RE: [Worldwide-Filipino-Alliance] Re: [HS59LaSalle] Dead Man Walking - NEJM
Eduardo Gimenez
Chay,
It is so surprising to see Ramon Corrales in the Tea Party camp. He speaks of immaturity and places criticism of Tea Party intransigence within that realm. Instead of looking at the issues that come out of their hard-line illogical intransigence in the realm of "critical thinking" (the lack thereof).
The absence of critical thinking comes out of minds so trapped in confirmation and cognitive biases that their world is bent like a Picasso painting into realities so warped that their resemblance to normal experience is a world squeezed through a black hole singularity from where nothing real can escape.
The Tea Party mind is strangeness itself brought to extremes of irrationality in dogmas of faith. "National Health is bad" is one such dogma of faith born out of a larger belief that "government is bad". Only if "government is bad" can true believers conclude that shutting down the government is good.
Only if "government is bad" is it possible to conclude that threatening worldwide financial devastation is good. The Tea Party zealots were fully immersed in this crazy world of dogmatic belief bringing us and the world into the brink with their stupidity.
We all know pinoy Tea Party Idiots as they abound within the expat community throughout the USA. Given his education, it is so hard to understand how Ramon Corrales could have fallen into this black hole of irrationality and ignorance.
Danding
From:
Worldwide-Fil...@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Worldwide-Fil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Cesar
Lumba
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 2:21 PM
To: HS59LaSalle
Cc: DLS...@yahoogroups.com; Archersnook; 62ndforum; Moonglow;
World-Wide Fil Alliance; CFGG Assoc. *CFGG CFGG
Subject: [Worldwide-Filipino-Alliance] Re: [HS59LaSalle] Dead Man
Walking - NEJM
Ramon C,
You disappoint me, my friend. We had a discussion going on about a week ago. I replied to your post point by frigging point and expected you to come up with your own arguments. Instead, all I got from you was silence.
Now I called the Tea Party people clowns and you called me names. You called me a crazy leftist loon and intellectually lazy.
I reacted by posting a response that outlined exactly why I felt the Tea Party people who shut down the government and are trying very hard to derail Obamacare are in fact clownish oafs who have destroyed nothing except their own credibility.
You react by calling me a one-position, one argument person.
Well, duh! Where have you been, my friend. I am a passionate advocate for the poor, the downtrodden, the exploited. That's my passion. And that is why I am the perfect antidote to the Tea Party people whose idea of a grand bargain is when the Democrats agree to everything that the Tea Party Republicans are asking for.
I am not like Obama, who is a "this is where I stand, folks, but on the other hand I can also see my opponents' and critics' points of view" type of person.
In other words, I don't present the arguments close to my heart then on the next breath present arguments that seemingly work against my own.
I believe very strongly in my arguments because I know they are the strongest arguments. So far, you have proven to me that you do not care about your own arguments because you have not presented them with any kind of passion. Instead you pull from your collection of pseudo psychological clap-trap and innuendo me in the process.
And the other guy, he acts like a chorus. I respect him and even like him as a person. When we are together we interact like we are long lost friends. But, when he argues, he has nothing to say except that he is sick and tired of me as a person and as a polemicist.
If you can't stand the heat, as Truman once famously said...
C
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Ramon Corrales <rcor...@integralmasterycenter.com> wrote:
Here’s my description of Immaturity, bias, and prejudice—they all are synonyms.
IMMATURITY IS A MINDSET WITH THE FOLLOWING QUALITIES:
· Someone who only has one perspective: mine and only mine counts—the hell with everyone else’s point of view.
· My view is the truth—and if you disagree with me, you are obviously wrong, hence put up or shut up. (Try to deal with your loved ones or your work colleagues that way, and your relationships will immediately deteriorate).
· Disagreement is viewed as disapproval of me, the self—not disagreement with ideas. That is why immaturity is synonymous with selfishness—because the self is tied to an idea or ideology.
· No distinction is made between facts and feelings: My View and outside events are one: my view (of what the facts are) is the truth. There is no credibility given to anyone else—unless he/she agrees with me. If you agree, you must be wise. If you disagree, you are obviously a moron.
· Egocentrism: Since only my view counts, then no other point of view counts. Egocentrism eventually leads to (1) isolationism (impatience with those who have a backbone and an independent head on them) or (2) to attracting followers who need to be true believers—on the left and on the right—the herd will be with you.
· Ethnocentrism: Only my group counts—only those who agree with my philosophy (that’s my kind, my group)—are worthy of breathing. Kill the rest of the fuckers. That by the way is the Mafia philosophy, except membership is defined by agreement with my point of view, not with belonging to an organization. If you are not with me, you are against me. If you are not part of my group, you are an infidel and must therefore be eliminated—demonized and pathologized.
· The external world is to blame: The immature person never takes responsibility for his/her thoughts, feelings, decisions, or actions. This includes the system: the poor, the needy, and uneducated, the minorities, and any unfortunate human being is always and only the VICTIM of oppressive forces coming from the outside. Individual responsibility has absolutely no part in the origin or maintenance of one’s plight in life. This is a form of black/white thinking. There is no nuanced version of the interaction between social and individuals forces in life. Social is always to blame for individual tragedies. The fix or the blame is always external.
In my view, the core causal factors of wars, polarization, lack of synergy, lack of tolerance, lack of mature compassion—even and especially toward those who disagree with us—have more to do with one’s level of maturity (vertical dimension) than with one’s position on the left-right spectrum (horizontal dimension). Mature people on the left or the right can have true dialogue and bring value to each other’s perspectives. It is the immature ones, on the left and on the right, that are unable to bring love, wisdom, and compassion. They will find a way to justify their hatred.
Mon C.
From: HS59L...@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:HS59L...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Cesar Lumba
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:30 AM
To: HS59LaSalle; DLS...@yahoogroups.com;
Archersnook; 62ndforum; Moonglow; World-Wide Fil Alliance; CFGG Assoc. *CFGG
CFGG
Subject: Re: [HS59LaSalle] Dead Man Walking - NEJM
Those Tea Party clowns and oafs are on the way to the dustbin of history. Mark my words. People like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Steve King are not quite as hypocritical as American history's most despised witch hunter, Joseph McCarthy, who saw leftists behind every door in America's homes, but close. Americans are on to them. They might keep their political offices because of voters' inertia, but they have no future beyond their present.
The unthinkable may yet happen. The House of Representatives is in play in 2014 and may turn Democratic. All courtesy of the Tea Party fanatics who wave the Confederate flag while they scream at Obama to drop the Kuran, rise from his kneeling position, and step out of the White House with his arms raised high. If Obama doesn't comply, presumably bullets will rain on the White House!
The point of my last post is that the Tea Party folks are desperately trying to overturn the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) when there is so much evidence that a lot of Americans - more than the total population of Canada and Australia combined, including those still in the tummies of expectant mothers there - have no access to health insurance and are just one illness away from death and/or bankruptcy, and the only, only, ONLY thing that can save them is Obamacare.
I have no use for heartless idiots, no truck for their sympathizers.
I don't care about people not approving what I do or say because I obviously don't value their opinions. I have not even an iota of concern that such people fanatically disagree with me.
I am a passionate sonofabitch, and if people don't like it, hell, there's 7 billion people on this planet about half of whom agree with me. I have a lot of soulmates in the underdeveloped world, where people generally passionately feel that there must be more compassion for the poor, the downtrodden, the exploited on God's green earth.
I passionately hate people who feel that the super-rich somehow deserve our sympathy. Sympathy, my ass. They are responsible for most of the unfairness and cynicism in this world. They are the polluters, the global warming deniers, the Wall Street bastards who created the monsters that were sold to the people as can't-lose investments.
They are the Neros who fiddle as Rome burns.
C
PS Why is that guy one of the moderators of this group? He obviously is a zealot for the extreme right of the political spectrum. Is this group a wholly-owned subsidiary of Fox News?
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Aquilino Alcantara <apalca...@yahoo.com> wrote:
many have given up ... you are now one of us ...
From:
Ramon Corrales <rcor...@integralmasterycenter.com>
To: HS59L...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 7:15 AM
Subject: RE: [HS59LaSalle] Dead Man Walking - NEJM
Chay
Should I call you a leftist loon just because your ideas are on the extreme left of the spectrum? Calling people loons or clowns is an INTELLECTUALLY LAZY way to dialogue because it bypasses discourse on issues. It’s also an immature way to energize one’s prejudices. There’s no way to dialogue with you, my friend.
Mon C.
From: HS59L...@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:HS59L...@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Cesar Lumba
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 2:05 AM
To: HS59LaSalle
Subject: Re: [HS59LaSalle] Dead Man Walking — NEJM
This is required reading for all those Tea Party clowns.
C
__._,_.___
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback
.
__,_._,___
Ramon Corrales
Danding and Chay
You both made my point—it is the uncivil discourse that I talked about. Civil discourse (or the lack of it) is the only thing I’ve addressed to Chay—which he never addressed—certainly not point by frigging point. I never defended the Tea Party in any of my postings. I only addressed the immature form of Chay’s syntax. He has reduced the cultural fiber of this group by calling people names and prejudicially labeling groups in broad swipes—as you do Danding: clowns, idiots, terrorists, etc… Please go back to my responses to Chay and you will not find any statement related to the content of his posts—only to the form or style of his statements.
So, for you to conclude I am in the Tea Party camp is a conclusion not based on facts. I am an integral theorist, one who looks from ABOVE the two camps, rather than positioning myself on a spectrum BETWEEN left and right. I never called Chay a leftist loon. My question was rhetorical: “Should I call you a leftist loon just because your ideas are on the extreme left of the spectrum?” If you read that carefully, it means Chay should not be called a leftist loon just because of his leftist ideas. He has a right to those ideas and the left emphasizes aspects of political life that are positive. But so does the right—something both of you refuse to acknowledge.
My descriptions of immaturity were directly culled from the style and the syntax of Chay’s response to me. Nothing there on the content of the issues itself.
I maintain my stance that there is no dialogue possible with Chay because he has not shown the ability to understand and honor opposing views. Have a good life, guys. No more arguments from me.
Mon C.
Jimmy E Arcebuche
A M Gonzalez
The inability to comprehend somebody else's idea is due solely to the incapacity to understand and or desire to honor opposing views.
In Danding's case, the sheer disrespect of those opposed to his views incapacitates him completely.
A person that is capable of honoring opposing views must first have the genuine desire to learn new things. If one is biased or prejudiced, how will one ever entertain ideas contrary to his own?
How can prejudiced persons ever admit that they are wrong? How will they ever publicly admit that they have learned something new when that new idea is contrary theirs?
Ergo, your conclusion is logical and correct. No dialogue is possible with people akin to Danding.
Manolo Gonzalez
--
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firstprincipl...@googlegroups.com
To post to this group, send email to firstpr...@googlegroups.com.
The subject line of your message will be the title of the post, and the body
of the message will be the body of the post.
All postings are viewable by the entire world at the following address:
http://groups.google.com/group/firstprinciples
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "First Principles" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to firstprincipl...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Eduardo Gimenez
Manolo: In Danding's case, the sheer disrespect of those opposed to his views incapacitates him completely.
Response: I have zero respect for stupid views. And for those who despite clear evidence will not change their minds and drop stupid views. I have very little respect for dogmatists who hold on to insane views no matter how much evidence is placed before them. In your case, the issue has always been your absolutely dogmatic attachment to the church's position on abortion and birth control. You and I are on opposite ends. Your position incapacitates any necessary action to alleviate overpopulation-induced poverty in the Philippines. Your position would have incapacitated the government from acting on the RH Bill. Your position was the intransigent one... the irreverent one that denies the existence of other valid positions. Your position is the one that has been thrown into the garbage dump by Pope Francis. One of your many positions was a denial that the church on orders of Ratzinger had been hiding pedophile priests from the legal authorities. Your position was a goose-step march with the very worst elements of Catholicism. You expected me and others to yield to the utter stupidity of your dogmatic pronouncements. No one did because stupidity isn't persuasive.
Here is what your new pope says about your stance:
VATICAN CITY -- Pope Francis has
warned that the Catholic Church's moral structure might "fall like a house
of cards" if it doesn't balance its divisive rules about abortion, gays
and contraception with the greater need to make it a merciful, more welcoming
place for all.
Six months into his papacy, Francis set out his vision for the church and his
priorities as pope in a lengthy and remarkably blunt interview with La Civilta
Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit magazine. It was published simultaneously
Thursday in Jesuit journals in 16 countries, including America magazine in the
U.S.
In the 12,000-word article, Francis expands on his ground-breaking comments
over the summer about gays and acknowledges some of his own faults. He sheds
light on his favorite composers, artists, authors and films (Mozart,
Caravaggio, Dostoevsky and Fellini's "La Strada") and says he prays
even while at the dentist's office.
But his vision of what the church should be stands out, primarily because it
contrasts so sharply with many of the priorities of his immediate predecessors,
John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They were both intellectuals for whom doctrine
was paramount, an orientation that guided the selection of a generation of
bishops and cardinals around the globe.
Francis said the dogmatic and the moral teachings of the church were not all
equivalent.
"The church's pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission
of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently," Francis
said. "We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of
the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and
fragrance of the Gospel."
Rather, he said, the Catholic Church must be like a "field hospital after
battle," healing the wounds of its faithful and going out to find those
who have been hurt, excluded or have fallen away.
"It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high
cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars!" Francis said.
"You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything
else."
"The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in
small-minded rules," he lamented. "The most important thing is the
first proclamation: Jesus Christ has saved you. And the ministers of the church
must be ministers of mercy above all."
The admonition is likely to have sharp reverberations in the United States,
where some bishops have already publicly voiced dismay that Francis hasn't
hammered home church teaching on abortion, contraception and homosexuality --
areas of the culture wars where U.S. bishops often put themselves on the front
lines. U.S. bishops were also behind Benedict's crackdown on American nuns, who
were accused of letting doctrine take a backseat to their social justice work
caring for the poor -- precisely the priority that Francis is endorsing.
Just last week, Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island, said in an
interview with his diocesan newspaper that he was "a little bit
disappointed" that Francis hadn't addressed abortion since being elected.
Francis acknowledged that he had been "reprimanded" for not speaking
out on such issues. But he said he didn't need to.
"We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the
use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible," he said.
"The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of
the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the
time."
Francis, the first Jesuit to become pope, was interviewed by Civilta
Cattolica's editor, the Rev. Antonio Spadaro, over three days in August at the
Vatican hotel where Francis chose to live rather than the papal apartments. The
Vatican vets all content of the journal, and the pope approved the Italian
version of the article.
Nothing Francis said indicates any change in church teaching. But he has set a
different tone and signaled new priorities compared to Benedict and John Paul
-- priorities that have already been visible in his simple style, his outreach
to the most marginalized and his insistence that priests be pastors, not
bureaucrats.
"Mercy has been a hallmark of his papacy from its earliest days,"
said the Rev. James Martin, editor at large for America magazine. "The
America interview shows a gentle pastor who looks upon people as individuals,
not categories."
It also shows a very human Francis: He seemingly had no qualms about admitting
that his tenure as superior of Argentina's Jesuit order in the 1970s --
starting at the "crazy" age of 36 -- was difficult because of his
"authoritarian" temperament.
"I have never been a right-winger. It was my authoritarian way of making
decisions that created problems," he said.
Two months ago, Francis caused a sensation during a news conference when he was
asked about gay priests. "Who am I to judge?" about the sexual
orientation of priests, as long as they are searching for God and have good
will, he responded.
Francis noted in the latest interview that he had merely repeated church
teaching during that press conference (though he again neglected to repeat
church teaching that says while homosexuals should be treated with dignity and
respect, homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered.")
But he continued: "A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I
approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: `Tell me: when God
looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love,
or reject and condemn this person?'
"We must always consider the person. In life, God accompanies persons, and
we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to
accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the
priest to say the right thing."
The key, he said, is for the church to welcome, not exclude and show mercy, not
condemnation.
"This church with which we should be thinking is the home of all, not a
small chapel that can hold only a small group of selected people. We must not
reduce the bosom of the universal church to a nest protecting our
mediocrity," he said.
A M Gonzalez
I have told you repeatedly that one can not conclude that it is a large population that induces poverty. By the same token, birth control does not bring about economic prosperity (see China before Deng Xiao Ping).
You claim that "clear evidence" should be enough to drop stupid views when I have given examples of how densely populated Hong Kong and Singapore are among the best places to live in because the vast majority enjoy opportunities to get a job.
Intransigent & Irreverent? Surely you aren't talking for the unborn or have you asked them if they want to continue living?
Manolo
Eduardo Gimenez
Manolo Gonzalez: You again result to invectives calling ideas contrary to yours as stupid or insane.
Response: After all these years you still don't get it. I don't call ideas stupid because they are contrary to mine. I call dangerously stupid ideas "STUPID IDEAS" because they are dangerously stupid. Stupid ideas that will lock tens of millions in poverty are dangerously stupid. Denial of Philippine overpopulation is DANGEROUSLY STUPID. Denial of need for active family planning is DANGEROUSLY STUPID. Opposition to the RH Bill is dangerously stupid. Denial of AGW is dangerously stupid... etc.
Such dangerously stupid ideas cannot be handled with kid gloves. They have to be smashed into smithereens using whatever rhetorical tools one has at his disposal. That was what Cesar Lumba was doing and Mon Corrales just couldn't see it.
Plain old stupid ideas are ok with me. If you insist the sky is green, be my guest. I will not call you stupid for that. But if you insist that a poor woman with 8 children has no right to take a morning after pill because it may kill a single-cell zygote lodged in her uterus... and should be charged for murder if she does... then I will blow your stupidity into smithereens with all the rhetorical power I have.
Danding
A M Gonzalez
Prove that large populations induce poverty!
Prove that birth control brings economic prosperity!
Prove that I am irreverent and intransigent when I say that you don't speak for the unborn because you don't want to give them a chance to continue living!
Manolo
Eduardo Gimenez
Manolo: Prove that large populations induce poverty!
Response: No. There isn't poof that can possibly dissuade the emotional dogmatism of an idiot. I had been dealing with you for years and know you to be a dogmatist religious idiot. Do not bother me as I cannot learn anything of any value from you nor will you learn anything of any value from me. Go away.
A M Gonzalez
For a supposedly learned man, your only recourse is the use of invectives against those whose ideas are contrary yours but worse..... you are unable to prove that large populations induce poverty!
Bwahahahahahaha
Manolo
MANUEL almario
Eduardo Gimenez
Martin: Manny, which institution that has not made mistakes?
Response-1: The church has always claimed infallibility. The dogma of infallibility of the pope came out of an earlier dogma of the infallibility of the church (see below). An infallible organization does not make mistakes.
http://www.theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm
The Catholic Church is infallible because it is :
· 1 Tim 3:15. the church of the living God, the pillar and the ground of the truth.
If a baptized person deliberately denies or contradicts a dogma, he or she is guilty of sin of heresy and automatically becomes subject to the punishment of excommunication.
Response-2: One little mistake here or there would have been OK. But the historical mistakes done by almost every pope, cardinal and bishop for more than a thousand years have been of epic proportions. They weren't little mistakes. They were huge and included almost every known depravity done by pope after pope and cardinal after cardinal all the way into very recent times. Here is a very recent one... Cardinal Hans Hermann Groer apponted Cardinal by JP-II and lived as cardinal until 2004:
Martin: The Church is dynamic and changing. Pope Francis epitomizes the great changes that are and will be coming in his papacy.
Response: There is nothing dynamic about the church. It remains abusive and locked into insane dogmas and practices. Francis may be making small changes here and there but the church itself remains abusive and insane. Vocations have dropped by 90%. Church attendance in the developed world has dropped by more than 90%. The Catholic Church is a dying institution. Ratzinger himself said so:
"The church will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes . . . she will lose many of her social privileges. . . As a small society, [the Church] will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members…. It will be hard-going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek" - Joseph Ratzinger
A "priestless church" is just around the corner. Without priests and nuns there is no possibility of new Catholics emerging. Our generation is the last Catholic generation. Our children's generation is far less catholic than we and their children will not be Catholic at all. The Catholic Church is dying as is every other organized religion also dying.
Religion is dead and by dying in such an ignominous way, religion has killed God. Nietzsche's statement that "God is dead" is correct. Here is how he explained it:
The Parable of the Madman
Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the
bright morning hours, ran to the market-place, and cried incessantly: "I
am looking for God! I am looking for God!"
As many of those who did not believe in God were standing
together there, he excited considerable laughter. Have you lost him, then? said
one. Did he lose his way like a child? said another. Or is he hiding? Is he
afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? or emigrated? Thus they shouted and
laughed. The madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances.
"Where has God gone?" he cried. "I shall tell you. We have
killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How
were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the
entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun?
Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we
not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is
there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing?
Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not
more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the
morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are
burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God's decomposition? Gods too
decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we,
murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and
mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our
knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify
ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to
invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not
ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater
deed; and whosoever shall be born after us - for the sake of this deed he shall
be part of a higher history than all history hitherto."
Here the madman fell silent and again regarded his listeners; and they too were
silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern to the
ground, and it broke and went out. "I have come too early," he said
then; "my time has not come yet. The tremendous event is still on its way,
still travelling - it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and
thunder require time, the light of the stars requires time, deeds require time
even after they are done, before they can be seen and heard. This deed is still
more distant from them than the distant stars - and yet they have done it
themselves."
It has been further related that on that same day the madman entered diverse
churches and there sang a requiem. Led out and quietened, he is said to have retorted
each time: "what are these churches now if they are not the tombs and
sepulchres of God?"
From: Worldwide-Fil...@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Worldwide-Fil...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Martin
Celemin
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2013 1:08 AM
To: Worldwide-Fil...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: {First Principles} RE: [Worldwide-Filipino-Alliance] Re:
[HS59LaSalle] Dead Man Walking - NEJM
Manny, which institution that has not made mistakes? The Roman Catholic Church made mistakes
in the the distant past like the Inquisition, etc. and has apologize for it. Why keep bringing it up?
The Church is dynamic and changing. Pope Francis epitomizes the great changes that are and will be coming in his papacy. Let hope he will suceed.
Martin
Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
firstprincipl...@googlegroups.com
To post to this group, send email to firstpr...@googlegroups.com.
The subject line of your message will be the title of the post, and the body
of the message will be the body of the post.
All postings are viewable by the entire world at the following address:
http://groups.google.com/group/firstprinciples
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"First Principles" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to firstprincipl...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
__._,_.___
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback
.
__,_._,___
Eduardo Gimenez
THIS STANDS ALONE AS A PRIMARY THOUGHT-PROVOKING CONCEPT
Religion is dead and by dying in such an ignominous way, religion has killed God. Nietzsche's statement that "God is dead" is correct. Here is how he explained it:
The Parable of the Madman
Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market-place, and cried incessantly: "I am looking for God! I am looking for God!"
As many of those who did not believe in God were standing
together there, he excited considerable laughter. Have you lost him, then? said
one. Did he lose his way like a child? said another. Or is he hiding? Is he
afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? or emigrated? Thus they shouted and
laughed. The madman sprang into their midst and pierced them with his glances.
"Where has God gone?" he cried. "I shall tell you. We have
killed him - you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How
were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the
entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun?
Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we
not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is
there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing?
Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not
more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the
morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are
burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God's decomposition? Gods too
decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we,
murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and
mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our
knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify
ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to
invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not
ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater
deed; and whosoever shall be born after us - for the sake of this deed he shall
be part of a higher history than all history hitherto."
Here the madman fell silent and again regarded his listeners; and they too were
silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern to the
ground, and it broke and went out. "I have come too early," he said
then; "my time has not come yet. The tremendous event is still on its way,
still travelling - it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and
thunder require time, the light of the stars requires time, deeds require time
even after they are done, before they can be seen and heard. This deed is still
more distant from them than the distant stars - and yet they have done it
themselves."
It has been further related that on that same day the madman entered diverse
churches and there sang a requiem. Led out and quietened, he is said to have
retorted each time: "what are these churches now if they are not the tombs
and sepulchres of God?"
Danding
_
A M Gonzalez
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7375
Nietzsche and the Nietzscheans: Shaping the Culture of Death
In seeking the deepest roots of the struggle between the "culture of life" and the "culture of death" . . . [we] have to go to the heart of the tragedy being experienced by modern man: the eclipse of the sense of God and man. (EV 21)
I am consumed by doubts, for I have killed the Law . . . If I am not more than the Law, then I am the most abject of men.
Lonely and deeply suspicious of myself as I was, I took, not without secret spite, sides against myself and for anything that happened to hurt me and was hard for me.
This work stands alone. Do not let us mention the poets in the same breath. . . . If all the spirit and goodness of every great soul were collected together, the whole could not create one of Zarathustra's discourses.
The noble type of man experiences itself as determining values; it does not need approval; it judges "what is harmful to me is harmful in itself"; it knows itself to be that which first accords honor to things; it is value-creating.
Massimiliano
PAYPAL TRANSFER
CASHAPP TRANSFER
ZELLE TRANSFER
LOAN DEAL
TRANSFER WISE
WESTERN UNION TRANSFER
BITCOIN FLASHING
BANK ACCOUNT LOADING/FLASHING
IBAN TO IBAN TRANSFER
MONEYGRAM TRANSFER
IPIP/DTC
SLBC PROVIDER
CREDIT CARD TOP UP
DUMPS/ PINS
SEPA TRANSFER
WIRE TRANSFER
BITCOIN TOP UP
GLOBALPAY INC US
SKRILL USA
UNIONPAY RECEIVER
Thanks.
NOTE; ONLY SERIOUS / RELIABLE RECEIVERS CAN CONTACT.
DM ME ON WHATSAPP
+44 7529 555638