a copy of it) ...
"A teacher, just like a client, can require a student, just like a practicing engineer, to submit documentation in specific nomenclatures.
A student, just a client, must conform and, after making an initial submission that is incorrect, do everything to adhere to those expectations.
That includes a student, just like a client, not receiving any credit, like like no compensation (and even termination of the contract without any compensation), after the fact, even if they spend time correcting their initial misunderstandings of the teacher's, like client's, requirements.
From Mr. X's letter, this sounds like his entire intent, that he accepted his mistake and wanted to make good on it, regardless of any credit applied after-the-fact, although we understand there were other social factors involved.
While we will not comment on those social factors, his willingness to change his documentation to the teacher's wishes is a sign of integrity, a quality we require of all of our licensed professionals.
Furthermore, and to set the record straight, Mr. X's use of nationally recognized statues and common practice of official surveying units is not merely required on all sealed document submissions, such as maps, by all of our licensed professionals, but it is tested by all licensing boards of all 50 states and US territories.
Had this been a commercial or contractual issue between client and professional, and received such a letter, we would have no choice but to intercede or otherwise provide testimony on behalf of our licensed professional, especially if the client caused commercial and contractual harm to our professional.
We understand the teacher did not contract the student or is not otherwise employing the student in this case.
The teacher, like many clients, have the right to question the student, just like our professionals, and seek additional opinions from other professionals.
But the teacher did and still does hold the academic integrity of the student in question, and did not seek an additional opinion of another individual to confirm.
We understand this is the main reason why the student has written this letter, all other social issues aside.
So the statues, combined with the student's wiliness to still change the work even without further credit, means we cannot condoned the actions of the teacher.
In fact, when we have clients that cause issues for our licensed professionals who know our statues, we inform all other professionals not to conduct business with such clients.
As a result, troublesome clients quickly find they cannot get buildings build or road paved as a result, until they understand the integrity of our professionals who are not mistaken, and try their best to do as their clients desire.
Statues exist not merely for uniformity, but for the protection of the clients, and the safety of the public good in general, especially when clients believe they are right or the professional must do something."
It's safe to say I failed every fucking thing after that in the class.
I pulled a C for the year overall as a result -- the only C I've ever pulled in a math/science course before college.
He also refused to sign off on AP Chemistry/Physics courses as a result, classes I wanted to take my senior year.
Instead, I took a remedial science course (the only one I could take) and utterly goofed off (and pulled an A, all while my teacher kept saying, "WTF are you doing in here?" -- except the "TF" part, of course).
This affected my college education, just like my trignometry teacher did as well because she "didn't like the fact that I was frigid" (didn't have sexual intercourse).
I kid you not, she had ex-gf's in my class, and was eventually kicked out of school for serving alcohol to students (and statutory rape charges, although I don't know if she did that or not).
A lot of teachers and parents are selfish in how they teach you in general, especially when it's about "blind faith" in something.
I got detention for a full week for questioning -- and I mean questioning with respect -- why I got an 0 for using civil engineering/surveying nomenclature on map instead of 360 degrees for bearings by a physics teacher.
This was my favorite class, and I like the teacher, but he went off on me, and it was totally undeserved.
I didn't back down, and we went at it for 20 minutes, each time I said, "I will redo my assignment, you can still give me a 0, but what I used was not wrong, and I ask you to research instead of rebuking me."
Eventually he sent me to the office for "yelling at him" (when it was vice-versa), I literally think it was absolute pride.
It wasn't that I was a jerk at all, I literally went to him and said, "I'm sorry, I've just done a lot of maps with my dad, a civil engineer, and I used surveying nomenclature. I would like to redo this for partial credit."
He rebuked me instead, saying he had never heard of it, not realizing that my use of N/S-E/W on hemi/quads was how common, official plats are done in the US.
He literally embarrassed the fuck out of me after I repeated that I wasn't making it up, drawing it on the board and the entire class got a laugh out of it, ending with the rhetorical question, "has anyone seen this before? I think not."
He didn't like my use of trignometry and differential/integral calculus in class either, often to derive the common, simple, 1-dimensional algebraic formulas I didn't want to memorize (I hate memorization).
So he used it to say I just make shit up and try to "act smart."
That's when I didn't back down and told him I didn't deserve that, and it was pure attitude that I didn't deserve.
It was one thing for him to think me wrong, another to attempt to embarrass me in front of the class, which would only serve to be an embarrassment to him in the end.
Yes, I could be a real prick if you wanted to test my integrity, that was what finally got me to "stand up."
He went at me for 20 minutes, bringing up everything I did, calling me a show-off, and that I was continually wrong anyway.
I didn't get pissed, I wrote a letter instead.
I wrote a letter to the local state Board of Professional Engineers, asking them to confirm my usage was "Best Common Practice."
The nice PE who wrote back, just as I started in my letter, and I'll never forget this sequence of statements ... (paraphrased, with "X" for me) ... the basic statements were (again, it's been a bit, but this was all he covered -- I wish I still had a copy of it) ...
"A teacher, just like a client, can require a student, just like a practicing engineer, to submit documentation in specific nomenclatures.
A student, just a client, must conform and, after making an initial submission that is incorrect, do everything to adhere to those expectations.
That includes a student, just like a client, not receiving any credit, like like no compensation (and even termination of the contract without any compensation), after the fact, even if they spend time correcting their initial misunderstandings of the teacher's, like client's, requirements.
From Mr. X's letter, this sounds like his entire intent, that he accepted his mistake and wanted to make good on it, regardless of any credit applied after-the-fact, although we understand there were other social factors involved.
While we will not comment on those social factors, his willingness to change his documentation to the teacher's wishes is a sign of integrity, a quality we require of all of our licensed professionals.
Furthermore, and to set the record straight, Mr. X's use of nationally recognized statues and common practice of official surveying units is not merely required on all sealed document submissions, such as maps, by all of our licensed professionals, but it is tested by all licensing boards of all 50 states and US territories.
Had this been a commercial or contractual issue between client and professional, and received such a letter, we would have no choice but to intercede or otherwise provide testimony on behalf of our licensed professional, especially if the client caused commercial and contractual harm to our professional.
We understand the teacher did not contract the student or is not otherwise employing the student in this case.
The teacher, like many clients, have the right to question the student, just like our professionals, and seek additional opinions from other professionals.
But the teacher did and still does hold the academic integrity of the student in question, and did not seek an additional opinion of another individual to confirm.
We understand this is the main reason why the student has written this letter, all other social issues aside.
So the statues, combined with the student's wiliness to still change the work even without further credit, means we cannot condoned the actions of the teacher.
In fact, when we have clients that cause issues for our licensed professionals who know our statues, we inform all other professionals not to conduct business with such clients.
As a result, troublesome clients quickly find they cannot get buildings build or road paved as a result, until they understand the integrity of our professionals who are not mistaken, and try their best to do as their clients desire.
Statues exist not merely for uniformity, but for the protection of the clients, and the safety of the public good in general, especially when clients believe they are right or the professional must do something."
It's safe to say I failed every fucking thing after that in the class.
I pulled a C for the year overall as a result -- the only C I've ever pulled in a math/science course before college.
He also refused to sign off on AP Chemistry/Physics courses as a result, classes I wanted to take my senior year.
Instead, I took a remedial science course (the only one I could take) and utterly goofed off (and pulled an A, all while my teacher kept saying, "WTF are you doing in here?" -- except the "TF" part, of course).
This affected my college education, just like my trignometry teacher did as well because she "didn't like the fact that I was frigid" (didn't have sexual intercourse).
I kid you not, she had ex-gf's in my class, and was eventually kicked out of school for serving alcohol to students (and statutory rape charges, although I don't know if she did that or not).
Individualism ...
Groups argue "fair" back and forth like they are right and others are wrong, and they will take individual support (and money) to do that.
When groups are "mandated" and you have no individual choice to join them or not, let alone they take your money without your input (let alone where to spend it), that bothers the fuck out of me.
Freedom is not fair, it's grossly unfair, it lets strong individuals take advantage of weak individuals.
Capitalism is all the same, those who have wealth take advantage of those who do not.
But even weak people, as individuals, can still choose to be part of a group to fight against strong individuals exploiting them.
And even poor people, as individuals, can still choose to be part of a group to fight against wealthy individuals exploiting them.
Good organizations survive on the basis of people choosing to join them, bad ones don't.
Mandating membership in groups, via government, via blind religious belief, is not the answer, it takes away individual choice.
In fact, it's because these organizations often make the cry, "we are right, you are wrong" and have the enforced and mandated power to make you conform, are everything against freedom.
It's why I am so damn strongly against large governments and socialist control, or even "privatization" where governments still takes money, but gives it to corporate monopolies.
Governments exist to protect individuals, and nothing more, not serve the needs of any group, and groups are damn selfish.
Same deal for churches, especially large churches, that absolutely reflect forced servitude and political bodies.
Individual freedom is about choosing your own lifestyle and your own monetary needs, earnings and charity.
If you don't like how you life your life, you change it, not what others day.
And if you don't like your job, you change it, not what others force you to do.
I honestly cannot say this enough, if you don't like who you work for or live with, fucking change it.
Start your own company, kick whomever you don't like out -- take responsibility for it, not let others.
Everyday I literally run into way too many irresponsible people blaming the government or their relatives for their own irresponsibilities.
Yes, fucking circumstances set you up bad -- I care, but fucking don't care to the point you're not producing and just taking money from others.
My wife and I live on $30,000 a year, in the smallest, 1,200 square foot house on the block (no basement, 1 car garage).
I have a $10k (original price), 12 year old pick-up, she has a late model, sub convertible we got for under $20K and it's now paid off.
We take one, small vacation a year.
I give about $10,000 to charity/year and the rest goes into investments, which create private sector jobs.
My goal? To save enough of an "endowment" that my wife and I will have $30,000/year to live on when we retire (adjusted for inflation).
If we have kids, that will go to our kids after the 55% (or whatever it is) "redistribution of wealth tax" that's utter bullshit.
And if we don't have kids, I'll give that money to a couple of charities as an endowment so they can give scholarships or other, retraining/educational funding, because I want people to have opportunities.
When people raise my income tax, including my wife bringing home less than 45% of what she makes after all withholdings because we're well into the "marriage penalty," all you're doing is cutting the funds I send into private sector investments.
If there is one thing I hate about both the left and right, it's the "religion" that there is unquestionable wealth out there, that people making over $100,000/year buy yahts or are worth $1M+ and "live it up," and that "endless money" should be taxed away and "spent on groups that need it."
I, for once, would like people to stop blaming others -- from the church, to the "rich" (again, wealthy? or high income earners?), and countless other things, and actually blame themselves for their own inability to do what is right for them, so they are not a burden on society -- fiscally or socially.
Hell, I almost live my life to Islamic denies (e.g., I've never drank alcohol), but damn if I don't say alcohol should be banned because it's about personal responsibility.
I know I'm going all over on this, but it's the truth -- individual rights and freedoms rule, subjective and questionable value judgments on "right" and "wrong" as a "group" and often conflicting "groups" is just a stupid concept, and why social institutions of "fair" or "just" never work.
The only thing that works is when you pit organizations of people against one other where they have balances against each other, majorities with appointed law officials of meritocratic value overriding them unless a supermajority group overrides them.
Any institution of "belief" or "blind faith" as a group, especially exploiting minorities (including "the rich" or "the young"), is an equal issue, and people need to be responsible as an individual.
And that includes "moving on" after you've been an alleged "victim" of "the system" or "your upbringing" or "whatever my bitch is."
That's why I live on $30K, a meager lifestyle, even though I make 3x as much as the families around me who have 2-4x the car and house I do.
They blame others for how they act, I blame myself anytime I let my experiences dictate how I'm going to live my life wrong and without responsibility.
You have just struck the note why I'm a staunch American Libertarian-Capitalist, and against Liberal/Libertarian-Socialism, Communism as well as Conservative-Capitalist or even Conservative-Socialist.
Groups argue "fair" back and forth like they are right and others are wrong, and they will take individual support (and money) to do that.
When groups are "mandated" and you have no individual choice to join them or not, let alone they take your money without your input (let alone where to spend it), that bothers the fuck out of me.
Freedom is not fair, it's grossly unfair, it lets strong individuals take advantage of weak individuals.
Capitalism is all the same, those who have wealth take advantage of those who do not.
But even weak people, as individuals, can still choose to be part of a group to fight against strong individuals exploiting them.
And even poor people, as individuals, can still choose to be part of a group to fight against wealthy individuals exploiting them.
Good organizations survive on the basis of people choosing to join them, bad ones don't.
Mandating membership in groups, via government, via blind religious belief, is not the answer, it takes away individual choice.
In fact, it's because these organizations often make the cry, "we are right, you are wrong" and have the enforced and mandated power to make you conform, are everything against freedom.
It's why I am so damn strongly against large governments and socialist control, or even "privatization" where governments still takes money, but gives it to corporate monopolies.
Governments exist to protect individuals, and nothing more, not serve the needs of any group, and groups are damn selfish.
Same deal for churches, especially large churches, that absolutely reflect forced servitude and political bodies.
Individual freedom is about choosing your own lifestyle and your own monetary needs, earnings and charity.
If you don't like how you life your life, you change it, not what others day.
And if you don't like your job, you change it, not what others force you to do.
I honestly cannot say this enough, if you don't like who you work for or live with, fucking change it.
Start your own company, kick whomever you don't like out -- take responsibility for it, not let others.
Everyday I literally run into way too many irresponsible people blaming the government or their relatives for their own irresponsibilities.
Yes, fucking circumstances set you up bad -- I care, but fucking don't care to the point you're not producing and just taking money from others.
My wife and I live on $30,000 a year, in the smallest, 1,200 square foot house on the block (no basement, 1 car garage).
I have a $10k (original price), 12 year old pick-up, she has a late model, sub convertible we got for under $20K and it's now paid off.
We take one, small vacation a year.
I give about $10,000 to charity/year and the rest goes into investments, which create private sector jobs.
My goal? To save enough of an "endowment" that my wife and I will have $30,000/year to live on when we retire (adjusted for inflation).
If we have kids, that will go to our kids after the 55% (or whatever it is) "redistribution of wealth tax" that's utter bullshit.
And if we don't have kids, I'll give that money to a couple of charities as an endowment so they can give scholarships or other, retraining/educational funding, because I want people to have opportunities.
When people raise my income tax, including my wife bringing home less than 45% of what she makes after all withholdings because we're well into the "marriage penalty," all you're doing is cutting the funds I send into private sector investments.
If there is one thing I hate about both the left and right, it's the "religion" that there is unquestionable wealth out there, that people making over $100,000/year buy yahts or are worth $1M+ and "live it up," and that "endless money" should be taxed away and "spent on groups that need it."
I, for once, would like people to stop blaming others -- from the church, to the "rich" (again, wealthy? or high income earners?), and countless other things, and actually blame themselves for their own inability to do what is right for them, so they are not a burden on society -- fiscally or socially.
Hell, I almost live my life to Islamic denies (e.g., I've never drank alcohol), but damn if I don't say alcohol should be banned because it's about personal responsibility.
I know I'm going all over on this, but it's the truth -- individual rights and freedoms rule, subjective and questionable value judgments on "right" and "wrong" as a "group" and often conflicting "groups" is just a stupid concept, and why social institutions of "fair" or "just" never work.
The only thing that works is when you pit organizations of people against one other where they have balances against each other, majorities with appointed law officials of meritocratic value overriding them unless a supermajority group overrides them.
Any institution of "belief" or "blind faith" as a group, especially exploiting minorities (including "the rich" or "the young"), is an equal issue, and people need to be responsible as an individual.
And that includes "moving on" after you've been an alleged "victim" of "the system" or "your upbringing" or "whatever my bitch is."
That's why I live on $30K, a meager lifestyle, even though I make 3x as much as the families around me who have 2-4x the car and house I do.
They blame others for how they act, I blame myself anytime I let my experiences dictate how I'm going to live my life wrong and without responsibility.
