ATW FRIDAY NIGHT JUKEBOX
By Pete Moore On August 10th, 2012Because Friday night is Music Night: a modern rock n roll classic, in my view -
-
THE PRICE OF REWARDING TERRORISM 
You do not defeat terrorism by rewarding terrorists, regardless of how many bleeding heart liberals argue otherwise. Want to know where that flawed approach leads to? Read UNIONISM DECAYED 1997-2007 - It's my first book and it explains what happens when you seeek to appease terrorists and call it peace. It's available right now for ATW readers so make sure you get your copy by emailing the editor! This is the book that dissents from the herd mentality that doing wrong can lead to being right. It doesn't and this book spells out WHY. -
ABOUT THIS SITE 
-
Pete,
So you’ve also got a lousy taste in music.
All that’s sordid about modern British society, and a man who claims to be an English gent likes it..
Weird!
Liking the song doesn’t meaning liking the lifestyle depicted.
Agit8ed -
It’s just a song, one which doesn’t glorify a sordid lifestyle, and it’s no great secret in these here parts that I’m into rock music.
It’s all about the riff man!
Colm,
It’s a noise!! It’s kitchen sink music at its very worst! Horible loud music about a sad and empty life style..
Mrs Agit8ed is a registered manager of a new cjildren’s home. One child’s father was an addict who committed suicide. A grandparent shot themself. The mother told the child that they were a f*****g waste of time and a f*******g waste of space. The child is only just a teenager..
Welcome to Sordid Britain Colm. And I don’t care how “good” the music is, I don’t divorce it from the subject matter.
I don’t know if you’re a fan of SouthPark, but we enjoy the less extreme ones, and Cartman singing “In the Ghetto” when he visits Kenny’s house is as extreme as I get..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z34j0S_pqPQ
Although this is pretty funny..
Agit8ed -
You misunderstand. The lyrics are about how scummy a pimp is and are disaproving of prostitution.
“welcome to sordid Britain”
Nonsense. Welcome to the human race. The sad family story you mention can sadly be replicated thousands of times both today and in every generation past and in every country. Britain is not a worse place today than in the past. It is just different. It changes, sometimes for good sometimes for bad. It has never been any different.
Pete,
“It’s all about the “ruff” man!
“You misunderstand. The lyrics are about how scummy a pimp is and are disaproving of prostitution.”
No, I don’t misunderstand. I just don’t need to listen to a rotten record to know that!
Alright, don’t listen to it then.
Blimey.
But you made him listen to it Pete. He will never be able to get the filthy dirty scummy sordid impression of it out of his mind now
Colm,
My dear chap.
Of course it’s true. But doncha want better for children? Why should ANY child’s life be nasty, brutish and short because “that’s life”? Didn’t Victoria Climbie or little Peter, or the boy fished out of the river deserve more?
What makes me laugh about the human rights brigade is that a woman has the right to bring children into the world, but the kid doesn’t have the right to a decent childhood…
Anyway, what are you doing in? You should be out enjoying your Saturday night, not talking to miserable old sods like me on the internet.
How’s your brother doing? Are you any closer since the funeral?
Agit8ed
We will never have a perfect world with all children happy and secure in their envnronments. But unlike you I actually think we are doing better today to try and deal with childhood misery than in the past where abuse was swept under the carpet.
As for myself. I am no spring chicken. My Saturday night clubbing days are over. I’m happy to stay in with a few glasses of wine spreading my words of wisdom to the world via the web. Me and me bruvva are fine. We’ll never be close. Far too different for that. But we get on well and see each other often, thanks for asking.
Colm,
You are a good lad. I am sorry you’re not closer with your brother, but for various reasons it happens. I am no longer close to my last surviving younger brother. Sad but true.
Take care of yourself and don’t drink too many glasses of wine
Oh, by the way ,Mrs Agit8ed and myself have decided “The future’s bright, the future’s Cox’s”
or Apple at any rate.
I am going to have an IMac and the wife wants one of those Ipads. We sealed the deal today at PCWorld. I have given up the struggle with Windows 7 and succumbed to the charms of Apple products.
Watch this ssp ssssppsssppppace…
“I am going to have an IMac and the wife wants one of those Ipads. ”
Good call. You’ll probably be back for an ipad for yourself
Frank,
I doubt it. What I don’t like is the size of ‘em. Otherwise incredibly impressive. The features on the Imac and the intuitivity of the OS made me realise that buying Microsoft has been a false economy over the years. The fact that Apple are doing interest free over six months was an added incentive.
BTW
Have you checked the Hoorah thread lately?
You did see what I said about the spirit in which an argument is presented is almost as important as the logic of the argument? I haven’t got The Blind Watchmaker yet, but I will. You could try reading a Christian book along the same lines…
“What I don’t like is the size of ‘em.”
Too big or too small?
“Have you checked the Hoorah thread lately?
You did see what I said about the spirit in which an argument is presented is almost as important as the logic of the argument? ”
I saw the latest posts yes. As far as the spirit in which an argument is presented, I think people think they can read the mood of a person from their written comments, but usually they are wrong. At least in my case I’ve lost count of the number of times people have told me what mood I was in or what I thought and got it wrong. I don’t mean that a simple misreading of what I wrote either (which could be my fault as much as theirs) but what should be obvious to anyone is blatantly crazy attempts at mindreading.
“I haven’t got The Blind Watchmaker yet, but I will. You could try reading a Christian book along the same lines…”
I don’t think The Blind Watchmaker is an anti-Christian book at all – once or twice he does connect it to atheism but the idea that if you believe one you can’t believe the other is not right. So if by ‘Christian book’ you mean a creationist book then I haven’t read any though I’ve read a lot of the arguments of the Intelligent Design crew. If you just mean Christianity generally then I’ve had plenty of exposure to that and talked to people I respect that believe it and asked them to explain why, and I reckon given them a fair listen. I just don’t buy it.
Frank,
You are right about the argument thing, but what I was getting at is that I was wrong to lose my rag with you, especially as you usually do try to be reasonable.
I have argued along similar lines re the written word of the scriptures. That is what we write somehow becomes like written in stone, whereas if you actually talked face to face with say, St Paul, you would find him far more flexible without abandoning the basic principles of the Christian faith.
If you’ve listened to your believing friends and still don’t buy it, fair enough.
What did you think of the Nobel Laureate guy’s story?
Re the Ipad, I usually wear jeans and t shirts/shirts. I haven’t got pockets big enough for an Ipad.
What I most dearly want is to improve lung function so that I can exercise more regularly. I get quite tired these days, and I put it down to the scarring of the airways making it more difficult to expel air quickly. I will ahve to look into a fairly recent technique where they use heated wires to burn away scarring..
Yeeeeukkk!
Here you go Frank,
another interesting link…
http://creationrevolution.com/2012/08/abandoned-transitional-forms/
“What did you think of the Nobel Laureate guy’s story?”
Not a lot really – it is basically an argument from authority but an unqualified authority. Also the fact he is bright doesn’t mean anything – Newton was a genius and a Christian but he also believed in stuff like alchemy and even his Christian beliefs were considered odd by other Christians.
“Re the Ipad, I usually wear jeans and t shirts/shirts. I haven’t got pockets big enough for an Ipad.”
Then you want an iphone
Thought there is a rumour of an upcoming ipad mini it won’t fit in your pocket either. Really the ipad is for the couch or taking on a trip.
“What I most dearly want is to improve lung function so that I can exercise more regularly. I get quite tired these days, and I put it down to the scarring of the airways making it more difficult to expel air quickly. I will ahve to look into a fairly recent technique where they use heated wires to burn away scarring..”
Yikes. Maybe you just need to look at low impact exercise like cycling or swimming. I know that’s pretty aerobic also – but while I myself could not run to the shops I have cycled from London to Amsterdam a couple of times and while the others were having their power bars etc I was stopping for a cigarette. Norfolk is great for cycling too, flat as a pancake up there, I had a few days cycling on the coast there years ago.
Re your link it’s an example of requiring a particular proof and ignoring all the other evidence.
Look, there’s no more doubt that you are related to apes than there is that you are related to your grandparents. To argue otherwise, especially the ‘young earth’ creationist version, is like arguing that despite the genetic evidence, birth certs, documentary evidence of your grandparents lives, photographs of you with them, etc, you are not in fact related to them at all but spontaneously came into existence 5 minutes ago at your present age.
Ha!
So you do admit that intelligent, functioning people can also be Christians, even if you don’t agree with WHY they believe?
“So you do admit that intelligent, functioning people can also be Christians, even if you don’t agree with WHY they believe?”
Well, of course. Bad things can happen to good people
“Well, of course. Bad things can happen to good people
”
You’re such a wag O’Dwyer..
But if you concede the point , then by extension you must also accept that equally intelligent, well educated and professional people do believe: despite your assertion that any intelligent person would write the idea of God off as pure superstition.
“despite your assertion that any intelligent person would write the idea of God off as pure superstition.”
I’ve never asserted that.
I do say that the evidence for God, especially the very specific and elaborate ones of the major religions, is unconvincing. And according to you it should be unconvincing because otherwise there is no need for faith.
But then you (and may other believers) say there is evidence anyway! It’s like you can’t help yourselves! But you can’t have it both ways, either you have to have faith because there is no convincing evidence, or there is evidence that should convince anyone.
If there isn’t evidence that should convince anyone, then nobody can really be blamed for not believing in it. Nor should they pretend to believe in it or just scrunch their eyes real tight and try very hard to believe it. And yet believing is held out as the greatest virtue and not believing the greatest sin. It’s moral nonsense.
‘despite your (Frank’s) assertion that any intelligent person would write the idea of God off as pure superstition.’
I would suggest that it is the opposite that is corect – that any intelligent person would have the wit to realise that the ‘fables from the past’ were the only way of providing an answer for the many questions that, even ‘back then’, an uneducated and naive, but nevertheless curious, populace might surely have asked of their ‘Elders’.
Of course it all sounds so simplistic to us now, and we must remember it wasn’t just Christianity that believed in a ‘God’ or even multiple ‘Gods’, and there were, even in pre-Christian beliefs, speculation and various ideas of a ‘heaven’ concept.
I would love to read how Frank would explain the concept of evolution or a ‘black hole’, and all within the confines of the ‘knowledge of the times, to folk who could barely write their own names.
It is just so easy, not to say convenient and lazy, to mock the ‘knowledge base’ of our tri-millenial ancestors, – and all by altering the context….
When I read Dawkins and co. I get the impression of being led through a maze of extremely narrow passageways, – and barely lit, at that!
Ernest,
Believers don’t say that the Bible was written for bronze age people or even by them – they (pretty much all of them) say it’s the word of (omniscient) God and (many of them) that it’s all correct and (pretty much all of them) that it’s relevant now.
Even today there are people poring over the Bible expecting to find 21st century wisdom and prophecies of the future in a book that was written, as you seem to be agreeing, not by an omniscient god but by 1st century people. Because there’s nothing in it that couldn’t have been written by a 1st century person. On the other hand if God was addressing it only to those people isn’t it due an(other) update by now?
” it all sounds so simplistic to us now”
It doesn’t sound simplistic, it sounds wrong. Morally and factually. For example we hear a lot about ‘traditional Christian marriage’ these days. Supposedly this is between one man and a woman with consent. But the Biblical version of that includes polygynous marriage; levirate marriage, a man, a woman and her property (a female slave); a man, one or more wives, and some concubines; a male soldier and a female prisoner of war; a male rapist and his victim; a male and female slave (forced marriage); all accepted as well as, not instead of, monogamous, heterosexual marriage. That was a ‘simplification’ of the current approach, was it?
” it wasn’t just Christianity that believed in a ‘God’ or even multiple ‘Gods’, and there were, even in pre-Christian beliefs, speculation and various ideas of a ‘heaven’ concept.”
There’s not much in the Bible that’s original. Prior religions had their resurrection story and their virgin births etc and Confucius even beat Jesus to the ‘do unto others’ thing by about 500 years (and his version was better).
Very interesting observation, Frank, that “if God was addressing it only to those people isn’t it due an(other) update by now?”
You have actually quite succinctly defined the whole (very heated and impassioned) debate between the catholic and reformed churches, as to how the Bible is meant to be regarded. The reformed churches view the Bible as very much “the final word” of authority, something that cannot and must not be updated or amplified as time goes by (they have set down an edict known as ‘sola scriptura’ regarding this), whereas to the catholic church, the Bible, although very central to the faith, is (how to put this?) ….seen as forming part of a wider tapestry, or something like that. To catholics, the teachings of the church ARE the ‘updates’ you refer to, and are seen as coming from the same line of authority which decided what books to include in the Bible in the first place.
The danger is, of course, that any Pope is therefore free, in theory, to diverge from the original intent of the Bible, and to add whatever new teaching he pleases, and this is precisely what many Protestant churches say that the Catholic church has indeed done.
Hence, for David, in his “all sperm equal?” post, his central question is “What is the Biblical basis for this?”, whereas a Catholic would come to the issue from the point of view that “The church’s teaching IS the basis, as it derives from Christ’s apostolic commission, as found in the Bible”.
-And we think that modern party politics is a tangled web!
Frank,
‘On the other hand if God was addressing it only to those people isn’t it due an(other) update by now?’
Exactly the point I made a few days ago – the ‘church’ is so embroiled in its history and its procedures that it has totaly failed in its task of moving its understanding and beliefs for the modern era and in line with modern knowledge and thinking.
However religion isn’t just about the metaphysical side of life, much of it applies to the moral aspects of the communal or social lifestyle, as about the various asppects of faith and belief. The threat of the unknown seemingly an excellent way of getting people to ‘toe-the-line’, fire and brimstone over brute force and ignorance.
As with the science stuff, the Church has not kept abreast of improvements in the modern social lifestyle. The decline in church attendance and the consequent rise in crime, is hardly coincidental. Almost literally the ‘rule book’ has been discarded in favour of the more brutish cult of self.
It seems that the Church has almost deliberatley withdrawn from the community by seemingly being more concerned with preserving its ‘pomp and circumstance’ and ceremonial aspects than in instilling a degree of moral substance among the populace. They have failed to ‘get their hands dirty’ with their reluctance to mix with the hoi-polloi, prefering to mingle with the nobs. The concept of priests also being teachers appears to be an idea that has long been discarded.
For many years the morality of the Bible, – the ‘Christian’ lifestyle proved to have a very civilising effect on communities everywhere, it certainly wasn’t perfect, but it worked quite well at a time when it was most needed and most effective.
Frank,
From a Christian perspective faith is not a leap into the dark.
God says,
“The fool has said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that does good.” Psalm 14:1
“When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have ordained; What is man, that you are mindful of him? and the son of man, that you visit him? Psalm 8:3,4
God expects us to look at ALL the evidence and make a step of faith BASED on that evidence.
If there was overwhelming evidence for God or evolution, there would be no need for faith.,
“But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,” But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect. 1 Peter3:15
So all I was hoping to get from you is the concession that maybe, just maybe; there are people in the world who are just as intelligent and educated as perhaps yourself and Richard Dawkins, and who DO believe in the Christian faith and live their lives in accordance with its teachings.
That you could accept that this might be the case, but for yourself you don’t believe.
So that when you pass on and perhaps find that life doesn’t end in death; you will be quite confident to offer as your defence that “no intelligent person could be expected to believe in God,”
so you didn’t.
Agit8ed,
““The fool has said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that does good.” Psalm 14:1″
So according to the Bible anyone who does not believe in God, despite the lack of evidence, is not only a fool but a completely bad person! Imagine if I were to say this about a believer?
But then the Bible also says this:
“Matthew 5:22
Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.”
“you will be quite confident to offer as your defence that “no intelligent person could be expected to believe in God,””
I can simply say there is nothing unreasonable about not believing in God and it is dishonest to pretend. According to the BIble we are commanded not to lie aren’t we?
But again with the ‘defence’? What is to defend. It’s not immoral not to believe in something without evidence. If I were to take a ‘leap of faith’ on all things without evidence I’d be signing up for incompatible religions and myths all day.
And you, what will YOU say to the 33+ Hindu gods on judgement day?
Morning Frank!
Are you at work/off sick or retired?
Usually you answer in the evenings.
http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/q37.htm
You are quoting from the Sermon on the Mount. Context is all Frank, you surely know that.
“I can simply say there is nothing unreasonable about not believing in God and it is dishonest to pretend. According to the BIble we are commanded not to lie aren’t we? But again with the ‘defence’? What is to defend. It’s not immoral not to believe in something without evidence. If I were to take a ‘leap of faith’ on all things without evidence I’d be signing up for incompatible religions and myths all day.”
I agree, but you seem to be backtracking from your (almost) acknowledgement that other people of equal intelligence and education can also give good reasons FOR belief.
I don’t think you are so arrogant as to write off many many intelligent men and women who do believe.
“And you, what will YOU say to the 33+ Hindu gods on judgement day?”
That is a nonsense statement Frank, as Hindus believe in reincarnation and the immortality of the soul..
http://hinduism.about.com/od/basics/a/heavenandhell.htm
No, I was just heading out the door to work when I wrote that.
“Context is all Frank, you surely know that.”
Like the context makes a difference in this case?
“I agree, but you seem to be backtracking from your (almost) acknowledgement that other people of equal intelligence and education can also give good reasons FOR belief.”
But I don’t think they can, or at least if they can they don’t. Obviously I don’t think they give good reasons or I would find them convincing. I’m sure that people can find good subjective reasons to believe or to pretend or wish that they do, but that’s not the same thing.
“That is a nonsense statement Frank, as Hindus believe in reincarnation and the immortality of the soul..”
What does it matter what they believe? Are they infallible? What if they’re mistaken about that and right about the rest?
What if you wake up in the afterlife, and Zeus is there asking you to defend your unbelief?
What for that matter if God is there asking what you were thinking when you rejected evolution, who is this Jesus guy, and why didn’t you wait for the Messiah like he said?
Or perhaps it will be Jesus there, gay as Christmas, with a same sex partner, asking you which part of give your coat to anyone who asks wasn’t clear and denying all knowledge of this St Paul dude?
Or maybe it will be some god nobody ever heard of, mad as hell that you believed in things that were made up instead of using your God given reason and living in the here and now like She intended.
Good stuff Frank!