Have I Ragged on Glen Beck Yet, or if so, Recently?
I am pretty sure not recently, so here goes.
I saw this clip over on Crooks and Liars where Beck, newly happily comfy as part of the Fox (not) News family, went on one of his loony tunes flavored tangents about a judicial decision striking down a school moment of silence on account of that whole deliberately encouraging prayer thing.
And before I go all off with my "Free Thinker," ya'll got the right to believe what you do, but you don't have the right to even try to only encourage me to do your thing, leave alone try to force me thinking? Actually that is where I want and need to go here. Now perhaps not here, but I have (swear) said the following about Mr. Beck. He is a crazy man. Either that or he is one hell of an actor, as he has me convinced that he has some serious brain damage, or biochemical imbalances, based on just the clips I have seen/heard. In any event, the following detail is not evidence of being truly crazy, but being more ordinarily not thinking properly. Words so have meanings, meanings have concepts, concepts are based on ideas, and one should keep to the reality side of things, and not spin them to suit one's biases and bigotry.
That is the long way (but complete way) to get to the following point. Crazy man Beck did the "We're Oppressed" line. Hell, he started out with that nonsense, and actually said that the 10% of America that doesn't believe in God is pushing around the 90% who do. (In my book, that counts as being detached from reality, but I will just leave that at that.) But he goes further to suggest that (and note, I am explaining here, not quoting) when members of the 10% remind the 90% that no, you can believe what you all want but you have no right to even make us have to listen to your stuff, or stand idly by while you engage in you religious practices, on public property, that that is oppression. Telling religious peeps, thanks but no thanks, keep your religious practices in your homes and places of worship, but out of the public places supported by all of our tax dollars, is not oppression. It is, however, an unfortunately too frequently necessary reminder to some zealots that their rights to their beliefs ends at the next person's nose. And if that next person is either a non-believer, or someone who practices a different faith/ritual/practice, well, it is the obligation of the zealot to zip it, particularly in the publicly funded locations owned and operated by Fed., state, and local government. In fact, we start off with the assumption in the American System that professing your faith and or practicing your religious ritual/practices is basically forbidden in those government owned and operated places.
How is that oppression? Are people's houses of worship being stormed, and people dragged off for practicing the wrong ritual? No. Are people being snatched off the street, or pulled out of their homes and forced to convert to the official practice, or be locked up, tortured, or have their property confiscated? No. Are people being barred from voting or serving in government or getting a job with the government on account of their preferred practice? Quite the opposite, really. The only thing people are being forced to do is not evangelize or proselytize, or engage in any sort of pro-our-religion activity on government property. That applies across the board to all religions, so no body is being picked on. Every one gets treated the same.
And just to be clear, here, there is no rational basis for saying that the prohibition of religious practices and rituals on government owned and operated property is in any way pro Atheist. Never mind the reality that a lack of belief in God is no where near the same as following a religion, but the reality based truth of the matter is we are striving for neutrality in the government owned and operated spaces, not advocacy or predominance of any idea, ideology, or dogma. That is what neutral means, no body's belief is raised above the others.
Hell. I stared on Beck, but went longer on the underlying issue there. I wish that it was not necessary to have to tell or remind people that not getting their way is not the same as being oppressed. But this weirdness with religious zealots is what it is. They tend to believe not only are they right, but that their way of belief can not possibly be wrong. It is one thing to be knowingly engaging in the process of coercion. That is one level of odiousness. But then there are those zealots who are in denial of it; they misstate their intentions (when circumstances require dishonesty to advance their goals), and then they act like a religion neutral environment is particularly oppressive to them, even if there are (let me check) some 22 major religions in the world.
Obnoxious, selfish, thoughtless, delusional, and transparently hypocritical, I call that.
I saw this clip over on Crooks and Liars where Beck, newly happily comfy as part of the Fox (not) News family, went on one of his loony tunes flavored tangents about a judicial decision striking down a school moment of silence on account of that whole deliberately encouraging prayer thing.
And before I go all off with my "Free Thinker," ya'll got the right to believe what you do, but you don't have the right to even try to only encourage me to do your thing, leave alone try to force me thinking? Actually that is where I want and need to go here. Now perhaps not here, but I have (swear) said the following about Mr. Beck. He is a crazy man. Either that or he is one hell of an actor, as he has me convinced that he has some serious brain damage, or biochemical imbalances, based on just the clips I have seen/heard. In any event, the following detail is not evidence of being truly crazy, but being more ordinarily not thinking properly. Words so have meanings, meanings have concepts, concepts are based on ideas, and one should keep to the reality side of things, and not spin them to suit one's biases and bigotry.
That is the long way (but complete way) to get to the following point. Crazy man Beck did the "We're Oppressed" line. Hell, he started out with that nonsense, and actually said that the 10% of America that doesn't believe in God is pushing around the 90% who do. (In my book, that counts as being detached from reality, but I will just leave that at that.) But he goes further to suggest that (and note, I am explaining here, not quoting) when members of the 10% remind the 90% that no, you can believe what you all want but you have no right to even make us have to listen to your stuff, or stand idly by while you engage in you religious practices, on public property, that that is oppression. Telling religious peeps, thanks but no thanks, keep your religious practices in your homes and places of worship, but out of the public places supported by all of our tax dollars, is not oppression. It is, however, an unfortunately too frequently necessary reminder to some zealots that their rights to their beliefs ends at the next person's nose. And if that next person is either a non-believer, or someone who practices a different faith/ritual/practice, well, it is the obligation of the zealot to zip it, particularly in the publicly funded locations owned and operated by Fed., state, and local government. In fact, we start off with the assumption in the American System that professing your faith and or practicing your religious ritual/practices is basically forbidden in those government owned and operated places.
How is that oppression? Are people's houses of worship being stormed, and people dragged off for practicing the wrong ritual? No. Are people being snatched off the street, or pulled out of their homes and forced to convert to the official practice, or be locked up, tortured, or have their property confiscated? No. Are people being barred from voting or serving in government or getting a job with the government on account of their preferred practice? Quite the opposite, really. The only thing people are being forced to do is not evangelize or proselytize, or engage in any sort of pro-our-religion activity on government property. That applies across the board to all religions, so no body is being picked on. Every one gets treated the same.
And just to be clear, here, there is no rational basis for saying that the prohibition of religious practices and rituals on government owned and operated property is in any way pro Atheist. Never mind the reality that a lack of belief in God is no where near the same as following a religion, but the reality based truth of the matter is we are striving for neutrality in the government owned and operated spaces, not advocacy or predominance of any idea, ideology, or dogma. That is what neutral means, no body's belief is raised above the others.
Hell. I stared on Beck, but went longer on the underlying issue there. I wish that it was not necessary to have to tell or remind people that not getting their way is not the same as being oppressed. But this weirdness with religious zealots is what it is. They tend to believe not only are they right, but that their way of belief can not possibly be wrong. It is one thing to be knowingly engaging in the process of coercion. That is one level of odiousness. But then there are those zealots who are in denial of it; they misstate their intentions (when circumstances require dishonesty to advance their goals), and then they act like a religion neutral environment is particularly oppressive to them, even if there are (let me check) some 22 major religions in the world.
Obnoxious, selfish, thoughtless, delusional, and transparently hypocritical, I call that.
posted by Abstentus at 12:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home