10

A New Beatitudes for the Age of Equality

Posted by sdesapio 9 years, 1 month ago to Politics
47 comments | Share | Flag

From the article: "With Pope Francis taking a progressive line, it is time to recognize the common premises of Christian doctrine and the egalitarian, identity politics of the progressive left. It is time for an updated Beatitudes for the age of equality."
SOURCE URL: http://atlassociety.org/commentary/commentary-blog/5865-a-new-beatitudes


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 1 month ago
    Brilliantly mordant satire by Kelley. Now let's give the same treatment to the ten commandments, list of virtues, and the 7 deadly sins. I'll start: "Thou shalt not murder people of your own kind; all others are fair game."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 1 month ago
      "Thou shalt not bear false witness; unless you are a politician or your neighbor is conservative, in which case go ahead and SWAT him."

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 1 month ago
        Now now are you still using PC? Remember the roles are switched. Basic definition of conservatism now defines the entrenched establishment left RINOS and all. Basic definition of liberal especially the pre-PC version describes the current counter revolutionaries. Got to keep up with the chanes the coach sends onto the floor otherwise bassackwards.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 1 month ago
    Hear hear. Anyone who seriously studies the philosophy of Christianity and Socialism, know they share the same ethics and similar epistemology and metaphysics. The Socialists claim a scientific basis in epistemology and metaphysics, however the reality is that their ideas are based on Kant, Hegel, etc who explicitly reject reason. This is why Hitler (a socialist) could say 'Oh that's Jewish logic".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 1 month ago
      Uh, I've seriously studied both and there are worlds of difference. I can list them in great detail. They don't share either epistemiology or metaphysics because they are based on two diametrically opposed belief systems: Christianity is based on a universal law approach while Socialism is based on a relative law approach: ie theism vs atheism. Anyone claiming that the two are equivalent has never done a thorough and honest comparison.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by JeffG 9 years, 1 month ago
        I too have seriously studied both. That is why I know that they have diametrically opposed ethics, epistemology, metaphysics. That is what the article is illuminating - the difference between the two!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 1 month ago
        They both reject reason - sorry I don't see a big difference in different brands of irrationalism. The ethics is exactly the same.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ blarman 9 years ago
          By the same reasoning, one can say that Objectivism and socialism are identical because both support homosexual marriage and abortion. But why would one do that? There is only one reason: to attempt to apply fallacy of association. It's simply a false assertion and you and I both know it.

          It's one thing to say you don't adhere to a particular line of belief. That's a personal choice and everyone makes theirs and should be free to do so. It's quite another to attempt to slander any particular belief while simultaneously trying to claim objectivity or any semblance of connection to the ethical high ground. -1
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 1 month ago
          The Ba'hai church accepts all forms of monotheism reasoning if a creator by whatever name or source created us all differently why worry about which path each of us chose.

          Of course they have suffered more form those who do not share that view primarily the Shiite branch of apostates in the Muslim religion. Had the Crusades been conducted today the same would result. The sole difference would be Soros Wills or Trump wills or Obama wills instead of God. Plenty of room for more names and they all fit.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 1 month ago
    I have no problem with Pope Francis promoting social freedom goals (most of which I agree with), as long as he stays away from economic theory. The idea of a pope supporting the freedom of women and homosexuals is...well, amusing. The problem is that he is endorsing the socialist endowment agenda and anti-capitalistic propaganda is where his view of the world breaks down.

    He thinks that the road to prosperity is the redistribution of wealth from the evil people who have made themselves successful by their inspiration and hard work. He does not understand that pulling these people down will have us all living in Old East Germany before long.

    Jan

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 1 month ago
    I don't get it. sorry
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 1 month ago
      David's just poking a little fun by drawing a comparison between the biblical Beatitudes ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatitu... ) to the reality of today (e.g. The bible says "the meek shall inherit the earth." Uhm... yeah... it appears they're off to a great start in the west.).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Animal 9 years, 1 month ago
        A more accurate statement was put forth in the final episode of the first "Black Adder" series, by the evil Friar Bellows:

        "Blessed are the meek - for they shall be slaughtered!"

        Meekness never got anyone anywhere. This is a world dominated by aggression and the willingness to use force. We forget that at our peril.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Maritimus 9 years, 1 month ago
          Hello, A,
          It seems to me very clear that life, as a phenomenon, has these drives (or properties?): to survive, to procreate, to multiply and to evolve in any direction that will enhance the ability to perform the other three better. The completion for food and more successful evolution has been in the nature of all living things since ever, form protozoa and thallophyte to homo sapiens.
          The meek do not fit well. On the other hand, I perceive religion as a hope and consolation (among other things) for those that do not fit well.
          Recently, I saw some work that seems to explain the origins of "living matter" through considerations based on noon-equilibrium thermodynamics. I was impressed.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 1 month ago
            Go you one better. Theory of Aging in Gerontology states that the average age of death is based on the following cycle. If it can be broken or in some way changed age of death changes.

            Birth, Nurturing and training, procreating, food gatherer, inability to procreate some use in gathering food, no use at all, death. When useless that is inability to procreate you die.

            So sayeth the biological history of the world.

            Impress Mother Nature with the notion that you are doing your fair share and them some less chance of dying and age of death gradually extends.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 1 month ago
    Maybe column two titled New Be-attitudes? i already sent it to my spreader of joy and good tidings for her circle of circles ....

    Excellent.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 9 years, 1 month ago
    Just like anything else from the 'holy' roman church to the vatican; getting it backwards on the teachings of someone whom displayed conscious thought, behavior and world views to the fullest extent and the rest of our biblical ancestors that learned it the hard way.
    I am beginning to think that the grand popo francis is related to Alistar Crowley or at least prescribed the same prescription drug.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 1 month ago
    yes, no matter how fast we bail out the deep end and
    move the water to the shallow end, the pool just doesn't
    become equal in depth. -- j
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 1 month ago
    Progressives overwhelmingly reject religion - especially Christianity. Why the article attempts to link Biblical proclamations with the Progressive movement confuses me as well.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by IndianaGary 9 years, 1 month ago
      The link is philosophical. Scratch a progressive and scratch a Christian: you'll find pretty much the same thing underneath.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 1 month ago
        Uh, I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but Christians overwhelmingly vote for conservative values and Republican candidates - just do a red/blue map of the states. It's why certain candidates like Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee pander for the Christian vote.

        You don't see Progressives going after the Christian vote. Progressives vote for progressive values and Democratic candidates. Remember Obama's famous "clinging to guns and religion" statement? And do reporters badger Democratic candidates about their religions like they do Republicans? No. Both Trump and Carson have been hounded about it, yet not a word for Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by IndianaGary 9 years, 1 month ago
          You are looking at them politically based upon terms largely defined by the progressive left; I'm looking at their same, basic, underlying philosophy. Read up on Attila and the Witch Doctor.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 1 month ago
            How are the philosophies the same? Or even similar? Progressives want to create a ruling class with special privileges. Christians specifically espouse everyone as being equal in privilege and beholden to the same rules. Progressives support abortion because they do not believe in the sanctity of life. Christians eschew abortion and value children. Progressives support massive government welfare programs and encourage the behaviors which expand such a state. Christians favor voluntary and independent private entities to deal with social problems and aggressively teach values to eliminate the problems in the first place. Progressives push for the disintegration of the family. Christians are one of the few groups pointing out it's necessity and positive benefits to society. Progressives see themselves as making the rules. Christians view God as the ultimate authority. It's not just politically. Christians are diametrically opposed to the Progressive philosophy and its core.

            If you want to point out specific philosophical tracts which you believe the two share, please do. If you want to refer to other texts voicing opinions of others' philosophies, I'd point out that it's far more beneficial to use authoritative sources rather than pontification by third parties. If I want to know what a Christian believes, I don't go ask an atheist. If I want to know what an Objectivist believes, I don't go ask a Hindu.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by IndianaGary 9 years, 1 month ago
              In Ayn Rand's book, For The New Intellectual, read the first article for an explanation of who Attila and the Witch Doctor are and how they relate to the "mystics of spirit" and the "mystics of muscle." Religionists are the spiritual mystics and progressives are largely, but not exclusively, mystics of muscle.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 1 month ago
                Your original argument was that Progressivism was morally and ethically equivalent to Christianity. This is prima facie false as I have demonstrated in both means and content. If you want to make the argument that neither adhered to Rand's ideals, that is quite another argument altogether and a far cry from the original argument you posted.

                In the original Beatitudes, the points laid out were ones of direct philosophy. The modified versions being inserted by the author on behalf of Progressives exist for the point of drawing contrast. But one does not claim equivalency and contrast at the same time and maintain logical consistency. Thus my comment. If the point of the piece was satire or to ridicule both, some comment by the author to that effect should have been included.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo