|
Post by Hunny on Aug 21, 2013 13:44:43 GMT
Something I've always tried to do is to understand people who disagree with me or have attitudes I find fundamentally immoral. Why are so many people nowadays prepared to condemn human rights without a word of protest from other people? Why are so many people willing to condone the use of torture? Why do so many people lump all criminals together as if every one of them was a serial killer? Why do so many people hate and fear freedom and want to abolish it in favour of authoritarian regimes? Why are so many people intolerant?
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool liberal (with a small 'l') and to me freedom, tolerance, human rights and compassion are the only moral foundations for a civilized society. How is it that these ideas have become so unpopular and that we find ourselves in a world where, to use Yeats' words in his poem 'The Second Coming'
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity
On every level liberal values are being not just challenged but trashed. The religious right in America, fundamentalist Muslims, the BJP in India, even fundamentalist Buddhists are all demonstrating intolerance, even violence towards others.
So what is the basic problem? In my opinion we're suffering from what Erich Fromm called 'the fear of freedom.' It's much easier to be robotic slaves who never have to think for themselves and just leave it to the powers that be. Or to trust in some infallible religious leader, some charismatic politician or a similar type of guru.
But freedom means responsibility and too many people are terrified of having to think or act for themselves.
That's why they are rushing towards an authoritarian future like Gadarene swine.
It's a sad prospect and us liberals have to stand up and fight.
_________________________________________________________________________________
ONE LINERSSome people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs. If I agreed with you we'd both be wrong. Crowded elevators smell different to midgets. Worrying works! 90% of the things I worry about never happen. Laugh at your problems, everybody else does. The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas! Whenever I fill out an application, in the part that says "If an emergency, notify:" I put "DOCTOR". What's my mother going to do? There's a fine line between cuddling and holding someone down so they can't get away. Does this rag smell like chloroform to you? You are such a good friend that if we were on a sinking ship together and there was only one life jacket... I'd miss you heaps and think of you often. I got in a fight one time with a really big guy, and he said, "I'm going to mop the floor with your face." I said, "You'll be sorry." He said, "Oh yeah? Why?" I said, "Well, you won't be able to get into the corners very well." ______________________________________________________________________________ Delusions of A Hopeful Pessimist by Sadie1263 Sadie is married, with three grown sons and nine dogs. She works for a family business, loves reading (just about everything), watches a lot of TV and does a lot of dog walking!!
Middle age, menopause and empty nest syndrome..........let me see....what else could I add in there .......locusts.....frogs......I live in an area going thru a severe drought.......maybe I could toss in a few boils and giant warts to really finish me off.
I’ve been a mother for over 30 years......every moment filled with what the kids need, what they are doing, where they need to be....where I need to be.....taking what they forgot to them......games, meets, building science projects into the middle of the night!! Now....don’t for a minute think I am complaining.....it has been glorious! Even if I did threaten to beat them on a regular basis. The youngest one is now 19 years old and living in his own home. So what am I supposed to be doing with this time that has been dedicated to them? I don’t want any major changes....don’t want to run off and join the circus.....do I want to go back to school? OMG...share a room with 20 year-olds.....well that’s not going to ratchet up my middle age crisis....then again I maybe could get off with the menopause excuse if I axe murdered a few of them. Do I enroll in a cooking class? Didn’t I just get to stop cooking continually because the kids are gone? But maybe for fun would be ok. I’m not ready for knitting booties on the front porch in a rocking chair. What the heck do I do with all this energy that has been dedicated to other people?
Middle age and menopause......hey....I’m fairly happy with myself......yeah....I need to lose some weight....but it obviously doesn’t bother me enough to not drink that Coke float last night........but I am starting to notice those multiplying “laugh” lines in the mirror......and I swear my skin is looking a little different. Exactly how many layers of lotion can you safely put on? I’m already sliding off chairs.
Admittedly, I can’t do anything about the drought......or wait.....maybe I can.....rain dances!!! Oh yeah......maybe start a group and gather in the town square and bring down the rain......now that would be fun. Wonder if you can get arrested for that? Ok...I should check into a few things before I start that!!
I am talking with my kids about going skydiving for Christmas. Which I have always wanted to do.....but I don’t think that is going to be a full time hobby........so I guess I need to find one!! This should actually be an interesting adventure in itself......I am fairly accident prone so I will try to choose the less accident prone hobbies......I’ll keep you posted. Or if you have any spectacular ideas......send them my way!!!
__________________________________________________________________________________________ mikemarshallHusband to BigLin who founded the site, Mike Marshall is a retired college lecturer with a PhD in Philosophy. He and Lin have been together 15 years - married for 12 - and have a son who's eleven and a daughter aged seven. They make their way together, buying and renovating real estate to sell and let. Here is another brilliant article which he was kind enough to write for us.
Four different attitudes to crime and punishment
The four principal approaches to crime and punishment are deterrence, retribution, intentionalism and environmentalism. All four have their advantages and disadvantages when considered from a logical, practical and/or moral viewpoint.
Let me illustrate the differences of emphasis between the various approaches. An advocate of deterrence will claim that the purpose of punishment is to deter crime. A retributionist claims that the purpose of punishment is to punish crime.
In the first case it is the consequences of the action that are seen as important. A criminal act is punished with the intention of discouraging other criminals from following the example.
In the second case it is the act itself that is punished and whether or not the punishment deters criminals is of no importance in the thinking of those who frame laws and prescribe penalties.
Thus for example (to illustrate the difference in approach at its most dramatic) an advocate of deterrence would claim that the death penalty deters murderers and would support it on those grounds. A retributionist would say that the act of murder requires the forfeiture of the murderer's life. Though both would support capital punishment it is for entirely different reasons.
Intentionalists and environmentalists may also support the death penalty but their approach to it will be entirely different. An intentionalist will consider the precipitating factors in a crime, whether the act was intentional and if so to what degree. They may well also consider the motives of the criminal (motive and intention are not at all the same thing) on deciding on what they consider an appropriate punishment. They will be flexible sentencers while deterrence advocates and retributionists cannot consistently support flexible sentencing.
Environmentalists share the beliefs of the intentionalists but go much further. They consider the background of the criminal, their psychological state, place great emphasis on motive and are always considering mitigating circumstances.
Both intentionalists and environmentalists want to know what caused the criminal act whereas to both retributionists and deterrence advocates that is irrelevant. Retributionists and deterrence supporters claim that an intentionalist or environmentalist approach leads to unfair and arbitrary justice because some people are punished more severely than others for the same crime. Intentionalists and environmentalists claim that the retributionist or deterrent approach leads to unfair and arbitrary justice because it is a 'one size fits all' approach that is unreasonably inflexible.
The discussion is often muddled both by the frequent confusion of motive and intention and, more fundamentally, by (particularly when the issue of capital punishment is being discussed) the use of a scattergun approach and the marrying together of morally incompatible positions.
Let me try and explain the problem in simple terms. What is the purpose of punishment? If it is retribution then all other considerations are irrelevant. Executing a murderer is no different from fining a speeding motorist. To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, a crime is a crime is a crime.
Now if the purpose of punishment is deterrence then the whole focus of the law is on discouraging others from emulating those actions. A murderer is executed in order to prevent future murders.
Now many people - both pro and anti (though perhaps this mistake is more common among pros) - often try and conflate the two positions together. They argue both that capital punishment is a deterrent and that is the appropriate punishment for murder.
What they do not seem to realise is that the two positions are morally and logically incompatible. Either the effect of the punishment - its deterrence - is important or the reason for it - retribution - is important. Logically the punishment can only be awarded on the basis of one or other of these beliefs and NOT of both.
In practice the law has always operated on a retributionist model rather than any belief in deterrence. All the available evidence, both historical and contemporary, has shown a singular LACK of credibility in terms of any form of punishment acting as a deterrent to crime.
Retributionism has been much criticised in recent years but it is a far more defensible position than deterrence on moral, logical and factual grounds. Surely all forms of punishment must in essence be at least partly retributive in their intention?
Where environmentalists and intentionalists score is not that they do not accept the retributive aspect of punishment but they believe that the punishment has to be tailored to individual circumstances.
But it is hard from both a moral and logical viewpoint to see how punishment can ultimately rest upon any other sanction than retribution, or, as the more excitable antis like to refer to it, revenge.
Like most theories of crime and punishment every position has strengths and weaknesses but I hope that I have helped to clarify some of the grey areas in this controversial subject.
At the seaside -by Linda Marshall
The seagulls plunge through the air with their harsh music, demanding food
our words fall like soft snowflakes or gently lap the sand that resists the sea but always loses its battle
moving on from this familiar scene in search of some unspecified promise we dance our voluble way along the pier, the light merging into a prism of gold as we attempt to find the sure-footedness of a ballerina,
yet more resemble the stumbling, halting steps of one long buried beneath a rockfall emerging suddenly into unexpected light
but laughter at last, the faces of those I love all around me, bathing me with the delicious oil of their affection, cradling me as the sea breeze strokes me towards a correlation, perhaps even a solution, all of that seaspray touching me with the certainty of a volcano as I smile confidently, the weather in my heart bright sunshine
_______________________________________________________________________________ How awful it is that the right wing encourages people to hatefully parrot that the poor are just lazy and we should not aid them because 'they're robbing the system'. What horrible excuses for human beings -with all their money, that they GOT by robbing the system themselves - to deflect blame, by suggesting we scorn and deny rather than help and encourage and bring back up those who aren't making it. I suggest don't just repeat the mean-spirited bilk. Go help someone instead. Your heart will thank you for it. -Hunny_______________________________________________________________________________ Some are just an individual having fun, some have high production values, but there is internet-born TV!
This month: a thought-provoking series called ... DISCOVERING RELIGIONAdmittedly, I've only watched the first episode - but it managed to keep my attention for ten uninterrupted minutes, which is not easy to do. The reviewer said... "Whether you're religious or not, this show will hook you from the very first second. You won't believe the show's host, Andy Zohoury, is not a professional. He will mesmerize you with his deep, mellifluous voice and continuous stream of poetic philosophizing -- loaded with esoteric facts. Zohoury, a medical student, has been producing the show in his free time since 2009. At the end of the first episode, he states his goal for the program: "If god is both the first-hand author of the universe and second-hand author of the scriptures, it is my hope in investigation of the two to provide an accurate and unbiased way to perceive reality, regardless of one's sense of spirituality or religious affiliation." ______________________________________________________________________________Did you know? When Taco Bell attempted to enter Mexico, their food was labeled "Authentic American Food".
"Percussive maintenance" is the term for hitting something until it works.
Money isn't made out of paper, it's made out of cotton.
_______________________________________________________________________________ MEMBER INTERVIEW ___________________________________________Our Member of The MonthSadie1263 Congratulations Sadie. We love you! ___________________________________________Tell us how you discovered the internet, and a brief history of where you've been online. I started out researching crime stories on what was Crime TV......on one of the stories there was a link to chat about it. From there I found the chat room. Found a friend there that invited me to some of the boards he was on. Since then I have gotten away from the large boards.....too many trolls and arguing and am now a member of just three. Tell us about your family?I have been married for 25 years, have 3 grown sons, one daughter in law, one grandson and nine dogs. Tell us some favorite advice or lesson you got along the way?We can’t ever change other people; we can only change how we respond to them. Hobbies?I enjoy cross stitching, cooking, and playing with dogs....I love swimming and the ocean. I also love to watch tennis. Do you play sports?I try......but grace and coordination are not high on my list of accomplishments.....so I wouldn't pick me for any teams!! But I don't mind going out and making an ass out of myself and having a good time!!! Did you get into trouble as a kid? Any stories you can tell?Oh gosh.....I was a horrible child and an even worse teenager. My sisters are nine and six years older than me.......I regularly got in fights with the older one.....I once locked her in a closet for 3 hours. Do you like to cook? I really enjoy cooking......not a gourmet chef or anything but I enjoy trying new recipes and I love having all the family together for meals. Your favorite material possession(s)?Hmmm.....that would be a tough one for me......I have a lot of things that I enjoy but in the end they are just things......If the house was on fire as long as everyone, including all the pups were out.......things would be fine. What type of entertainment do you like best? I love crime solving shows on tv.......love scary and silly movies. There is no rhyme or reason to my choice of music.....love all sorts.....as long as it is not rap or country!!! Do you have any funny or strange tales to tell, things that happened along the way?I had a 2000 Chevy Blazer that was totaled in a two car accident. No one was in either car......nor was anyone driving either car. If there is one thing you are absolutely passionate about, what is it?Animals......love them.....will run out in a busy road to save a turtle.....I want to volunteer at an animal shelter here....but my husband is afraid that I would bring every animal home......the majority of our pets now are rescues. __________________________________________________________________ By Donna
Married, with three children - a son and two daughters - Donna works part-time as an office cleaner, loves the countryside, West Ham United Football Club and politics. In her spare time she writes as much as she can as well as running three yahoo groups, four blogs and two other forums!
Political correctness
People tend to assume this is just a problem for people on the left but it's as big a problem on the right. There's a political correctness on both sides but it just takes slightly different forms.
For instance on the right you won't hear anyone saying that maybe SOME immigration is a GOOD thing; that maybe there are good aspects of the EU; that maybe most people on welfare are not workshy; that maybe most people claiming sickness benefit are not malingerers; and so on. Just as on the left you won't hear anyone saying that maybe some restriction on immigration is necessary, maybe the EU is not overall a positive institution, that maybe some people on welfare are workshy, maybe some of those claiming incapacity are malingering and so on. To an objective person obviously there are true and false aspects to both those ideas but because of the rigid mindset of the PC mob on left and right they are just not capable of thinking independently.
Let's start by looking at the history of the term which didn't even exist till about the 1970s.
What brought it on? Mostly a well-meaning attitude of wanting to treat people who were seen as disadvantaged groups in a better way. Blacks, women and gays were the main groups they wanted to help.
Not everything about the PC idea was bad or is bad even now. To me it's obvious that discriminating against people or insulting them just because of the colour of their skin, their sex or the fact they prefer their own gender is just stupid and wrong.
But then of course it started going off into tangents and getting weird and oppressive. It's one thing disapproving of people using words like 'black person,' 'yid,' or 'Asian person' and similar but it's not a good enough reason to lock up people for talking like that.
And a whole new language and 'philosophy' evolved to extend PC ideas beyond what had once been reasonable boundaries. Words like sexism, sexist body language, heterosexism, tokenism, positive discrimination and homophobia were invented and used as insults to bash anyone disagreeing with extending the PC influence.
It suddenly became alright to blacks to use words like honky or ofay or whitey but not for whites to use words like black person, coon, sambo or similar. To me the black on white insults are just as racist as the white on black ones but the PC mob excuses them as being an oppressed minority!
Of course any decent person admits that slavery was wrong but the blacks have been milking it ever since to try and get guilty money and special favours and general moaning at the world as an excuse for their own failure.
Over the last ten years or so a lot of people have called on Britain and America to apologise for the slave trade and slavery. I haven't heard anyone calling for black governments to apologise for THEIR part in slavery and the slave trade. Who do they think was selling the Africans in the first place? Their own leaders and their own people, of course So let's have some honesty and humility!
In the same way, feminists spoke and wrote about men in the same tone of voice and with the same mythological structures as Nazis did about Jews. With the worst offenders like Andrea Dworkin and Catherine McKinnon, it's like reading a page of 'Mein Kampf' with men taking the place of Jews.
These women really believe there's a vast patriarchal conspiracy, that society in the West is dominated by 'patriarchal attitudes,' that all men are either predatory rapists or preparing to be, that all women are victims, that 50% of women are being subjected to domestic violence regularly, that 25% of women are rape victims, that women are superior to men, that men are virtually subhuman, that women never lie about rape or domestic violence, that domestic violence only happens to women - the list of distasteful fantasies goes on!
Then there's the double standard feminists have where in their eyes they're entitled to special treatment and that what's sauce for the goose is definitely not sauce for the gander. They've made the whole area of 'gender etiquette' a confusing minefield where the only 'rule' seems to be that whatever a man does is wrong.
So for instance these feminists say that it's 'patronising' and 'disrespectful to women' if a man holds the door open for them, offers them his seat on public transport or offers to help her if she's carrying something heavy. Only someone who lives in the paranoid delusional universe of the rad fems could possibly look on acts of kindness and consideration as being patronising or rude.
For what it's worth I hold doors open for both men and women and so does my husband. I've given up my seat for pregnant or elderly women and for elderly or disabled men. I'm grateful if someone helped me with heavy luggage and I've also helped both men and women who are obviously struggling. It's not a gender thing in my opinion; it's behaving like a decent human being.
So let's try and keep the good side of political correctness - respect, consideration, trying to help people who genuinely are oppressed or disadvantaged, and let's tell the loopy PC fascists to jump in the lake!
____________________________________________________________________________________ Gibby's CornerOur Gibby is a retail manager who wants to one day run her own business. Born in France, she has two boys, loves to run, loves pizza, has one sister ("My sister inspires me, she beat cancer 3 years ago, she is my hero."), her favorite word is bootielicious, her favorite song is Elvis's 'Burnin' Love', and she prefers the city to live ("I would be too bored living in the country , I need to be close to shops, clothes shops in particular and I need the night life a city provides."). Gibby runs her own board: Gibby's Place. Check it out, it's a lot of fun!
"The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time" by Mark Haddon A book review
This book is classed as a children's book but it has become a popular one with adults too. It is one of those books that you can pick up and read quickly , I read it over 2 days , you don't want to put it down and it is so easy to read. Haddon writes in a very direct, straight forward way. Here is the blurb from Amazon:"Winner of the Whitbread Book of the Year
'Outstanding...a stunningly good read' Observer
'Mark Haddon's portrayal of an emotionally dissociated mind is a superb achievement... Wise and bleakly funny' Ian McEwan
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time is a murder mystery novel like no other. The detective, and narrator, is Christopher Boone. Christopher is fifteen and has Asperger's Syndrome. He knows a very great deal about maths and very little about human beings. He loves lists, patterns and the truth. He hates the colours yellow and brown and being touched. He has never gone further than the end of the road on his own, but when he finds a neighbour's dog murdered he sets out on a terrifying journey which will turn his whole world upside down."
I was first attracted to this book by its unusual title, and then when I saw the subject matter I wanted to know more. As the story progresses Christopher finds out more clues that link to real life issues that are going on in Christopher's life and involve his family. It was interesting to learn how people with Asperger's Syndrome have this affinity with numbers and when Christopher becomes stressed or upset he resorts to solving number puzzles or working out number problems in his head for example he knows all the prime numbers up to 7507 and can work out the cube of 227 in his head!It is a touching story and one that you won't forget easily once you have finished reading it. I would rate it 10/10
Bits & Pieces CONTRIBUTING STAFF
Big Lin MikeMarshall Sadie1263 Hunny Donna Gibby
__________________________________________________ If you have anything you'd like to submit for next month's issue, send it to Hunny (click). Copyrighted material re-printed herein is with permission, or for purpose of review or education, by allowance - in the U.S. - of the Fair Use Act. We do not claim ownership of said material. Our writers do claim copyright of their own material, by-lined or not. To contact the Editor, click here.
|
|
|
Post by Hunny on Aug 21, 2013 14:19:58 GMT
Great contributions all, as usual. You make a really good magazine together, and for a whole year now. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Aug 21, 2013 21:17:01 GMT
Thank you for all your hard work, Hunny. Without you none of this would be possible!
|
|
|
Post by heeeeey on Aug 22, 2013 1:03:41 GMT
Love the magazine! Really enjoyed reading, and I LOVE that pick of the horse and cat.
|
|