I'm not saying that Glenn Beck did or didn't rape and murder a girl in 1990, I'm not saying that.

I'm a person who doesn't see comedy as something that has boundaries and taboos. I'd also add that everything has a place and you have to find an environment that is receptive to your kind of humor. All said and done, I don't think think anyone should have been fired for what they said. Reprimanded? Sure, but to lose a job over something like this is just silly.

I just like how they throw in gerrymandering at the end. They tried to do this in Utah last year to keep democratic winners at a minimum.

If you wish to know why: Salt Lake City, it's northern neighbor city, Ogden, and the city that had most of the Olympic events, Park City, all vote democratic. However, the farther south of Salt lake City the more republicans you find. The only reason they vote Republican is for some reason we've yet to figure out in the main valley is why they vote Republican. These are typically good 'ol church going or listening to Rush/Beck type people and have a LARGE tendency of group-think and block voting.

In other words we always get screwed over (even in the suburbs) by this demographic. It's the same demographic that screwed over California on prop 8. The block or: "your religion wants you to vote this way" (which I see as a huge state versus religion debate that should be brought up) works VERY well. It's very tiring to watch it happen in EVERY election, but people are getting smarter as the cities, specifically, along the Wasatch Front (the western edge of the Rocky Mountains end in a huge corridor that runs N/S from southern Idaho to Southern Utah--close to Las Vegas) that are natural valleys that form every 40-70 miles and end with the mountain ranges on both sides "cutting off" the metropolitan areas forming about six major areas, and then some cities off to the east of the mountains (not many, some of them are: Moab, Tooele, Price, Vernal, etc...). Most of the populace lives in this area and it distinctly follows I-15 which runs straight into Los Angeles.

Strangely enough the more people that live in more urban type environments with lots of people, these people tend to have a democratic or atleast a very moderate republican stance. The smaller cities ALL vote republican. In other words, Salt Lake City is held hostage by Utah's small cities and developing cities along the I-15 corridor or cities that are not located next to I-15 and of course Utah County, just south of Salt Lake City or Salt Lake County (which has many cities, Provo being the biggest; but more importantly it has BYU; hence it's almost inane voting standard).

The politicians wish to divide Salt Lake County into an area unable to vote democratically as they would group us with just enough "typical republican voters" as to make our votes worthless. This got shot down last year, but I have no idea about this year. With our new law passed I can't even look to see if they're trying to do this--which is probably why they wanted to do this anyway.

Lots of these politicians were going to get kicked out in the next election cycle, some did. But, they got replaced by a worse setup: Tea Party or Glenn Beck followers that hide behind the all magical (R). The populace loving their block voting voted these idiots right in and of course the laws this year are inane. Mike Lee would be an example of this.

It should also be known that the LDS/Mormon church owns quite a bit of media in and around this area (the biggest is called Deseret, but there are a few more). The reach of this media reaches a lot of areas in the Intermountain West or Intermountain Region (which is HUGE): Utah, Wyoming, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, California, Oregon, Idaho and Washington--there may be more, but the largest stronghold is Wyoming, Utah, California (around the Sierra Nevada and north), and Idaho. KSL (at KSL.com) is the LDS churches right arm in Utah and in the regions I listed above; it's also the churches direct feed to their semi-annual conferences that are followed by members voraciously. Many people consider coming to Utah to see the conferences much like a pilgrimage you see in other religions.

Wyoming and Idaho, as they do not have major news/media stations (or atleast in the past they didn't-this is still true for western Wyoming), KSL fills that void, as the church and the members have more than enough money to make this a very far reaching media outlet for the Intermountain West/Region. KSL plays it's role well when it comes to group-think and spreading the ideas created by the church and even LDS politicians, along with the churches run newspaper "Deseret News"; with the "satanic" or democratic/moderately conservative and more level headed news publication provided by "The Salt Lake Tribune" which is a very good newspaper. Even if you're a republican and not LDS, you'll find it to be a good source for news for anyone that isn't a "Republican Mormon"; they are very centrist in their opinions and provide a VERY MUCH needed counterweight in the region. KSL tends to follow Deseret News or likewise, Deseret News follows KSL--obviously following the LDS churches thoughts and opinions on subjects. Though they tend to do fine as long as they're ONLY reporting the news, like a breaking story...

Anything that has time to become an op-ed becomes an obvious religiously slanted opinion and more annoyingly, lately (the last decade or so), it has a politically charged republican view. Recently some Tea Party views have crept in. The LDS church doesn't seem to like or hate the tea party and I've never heard an opinion making their stance on that issue official at any level; but, at the same time I know a lot of Mormons that love Glenn Beck and Rush, so that situation to me seems "fuzzy" at best. As the church has never reprimanded Glenn Beck (as far as I know). If I said some of the same things that Glenn Beck has, would most certainly be incurring a disfellowship or even a excommunication. I'm an atheist, so if I made that known I'd certainly get the excommunication. But, you may need to go to the meeting to see that happen; which I wouldn't--I'd have to ask someone more "in the know" to get an idea what would happen as even when I was a Mormon no one ever talked about these meetings, they were taboo. Anyway...

Typically the Intermountain West or Intermountain Region is the "Mountain States or the Sierra Nevada, Cascades, and the Rocky Mountains" and the "Great Basin or Intermontane Plateaus and Colorado Plateau". Which is VERY large.

So that is my experience with church vs. state and the members of said faith trying to hoodwink others by using gerrymandering or other unscrupulous ways to change the vote in their favor. These people should be the excommunicated ones... But, since they aren't it makes me think MUCH less of the LDS church (but, since Proposition 8 I've had little faith that they were anything, but another religion trying to force people to see things there way--there is no middle ground). So if you live in "The Intermountain West", which is a huge region, make sure you find out who is behind your media. You may be surprised.

I think that should cover everything I wanted to say.

Kind-of an aside:
It is extremely challenging in this country to simplify goals towards combating intractable poverty (or improving healthcare, etc.) and then maintain sight of those simple goals through the processes of solution identification and implementation.

This has always been a challenge for human society once a community becomes large and heterogeneous.

However! I'm writing this comment in a public forum in which individuals submit good ideas that are then analyzed, commented on and culled by an encouraging community. I'm here because this community is entertaining AND interesting AND self-encouraging of participation.

... therefor I propose that @dag run for President.

...OkNotReallyButWhatI'mSayingIs... with the internet we not only have access to knowledge, we have access to people's ideas to solve a problem and people to vet and cull and promote these ideas. In principle this should allow management of very simple anti-poverty ideas from birth to implementation to statistical analysis of the idea's impact.

Topic: Being poor is a taboo
Discussions: impact of self-identifying as poor, implementable ideas to address taboo of self-identifying as poor, and methods to quantify impact
Reward: Top 10 discussion notes, chosen by community, receive... um... 3 power points


>> ^peggedbea:

It seems ever so unlikely that economic, social, political and cultural devastation is going to put it in check now. Right around 15% of the country is now receiving food stamps. I think if we knew that, instead of "poor" being taboo, you'd be more likely to see some kind of authentic populist uprisings. I think the decades since the cold war have seen such a demonization (and femalization for that matter) of economic hardship, you're unlikely to meet enough people ready to come out of their homes and yell about it. Not only does the media and marketing make women feel bad about their bodies, I think it's making people feel bad about their inability to consume the desired quantity of shit.

I think this is the direct result of some very specific, intentional rhetoric. I think it is also mostly, specifically american.

I'm listening to an audio book right now about John Winthrop and the puritan dream of america. The book focuses a lot on his speech on the model of Christian charity. History has been more concerned with his excerpts from the sermon on the mount, focusing entirely on "the city upon a hill". America is a beacon to the rest of the world, Christian values and American exceptionalism and boundless opportunity ... except to Winthrop these things had a more egalitarian backbone. We would be exceptional because of our belief in Christ's charity.... among other things mixed in with calvinist self-hatred and a sense of impending apocalyptic doom.

Here's an excerpt from the speech:

that He might have the more occasion to manifest the work of his Spirit: first upon the wicked in moderating and restraining them, so that the rich and mighty should not eat up the poor.

Reagan of all people invoked this speech. Leaving out the part about the rich eating up the poor of course and focusing only on "that shining city upon a hill" .... I think you've touched on something with your cold war reference. Reagan made greed and enduring pride a national value during the cold war. Contextually, this seems sort of appropriate... if you're ronald reagan, it's the 80s and capitalism proving a more lasting and successful social/economic value than communism is of the utmost importance.
And somewhere between then and now, we've skipped the part where we redefine our national values and even 9/11 and the decade of war proceeding did not put our moral folly in check.

It seems ever so unlikely that economic, social, political and cultural devastation is going to put it in check now. Right around 15% of the country is now receiving food stamps. I think if we knew that, instead of "poor" being taboo, you'd be more likely to see some kind of authentic populist uprisings. I think the decades since the cold war have seen such a demonization (and femalization for that matter) of economic hardship, you're unlikely to meet enough people ready to come out of their homes and yell about it. Not only does the media and marketing make women feel bad about their bodies, I think it's making people feel bad about their inability to consume the desired quantity of shit.
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I've noticed that even broaching the topic of poorness is taboo. You either get complete disinterest, eye rolling, jokes or people who try to explain to you that poor are really living it up on tax payer dollars. Even the democrats seem to avoid using the word 'poor', but they have no problem defending the 'middle class'. I'd love to see democrats combine the middle and poor classes into one 'underclass', since international free trade seems to be destroying the line between the middle and lower classes anyway.

>> ^direpickle:

>> ^TheSluiceGate:
>> ^Deano:
What makes this stand out of course is the child. You never see them getting infected and rampaging around. It's still so taboo to kill virtual children, zombies or not.


That's not really true anymore: see The Walking Dead, remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zombies: Wicked Little Things etc. Modern cinema has had to up the ante in this case to get the shocks.

Even the Dawn of the Dead remake starts with a zombified little girl attacking her parents.

The 2004 remake didn't. Vivian was the kid of the family who lived in Anna's guest house. </geek>

I've noticed that even broaching the topic of poorness is taboo. You either get complete disinterest, eye rolling, jokes or people who try to explain to you that poor are really living it up on tax payer dollars. Even the democrats seem to avoid using the word 'poor', but they have no problem defending the 'middle class'. I'd love to see democrats combine the middle and poor classes into one 'underclass', since international free trade seems to be destroying the line between the middle and lower classes anyway.

>> ^TheSluiceGate:

>> ^Deano:
What makes this stand out of course is the child. You never see them getting infected and rampaging around. It's still so taboo to kill virtual children, zombies or not.


That's not really true anymore: see The Walking Dead, remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zombies: Wicked Little Things etc. Modern cinema has had to up the ante in this case to get the shocks.


I was thinking more about videogames but point taken.

>> ^TheSluiceGate:

>> ^Deano:
What makes this stand out of course is the child. You never see them getting infected and rampaging around. It's still so taboo to kill virtual children, zombies or not.


That's not really true anymore: see The Walking Dead, remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zombies: Wicked Little Things etc. Modern cinema has had to up the ante in this case to get the shocks.


Even the Dawn of the Dead remake starts with a zombified little girl attacking her parents.

>> ^Deano:

What makes this stand out of course is the child. You never see them getting infected and rampaging around. It's still so taboo to kill virtual children, zombies or not.



That's not really true anymore: see The Walking Dead, remake of Dawn of the Dead, Zombies: Wicked Little Things etc. Modern cinema has had to up the ante in this case to get the shocks.

Very classy. Obviously showing decapitation is extreme but it is a zombie game I presume (I haven't even heard of this til today). They'd definitely have to make cuts for telly but this is perfect for the net. What makes this stand out of course is the child. You never see them getting infected and rampaging around. It's still so taboo to kill virtual children, zombies or not.

What's most impressive is the quality of movement and facial expression. The eyes still look dodgy most of the time but in terms of rendering people we are getting there.

Animals, when I first read this reply, I did not know who wrote it. When I read your name, I smiled. Thank you Animals, not just for the apology, but for the insight of how a good man's mind can work when not blinded by the Blizzard-Of-Hate (Or, less that Blizzard, blinded by the rhetoric of his own mind.) For the record, I used to be an unequalled troll. I was God back then, and no one was allowed to have 'silly' ideas outside what 'should be,' but I did have one flaw. I looked to myself and asked questions. And I did not like my own answers.

As to you being immutable--it is true that I assumed you would not readily change

To the well-answered points you made;

Even if this video is a parody, some religious evangy would gobble this response up and spew it back out. But they would probably mean "inspired the bible", and yet still the sift would pound away for a simple mistake of words-versus-meaning. On a side note, I have heard far worse than this video's content from godly men--and it was stated in seriousness. I still cringe...

You bring up the multiple levels of feelings on this issue... To that I say and ask--it is factually true what you say, but when so many tiers/levels are calculated, doesn't the entire tier system become useless? (He is middle class making 40,000$. He is 'above middle class, making 40,005$, and so forth and so on.)

I tier this argument into three simple groups, Those that Believe, Those that Do Not, and Those who Couldn't Care Less. I fall into the Care Less. I know that list is subjective, and probably wrong of me, but I do it simply for simplicity.

Onto control--every nation, country, culture, etc. of humanity has created some form of control. Whether norms, government, religion, taboos, implied demands--or something societal, like commercialism--there has not been a gathering of man that has not exerted control. I am not saying control is evil, mind you--just necessary. In fact, when man is left untouched by any which way by another man (I.e. abandoned from birth, and never in human contact,) he becomes feral, and nothing smarter than an animal.

The control points I bring up are cheap for one reason--it just is easy to say and give examples. Kind of like 'humans need food.' So it is simple of me to say, and offers little but I feel it needs said.

Again, thank you fro proving me wrong.

>> ^AnimalsForCrackers:

Okay, give dummy lady a break. She meant to say "Who inspired the bible" but put foot in mouth.

@SDGundamX

To be absolutely honest I haven't done much reading about how many Africans were killed as a direct consequence to the preachings of the Catholic Church. I do however believe that in poor parts where people are uneducated, a missionary loaded with the dogma and latest rationales about the sinfulness of using condoms can do significant damage (especially if it fits the culture). I will try to fit some time in to do more research on the topic and get back to you. My somewhat uninformed view is that the Pope now having changed his mind opens a brighter future, but significant damage has been done and will linger for a long time. For now I assume we both agree that the Catholic Church has done more damage than good when it comes to the spreading of AIDS in Africa.

If we flip the argument a bit instead, imagine a church that actively supported the use of condoms for stopping the spreading of AIDS and did not believe in abstinence (which has been pretty much proven ineffective). Members giving contributions to send missionaries that could do sex education and supply free condoms and advice about sexuality. I bet that religion could save countless lives, but instead we are stuck with the Catholic Church and its books and dogmas. The Catholic Church did not want people to get infected with AIDS but at the same time I've a hard time seeing how its dogmas help the situation. Either way I will read up on the subject and we can have another round

I don't see this video as aimed at religious people. I see it squarely aimed at people who think religion is nonsense but cave in to the taboo of not calling it just that. The emperor has no clothes; people do not need to give the respect that religions think they owe. Calling religious people idiots dispel peoples belief that some thoughts deserve to go unchallenged.

A quick word about religious moderates. I do not think they exist because the church realized one day a new way of reading the bible. I do believe moderates exist because science just made people realize the Bible or any other holy book cannot be read literally. This whole thing about reading the Bible (or any holy book) in a new and better way; I simply cannot see how it comes from religion itself, built on authority and dogma it just wont move on its own. This to me means that if moderates have a somewhat better perspective and attitude they do not owe it to religion.

>> ^rottenseed:

"People have the right to be protected from having their beliefs insulted"
That is the exact opposite of what people should have...
What he is saying could be insulting the beliefs of those who think freedom of speech and the right to express ones opinion, along with the idea that nobody deserves to not be shocked or insulted.


In my estimation, it started when somebody thought up the term 'hate speech.' It's gonna get worse. Remember 1984? . . . incessant public mind control . . .

When some words became taboo and when some beliefs became unassailable, the slope was greased and we are well on our way to having some real problems. My generation will not suffer as much as the next, but I will likely live to see the next do so.

In my estimation, it started when somebody thought up the term 'hate speech.' It's gonna get worse. Remember 1984? . . . incessant public mind control . . .

When some words became taboo and when some beliefs became unassailable, the slope was greased and we are well on our way to having some real problems. My generation will not suffer as much as the next, but I will likely live to see the next do so.

In reply to this comment by rottenseed:
"People have the right to be protected from having their beliefs insulted"

That is the exact opposite of what people should have...

What he is saying could be insulting the beliefs of those who think freedom of speech and the right to express ones opinion, along with the idea that nobody deserves to not be shocked or insulted.

Interesting that the interviewee said that moving these corporate donations out into the open would be a first step into fixing some of the damage since buying elections is still something that we wouldn't do in the public eye -- I doubt that taboo is strong enough to limit things much at all. Hell, Fox News would probably be proud to hold a fundraiser and publicly disclose / brag about how much they raked in for republican / T.P. candidate X.

I'm rather disgusted that this has come to pass. The only way the "lame duck" legislative branch could even make headway towards redeeming itself would be to pass through *far* more drastic campaign finance reforms AND institute single-term limits for both the senate and house. I don't trust anyone being fed massive sums of money by corporations for more than a single term.