DISQUS

thank god for bloggers like you and the new mexico independent for offering a different perspective from the mainstream media!

thank god for bloggers like you and the new mexico independent for offering a different perspective from the mainstream media!

Thanks, Donny.
As a politically moderate Christian, I like to be exposed to thoughtful and respectful viewpoints from the Left, Middle, or Right. I don't see that labelling people as "Christian-hating" leftists, etc.

Can I just add that when I was many years younger, my politics were much more to the Left?

Then, as I grew older, I realized that people have to be taken as indiviuals, not labelled as "Bourgeois," or "Yuppies," or "Tree Huggers" or "Soccer Moms" or "Bushies" or whatever. Labels appear to me to be shorthand used for the purpose of dismissing people without addressing the substance of their arguments.

Brian's piece said: "The United States is not leading the world in addressing our unsustainable economy. We are the world's prime example of an unsustainable consumer society, and if our lifestyles were generalized to the whole human population, we would need many planet earths to sustain us." This "green question" is certainly one of the most important questions on my mind.
However, I have to take issue with the traditional "religious left" canard about terrorism arising because of global poverty, and, for me, taking the terrorist threat seriously is one of the most important things I am looking for in our next POTUS.

Those who think the Patriot Act was excessive should think about would happen here if there was another mass casualty terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

In this regard, I recommend that everyone who is interested read Paul Berman's book, "Terror and Liberalism" which tells, from a left-wing perspective, why liberals should view Islamist radicalism as the greatest anti-democratic threat since Hitler and Stalin.

I want to hear from the candidates how seriously they will take the two greatest threats to the future of humanity: global climate change, and Islamofacism. There are many other terrible threats to humanity, but I believe these have the potential to cause the greatest destruction.

seriously you go out without a bra?
hmmm..what can i say...
hahahah...
even when you are with friends?

hey...u girls go out without a bra?

Vonnegut is my brother's favorite writer. Thanks very much from quoting from his wonderful sermon. ("Life of Brian" is also a personal fave.)

Christian Beyer said: "The problem with both Dawkins and Harris is not that they are innacurate when it comes to identifying the problems that religous extemism presents.
It's that they have have no tolerance for moderation of any sort, whether it be with traditional religions or that of the most recent religion on the scene, "New Atheism"."

Not having read Dawkins yet, except for bits of his articles on B-Net, I can't judge either his writing or his argument, only give my impression that his abrasive style does his cause no good, except that it may gain him some attention.

Of the "Evangelical Atheists," thus far I am most impressed by Sam Harris. His criticism of religious moderates also seemed pretty on target to me, though I won't go into depth about it here, I thought his points were extremely well-taken.

Relating this back to the issue of Global Warming/Climate Change, I would agree that it is not fair to label everyone who questions what has become the prevailing opinion on Climate Change an anti-environmentalist (or whatever) and I agree with what you just said above about having some humility related to the issue.

I will read Richard Dawkins book, "The God Delusion" even though I am put off by his evident disdain for religious people -- I still want to hear what he has to say, because there may be something of value there for me. I just finished reading (and am beginning to reread) Sam Harris' excellent book, "The End of Faith."
Not only is Harris a good writer, and an open-minded person (open to ideas such as God, life-after-death, and reincarnation, for instance) but he comes across as remarkably forthright, and makes a great deal of sense.

What he has to say about what is wrong with religion is "right on" in my opinion. I am in the process of reading the Old Testament at the same time, and it is quite illuminating.

The Book of Joshua, for instance. The Canaanites were to be "dedicated" to Yahweh (ie. slaughtered, down to a man, down to a woman, down to a child) though in some rare cases, virgins were spared, as spoil. Cattle and sheep were usually also "dedicated" to Yahweh.

If I am to believe that this is literally God's prescription for unbelievers, then how does that differ from "Slay the infidels whereever you find them?"

From all of my reading about Islam, my impression has been that Islamic conquerers oftentimes granted second-class citizenship status (aka dhimmitude) to conquered peoples of other faiths.
I'm sure that sometimes this approached genuine tolerance and respect for people of different faiths. Unfortunately, it all too often did not. If my faith will only be "tolerated" if I accept my second-class citizenship status as a non-Muslim, then my answer is, respectfully, no thank you.

Absolutely, Don. I think it is great to be hopeful about Iranian society, to be open to learn more about them, to try and understand them on their own terms, but hope and naivete are a toxic combination, it seems to me. I've heard something about the persecution of members of the Baha'i faith, and, indeed, of the status of all religious minorities (or infidels) under Islam, and I think it is absolutely shameful.
One of the many interesting points that Sam Harris makes in his book, "The End of Faith" is that so many religions consign those who are "outside their faith" as "outside their moral community" and not covered by the same ethical standards as fellow believers.

So, if somebody is "an infidel" by that definition, they are already going to Hell, so there is no reason for me to treat them ethically or justly, if I am "a believer." They fall outside my area of "moral concern" into outer darkness.

I'm curious as to how much exposure to the persecution of religious minorities Mr. Carr and his associates have had while visiting Iran?
Once again, I can't help but think that this is a very carefully orchestrated visit (by the hosts of this tour) to show Mr. Carr and his associates only what the Iranian government wishes them to see.

Even though I think talking is better than not talking, I am a little surprised at what I see as somewhat Pollyana-ish responses to this visit.

Perhaps the delegates that are visiting need to try and refrain from cynicism, but I would appreciate a little leaven of skepticism in the midst of all the wishful thinking.

Andrew Sullivan's book, "The Conservative Soul" offers an excellent definition of the kind of conservatism I personally feel everyone should consider and try and learn from. As someone who was raised in a liberal household and who spent years "left of center" I find myself more interested in conservative ideas than in liberal ideas at the present time.
Particularly now that the "Conservative Movement" is coming apart, there are a lot of really interesting books and ideas out there, many of whom's authors have blogs on this website.

Honestly. If anything, I'm not sure this delegation ought to be meeting with Ahmadinejad at all. It conveys a credibility to his regime that is undeserved.
But, George W. Bush's approach to Iran scares me to death, so I'm not sure what should be done. Perhaps, in this case, talking is better.

If you do have the opportunity to ask my question about theocracy, I just wanted to add that I am well aware that there is no "church-state" separation in Islam, and I am also aware that Ahmadinejad is a secular leader of Iran.
(So perhaps part of my question could be directed to Khatami.) I am looking for a direct answer to my question, not an evasion. (Assuming, always, that you have the opportunity to ask it.) Cheers!

How can you justify theocratic government when history (including Iran's) shows that men end up using the name of God to bolster their own power, inevitably leading the people to lose faith in their government, making people irreligious (but hypocritical) and breeding corruption, and, in every respect, creating the opposite of a Godly society?
"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely," was written about he Papacy, but it could as easily be applied to the theocrats who govern Iran. Not because they are bad men, but because they are human.

Thanks, butch.

I also like Joe Biden. I think he is a straight-shooter but I know he has an (apparently) well-deserved reputation for having a big mouth. It's funny - my impression of Barack Obama has been almost identical to Biden's. Though I haven't yet read either of Obama's books, and I don't yet know a great deal about him, I find Obama almost preternaturally clean-cut and articulate and also nearly unflappable.
I heard him interviewed recently on "The Today Show" and he responded with an utter lack of defensiveness when David Gregory asked him if his middle name was "Hussein." (It is.) If a presidential candidate whose last name rhymes with "Osama" and whose middle name is "Hussein" can laugh off questions about his name, he should be able to handle being called "clean" and "articulate." IMO, the real reason for the fuss is that Obama doesn't want to hurt the feelings of previous African-American presidential candidates, none of whom (IMO) had a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected.

gekéu! ilö haget..

soble tokio hotel..


tom i love you... ik hab mi tom sex!


kiss ala

gekéu! ilö haget..

soble tokio hotel..


tom i love you... ik hab mi tom sex!


kiss ala

gekéu! ilö haget..

soble tokio hotel..


tom i love you... ik hab mi tom sex!


kiss ala

What an experience you had... I felt nothing at all in Singapore. Some of my housemates do feel a little shaky. A Friend in Penang got panic when his aparment shakes, things on the wall sways, ripples on the swimming pool... he quickly get out of the apartment and drive himself to his office together with some of his colleagues.