Although I largely disagree with shinyblurry, I will concede that if we were not a civilized society, people with either physical or mental disabilities would be at a much greater risk of death. MOST new genetic mutations are deleterious, that is to say, they cause harm to their respective owners. And while I fully understand that Darwin didn't coin the phrase, it doesn't change the idea that some people are vexed by their genes in one way or another. However, I DO agree that writing said people off as "genetic baggage," as he put it, is callus and unkind. We could just as easily say that "love" is simply a chemical reaction in the brain, and can be written off as such. But it's the value we place on those feelings, the choices we make to assign it meaning, much like the choices we make to care for one another, that give our own lives meaning and purpose. In reply to this comment by peggedbea: you don't know what i do for a living, so i'll skip the part where i yell at you passionately kids with downs/people with disabilities/kids with syndromes. furthermore, survival of the fittest was not a phrase coined by darwin. and did not originally apply to the evolution of organisms. applying it to people with genetic disorders further offends me.
Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.
Ghost Mice song rocks!
ack! you're a master of disguise. the one that made me laugh had a baby alligator in it, though this one is excellent as well. good at striking fear into hearts In reply to this comment by peggedbea: hehe. which one? i've changed it 3 times! In reply to this comment by residue: your avatar made me giggle
Thanks for rechartering PB - you're good to go. Cheers!
your avatar made me giggle
He can wait, he made you wait 2000 years! In reply to this comment by peggedbea: shit! it's this saturday?? i was planning on being raptured. In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK: http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/158194 For the Doug Stanhope event!
http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/158194 For the Doug Stanhope event!
Fracking is for punk mofos! Recognize!
"sneeze and bleed and eat cereal thats all i ever do anymore" SEXY!
Well, I'll have to disagree with you here. God isn't a myth. At the very least, God is an idea, and a philosophical conception. Let me ask you this, since you're science minded..Is the postulate of a creation really that irrational? Why is it so unlikely that it was? You may not agree with a particular account of creation, but just the basic question of how the Universe got here..why does creation seem unlikely to you? I mean, for a species that hasn't even left its backyard, don't you think its a bit premature to rule that out? That in itself is bad science..as well as the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support that view. Only a lack of evidence is pointed to, but as William Lane Craig says, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Yes, religion has been misused. Evil people can abuse anything, especially Gods authority. Personally, I don't agree with anything the catholic church has done. If they are Christians, it's only by the skin of their teeth. There have also been evil atheists, like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot..and others who slaughtered tens of millions of their own people. It's human nature that is the problem here. I know you don't believe in a spiritual reality, so you just don't get this video at all. It's not about the mans insight, he is describing an experience. This video is kind of chopped up..if you really want to evaluate it, watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9f2n0xPZ3k ..it's an interview which is much more indepth and makes some things clear which are not apparent. For instance, when he goes to hell..he experiences being there for an eternity..not just a few minutes like it seems in the video..he describes being there for a vast amount of time, being self-aware the entire time and vividly recounting the thoughts that he had. He also goes into supreme detail of the experience he had with Jesus in going over his entire life, and secrets God revealed to him..not only that but he spends perhaps months with Jesus learning from Him and the angels in a question and answer session. When he finally gets back, it turns out he was only unconscious for a moment..so all that time that had passed only equaled a moments time here. Plenty about this experience is unique, and intriguing. I would humbly submit that it is your lack of curiousity about the subject, mixed with the judgements you already have, that prevent you from seeing that. In reply to this comment by peggedbea: there is a bias, all communities have a common ground. i just don't think the bias is against people of faith as much as it is a bias in favor of empirical evidence and against perpetuating bad science and myths. all myths, not just ones of a religious nature. and all bad science, not just creationism. i generally don't upvote atheist videos either. because they're often loaded with self righteousness and bad arguments. i do however, upvote good science and i do upvote thoughtful insight. i just didn't find this mans insight particularly insightful or original. people often have religious experiences when facing death, i have absolutely nothing against that. and i can understand the need to believe in an afterlife. i think spirituality is deeply personal and deeply powerful and deeply beautiful and fascinating. i think religion, however, is a massive power game and i think power breeds massive corruption... see the history of the catholic church and the influence of the christian right on todays political landscape.
No problem. I can see how it might have been interperted as demeaning, in which case I would have deserved it. Regarding the bias, I know this is a community made up of mostly atheists. If you were posting on a Christian site, I'm sure you would see the bias there too. It's human nature I suppose. I don't upvote atheist videos so I guess I am a hypocrite. I'll just shut up about it..I think it's attracting more downvotes. In reply to this comment by peggedbea: Oh, alright then. I retract my "you're a douchebag" comments. I forgot about my avatar. good day to you. In reply to this comment by shinyblurry: Say what? I was just commenting on your avatar..trying to defuse the tension. I didn't mean it that way and I'm sorry if I offended you. I didn't even know if you were female.
Wasn't worried, nor did I take it personally .... it is just my nature to say -- hey, I didn't say that, you misunderstood. Just like to keep the record straight, is all. I'll eventually learn to just let misunderstandings be, it seems to provoke more confusion than trying to straighten things out. PSAs. There is a whole 'nother topic.... Kisses! In reply to this comment by peggedbea: hey lady, i didn't take your comment personally if that's what you were worried about. i always feel like most of the PSA campaigns i see are going about it all wrong. for instance, i would like to see an anti-drug PSA that's more about human rights and the gross exploitation of the third world thats inherent in the production of hard drugs. I did a ton of drugs as a very young kid, and knowing the kind of kid i was, i would never ever have shoved coke up my nose if i knew how it was made, who made it, how it gets here and how many people died over it on its way to my blood stream. i think that kind of thing would be even more relevant now that the cartel war in mexico is all over the news. the typical 1990 "drugs are bad, mkay?" commercials that were on when i was kid seem completely impotent. sure, maybe PSA's don't hurt. but i think a very serious cost/benefit analysis should be made.... is this making enough bang for the buck?? is there another, more productive, method of outreach we could use these funds for?? maybe keep the PSA because it undoubtedly gets the message out to the greatest amount of people, but maybe the PSA could be about signs of poorly managed stress and the importance of coping skills and where to get the tools to deal with out of control feelings. or some shit. i don't know. just my 2 cents. In reply to this comment by bareboards2: Um, my comment was about the 30% who grow up to be abusers. It wasn't directed to the 70% who didn't. And you're right, there are other things to do. The PSA is just a tactic. One tactic. It certainly doesn't hurt, and it might help. In reply to this comment by peggedbea: The idea that the abused grow into abusers is kind of.... meh.... Only about 30% of people who were abused as children grow up to abuse their own kids. Because 70% of us grow up to see ourselves in the eyes of every frightened child ever. Abuse is about anger and it's about power. It's the inability to cope with stress or feelings of powerlessness. It's rampant in areas of high poverty, but certainly isn't non-existant in the homes of the wealthy. Sure, I like the IDEA of PSA's.. but generally find them targeting the wrong side of the issue. This PSA targets the symptom, but not the root. If the root cause of domestic violence is power and an inability to cope with stress productively, then why can't we have a campaign to teach positive coping skills and educate little people and big people and even bigger people how to productively manage stress and take control of their own lives? ..... oh, right.. because that might actually EMPOWER people instead of just scare and depress them.
Not yet a member? No problem!Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?Recover it now.
Check your email for a verification code and enter it below.Don't close this box or you must fill out this form again.
Already signed up?Log in now.
Remember your password?Log in now.