She couldn't even die during the school term, to give Aussies a meaningful day off. but somehow she lived a life of "service".
I am going to be away and the f'n public holiday better not stuff up any plans.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Monarch Discussion
- Thread starter spook
- Start date
I am going to be away and the f'n public holiday better not stuff up any plans.
What annoys the crap out of me is people calling for a republic is somehow disrespectful to the queen. I mean, why should I be respectful in the first place? Someone who is born into privilege and entitlement get to rule over me, how can I respect that? Now could never be a better time call for a republic.
The only thing I do acknowledge is that our head of state died and its something as a country we should acknowledge… so I support the day of mourning. I just don’t support the idea of a foreign monarch being our head of state. Its time to change this,
probably going off tangent here, but I am of the view that atheism goes hand in hand with left wing ideology. That’s not to say right wingers can’t be atheists or lefties can't be religious. But as a general rule, atheists tend to be more progressive/anti-establishment and religious types tend to be more conservative.
The only thing I do acknowledge is that our head of state died and its something as a country we should acknowledge… so I support the day of mourning. I just don’t support the idea of a foreign monarch being our head of state. Its time to change this,
probably going off tangent here, but I am of the view that atheism goes hand in hand with left wing ideology. That’s not to say right wingers can’t be atheists or lefties can't be religious. But as a general rule, atheists tend to be more progressive/anti-establishment and religious types tend to be more conservative.
Won't finish until her funeral on my 56th birthday next Monday.......as Sam Newman would day "sh!t I'm old"
Dunno. According to The Suburban Footballer - Tom Siegert
"The Queen did some great things in her time but getting us the Thursday before the AFL Grand Final off work would be right up there."
In general terms, yes - but it's the old correlation doesn't equal causality trope Ian.
There's a clear counter-example as well - in Southern (US) Baptist churches there is a strong element of social justice/woke-ism that is growing but also causing consternation in the more conservative parts of the church. You have to remember that most churches - even the conservative Catholics - have always had a strong social justice element - Christ always wanted to save our eternal souls, but he also wanted us to help each other. This easily aligns with many "woke" ideas.
Here's an (arch) conservative Christian take on how wokeism in the church is a threat to the church. https://thefederalist.com/2021/06/0...y-is-the-greatest-threat-to-christians-today/
The line that Panthera takes that wokeism is a religion that is promoted by "militant atheists" is just nonsense.
Anyhow Morrison's name and reputation will always be tarnished, in my eyes anyway.
Last edited:
How *smile* ridiculous is it that humans just stand by and accept this old tosspot being anointed as the 'King' of a great many people.
Come and kiss this twisted old sexual deviant on the ring, he's better than you and you need to worship him.
It's moments like these I think there is merit in the idea of rounding up human kinds best and brightest, executing the rest and just starting the human race again. We are *smile*.
Come and kiss this twisted old sexual deviant on the ring, he's better than you and you need to worship him.
It's moments like these I think there is merit in the idea of rounding up human kinds best and brightest, executing the rest and just starting the human race again. We are *smile*.
Totally misrepresented me. I didn't say that atheists promote it. Dawkins is a big critic of a lot of the modern social justice activism that he sees as going down the rabbit hole of quasi-religion. The so called 'woke folk' of social media aren't actually big fans of Dawkins anymore. Perhaps because he dissed their new 'religion'. Or it could just be his irredeemable 'original sin' of being an older white, heterosexual male with an opinion that they detest him. Maybe a combination of both.
I said that the idea promoted by some outspoken atheists, that if we remove legacy religion, suddenly the world is a type of post god utopia ruled by rational, reasoned thought and logic - disappointingly - doesn't appear to be eventuating. People find belief systems that manifest into quasi-religion to fill the void.
Totalitarian states replace religion with cult like veneration of dictators and their close associates. Khmer Rouge Cambodia, Stalin's Soviet Union, North Korea for example. And in so called 'woke culture,' the veneration and reverence of victim status, that is at the heart of a lot of modern social justice activism, is along this same lines.
Nothing wrong with the concepts of social justice per se. Any decent person would tell you that. It's when it delves into the realms of irrational veneration, creating it's own unquestionable dogma and in turn, instituting it's own secular blasphemy laws you are delving into insane quackery.
Last edited:
Shows the quality of the Royal family when the bloke who wants to be a tampon and was good mates with Jimmy Savile is only the second biggest deviant. No wonder they rule us.
Shows the quality of the Royal family when the bloke who wants to be a tampon and was good mates with Jimmy Savile is only the second biggest deviant. No wonder they rule us.
Don't get me wrong - I despise the monarchy, but the tampon thing was just some stupid banter he had with Camilla in private. Jimmy Saville - ok, a pedophile criminal, but was Charles part of all that? Did he know about it? If he did that that's a very problematic to say the least. You'd think the royal family would have good backgrounding done on their friends/acquaintances and it's impossible to believe that highups in the BBC and the establishment didn't know about Saville's activities.
None of that really makes Charles a sexual deviant though.
I don't disagree. Labor has catholic roots as well. If Jesus lived today, no doubt he would be considered a woke, anti-establishment socialist (the religious right fail to see the irony). But we all know that the powerful (eg. Kings from past empires) used religion to control the masses. And how well did it work? Still works in many countries today.
I see Dawkins as a pragmatist. The gender identity thing for example. The science tells us XX = female and XY = male, and no reassignment surgery can change that. I mean, essentially he’s right according to the science. But if identifying as someone else (or neutral) makes a person happy, then WTF is the problem?
I laugh when people use claim totalitarian regimes mentioned ^^^ were atheist. Not one of these regimes have claimed their cause was done in the name of science or atheism. In fact, they were generally anti-science.
But that's not what I said at all Ian. I said that in the absence of religion, societies replace legacy religions with what amounts to a post god religion. It's like it's an innate human condition that we are unable to break the shackles of. That's my argument. I'm not talking of these regimes as worshiping atheism. Although atheism can be used as a tool for a period, to purge a society of religion, to then replace it with what I refer to as post god religions.
Last edited:
Apologies for the misquote PT, I stand corrected.
I can't think of too many outspoken atheists who actually claim that a utopia would arise once religion is banished. Sam Harris maybe? But not really. Dawkins? No, he doesn't say that. Carl Sagan? Nope.
On an individual basis in personal relationships, of course, no issue. But it does deeper than that. It steps over the line and becomes a problem if the institutions that we rely on to uphold our society actively subvert the central tenets of objective truth, logic and rational thought in order to accommodate such an ideology. And because much of what is espoused goes against objective reason, it ties itself in knots of contradictions trying to argue it's case. Hence, like religions of the middle ages, it ends up protecting itself by enshrining unquestionable dogma, which is enforced by uncompromising zealotry and the creep towards what amounts to secular heresy laws.
This is where Dawkins is very careful with his words and principles, so as to not be a hypocrite. He believes a society should be ruled by objective fact, reason, logic. Essentially (as you infer) pragmatism. Where he buts heads with the social justice movement (the so called 'woke' movement) is he sees them going down the same rabbit hole as religion by departing from logic, reason and rational thought for forming a world view. And the fact that the so called 'progressive' or 'woke' establishment intertwines itself with atheism - which is a concept built on logic, rational thought and objective reason - opens it up to all sorts of knots of contradiction.
Last edited:
I'm coming at it more from observations of people on the most 'progressive' fringes of politics who espouse their atheism. But actual fact don't actually understand what atheism is. For them it's more just a tool to usurp legacy institutions of western society. Hence their blind spots around Islam. And descent into insane quackery of their social justice (so called 'woke') zealotry.
At some point the Windsors were concerned that Charles would turn out like his uncle. I think he was more influenced by his godfather (Louis Mountbatten). Andrew may have inadvertently been more like Uncle Eddie.
