The Dump is:
For posting comments that don’t get up at the Drum, and for having a pleasant, mirthful or enlightening off-topic discussion.
It’s not for personal abuse of other commenters.
Please do that somewhere else if you must.
Play nicely or piss off.
However, why doesn’t a poster add a link for us to read and comment on here, much quicker. Maybe we can do a bit more bagging here, not that I speak for the moderators, yet.
NB: Being tiresome and boring, racist, sexist or just plain creepy is not playing nicely.
———-
The Pig’s Arms exists because a dozen or so years ago our other favourite playpen – the ABC’s Unleashed blogsphere started to go off. Like a sack of prawn heads in the sun. Something had to be done.
Moderation was taking forever. Comments seemed to be rejected randomly – outrageous ones appeared and reasoned ones were pinged. When they released the Drum / Unleashed ….. things actually got worse !
So many pieces from professional writers appear with no obvious merit. And the moderation has become, to put it frankly, appalling.
As a former contributor and a commenter, I was deeply disappointed at the plummeting quality from our pre-eminent media empire. And I resented so many challenging or dare I say, witty or funny posts in which we’ve invested seconds of our precious time – getting the chop.
So here, for all our benefit – is an open slather blog. Copy and paste your best rejected comments here for posterity. Does not matter whether you’re posting on the Guardian, First Dog on the Moon or wherever else.
And sprinkle pointers to the Pig’s Arms amongst your comments. Let’s try to rescue some of the old faithful.
Cheers,
Emm.
Window Dresser's Arms, Pig & Whistle 
Well I’m miffed, all of my “Helvi One On” comments on Unleashed this morning got blocked, you just can’t trust some moderators.
LikeLike
Looks like some of them got up Hung, you’re in the shit now….
LikeLike
Gorrrrrd save us!
Another one on “What sort of… is Julia… or Tony!” this one by Mz Crabb.
This must be the year where I opt out of things even before they begin. I read the first sentence, then sped-rolled by retinas through the rest of the article all the while something rising up to my oesophagus, and then stopped dead.
Nah! Not another Thyestes-type of experience, I told myself.
So, I walked out again!
How bereft of ideas our journos are outside the cycle of elections! Their love for disparagement of their party’s enemy blinds them of every other possibility to write something useful, something meaty, something of interest to the folk outside the navel-gazing media hacks.
And so, after a series of articles showing unmitigated contempt, by Ellis, another by Lewis (“Comparing the leaders”) earlier this week and some more by Ben Pobjie (though a little more subtle but still unbearably inane) we have this one by Annabelle, called -how crime-writer like- “The Fixer’s Agenda.” The first sentence which includes the words “Ancient Greece” roped me in but only until I came up to her rhetorical question “But what sort of prime minister is she?”
It followed after the convoluted and confused confluence of ancient greek myth and modern Oz History and by then I was emotionally, as well as intellectually exhausted (though I wouldn’t make much of the second adverb).
Nah, I said to myself. No more of Thyestes OR of Anabelle! Brains and bowels (I’m into an alliterative mode today) can only cope with so much.
But then again, I’ve been checking out the Drum progressively less every week and with a growing feeling of reluctance, though, I must admit, I enjoyed Adil Khan’s essay on Ahmadinejad which was long overdue. It’s been slipping from the banal to the excruciatingly biased with every article.
Greek coffee and ouzo coming up!
Haveagoodweekend everyone!
LikeLike
Ditto.
LikeLike
Ida Goodtime comments were posted on the Julie Posetti piece and then pulled later on.
The first one said that Julie shouldn’t worry about being criticised in the Australian since I didn’t read it ….. nor the rest of the article after the shocker of a first sentence.
Since this woman is a lecturer in journalism, I really feel sorry for her students….
Hence Freda Press’ comment ………I had the rather extraordinary experience of reading a monstrosity – like the first sentence in this piece.
“editorialised against” ! Poor students.
Also the quip that Pythagoras was such a square was published and then pulled later – probably because Ida said that too……
Poor sport.
LikeLike
Anyone saw The Deal, last night on 4 corners?
What a mongrel Katter is!
Not that anyone was ever fooled by the fool that he’d ever go the way of the ALP but, stringing everyone along, pretending that he’s undecided, while all the time he had this hatred for the Greens and an even bigger one for the ALP because Wilkie favoured them was the most vulgar proof of this man’s dishonesty!
All this waffle!
I can see that he tried to exact some promises from the ALP but it was obvious, he couldn’t give a stuff about Polity reform -and all this blatant lying to everyone, particularly to Winsdor and Oakshott! He followed their coat tails, making them do all the work when he had no intentions whatsoever -and under no circumstances- to go with the ALP. A thoroughly dishonest creep, just like his minders who cringed at the fact that he had uttered a bit of an insult at Abbott! Did no credit to his “outrage” about his poor constituents. How poorly it reflected on his rhetoric at the Q&A! Just how much of this man is dissembling? Stupid, short-sighted, self destructive tactics performed by a fool.Who could ever trust him about anything, after seeing that story? He’ll never be able to play this game again.
Shameful exhibition of politicians’ dishonesty! We have it in superabundance, I know but bloody hell, this was such a pitiful and unintelligent attempt at it, as well.
Winsor came out of it as thoroughly genuine, Oakshott, a bit less so but nowhere near as dreadful as Katter and I can’t believe that these two didn’t see through Katter early on and toss him out of their group instead of allowing him to play such a pathetic game with them!
Well done, ABC.
LikeLike
That shoulda been “Oakeshott” and “Windsor” of course.
LikeLike
It just confirmed what I thought all along. I was however, more concerned at his general rudeness during the process. At one stage I began to wonder if he could read and write. He was more interested in eating that sandwich than listening.
LikeLike
I am fuming, some mean soul has written a post under my name, Helvi, on Michael Danby’s blog. Must be some bloody Liberal, I have a feeling I know who it is.
I have alerted the moderators, and I sent a post there saying that the one up there now, is not mine.
LikeLike
Thank god it’s gone, but I’m still upset that someone would do such a nasty thing.
LikeLike
Remember that is why I became Stuffed Olive. A lot of my posts are not appearing and I am beginning to wonder
if someone is offended by my name. On Milne, last Friday I think, I wrote that since he was so good at digging up dirt perhaps he should write a gardening column. Not published.
LikeLike
I thought of you last night, Viv. The post was written in my ‘style’, but he/she used ‘dashes’, which I don’t …also ‘china’ in lower case..
Some of my posts on Milne don’t see the daylight, maybe he’s the moderator on his own stories.
LikeLike
Nice quip, Viv. I can’t bring myself to read his manure. Moreover I struggle to see what the point of reading material like Milne’s ordure actually is. Is it to maintain an accurate knowledge of thine enemy ? Or could it be that we like to feel offended and actually feel some pleasure in being confronted by the faecal matter?
Speaking of which, we know what to expect from Alan Moran, Tom Switzer et al. Fatuous right wing beat-ups and publicity-seeking. Just a different flavour to that of Razer, Pobjie and so many other lower mediocrities.
LikeLike
Yes, exactly my thoughts. I read the garbage mainly because I like to know what the enemy is up to in
the propaganda department. It does seem that he is no longer writing for The Australian – as a columnist
he is still listed but his last article is a couple of months old.
Helvi – I too am fairly sure he moderates his own column and I don’t think he is the only one on Unleashed who
is allowed to do that. Tends to go against Unleashed ideals.
LikeLike
Mrs Ato just sent a message from the footy:
“This is like the bloody elections!”
Ya gotta larf!
LikeLike
The AFL will make a lot of money from the draw
LikeLike
And then, of course, they’ll cry poor!
Demetriou is having his happy cigar and McGuire says, “them’s the rules and we ain’t changing ’em!”
Ah! The sheer, unadulterated greed of the conservatives. Once they get their teeth on the reins of power, they’ll never let them go. Sport, Politics, Religion, Banking. It’s all the same.
Puts one off his souvlaki, that does!
LikeLike
I was just reviewing a mini-debate on unleashed around same-sex marriage.
One theist was vehemently defending their position, and was doing a reasonable job of it, and brought in the notion of Vygotsky’s theories on schema development. There was a little discussion about the validity of his theories, after which I concluded it by stating that I wouldn’t take his work “for gospel” with all intent of it being a pun (if you infer that there is a pun in my writing, chances are there are more lurking in there than you realise). The reply to this was “BTW, had a chuckle at the use of taking Vygotsky as ‘gospel’; an unintended pun, but funny nonetheless”
Just because I don’t put ‘(pun intended)’ i.e. “Hey, everyone! Come look at this – I made a funny!!!1”, or the infinitely more detestable ‘(no pun intended)’ in no way means that it wasn’t my objective to make a pun in the first place. How terribly condescending to think, when I make conscious decisions in my use of language constantly, that I would overlook the perfect opportunity to not only make a joke but to make a subtle swipe at an dissenters capacity for making valid choices in what they believe.
The moral of this rant? There is none. However, I did manage to learn something courtesy of Tomokatu – the anti-marriage equality arguments are so perfectly ripe for parody that when one satirises those arguments, the parodies are all but indistinguishable from the arguments themselves.
LikeLike
Ah, the pun. I love a surprise lurking in a line of prose, Jayfa. And I feel embarrassed when I miss a beauty – or worse, when I find it on second or third reading. This makes me feel dumb as well as inefficient. But we have a wonderful language and there’s room for pedestrians as well as acrobats.
There is a certain deliciousness in the discovery of a pun, isn’t there – even more so when it’s something written by oneself. Sometimes I feel the need to write a comment – or even a piece that’s almost all puns and I confess a serpent pride in creating pseudonyms that go through excessiveness into hyperspace – like commenting on Alan Moran’s pieces under the pseud of Yorick Hunt, for example.
There are some clever and sly punsters here (you know who you are, Voice) – and also over at Crikey’s First Dog on the Moon blogs. I’m sad to say that I’ve almost completely stopped going to Unleashed and I miss some of the excellent writers there. I’m talking about the commenters more so than the contributors of articles (not you, of course, Gez). But all in all, good stuff is too hard to find amongst all the dross and folderol on Unleashed and the topics have become so narrow, almost everything looks like it’s been flogged to death. Over-exposure like the 24 hour “News” channel ? Maybe.
I agree, flagging puns is well beyond the pale and “no pun intended” is either naked self-consciousness or idiocy.
Thanks for this comment, Jayfa. I’d really like to see a contributed piece here at the Pig’s from you. Most welcome.
LikeLike
Totally agree re the ‘no pun intended’ – more often than not it was intended.
LikeLike
Really I should have canned that line (pun not … oh, whatever :)).
LikeLike
Anyone note the bit in Column 8 of SMH – a joke ending in no pun in ten did.
LikeLike
Boom Tish ! Very good.
LikeLike
The title of Kevin Donnelly’s piece today on the Unleashed index page: Deferring the eduaction revolution.
OK, it’s just a typo. But one that would be picked up by any spell-checker. It annoys the hell out of me that an ABC website doesn’t do even the most basic proof reading.
LikeLike
Another Ernesto Depesto diatribe – this time on Christopher Joye’s Sin Qua Non – ABC piece.
Well, no, most of the missiles hurled at the ABC don’t come from commercial “competitors”, they come from citizens who see the ABC as slowly turning into one of the same. Maybe not so slowly.
Not only has the ABC fallen into the hole of declining reliability, but it has also, by the nature of its selection of what is on the news agenda, gone down the rabbit hole of the trashy tabloid media. Check it out. Lots of stories of murder, mayhem, doom and gloom – no matter how trivial.
The effect ? Information of little or no value, dispiriting trite and invariably casting a bad light on people for whom it should show more respect.
This is not investigative reporting. It’s cheap sensationalism.
It’s not constructive. It’s overwhelmingly negative and depressing.
And recycling any old rubbish that the ABC finds lying around – over and over and over does not make a “24 hour” news service worth watching.
LikeLike
I hope they’ll put it up, Emmjay…when I saw old Donnelly there this morning I almost felt sick, no doubt Milne too will pop up again today.
LikeLike
I do feel strongly about this H, but I’m afraid I’m starting to look like a one issue whinger.
LikeLike
Me too, they must think my obsession about Milne means i’m secrectly in love with him 🙂
LikeLike
Not exactly “unleashed” but the ABC none the less. A piece on the afternoon news on “24”. Allie Moore, straight faced I might add, described a dinosaur from 125 million years ago as a “man eater”.
125MYA, a man eater…….? Placental mammals hadn’t even evolved at that time!
The decline continues.
LikeLike
Warrigal didn’t you ever watch “Its about Time” in the ’60’s. It was about prehistoric man in the time of rhe dinosaurs, well when the earth was new at least.
It was Youtube so it must be true
LikeLike
I checked it out and have to admit missing that one. Pity really because as I remember myself from the sixties, (and you know what they say about remembering the sixties), it would have been right up my alley, but I’m afraid my alley was completely blocked with a whole lot of other stuff in the sixties.
The goofball one obviously went to the Jerry Lewis school of comedy, whaddayarekkon?
LikeLike
Certainly did. I’m amazed at the impeccable English spoken by the cavemen.
LikeLike
Algy, how far have we fallen since those days !
LikeLike
Emm, it was such quality television. Real deep and meaningful themes.
LikeLike
I’m disappointed Annabel Crabb had a drone about “Brown and Abbott: let their powers combine”. I suggested that, Perhaps Bob could share his recipe with Tony for his famous grilled banana. Well they didn’t post it.
LikeLike
Algernon, I did not bother reading it, she’s written too many pro Abbott stories fo me to want go there…she’s as biased as Mr Milne.
LikeLike
And Mr Ellis lately, though I said he voted Labor in the lower house
LikeLike
I saw Annabel Crab once on Q&A and she was impressive although I can’t remember the topic. I read that article as a non-partisan essay on the unusual possibilities of the minority government situation, not an endorsement of Abbott.
Ellis seems to dislike Gillard more than he likes Labor, which is pretty amazing from what little I know of his track record.
LikeLike
Regarding that appalling piece by David Russell, yesterday I posted this comment: “This person makes Glen Milne sound reasonable.” It did not get up.
LikeLike
I found Mark Mondue’s Father’s Day story a little too sentimental , and wrote that it was a cross between ‘chic lit and bloke pulp’…
It was not published, which I found unfair as Mark himself critisized other writers books using those very same words 🙂
LikeLike
Weird isn’t it. On Greg Milner’s Labor must take on the Greens – I suggested he was an IPA plant. Did not make it either.
LikeLike
What can it all mean? An article on ‘Unleashed’ entitled ‘Confessions of an Unleashed Moderator’? An overworked and stressed-out moderator, whose six-hour day is just not enough to enable her to properly do her job; poor thing sounds like she needs some assistance… it’s not a ‘rightist’/’leftist’/theist/atheist plot after all!
Something puzzles me though: in all the several years of my contributing to ‘Unleashed’ I think one of my comments made the ‘front page’ ONCE… But today, in my guise as ‘Cynicure’, I find not one but TWO of my posts quoted on the front page… and that only MINUTES after I’d posted them!
It’s not natural, I tell you… I think the end is nigh… I’m just gonna make myself a nice cuppa tea and wait for the Rapture…
😉
LikeLike
T2, I reckon the pup moderator was impressed by your cool and philosophical-sounding nom de plume. But then, Ernesto Depesto got up too. Bulk approval ?
LikeLike
Who’s Ernest Depesto?
😉
LikeLike
The same person that used to be half the Unleashed commenters, who else asty.
LikeLike
Much the same has happened to me. I have been quiet lately as much is just going over the same ground. I thought
the Moderator’s Confessions was a fairly pathetic attempt to explain. We know the rules (well I have read them). Alerting
the moderator gets no response. The bit about ‘off topic’ – well really, how many times have I seen one subject turned
into another denialist’s anti AGW rant? Lots.
LikeLike
My comment on the ‘Parliamentary Debate on Afghanistan’ thread didn’t get up; I’ve just tried to post it again. It’s very brief; all it said was: “What parliamentary debate on Afghanistan?”
Wonder if it’ll get up this time…
🙂
LikeLike
Yes Howie didn’t give us a chance
LikeLike
Ain’t THAT the truth!
😉
LikeLike
My reply to Sardine on Ritter’s blog was not accepted. It was on these lines;
Dear Sardine, why don’t you hop back into your tin. I hope you don’t mind the other five allready there…
LikeLike
🙂
LikeLike
Can’t see anything wrong with that, Helvi; but the, Voice was suggesting that some of my posts are ‘immoderate’, so I may not be the one to listen to; though for the life of me, I strive very hard to maintain a moderate tone… Compared to what I might be tempted to say sometimes, my posts are all very moderate (I nearly said, ‘extremely moderate’!).
🙂
LikeLike
Asty, your posts are ALWAYS extremely moderate 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you Helvi; I would have thought so; but you know ‘you can’t please all the people all the time’…
I’m glad you’re both enjoying your new home.
🙂
LikeLike
Hi T2. I think it might have been today you get a helper back. We had a beautiful day here in Sydney. Back to winter tomorrow, but it was nice to have one warm day. I spent more time than I should out in the garden. Crikey, it looks miserable over there in Adelaide. At least the rain should make the place a bit greener than it has been and Spring is on the way.
I can’t wait till after the election. Watching TV is excruciating due to the political ads.
LikeLike
Yes, Voice, and I must say he had his work cut out for him! So relieved to get rid of the rubbish! It was starting to get pongy…
It has been cold here lately, but Adelaide does get beautifully green in winter; it’s by far the best time for a visit to the botanic gardens… I’d like to stroll round them and take some piccies to share with you guys, but it’s too hard with my leg the way it is… but maybe I can find some old ones… including, if we’re lucky, one of that poor little imprisoned Wollemi Pine… Hey, you know, it’s been so long since I was last there, maybe it’s been released! Or paroled at the very least! Must check it out when I get a bit more mobile!
I’m not watching telly much these days Voice; if I want amusement I now have an excellent collection of DVDs; full of the best comedies and historical movies ever made! (Ben Hur looks great on my 42″ screen!)
I can’t wait until January when I go to the hospital again and they’ll probably do that bone fusion surgery thing… then maybe I’ll be a bit more mobile than I am now; and maybe then they’ll be able to decide on how much all that ‘pain and suffering’ is worth; and how much of it I’ll have left after lawyers’ fees!
I studied the wrong discipline at uni; if I’d known how anthropology was going to turn out, I think I’d have studied law; plenty of easy money there!
🙂
LikeLike
Well, the Zoo has wheelchairs for hire but the Zoo itself costs a fortune. I don’t think the Botanic Gardens have wheelchairs which is a real shame.
Have you been referred to Disability SA?
LikeLike
Actually no, Voice… and thanks for reminding me of their existence… In fact last time I went to centrelink to explain the difficulties I now have looking for work, (and indeed, attending any job I should be so lucky enough as to find!), I made a point of seeing a person who ‘had been’ a ‘disability support officer’ at centrelink at one stage, but although she now still had to deal with enquiries from disabled people, her role had evidently been ‘downsized’… and I don’t think even she mentioned Disability SA, although it was she who explained to me (after a year of having been told the contrary!) that I CAN get a disability sticker; even if it’s only a temporary one… I have the paperwork, but I want to take it in in person; one achieves so much more when dealing with bureaucracies, in a face-to-face interview than over the phone or the internet, where possibilities are always too limited…
Oh well, I’m informed, by the other person I saw at centrelink last time, that my ‘job network’ people are also there to help me overcome ‘barriers to employment’… including, so she said, trying to organize me a ground floor flat… I told her about the waiting list… Dunno… left hand; right hand… We’ll just wait and see what happens when I go to see them again a week on Wednesday.
It’s all very ‘interesting’… but also very tiring! I just wish they’d leave me alone to write… and play my guitar!
You do think some of my post are immoderate, don’t you, VoR? It’s okay; you can say so if you like; you are entitled to your viewpoint… whether or not I agree with it!
😉
LikeLike
Look here T2. Relying on random government people to work out what information you need and supply it, is not likely to be a successful strategy.
This is the FIRST link I clicked on after searching on “disability sticker parking”. It tells you that it is available for temporary disability and how to apply. Hopefully you have the required accompanying medical certificate organised.
http://www.sa.gov.au/subject/Transport,+travel+and+motoring/Public+transport+and+travel/Getting+around+with+a+disability+or+mobility+aid/Disabled+parking+permit
My experience with government paperwork is that it is important to get it in (correct and complete) as soon as possible.
I have been trapped inside a small flat for several months, although not by a condition anywhere near as severe as your own, and I can tell you that in retrospect it was most important for my morale to get out as much as possible, even though I didn’t really realise it at the time because my morale was low. You might be different but I suspect not.
Contact Disability SA.
http://sa.gov.au/subject/Community+Support/Disability/Corporate+and+business+information/Disability+SA/Disability+SA+Intake
You may not be eligible for their program. But at least phone the number on the web page, explain your situation to them, and find out what the score is.
Or we will have to send over HOO to rip your bloody arms off.
LikeLike
Thanks VoR! I’ll get onto it first thing Monday… I feel sorry for my poor GP, though; the only thing I’ve ever been to see him for since I came out of hospital is paperwork… to get him to sign sick certificates and other papers about a case he essentially knows nothing about… but it keeps the bureaucrats happy… Poor bugger; looks like I’ll have to get him to sign yet another one…
🙂
LikeLike
Gee. I have a problem. Sometimes I just can’t help myself. Let me point out I am against the descrimination of women but boy do I get sick those folk that you one issue to flog another. I posted this today on Jacinda Woodhead’s article about Afghanistan, I can’t see it getting up but one never knows:
It’s always interesting when an author here at Unleashed plays the gender card. It sort of detracts from the seriousness of the issue at hand.
With this in mind I now want us to stand up for the gay community in Afghanistan, that’s right, the gay goat community.You think it’s tough being a woman in Afghanistan try being a gay goat. If the locals discover you are a goat and gay, they kill you, drain your blood, remove you intestines and roast you on a spit and then eat you, barbaric I say. So I’m forming a group call the Gay Goats Afghanistan Society or GAS for short.
Please send all donations to Hung One One, GAS in your capital city.
LikeLike
So, even in Afghanistan we have sheep in goats clothing. Well, I never.
LikeLike
Sad but true Michael
LikeLike
I am cooking roast goat for Sunday night’s meal. What a coincidence!
LikeLike
Please advise of recipe so I can prepare one on my comrades 🙂
LikeLike
Cut side of goat in half and place in large baking dish, sprinkle with salt and a little olive oil and bung in the oven.
Cook slowly for 4 hours. If your comrade is an old goat prick all over, add garlic slivers and add 2 hours to the
cooking time.
LikeLike
That’s a Long Slow Cook Viv. Long Slow Cook is my cousin.
LikeLike
Are you sacrificing the goat yourself, Vivienne? Don’t forget to drape the entrails around the shoulders of the guest of honour; it’s a very special blessing!
😉
LikeLike
I don’t think Hung’s comrade will be much impressed by being pricked all over, either, Vivienne!
😉
LikeLike
Hung, wasn’t it a ‘Long Slow Cook’ who helped Tutu with tea last Sunday…?
😉
LikeLike
Well spotted Ace, he did a good job…
LikeLike
Chaps, I am concerned that HOO’s goat may in fact be an old billy goat. If that is the case I have the following
to offer: Cut off testicles and give the rest of comrade billy to one of your greyhound owning comrades. Carefully remove skin from testicles (discard skin), soak in water for half an hour. Pat dry. Flour them – add salt, pepper and pinch of mustard
powder, dip in beaten egg and then breadcrumbs. Shallow fry in peanut oil until just golden brown. Serve with a garlic
mayo and wash down with a fine Trotter’s ale.
LikeLike
Not being religious I make no sacrificial slayings. Living in the country has some advantages never available
to ‘city’ people. I have some very interesting contacts – one of whom works in the local morgue and in his spare time
slaughters and butchers farm animals on site. Some petrol money and a feed of my own excellent chicken curry is all
it takes.
LikeLike
Goats balls Viv, sounds different
LikeLike
Actually I have only ever had bull’s balls cooked Greek style but I assume that one ball is much the same as
another except for size.
LikeLike
Never had either, not sure I would want to try
LikeLike
Never been a ball-muncher myself either, Hung; I’ll leave that particular delicacy to the real ‘gourmets’…
Some interesting friends you have there, Vivienne… even if they don’t sacrifice goats…
😉
LikeLike
I understand that in some countries some get close to their goats.
LikeLike
Vivienne explained
“If your comrade is an old goat prick …”
You have a fine turn of abusive phrase, Vivienne. That’s a new one to me.
LikeLike
Perhaps a comma after ‘goat’ might have helped readers. But I love your interpretation.
LikeLike
Hung, goats mince. That’s what I’ve noticed.
LikeLike
Elijah, here is the discussion in question, cut and pasted from the link you gave me:
ElijahThomas :
31 May 2010 12:06:30pm
This question oversimplifies the role of church, doctrine and ritual to that of a simple ‘moral guardian’ social construct. I’ll address this error down further after i address the actual question.
Your question goes to much broader questions, questions which we two have clashed in answering time and time again. They are questions on which i expect it to be just as difficult to achieve consensus between us as to define morality.
Those questions beginning… Does God Exist?
And secondly the question (which theist religions all have different perspectives on)… What is His nature and the nature of the spiritual universe?
If the atheist point of view (there being no god, gods or spiritual ‘dimension’ to the universe) is held as your premise then there would obviously seem to be no need of “churches with all their doctrines and rituals.” You would see them as merely evolved social constructs that served as a sort of unifying principle and moral vanguard before taking off as the powerful and corruptible institutions some of them are. From an atheist basis this interpretation is understandable but incomplete.
From a religion-based (as you use the word ‘church’ i’ll adopt my usual base of ‘christian’) perspective ‘the church’ is not a man-made institution but rather the universal, spiritual fellowship of those who are christian. Christians meeting regularly in congregations with other Christians, reflect on their doctrines and practice their rituals because it helps in support of their beliefs. The church also serves as an agency through which Christians can continue in spreading God’s word of salvation.
The point of church, to answer your question depends entirely on whether or not you believe. The practice of religious ritual and the practice of the core morality handed down by God are not mutually exclusive. Your approach also denies the crucial importance of ‘faith’ as an aspect of a Christian’s moral life and seeks to impose a purely secular paradigm onto those whom it does not fit.
Reply Alert moderator
theseustoo :
03 Jun 2010 1:42:29am
“The practice of religious ritual and the practice of the core morality handed down by God are not mutually exclusive.”
So you’re saying that unless one believes in god it is impossible to behave morally? Elijah, I would have thought better of you than that…
LikeLike
In one of the blogs on Afghanistan, Chipinga and I differed on whether or not Saddam might use WMDs close to his own border; my initial response to this post was censored; please note the question he asks me in the second paragraph:
chipinga :
23 Jul 2010 8:53:24am
…Saddam was crazy enough to do a lot of things…certainly one of them was taking out Israel..you seem to forget that dictators don’t really care about the consequenses of their actions to their citizens..
…and if you say the “That excuse was transparent even back then!” perhaps you can enlighten us all and tell me why all the allied troops had biological and chemical suits to wear when SCUDS were used against them….?
an inconvenient truth perhaps …?”
And my initial response:
“Propaganda!”
Dunno WHY they censored that… do they think Australians don’t think their government, or the governments of the USA and the UK use propaganda? Even after spending how many? millions of taxpayers’ dollars on advertising? And how many hours of Foxtel ‘news’ coverage. Of course, it’s possible that, just like Uncle Adolf, he has them fooled by calling it ‘education’… Howard caught on to that trick pretty quickly too! But I think the Australian people have been duped once to often and I have a feeling that they are about to learn the meaning of the story of the ‘Boy who Cried, “Wolf”‘ … amazing isn’t it, how as adults we forget all the wisdoms we are taught as children.
🙂
LikeLike
chipinga had said
“…tell me why all the allied troops had biological and chemical suits to wear when SCUDS were used against them….?
an inconvenient truth perhaps …?”
And my (Astyages’) initial response:
“Propaganda!”
And so, I add:
I’d be loath to dismiss the issue and wearing of noddy suits as purely propaganda, Asty.
It’s the precautionary principle and could you imagine the (completely justifiable) media and public outrage if they were needed and not available?
Similarly, troops deployed to the region were given prophylactic injections against NBC agents in both Gulf Wars.
Quite understandable, really and (especially if you’re one of the troopies involved or a family member) praiseworthy.
LikeLike
I’m aware of that really Tomo; my response was flippant and made in jest… or at least partly in jest.
😉
LikeLike
Grrrr……
LikeLike
I don’t know about everyone else here, but the (im)moderation on Unleashed, along with the increasingly longer post delays, is enough to drive me to distraction.
I’d really like to see them implement a ‘notify me via email when comment is published’ option – instead of double posting/waiting for three days to realise that last comment has been censored for reasons unknown. While I’m at it, why not a ‘notify me of responses’ too?
It would make my position as Unleashed’s least favourite firebrand much easier…
LikeLike
Jayfa, nice to see you here at the Pigs Arms; Merv! A pint of Trotters for my mate from the ‘other place’…
Those very characteristics of what the ABC used to laughingly refer to as ‘Unleashed’, and now more accurately called, ‘The Drum’, are exactly why the Pigs’ Arms was established, Jayfa…
‘Least favorite firebrand’, Jayfa? I wouldn’t let that thought get to you too much; they’ve even censored our Helvi; one of the mildest and gentlest people on the planet… The christians especially, among their moderators, appear not to tolerate anything they regard as ‘blasphemous’; regardless of its truth.
Anyway welcome to the Pigs’ Arms!
Slange!
🙂
😉
LikeLike
Cheers Astyages!
It’s quite funny that you mention ‘blasphemous’ posts being censored – one of the comments that appeared recently asserted that there is no ‘real’ violence that is god-sanctioned in the bible. I replied with some passages from various verses which not only permit but encourage genocide and brutality in rebuttal to their point without vitriol (uncharacteristically). Unfortunately it was censored.
Blasphemous biblical quotes? Hmmm…
LikeLike
You got it!
😉
LikeLike
The christians are frightened of us Jayfa: Because of their own history of violent suppression of heretics, infidels and atheists, now that we have a legal right to express the views which they have so successfully suppressed for so many centuries, they anticipate revenge; assuming automatically that atheists are as bloodthirsty and vindictive as they have been known to be themselves, they fear what we would do if we ever became the political majority; the think maybe we’ll abolish the church; or make it pay tax…
But as I recently pointed out on the Drum, I have never bashed a christian in my life, although in my younger days I have been bashed by people who called themselves christian, so I do rather resent the rather hypocritical label of ‘christian basher’.
😉
LikeLike
My first post on Sava’s piece never got up – it was critical of her writing style and suggested it wouldn’t encourage me to buy her book (or words to that effect). Today my second and third posts made it but one has been edited (first sentence given the chop). I think Sava is doing her own moderation.
LikeLike
Hey Vivienne,
I’ve often wondered if the article writers had the opportunity to moderate the comments themselves… hmm…
My tips for avoiding getting censored for writing more controversial comments would be:
Avoid using web addresses if possible.
Write a short opening sentence or two that is acceptable, with a short ending sentence or two but place the contentious sentences within the body of the middle paragraph.
Also the use of metaphor, simile, double entendre and subtext are a useful way to sneak what you want to say past moderators.
Finally don’t directly attack the moderation, but apologising for not replying sooner because “‘for some reason’ the last comment was censored/didn’t appear” generally seems to work as a silent appeal to the moderator for clemency.
Hope that helps some.
LikeLike
Up early for a Staurday, Jayfa ! I award you two stars and a chevron for services in guerrilla posting. Good advice.
I might add: use a bland pseudonym.
LikeLike
Thanks Jayfa. All my posts are not more than one paragraph. Most are just one or two sentences.
LikeLike
and Viv you left out the bit that they usually don’t make any sense 🙂 Only joking olive….
LikeLike
My usual sense of humour is somewhat lacking at the moment. The fact is that about half of my
posts are not getting up on Unleashed while many long winded maniacal (often incomprehensible) posts are let
through wholeusbolus.
LikeLike
Post them here instead, Vivienne; it’s what this page is all about!
And may I say a hearty ‘Thanks a million!’ to whoever is deserving of such praise… Hung? Would this thread be one of your ideas? Well done…
And thanks too, for a great jam and a wonderful dinner this evening (last evening, now!). My offer to be your culinary guinea pig still stands, and may be called upon at any time in the future!
Garlic and rosemary in the lamb wasn’t it? And that sticky date pudding with hot butterscotch sauce! Yum! I’d really like the recipe for that one… and I’ll bet Gerard and Helvi would kill for it! Yes! Even Helvi!
😉
LikeLike
I have no idea as to how to keep a copy of my posts. I don’t pre-write them and really don’t want to
double up. For a change my posts of yesterday all got up.
LikeLike
Just copy from the Reply box (select the text then CTRL C in Windows) , paste into whatever word processor/text editor you use, and save.
I know there is some censoring on UL, but I still think a lot of missed comments are just incompetence. In any case, if it is intentional, it is very uneven. Usually if you re-post the same comment half a day later it gets up.
Personally I don’t believe there is moderator bias overall.
LikeLike
Ta for that. I forgot about trying the Control etc.
LikeLike
“… many long winded maniacal (often incomprehensible) posts …”
You’ve read my writings then?
LikeLike
No! That’s is not you Tomo. With a few exceptions most of their monikers are completely forgettable. Yours, I
remember well – usually rather good.
LikeLike
My comment on the new Ben Pobje piece is probably not going to get the guernsey, either.
In speaking of Bananaby Joyce, Ben said
“…he gives the impression of having a possum living in his brain. ”
to which I have responded
Photographically he gives the impression of an electrically-stunned lobster.
It’s probably ad hominem – no matter HOW accurate.
LikeLike
Yeah, but at least Ben has a sense of humour; if, as we’re beginning to suspect, the writers do their own moderating over there, as they do here, your post should get a guernsey… but in any case I’ve never notice ‘ad hominem’ arguments being particulartly banned… or even discouraged… certainly there are plenty of such arguments which seem to make it past the censors.
How are the legs Tomo? Hey do you get a wheelchair? or maybe even one of those scooters? You lucky bastard! Apparently my crushed foot isn’t enough of a disability to warrant a wheelchair… but I must say there are times when I think I could certainly use one… Anyway, get well soon; at least the piglets are here to keep you company… I’ve found that to be a great help and a wonderful support during the past year of my ordeal; a bunch of really good mates!
🙂
LikeLike
Astyages asked:
“How are the legs Tomo? Hey do you get a wheelchair? or maybe even one of those scooters? You lucky bastard! Apparently my crushed foot isn’t enough of a disability to warrant a wheelchair… ”
Still sore and the right ankle appears to be permanently so. That’s the one with the internal metalwork and fixin’s. On that foot, I haven’t been able to wear anything other than my Uggie slipper. I think I’m going to have to start buying shoes in odd sizes. The left is Size 13 and I may have to go 14s or 15s on the right. Or not go anywhere I need shoes?
I had the use of a wheelchair for a couple of months in hospital while I still had both casts on, but a week before discharge (Thursday before Good Friday) they weaned me off that and onto crutches. Had those at home for three months but I have since returned those to the Physio Department.
I’m currently looking online at getting a decent walking stick because I reckon I’m going to need at least that in future.
There are some nice ones here: http://www.walkingcaneworld.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc
But, to be honest, Asty, I have too many steps around my place to make a wheelchair practical, not to mention that the front path is too narrow for one. So, I’d have to carry the wheelchair along the path and up the steps to the road and then it’s all uphill to anywhere from my place. Uh…. no thanks.
As far as support goes, I have been leaning heavily on the very good offices of Mistress HELL(en) who has been a (diminutive) Tower of Strength.
LikeLike
This comment is actually for Tomo – my brother had the same issues with swollen feet and not being able to wear shoes after his breaks. He got around wearing shoes by getting some Volley Ugg boots – if you wear pants over them, they just look like regular volleys. Probably not suitable for more formal occasions though 😉
How coincidental that your convalescence is also assisted by auspices of a diminutive Helen – mine is too.
LikeLike
Glad to hear you’re making progress Tomo… I know what you mean about wheelchairs not being practical; I wish I could use one, because using crutches is putting my back out; but I live in a first-floor flat so stairs make it impossible for me…
And in any case, I’m beginning to think I may be able to start getting around with a stick, or maybe two… I must say that after a year on crutches the novelty has most definitely worn off… and as walking sticks make better weapons than crutches I’d feel a little less vulnerable than I have felt lately too… and I have to be my own ‘tower of strength’… still, ‘nil illegitimati carborundum’…
After a year of not parking in disabled spots because I couldn’t get a disabled sticker because I was told I wasn’t permanently disabled, I now find that, (a) that I can actually get a temporary disabled sticker, and (b) I now have a report from the surgeon which says I will be permanently disabled, though to what extent is unsure…
I do wish the bureacracies wouldn’t insist on making life so ‘interesting’!
😉
LikeLike
BTW, Tomo, you never did tell us the story of how you managed to break both legs… Care to share?
😉
LikeLike
Sure, there’s no secret. (I had intended to put up a website with x-rays and photos of the site but I haven’t yet.)
I had been chatting with the nextdoor neighbour on the previous day and in the morning, as I was retrieving the bins, I caught sight of him waving to me from the end of his driveway. I assumed that this was because he wanted to continue the converstion of the day before and, leaving the bins to their own devices, I started down his drive.
As it happens, his drive is made of very well-laid face bricks (not commons) and at the time was overlaid with a fine green layer of moss or algae in the gap between the tyre tracks of his 4WD and her small car.
It was slippery enough that I lost my footing.
As I fell, my right foot folded under me, firstly (approx.) 90 degrees to the right, then a further 90 degrees or so UNDER , with my full, not inconsiderable weight on it.
As I lay on my back, I could see that my right foot was seriously displaced so I was careful to stay down.
He called an ambo for me and I was admitted to Hornsby Hospital on 31st December, X-rayed (at which time it was shown that I’d broken the left tib & fib as well) and fiddled with generally, which condition continued until, as I said elsewhere, I was ejected just before Easter.
LikeLike
I admitted to slackness when I said…
“(I had intended to put up a website with x-rays and photos of the site but I haven’t yet.) ”
…but I happened to click on one of the WordPress links and it’s looking promising that I may intrude on the blogosphere, rather than craft a website. Hmmm…..
LikeLike
Tomo, if you’ve returned your crutches to the physios and you’re walking without them, you’re way ahead of me in recovery…
I’m still managing just two walks to the bathroom sans crutches and not every day, either; occasionally the foot’s just too sore and I give it a miss… still, that I can walk on it at all is a hopeful sign; though like yourself walking stick(s) are likely to become a permanent addition to my personal attire.
As I’ve mentioned already, the bonus in this is the added personal security; sticks make excellent defensive weapons; much better than crutches.
Glad to hear you’re improving, anyway!
🙂
LikeLike
Nice to know you’re contemplating a blog, Tomo… BTW, have you checked out my blog at: astyages.wordpress.com ?
It’s free to register and read anything there; and comments and/or questions would be more than welcome. Hung has his own blog to at: hungoneon.wordpress.com
(I think that addy is correct!)
🙂
LikeLike
I responded to little Jimmy Paterson (Unleashed – 3rd August “Unleashing the ‘real” Gillard – really?”).
I was the first to post a response. It’s not been posted on the site.
Basically (because I haven’t kept a verbatim copy) I pointed out that an undergraduate and a Young Liberal official is hardly credible in criticsing a Labor Prime Minister.
However, and FAARRRR more important was the second paragraph where I suggested to the moderators that every story should carry a sidebar where it is stated “The following posters have posted from the same IP address.”
I was hoping to flush out all the false identities – we, the serious discussers of ideas, really don’t need them and the proliferation of party clones just pollute the political discussions.
Perhaps if enough of us repeat that request to the mods we can get the sidebar up?
LikeLike
My post to Jimmy read : Really, are you for real !
Mods did not like that one either.
LikeLike
I do sometimes use other identities myself, Tomo, for different reasons; but not necessarily because I’m ‘hiding’ my identity; I think most of the posters over there know me now by the names of Astyages, theseustoo and Cynicure, which are the names I use most often, but sometimes I just use a name on the spur of the moment; one recent posting was under the name ‘Arthur Dent’; I’ve also used, ‘Marquis de Sade’ and even ‘Oprah’ if the occasion warranted it… in doing this I kinda like to post opinions which those whose names I’ve borrowed would most likely have said on the given topic…
But anyway, I’ve no objection to the sidebar idea; though I think it’ll be a hard job to persuade the ABC to do anything it didn’t think of itself… so good luck with that!
😉
LikeLike
Okay, here’s a response to Elijah, who denies ‘all but’ saying atheists were incapable of either morality or honesty, since the Drum have censored my first couple of efforts:
I’ll take your post point by point, Elijah:
1: I never said atheists were being deprived of their rights, Elijah; merely that the above article could be interpreted as an attempt to do so.
2: Historically atheists have had good reason to be scared of christians, Elijah.
3: An interesting trick that, Elijah, deliberately taking ‘over-represented’ that way… and using it in a sense I didn’t; but it still doesn’t work: You may feel there are atheists who could govern better for you as a christian than some christians (and I can’t say I blame you) but I sincerely doubt, not so much that a christian is capable of governing on behalf of atheists, but I doubt that they would; where what an atheist views as his/her welfare, and what a christian thinks an atheist’s welfare is, differ, a christian will always make his decision based on the directions of his faith rather than the ‘obviously misguided’ opinions of the atheists on what their own welfare is… any such decisions are, of course, patronising at best.
4: ‘Us vs. Them’ is not a ‘bias’, Elijah, but merely a perception of a state of affairs; a state of affairs which has existed ever since the ‘chosen ones’ decided to separate themselves out from the rest of the ‘godless’ human race… My ‘argument’ merely analyses this state of affairs. The ‘chosen ones’ used to be quite fond of suppressing, burning, hanging and torturing heretics, infidels and atheists; even now they apparently can’t abide any airing of any atheistic viewpoints; the suppression continues. Of course, scapegoats are not meant to ever be given a voice, though, are they, Elijah?
That I have to post this at the Pigs Arms, rather than at the Drum, because two of my previous attempts to answer your post have been censored already, is further proof of the power of the religious lobby. I’m not the only one to have remarked on a pro-christian bias to the otherwise apparently senseless censorship practiced over at the Drum. And you say christians are capable of governing in the best interests of atheists? Dream on…
LikeLike
Whose article? Drum or Unleashed – I’ve had a look but can’t figure out where Elijah is writing.
LikeLike
They’re pretty much the same Vivienne; it’s in one of the religious blogs; not sure which one… but one of the recent ones… This answer is probably a bit different from what I had said in the first couple of attempts, but the gist is more or less the same.
🙂
LikeLike
Thought so but it also explains why I couldn’t find it – I avoid the religious blogs as I have nothing to do
with organised religion/s. I am though somewhat fascinated by the whole thing but don’t think it is possible to
argue/debate with such people.
LikeLike
I feel much the same way Vivienne; though as an anthropologist I’m fascinated by religious behaviour as a human social phenomenon; and I kinda think of it as something of an act of charity to attempt to enlighten some of them about the more misconceived notions they seem to have developed about atheists…
🙂
LikeLike
Me too astyages. I’m very much a Philip Adams in this area.
LikeLike
Emmjay enquired of Elijah Thomas:
“Sin. Isn’t sin essentially the same as bad karma ?”
If I understand Elijah’s position correctly, sin is “disobedience to the will of God” which is why it was the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil (to give the concept in question its full title) against instructions that was the Original Sin.
Now, if we look at the concept of “the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” then that boils down (for me) to making up our own minds about what is and is not good or appropriate behaviour.
If I decide for myself what good and evil are and make my choices based on that understanding, then I have eaten of the fruit etc. and the priesthood of the god will condemn me for that to burning for ten thousand years in a lake of burning fire unless I acknowledge my fault, my fault, my most grievous fault and beg forgiveness all over again , forever and ever, amen!
I’ve got more backbone than that. So, I emphatically reject that Abrahamic notion of “sin” and I live by the concept of accepting responsibility for my actions (the Rede). The concept of karma as a burden of the consequence of our actions comes closest to the Wiccan “Rule of Threefold Return” which suggests that the consequences of our actions, both good and evil will return to us three times multiplied. (There are books written about WHY THREE that I’m not qualified to discuss, but which may include secular, spritual and afterlife dimensions.)
That Rule of Three, if you adhere to it, is a damn good check and/or balance on your decision-making process. I believe that it’s a far better one than the “sin”, repentence, absolution, forgiveness cycle of the Abrahamics.
Primus non nocere (“Do not be naughty in the first place”)
LikeLike
Hey theseustoo… im glad i managed to find your response.
“A response to Elijah, who denies ‘all but’ saying atheists were incapable of either morality or honesty”
While i reiterate that i do not RECALL ever making such a claim i didn’t deny it either. Rather i invited you to point out where i have “all but” said or implied as much. A simply link to an page where i’ve said that would suffice and i’d happily answer that particular point of yours.
The rest of your reply i’m a little puzzled as to what you are replying to. The issues stated seem to reflect one post i made but it was in response to Cynicure’s not yours. Of course that never stopped us from arguing about something before so, on the premise and assumption that it is my post at “01 Aug 2010 9:13:59pm” to which you refer i’ll continue:
1. I didn’t say that anyone claimed atheists were actually being deprived of their rights but i was questioning the claim that WAS made. If the article could be interpreted as “an attempt to deny atheists theirs” my question in reply is simple and yet unanswered… which rights are those? what rights do you interpret the article as conceivably attempting to curtail? it was an interesting comment but without expansion it means nothing.
2. Historically atheists have had cause to fear people who would persecute them, yes, and too often throughout history these people have done so under a christian banner. I’ll let into a little secret though. Historically christians have had cause to fear people who would persecute them also, as have jews, muslims, buddhists, sikhs and pagans. One of the groups that they have had caused to fear were atheist communists.
If a christian persecuted under a communist regime claimed that all atheists (or even all communists) were evil persecutors their statement would be understandable but wrong. If a christian who merely knew about that persecution made that claim they would still be wrong.
How is it that any atheist can claim to have a rational fear of all christians when persecution can come from ANY philosophical or ideological background, religious or secular. This is what has been shown historically… that absolute power is a dangerous and corrupting force and should not be in the hands of anyone, secular or religious.
3. “What an atheist views as his/her welfare, and what a christian thinks an atheist’s welfare is, differ, a christian will always make his decision based on the directions of his faith rather than the ‘obviously misguided’ opinions of the atheists on what their own welfare is… any such decisions are, of course, patronising at best.”
Not as patronizing as your post. This claim is simply wrong. There are a great many Christians who can and do set their religious bias to one side when representing people of another or even the same faith. They can do so without abandoning their beliefs but simply acknowledging the job they were sent to do. To claim otherwise is merely ignorance or bigotry.
4. “The ‘chosen ones’ used to be quite fond of suppressing, burning, hanging and torturing heretics, infidels and atheists; even now they apparently can’t abide any airing of any atheistic viewpoints; the suppression continues.”
Well this depends what you mean by “chosen ones”. There are some people who are (or claim to be) religious who have done exactly what you accuse them of doing. Speaking as a christian, however, i have not… ever. In fact, while you may not agree with anything i say i think that you would concede that I’ve never shown a unwillingness to engage with the debate even on hostile terms. You would also recall that i have been in highly critical of that behavior on the part of the avowedly religious.
“Us versus Them” is not a bias, technically, it is an intellectual cop-out and a comfortable way to elevate your own position by universalizing everything you don’t like onto a target group. Sound familiar? It is the same thing that the Roman Catholic Church of the middle ages did to pagans, muslims and, yes, even atheists. It was and is a feeble-minded grab for importance when a religious organization or individual does it and it’s no different when employed by an atheist.
The world is simply not that simple.
LikeLike
ET, Welcome to the Arms dude. I like someone I can have a knuckle with then a laugh, keep ’em coming mate
Your plastic pal that’s fun to be with [Douglas Adams, thanks bro’]
Hung
LikeLike
Merv, a trotters for the young man. A question Elijah, do you have trouble getting your posts up at Unleashed.
LikeLike
Hi ET.
Welcome. Great to see you at the Pig’s Arms.
LikeLike
Thanks all for the welcome.
I in fact didn’t know this site existed until theseustoo mentioned it.
Algernon: I haven’t had much trouble recently. On occasion a post doesn’t get through for reasons passing my understanding. I do have a bit of trouble on the more political topics, however.
I have been rather frustrated with some of the moderation of others posts. I prefer to take apart a post myself than have it blocked… where’s the fun in avoiding the argument?
LikeLike
Elijah, my reply to you was so mild I could not understand why it did not get published. I sent it twice more, still no luck…
Honestly, I can’t work out the moderation on UL these days, I could judge it better in the early days 🙂
LikeLike
Elijah, I’ve been looking for the blog in which we had the conversation in which I thought you implied that you think it’s impossible for an atheist to be moral and/or honest… To the best of my memory it was in the ‘Does morality need religion?’ blog… but that blog seems to have disappeared; at least, I couldn’t find it after several searches…
I wasn’t trying to insult you Elijah, but I would like some clarification as to whether or not you believe atheists can be moral and honest. Or do you feel that it’s possible, but they just aren’t anyway?
Frankly Elijah these inferences I feel you made (without the evidence of our conversation from the missing blog, I can’t point them out precisely, more’s the pity! Maybe that blog was censored, Elijah…) surprised me, because I would have given you credit for understanding that there may be more than one way to conceptualize morality and hence more than one ‘morality’… and I would have given you credit for appreciating that differing cultural ‘moralities’ may be seen as existentially equivalent, even if they differ in their manner of expression.
Much christian morality derives ultimately from catholic sources; or the reaction against them… but I think it is safe to say that because sex is considered to be the ‘Original Sin’, christianity as, for the most part at least, built its notions of morality on a (hypocritically restrictive) code of sexual behaviours, which I strongly suspect produces more ‘perversion’ than it either prevents or cures.
This concept of morality is ultimately based on ‘doing God’s will’ (whatever that is!) as it is expressed in the ten commandments, which still treat women (and children too!) as chattels and under which it is considered that anything which is contrary to these commandments are thus ‘sins’ simply because God said so; and in which sexual relationships are strictly controlled; and moreover, controlled by men.
Frankly, I do not see this as an appropriate method for determining ‘good’ or ‘evil’; or of separating ‘morality’ from immorality. From my perspective it would be much more socially healthy for the notion of ‘sin’ to attach itself to the notion of ‘hurting’ others; if no-one is hurt, where is the sin?
Just because some god or other said something is a sin, is not a good enough reason for instituting laws and/or ascribing punishments to relatively harmless behaviours.
Now this may mean that I probably have a more accepting attitude than many, if not most christians, towards such things as pre-marital sex etc, as long as they are conducted in such a way that no-one is hurt; but it needn’t be taken as indicating that I’m a total libertine, which I see as folly of a different kind…
However, the fact that my morality thus differs both in nature and degree from christian morality, does NOT automatically make it any less moral or socially appropriate.
Okay Elijah, I’ve bent your ear enough and given you my ideas of morality; which, of course, also relies heavily on ‘honesty’ and ethics to structure all social relationships, sexual, political, religious, educational, parental, marital, etc in such a way as to avoid exploitation. Now I’d like to hear just exactly how you construct your own personal morality; and whether or not you think an atheist can be moral and/or honest.
🙂
LikeLike
I did find a similarly named Unleashed article to the one you mentioned “Why Morality doesn’t need God” at http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2910081.htm.
I’ve not found the comment to which you refer but i thought that i’d throw that up in case it helped you find it.
“I would like some clarification as to whether or not you believe atheists can be moral and honest.”
The short answer is “Yes, I do think that atheists can be moral and honest.”
I do acknowledge that there is more than one way that people may conceptualize morality. I personally evaluate a person’s morality based on my conception of it as, while i acknowledge the existence of alternative conceptualizations of morality, i do not necessarily acknowledge those conceptualizations as correct. Even by my own, faith informed, conceptualization however atheists can and usually do act in a moral and honest way.
I try to avoid describing anyone of any faith or philosophical perspective as ‘moral’ or ‘honest’ because i try to avoid such absolute attributions. this is simply because i know of no human who acts morally and honestly all the time or is amoral or dishonest all the time.
“Much christian morality derives ultimately from catholic sources.”
Morality as understood by many Christians is derived from catholic sources. What precise beliefs or tenets constitute ‘christian morality’ is debated vigorously amongst different groups of Christians, however.
Original sin was not sex, it was never sex. Original sin was the original act of sin when Eve and then Adam ate the apple. While i do correct this misconception on a point of doctrine i should also point out that i do not interpret the story of creation or Adam and eve literally.
“it would be much more socially healthy for the notion of ‘sin’ to attach itself to the notion of ‘hurting’ others; if no-one is hurt, where is the sin?”
Understandably, being atheist yourself, you speak of sin as a social construction that should be assigned and understood in whatever context is most “socially healthy”. This interpretation is not however valid in the context of christian theology. According to the Christian conceptualization of God His greatest goal for human beings is to see them reconciled to him and ultimately experience eternal paradise. Sin is simply any act that separates a human from God and it is this concept of each person’s “spiritual health” that shapes the christian notion of sin.
“Just because some god or other said something is a sin, is not a good enough reason for instituting laws and/or ascribing punishments to relatively harmless behaviours.”
Here we actually agree. No society has been commissioned to rigorously enforce God’s laws since that of ancient Israel. The separation of church and state is something i support very passionately. Although i do not adopt the “harm” principle as a basis for morality i do support it as a basis for law.
When it come to enforcing God’s laws humans have, historically and generally, been really bad at it and end up committing more sins than they punish. It is interesting to note that Christ never called upon Christians to enforce the law, merely to strive to live by it. Despite at times the best of intentions people just generally suck at enforcing divine law.
“Now this may mean that I probably have a more accepting attitude than many, if not most Christians, towards such things as pre-marital sex etc, as long as they are conducted in such a way that no-one is hurt”
That depends what you mean by ‘accepting’ and how you define harm. Many (not all) Christians would consider sex outside marriage to be spiritually detrimental to all participants and hence that there is harm. I personally take this view myself but also regard others lives in this regard as none of my business. As you can imagine I have friends who do not share my perspective and I’m content to offer my opinion only when appropriate in the context of the discussion at hand though.
LikeLike
Well, Elijah, quite a lot to discuss here. Limited time so excuse my piecemeal response.
I agree too. Mankind IS bad at enforcing God’s “laws” – almost as bad as the “God” that has no existence outside of the imagination of some of mankind.
Virtually impossible, I guess. But more probably a shot at enforcing some guy’s interpretation of God’s laws – often across a gap of a few thousand years.
Sin. Isn’t sin essentially the same as bad karma ? It hardly matters against whom one sins. There is ultimately a price to pay – or in the case of good karma, a dividend to be realised. Forgiving those who sin against us increases our own karma. As fart as I can see, this does not require belief in a God, but it works best if one believes in an afterlife or a rebirth – and implies a karmic accounting system – which I gather may be a somewhat flexible concept, particularly across cultures.
I’ve got to run.
Hear from you soon.
Cheers, Emmjay
LikeLike
Elijah! Nice to see you here old chap! Merv, the next round is on me!
In answer to your response:
1: The right to engage in public life without the lack of a religion being put forward by the media as a reason why they are unelectable… alright I grant you this is a bit tenuous and the media also uses the fact that a person has a religion as a reason why they shouldn’t be elected; this is one of the reasons I’d insist on a complete separation of ‘church and state’ though… the moment a person starts to mention either their religion or even the lack of it, it’s already ‘out of bounds’ really; I suppose I just hate to see beliefs/philosophies politicised in that manner. They should not even be an issue.
2: I think what atheists are scared of, Elijah, is not so much christians themselves, or as individuals, but as a group, when christianity itself goes haywire and starts a fashion for some of the more extreme possiblities of dogma and doctrine… and you know it does happen; it is not even an uncommon occurence. Of course, you may well dismiss all those ‘run-amuk christians’ as not being ‘real’ christians… I could dismiss the atheist communists you mention and for similar reasons, but I won’t; being bored with the ‘no true Scotsman’ argument… All this really proves, as I’ve said before, is that the human race is a particularly bloodthirsty species; and I agree with what you say about power, whether religious or secular.
However, the tendency towards ‘absolute power’ is inherent in any hierarchical religion, and is not necessarily so in any secular organization, even hierarchical ones, because such organizations are usually structured in such a way as to minimize any actual executive power in the hands of individuals… of course, the danger here is going to the other extreme and allowing, ‘mob rule’, which is more like what happened in the communist instances you cite.
3: Elijah, look what Tony Abbott did when faced with the abortion issue… I seem to remember him being the spoke in the wheels which stopped this bill being passed on several occaions, in spite of overwhelming public opinion to the contrary. ‘Nuff said!
4: By ‘Chosen Ones’ Elijah, I do not necessarily mean what YOU would call christians; but it would certainly include many who call themselves christian. By this I simply mean anyone who believes in a religion which sees itself as the one and only, absolutely exclusive ‘Truth’ and denies the reality of other ontologies and/or cosmologies. Those who think that the religion they belong to HAS to be not only the RIGHT one, but the ONLY one; the only valid way of perceiving and relating to the universe (thus the phrase ‘Chosen Ones’ is as likely to include many muslims as well as many christians!).
Now, I don’t know (because you have never said) exactly which particular branch of ‘christianity’ you claim membership of, and so I don’t know whether of not you fall into this category or not…
But I do acknowledge that you are quite willing to engage in debate; often in a more interesting, and usually a much fairer, manner than many of your colleagues… and that, although we do not always, or even often, agree, indeed, you too have criticized (at least some) christians for exactly those things for which I was criticising them on the Drum; to such an extent that I’m not even sure why we’re disagreeing now… or what it is we’re disagreeing about.
Anyway, welcome to the Pigs’ Arms; I do hope that, now you know where we are, you will drop in from time to time for a chat; take some time to have a good look around the place; it’s a very friendly little pub, although it’s been a bit quiet of late… ever since the Burnside Refugees last gig…
Think I need another pint of Trotters! Merv!
😉
LikeLike
1.Yes i do think that such an argument is tenuous as a claim to having rights denied.
With regard to a blanket avoidance of religious belief i can’t agree with you. For my part religion alone is a minor factor in choosing politicians. If there is an atheist liberal/conservative that i agree with more on policy than a christian socialist then the conservative gets my vote. This is because they represent the values that i most identify with as being important to the selection of a Member of Parliament.
I disagree with people who make that consideration based on religion but i do not deny that it is up to the individual to decide by what they will evaluate the candidate.
I share your disgust at the politicization and, at times, exploitation of faith and philosophy but i truly think that it is a natural part of an open democracy. Narrowing what the debate can be about is a dangerous and exclusionary precedent.
2.Well if those are the one’s you’re talking about. They scare me too.
Perhaps even more so than atheists when you consider that, from where i’m sitting as a ‘member’ of an evangelical faith, it is my God and the name of my faith that they reflecting so poorly on.
I acknowledge the ‘checks and balances’ argument you put forward hear about the dilution of power. I would however propose that the trend away from absolute is more a result of our cultural liberal-democratic inheritance than it being an intrinsic attribute of secular organizations.
3.Firstly I’ll point out that abortion is actually a state issue as it is generally dealt with as part of the state criminal codes.
No, that is not enough said. Tony Abbott is well known for his religious views but it would be a mistake to attribute every aspect of every decision made to those views. I know many atheists who are anti-abortion on the basis that they believe that a foetus is a life and that killing it is murder. Some of those same atheists regard Tony Abbott as delusional for is beliefs.
The morality of abortion is question over when life begins and you don’t have to be catholic or even remotely religious to believe that it begins before birth. Once a position is reached on that question i’m sure you will agree with me that one doesn’t have to be religious to believe that killing is wrong.
Anti-abortion views are not limited to the religious and it is a convenient but flawed cop-out to suggest otherwise.
I agree… sometimes the line concerning about what we disagree is a little blurred.
Yet we always manage to find something to disagree on, sometimes for days at a time lol.
Anyway, thank you for the warm welcome.
LikeLike
It seems we agree on more than we disagree on, Elijah, most particularly on the relative nature of human morality; where we differ is that I accept human morality where would seem to refuse to accept this in your striving after your ‘divine’ morality, about which I might feel happier had such ‘divine’ moralities been so abominable in the past…
“I would however propose that the trend away from absolute is more a result of our cultural liberal-democratic inheritance than it being an intrinsic attribute of secular organizations.”
You are probably right in this; and I would point in the direction of the Vikings for its origins; but my point was that power in hierarchical religious organizations, most especially ones which see themselves as led by ‘god’s representative on earth’, tends inherently toward the absolute; it cannot be otherwise. Now, I never said this never happens in secular organizations; merely that it is not inherent in them in quite the same way; there is more possibility of controlling those with runaway egos or overweening ambitions… But in fact totalitiarism exists as a potential within any organization, most particularly ‘society’ itself; as any organization seeks to control its members for the sake of the perpetuation of the group and its purpose; the question is whether or not humans allow that totalitarianism…
Thanks for clarifying your concept of morality for me, Elijah; it’s pretty much what I expected; as I said, had you made the inferences I drew (mistakenly or otherwise) from one of our discussions, I would have been quite surprised… and not a little disappointed.
Anyway, it’s always interesting to debate with you Elijah; you do give me a lot to think about, whether I agree with it or not!
😉
LikeLike
“… in your striving after your ‘divine’ morality, about which I might feel happier had such ‘divine’ moralities been so abominable in the past.”
I would personally disagree that those past ‘abominable’ were in fact divine. As a Christian naturally that morality taught by Christ Himself holds precedence over other religious legalisms for me.
“… power in hierarchical religious organizations, most especially ones which see themselves as led by ‘god’s representative on earth’, tends inherently toward the absolute…”
Quite true and a source of great frustration for me personally. Although i would always resist anyone’s attempt to block free religious expression in politics i long ago reached the conclusion that formal political and legal power does the church NO favours whatsoever. Power inevitably leads to corruption which, in the context of the Church and from a Christian perspective, is detrimental to wider understandings of the faith and, by extension, the spiritual health of people (Christian and Non-Christian) in general.
I’m glad we cleared up the issue over atheists ability to be moral. Naturally i think that atheists do have a sense of morality and act moral as often as anyone else…
It was after all the Samaritan who aided the Traveller.
LikeLike
Listen chaps, this is making me giddy! Might it be appropriate that there be a discussion room for religious topics.
LikeLike
Thanks Elijah, for a thoughtful response.
One query I still have though, is about the equation (mine, I admit, but not mine alone!) of ‘Original Sin’ with sex:
If we take the story of Adam and Eve literally then the ‘original sin’ is simply disobedience of an arbitrary and otherwise meaningless prohibition; but if we apply the techniques of literary analysis, we understand the eating of the ‘forbidden fruit’ is a metaphor for sex… This has been quite an orthodox catholic interpretation of this story for centuries at least; and as such, it has informed the construction of the moralities, not only of catholics, but also of other christian groups…
Thus I still think that what I have said about catholics, at least, constructing their morality around a hypocritically restrictive code for sexual behaviour remains valid. And I still think that whether or not someone is hurt is a much better guide to whether or not something is ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; ‘moral’ or ‘immoral’…
But I’m glad we cleared up our misunderstanding over atheist moralities; of course you prefer your own morality, but it’s good that you at least recognize ‘different strokes for different folks’…
I’d like to know how you know your morality is ‘divine’ though; how can one tell the difference between a divine and a human morality, when both arrive at essentially similar prescriptions for human behaviour? Since any morality based on my premise would be essentially, ‘Don’t hurt people’; this comes very close to Jesus’ ‘Do unto others’ (not that Jesus was the first to invoke this formula by a long chalk! I think he got many of his ideas from the Pythagoreans…)
I hope you come back and visit us here at the Pigs’ Arms from time to time, Elijah; drop in as often as you want; you’ll always be welcome, even if we piglets are a bunch of godless atheists!
😉
LikeLike
I wrote a wonderfully crafted response to the original Sin=karma comment but I got a 408 Time Out error and it’s all no more than pissing into the wind now.
Unless somebody has a magickal method of recovery of lost text?
Bugger!
LikeLike
You would not want to rely on getting bread on the table from getting pieces up at the Unleashed. One is lucky to get 1:3 published, better make that 1:6 since Mr J Green took over.
As for getting even an ackowledgement or a response , they are as mute as . It is odd that the most inane and boring seem to get up the most.
LikeLike
I wonder whether this one will get a guernsey over at the Drum; Elijah was addressing one of Tony Abbott’s critics:
ElijahThomas :
30 Jul 2010 6:26:34pm
“Better an honest atheist than a pseudo-Christian.”
I would ordinarily agree though i don’t agree with your characterization of Abbott as a pseudo-christian and would advise you to look to Christ’s teachings that warn against judging others’ faith.
It’s a shame we don’t have an honest atheist available though for leader.”
My response:
Never heard of anyone attempting to deny any christians their rights, Elijah, but it seems to me that what the above article is suggesting may very easily be read as an attempt to deny atheists theirs… as has been done so often throughout the course of history.
Someone has suggested that some of the responses to this article are an ‘anti-christian witch-hunt’… this is so ironic! Of course, it’s all part of the ritual, isn’t it? To lay the blame on the back of the sacrificial victim? The scapegoat?
Why are christians so scared of atheists? Do you think we’re going to behave like christian churches have historically and continue to behave and have inquisitions, witch-hunts, human sacrifices and scapegoat rituals etc…?
But you know perfectly well don’t you Elijah, that it is christians who are the experts at all these arts, which they still practice in an almost infinite variety of forms; it’s one of the reasons atheists cannot agree with them.
And if prominence were given in accordance with the proportion of the population which actually practices religion then, I think someone else here has suggested that figure to be about 7.5%
In actual fact, if you count the number of people in parliament (on both sides) who actually espouse some christian belief or other, they are actually quite over-represented…
And no, I don’t think it’s just because christians are the only ones interested in politics; I think it’s because christians have a long and continuing history of suppressing the views of non-believers, especially through political influence; and most particularly here on this very site…
One blog which questioned whether or not religion should be taxed was promptly removed before it could get any more than ten responses…
This just goes to show the power of the religious lobby; that they can get such a discussion suppressed so quickly on what is supposedly an open and ‘free’ discussion (pardon me while I vomit!).
But can they suppress all similar discussion? Maybe once upon a time, but not now; far too many people understand far too much these days… the more religions act like tyrants, the more they prove the atheists’ point; that we’re better off without them!
I doubt that this article will get posted here on unleashed, but if not, I’m saving a copy to post at the Pigs Arms anyway!
😉
LikeLike
My THREE replies to Elijah were rejected.
LikeLike
Don’t feel rejected, H. We loves you !
LikeLike
Yeah, what he said, Helvi!
🙂
LikeLike
I’m amazed; the above reply to Elijah actually WAS posted; I think my warning them about my pre-emptive post here may have ‘forced their hand’, though… to some extent…
😉
LikeLike
Elijah is a blessed charactor at unleashed.
LikeLike
Isn’t ‘blessed’ used even by christians sometimes as a euphemism for insane, Algernon?
Actually, of the god-botherers over at the Drum, Elijah is at least one of the more interesting ones to debate; and perhaps one of the more sincere, too; although I’ve been somewhat disappointed with one or two of his statements of late…
🙂
😉
LikeLike
Asty would protected be a better choice of words. I doubt he has trouble getting any of his posts up.
I’ve noticed the updates seem to be more frequent lately.
LikeLike
Dunno about that Algae; I’m still waiting for him to answer a question or two I left him with… but I doubt that he dare answer either of them truthfully!
Helvi, what could you have said that was so controversial they were rejected? I can’t imagine… normally you’re the politest, mildest-mannered of people… so now I’m really very curious… go on, tell us all what you said that didn’t get posted; I’m sure we’re all listening with baited breath; I know I am!
🙂
😉
LikeLike
“Asty would protected be a better choice of words. I doubt he has trouble getting any of his posts up.”
I doubt any of the christians get too many of their posts censored… I see you’ve noticed the christian bias at the Drum too, then?
🙂
LikeLike
Asty as Elijah has paid us a visit perhaps we could ask him
LikeLike
I’ve just posted this over at The Drum. Under that idiot ex Liberal staffer Switzer’s filthy IPA piece about global warming. I wonder if they’ll put it up. Whaddayarekkon?
Quote:
“I drop in here for the first time in nearly a year and what do I find? Another idiot article from an IPA apologist for big money and the climate denialists that fund him and them.
But this is the ABC you say, they’re just being balanced.
BALANCED, MY ARSE!
The ABC has become the supine concubine of the same people that fund the IPA, just as its pimp Mark Scott has been planning all along. Have you watched the 24 hour news? Talk about Fox lite; but then that was also his plan. Bugger probity, forget equity, what, you want real balance!?!? But then what would we do with all these empty headed poseurs and their self aggrandising posturing? (Christ I cannot stand that Trioli woman and could Chris Ulhmann be more self important or Annabel Crabbe more vapid?) As Stephen Fry said on QI the other night, on a different subject I might add, “I wouldn’t cross the street to piss up its arse if its kidneys where on fire!” Sums up my sentiments on this site pretty succinctly!
This is business as cruel and unusual as it gets for those of us that thought the charter of the ABC would forever protect at least one bastion against sectional interests and the idiocy of the market fundamentalists. I suppose we were wrong. Talbot Duckmanton is just a memory with a funny name these days.
LikeLike
No way are they putting your one up, Warrigal.
Doc Merc was complaining about the thug Tuckey, and I replied: Ruddock and Robb are hardly going to lure me into the laps of the Libs.
The Mods rejected my harmless little reposte.
LikeLike
Oh, Top Notch,
you’re definitely over the nicotene withdrawal now, seemingly getting a bit of a hit or natural high from the fag ends of political low life and the ashtray of the ABC.
I’ll keep looking at the Switzer blog, but….so far, not a single word.
LikeLike
Love it and hope it does get up…eventually. You never know.
LikeLike
Its never going up Viv. You can swipe at contributors, but angry, disappointed critique of the ABC is simply not allowed no matter whether it’s accurate or not.
And it doesn’t matter to me really. It was really just like spitting something nasty tasting out of your mouth. You don’t look back and don’t expect anyone else to really care either. But thanks for your encouragement. I do my best.
LikeLike
I think the ABC should have changed its name to the DEF by now [Courtesy: Spike Milligan]
LikeLike
I don’t think Spike ever came up with a joke as bad as that one Hung… come on now, own up… it’s one of your own isn’t it?
😉
LikeLike
Sorry wise sage, but is definitely Spike’s
LikeLike
Oh well… I suppose even heroes have their ‘off’ days…
😉
LikeLike
I’m certainly getting censored a helluva lot more than I used to be, Warrigal; especially on the religious blogs… I think one of my posts, in which I respond to a christian calling atheists a ‘lynch-mob’ by pointing out that such a mob is another form of scapegoat ritual and that as such christians are the experts when it comes to scapegoats and human sacrifice…
And to think, they call Australia a democracy? Well, ah’ll go to’t foot of ower stairs!
😉
LikeLike