?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Tweet 1: https://twitter.com/#!/LauraShezBar/status/180107232539709441

Tweet 2 with translation from the Gay Study Bible by A. Nyland: https://twitter.com/#!/chemoelectric/status/180113416999010305

This is a quotation from Paul or pseudo-Paul (a forger, of Paul’s school after his death, using the name of Paul for authority).
Consider that passage that male chauvinist pig fundie Christians read as saying that a husband is his wife’s head=‘boss’ and that she should ‘submit’ to him.

Read in Greek of the period, apparently, and making a whole lot more sense, the passage says that the man is the head=‘source’ of the woman (an allusion to Adam and Eve) and that she should support him. We still actually have that figurative meaning of ‘head’ in English, as in ‘headwaters’; and a head needs support, doesn’t it?

The meaning is totally changed by the mistranslation.
If Richard Dawkins wishes to write a second book – the pair can be in volume, of course, as a volume divided into parts – then that’s fine. The result would be:

Part I. God is not a leprechaun.

Part II. You biblical ‘literalists’ are dead wrong.

Written well, that would be a good read. Unfortunately, Dawkins is an awful writer and I, personally, wouldn’t bother. :)

Dawkins promotes shallow study

It is ironic that Richard Dawkins, who is a famous scientist, is on record promoting shallowness of study of religion in atheist apologetics (let that notion sink in). On the other hand, in the process he has revealed his real thesis, which he buries under such titles as ‘The God Delusion’ and with page after page of discourse on natural selection, which really has nothing to do with the topic. Dawkins’s thesis is:

God is not a leprechaun (or anything like that).

It’s a good thesis, worth investigating, so one wonders why he buries it.

(Discourse on natural selection does serve the purpose of arguing with vicious evangelical fundie chauvinist pig types, which atheist apologists love to do. When they gain converts, the converts are pre-trained in the techniques! See, for instance, John Loftus – who, by the way, is much more readable than Dawkins, whose turgid writing I can barely scan through before tossing it aside.)
Just how many of my fellow atheists have read in the Bible that a rapist must marry his victim, without it occurring to them, or finding through investigation of the Jewish commandments, that this means he cannot get out of it if she demands marriage? In other words, he is trapped, not she.

They could have a case (although one with different content) if they argued that, in the patriarchal society, the victim’s father could make the decision, but they don’t bother. Instead they leap into attack as soon as they think they have a ‘gotcha’. They read the Bible like the vicious evangelical fundie chauvinist pigs they love to argue with.

(Similar things pertain to the New Testament, though in that case the trouble is abetted by terrible mistranslations of the Greek, and reliance on printed words rather than oral tradition.)

The way it is

I am disabled, collect Social Security, and am insured by Medicare. My wife is disabled and retired, collects Social Security, and is insured by Medicare. My stepdaughter is a ward of the state, lives in a group home, is non-verbal, spends her weekdays at a habilitation center, is insured by Medicaid and Medicare, and is very vulnerable. My father-in-law is very elderly, requires round the clock care, and has long had developers trying to push him off his property. This is America, folks.

If liberals insist on screaming about and nitpicking about and insisting on the pressing importance of public options, drones, Bradley Manning, Guantanamo, whether Obama says he’s for ‘gay marriage’, reform agendas, DINOs, Blue Dogs, etc., etc., America cannot be faulted for cursing the word ‘liberal’ as a synonym for ‘doesn’t give a shit about me.’ At least the current Republican presidential candidates come right out and say it: ‘How am I supposed to pay for college?’ asks the questioner; ‘As if I give a shit, and BTW, Missy, if you borrow that money you’d better pay it back in full, with interest!’ answers Mitt Romney. Of course we Democrats have a presidential candidate who gives a real answer; that’s how he got to be president in the first place, despite being supported by people who protested his inauguration, all over the radio no less, about stuff no one in Peoria with a Down’s syndrome child and parents in a nursing home gives a rat’s ass about. That’s how Bill Clinton got elected, and not doing it nearly as well is part of how other Democrats managed not to get elected.

(I can’t help noticing that Al Gore is much better screaming outrage at the Bush Administration’s national security policy than at giving the impression he’s thinking about your life problems.)

Launch an Apple

Apple likes dramatic launches, so I’m thinking of starting a ‘Launch an Apple’ program. I’m taking designs for launchers ... trebuchets, catapults, etc.

Probably the devices will work about as well afterwards as they did before, and I do not mean in the sense that my HP-11C still works.

Lunacy, Part II

I don’t pay attention, and so did not expect to have Ed Boyd, not long ago left dangling by the demise of Flook, as the new guitar player for Lúnasa. I like it; as one would expect from experience with Flook, Ed makes the group punchier (for want of a better word).

Kevin Crawford gab involved his family a lot this time, and was more or less safe for work.

Latest Month

June 2016
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Comments

  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:22
    In case it matters, the most recent confirmed lahar is about 500 years ago, but there were mixed reports of eruptions in the late 1800s.
  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:20
    Pretty low until you jinxed them.
  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:01
    What would you estimate the odds to be of it happening in the next 200 years?
  • 27 Jan 2014, 06:22
    Thinking about it further, I think I now understand. You're saying the WSJ is being antisemitic, not the people they're quoting.

    I don't think they'd listen to it coming from us, but a…
  • 27 Jan 2014, 06:09
    I'm not noticing it either. Seems to me they *are* being assholes to Jews, but only moreso than anybody else if we happen to be in the way. I think that's gneral-purpose assholery, not…
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel