tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post116355508107729478..comments2024-02-14T11:04:27.663-05:00Comments on Free and Responsible Search: Right and Left TogetherDoug Muderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1170136377221821362007-01-30T00:52:00.000-05:002007-01-30T00:52:00.000-05:00I hope you don't mind, I nominated this for a UU B...I hope you don't mind, I nominated this for a UU Blog award.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1168109258656159602007-01-06T13:47:00.000-05:002007-01-06T13:47:00.000-05:00Doug -- If i had your email address, I wouldn't be...Doug -- If i had your email address, I wouldn't be posting this here, but I thought it might be valuable to know, just in case someone else feels the same way I do:<BR/>I didn't reply to your post above on ex-gay programs because the first comment is by The Emerson Avenger. I'm scared to post. Maybe others are too? It just occurred to me, that I should make this anonymous too. Sorry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1167981452153980462007-01-05T02:17:00.000-05:002007-01-05T02:17:00.000-05:00Have you heard of The Church of Stop Shopping?http...Have you heard of The Church of Stop Shopping?<BR/>http://www.revbilly.com/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1167291507199292072006-12-28T02:38:00.000-05:002006-12-28T02:38:00.000-05:00Doug -- Your article has been posted at None So Bl...Doug -- Your article has been posted at None So Blind. Have you seen it there and the discussion? <BR/>I am a bit surprised at the folks who don't seem to understand it, though others were as excited about it as I am. <BR/>I have tried to explain it to the ones who aren't getting it. I hope it's helping. Some people just don't want to give up their black and white, two sides and two sides only ideas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1166683948024291912006-12-21T01:52:00.000-05:002006-12-21T01:52:00.000-05:00Thanks Doug -- I think it's a really important pie...Thanks Doug -- I think it's a really important piece and needs to get to more people. <BR/>--KimAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1166640808585447802006-12-20T13:53:00.000-05:002006-12-20T13:53:00.000-05:00Brilliant sermon! I appreciate the call for us "li...Brilliant sermon! I appreciate the call for us "liberal Christians" to seek common ground and understand those on the right. I've too often fell into the trap of bashing the religious right without acknowledging that they are also people seeking the heart of God but have chosen a different path. <BR/><BR/>I particularly like the term "Consumer Hedonism". History has proven that a common enemy is the most poverful force in bringing unity. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the conviction, inspiration, and hope!Mike L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15978997781556741350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1166617393577688942006-12-20T07:23:00.000-05:002006-12-20T07:23:00.000-05:00Kim, Oh, absolutely, reprint it. I keep thinking I...Kim, <BR/><BR/>Oh, absolutely, reprint it. I keep thinking I need to redo the whole blog look and maybe my whole web strategy. But at a minimum including a response address and reprint criteria.<BR/><BR/>I'm loose on republication: If it's attributed and it's not so out-of-context that it seems to say something completely different, I think it's great. More readers.Doug Muderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1166584291147554472006-12-19T22:11:00.000-05:002006-12-19T22:11:00.000-05:00Doug-- May I have permission to reprint this artic...Doug-- May I have permission to reprint this article on Andy Schmookler's site, None So Blind?<BR/>Andy asked me to ask you if it's ok, and I couldn't find any "contact" eddress for you. <BR/>If you would like to look at the site, here is the home page:<BR/>http://www.nonesoblind.org/<BR/>and here is the blog home page, where it would most likely be posted (it would definitely be attributed!)<BR/>http://www.nonesoblind.org/blog/index.phpAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1166256575779819562006-12-16T03:09:00.000-05:002006-12-16T03:09:00.000-05:00There is, after all, no Church of Consumer Hedonis...<I>There is, after all, no Church of Consumer Hedonism in Quincy or anyplace else, no place where people are getting together this morning to celebrate the superficial life and preach the Consumer Hedonist theology. </I><BR/><BR/>You know, I'm not at all sure this is true. Malls would pass for churches of Consumer Hedonism, and that flickering blue light coming from the box in our homes is the home alter for the religion. We celebrate the superficial life at malls and movies, in front of the tv, reading ads on buses and billboards, and the ever-changing bible is the latest issues of People and Us magazines....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1165527903484035362006-12-07T16:45:00.000-05:002006-12-07T16:45:00.000-05:00Kim,The "War on Christmas" is a great example. I'l...Kim,<BR/><BR/>The "War on Christmas" is a great example. I'll have to remember your analysis of it.Doug Muderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1165513969616451722006-12-07T12:52:00.000-05:002006-12-07T12:52:00.000-05:00You see, when a religion truly dominates a society...<I>You see, when a religion truly dominates a society, it's like air. You don't see it, and you can't point to it because it's everywhere. A dominant religion doesn't seem to have members because everyone is a member. It doesn't seem to have a temple because the World is its temple. The reason we don't see the temple of Consumer Hedonism is because we live in it. We can't get outside of it. </I><BR/><BR/>As I reread this, it occurred to me that this is the source of the "Anti War on Christmas" movement. Christianity is used to being that ubiquitous background religion, and is fighting having to give it up to Consumer Hedonism (can't offend the customers!), and blaming it on liberals because they aren't seeing the Consumer Hedonism as it's own religion. <BR/>Yes, we liberals think we should be more inclusive and say Happy Holidays to anyone whose religion we don't know, but that isn't really the unconscious objection. The objection is to no longer being considered the natural default assumption.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1165464229437859562006-12-06T23:03:00.000-05:002006-12-06T23:03:00.000-05:00It occurred to me on re-reading this that your lis...It occurred to me on re-reading this that your list of Consumer Hedonism values:<BR/>Where all relationships are transient. <BR/><BR/>Where life is cheap. <BR/><BR/>Where winning is everything. <BR/><BR/>Where no one will sacrifice for the common good. <BR/><BR/>Where impulse satisfaction outweighs any consequences. <BR/><BR/>Where the innocent are not protected. <BR/><BR/>Where the old are cast aside and the next generation is left to raise itself. <BR/><BR/>Where profit is the ultimate argument, and money answers all questions. <BR/><BR/>Where no one is willing to stand on principle, and truth doesn't matter. <BR/><BR/>This list sounds very much like the "values" of large corporations. This is not simply a blanket liberal condemnation of corporations, but a real evaluation of how they are. Corporations do not have consciences. They don't have compassion. (these things are why they shouldn't be "persons", even legally.) They do have rules that money and maximizing profit is mandatory. <BR/>Just throwing that out there....<BR/><BR/>By the way, one of the people I sent a copy of your sermon to was very impressed and is quoting you at her church.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1165416412613151802006-12-06T09:46:00.000-05:002006-12-06T09:46:00.000-05:00You attract some weird commenters, Doug.Myself inc...You attract some weird commenters, Doug.<BR/><BR/>Myself included, of course.<BR/><BR/>Interesting sermon; glad you posted it. I expect the phrase "Consumer Hedonism" will be rolling around in my head for a while.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164994073998778712006-12-01T12:27:00.000-05:002006-12-01T12:27:00.000-05:00In a world that must have sides, dualism,and defin...In a world that must have sides, dualism,and definition even to the basic level of male and female to even exist how silly it seems for "conservative" and "liberal" to be exempt from the tension that is life. What honest person does not have a value to conserve the good while also knowing that if things do not change they are dead? Rocks don't change and are very dead. On one side is the bondage of the prison and on the other side is the anarchy of chaos. The Extreem bondage of unlimited conservatism and Unbound Freedom of runaway liberalism both are rightly feared by those who struggle live between these two extreems. Each left to itself has the power to destroy what we concieve to be life. Conservatives put a limit on just how much must be conserved and Liberals have a limit on just how liberal society may become. Limitless Conservatism and Limitless Liberalism each would consume their Shadow and life must have its opposite. Limitless anything does not do well in our world that must have limits,forms,definition,objects. Death and Eternity have no fear of such extreems but in life there must be a tug of war with no ABSOLOUTE winner. After watching the news for so long it is time for a comedy which in time is no longer funny. There is a little monk in each Protestant when they go on "retreat" and a little Protestant in every Catholic when they "protest" a total obedience to the Pope-" no birth control who does he think he is kidding". Perhaps it is the idol of being consistent that is our prison. Could it be that a consistent conservatism is just as death producing as a consistent liberalism? Sometimes when opposites and enemies embrace both learn, grow and are enriched. That would be sometime not EVERY time.Individuals seem to usually want to run from their Shadow but somehow it continues to abide. Conservative Christians may "hate" sin yet the honest ones say they do "sin". Not so consistent. Liberals may say they "hate" people who have image and not substance but watched closely they too at times do more than play at triviality.Not so consistent. Could it be that each group prides itself in being the holy, right and just crowd but depends deeply on their own Shadow to make them Real? Does Real need Unreal to be? What if the two "groups" were in reality one but THAT Truth is their common deepest fear. Perhaps Hedonistic Consumerism,Liberal religion, Conservative religion and even the unnamed little group are all much more alike than different- somewhat like an individual from day to day or the world from age to age. The same but yet different is a hard concept but it is in our face. Consentency and Change what if they were one? Well if that were so the best logical minds of the conservatives and the liberals would have something to ponder from different sides of the same one room. Perhaps rocks do change and become dust that later settles to become a rock once again. Was it a rock or was it dust or was it dust becomming rock or rock becoming dust? Perhaps the liberals and conservatives will have different answers but it is what it is all about "both" groups. At such times Webster and Aristotle both close their books that define and give the best rules of logic and listen as Gomer Pile says, "Surprise,Surprise,Surprise" . What is a poor boy to do and where is the right grouping for such a time and place as THIS. Some will try to find one but perhaps there is only one.Jim Claunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17949260496866664944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164130554506261322006-11-21T12:35:00.000-05:002006-11-21T12:35:00.000-05:00Glad I was able to help Doug. ;-)OTOH is there a h...Glad I was able to help Doug. ;-)<BR/><BR/>OTOH is there a huge difference between institutionalized slavery and non-institutionalized slavery? I doubt if any slaves see any difference worth talking about. . .Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164116194177017712006-11-21T08:36:00.000-05:002006-11-21T08:36:00.000-05:00Crap! I hate it when I correct something and then ...Crap! I hate it when I correct something and then publish the wrong version.<BR/><BR/>My wife caught the slavery mistake the day before I gave the sermon, and I changed it to "institutionalized slavery". But somehow that version didn't make it onto the blog. I'll fix it.Doug Muderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164065798489839612006-11-20T18:36:00.000-05:002006-11-20T18:36:00.000-05:00Oops! Messed up the link.Oops! <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=slavery+in+modern+America" REL="nofollow">Messed up the link</A>.Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164065679465860122006-11-20T18:34:00.000-05:002006-11-20T18:34:00.000-05:00"Two centuries ago, a world without slavery was a ..."Two centuries ago, a world without slavery was a complete dream. No Golden Age had ever achieved it. But here we are."<BR/><BR/>And <A HREF="Two centuries ago, a world without slavery was a complete dream. No Golden Age had ever achieved it. But here we are. <br/>" REL="nofollow">where might that be</A> Doug?Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164053938015690482006-11-20T15:18:00.000-05:002006-11-20T15:18:00.000-05:00Hi Doug, I thought that I was on or close to the t...Hi Doug, <BR/><BR/>I thought that I was on or close to the topic. Certainly I was 100% on the topic raised in Kim's spurious assertion that it was some undefined third group that was really responsible for both liberals and conservatives being considered to be immoral. I was just pointing out that immoral and unethical pseudo-liberals and pseudo-conservatives are largely responsible for the fact that liberals and/or conservatives are considered to be unethical and immoral.<BR/><BR/>There was no vague innuendo in my post. In fact the phrase that you characterize as, or present as an example of, "vague innuendo" was a quote pulled from another U*U blogger and it was hardly vague in any case. . . You may read the rest of <A HREF="http://www.wizardfkap.com/2006/11/no-wonder-liberal-is-dirty-word.html" REL="nofollow">his post here</A>, along with the follow-up commentary. I think that you will agree that it is very apropos of what is being discussed here. Certainly it is 100% apropos of Kim's comment. Maybe Kim's comment took the thread off topic. I don't think that I did. <BR/><BR/>Indeed the very reason that I embed pertinent links in my posts that provide examples of what I am talking about is so that those who don't already know can find out. Anyone who does already know what I am talking about has little choice but to agree that oh so "liberal" Unitarians aka U*Us <BR/>can and do behave in ways that are quite symptomatic of totalitarianism. N'est-ce pas? If U*Us don't want that stain to spread they should responsibly do something about it when supposedly "liberal" U*Us behave in ways that justify describing them as "Stalinistic" or even at "tyrannical fascists" etc. Remember that it was not The Emerson Avenger but rather other U*Us who first used these words to describe their fellow U*Us, or fellow "liberals". I just happen to agree with them based on what I myself have either witnessed, or directly experienced, within the U*U World. . .<BR/><BR/>Just as moderate Muslims have a moral and ethical responsibilty, and indeed an "enlightened self-interest", to reel in their intolerant and abusive extremist coreligionists so do U*Us. . .<BR/><BR/>I too have very little respect for cowardly anonymous trolls. I stand behind what I say by attaching my name to it. Even if The Emerson Avenger is an appropriate and kinda fun pseudonym, all anyone has to do to know who The Emerson Avenger is in "real life" is to read the profile at the top of every page or in <A HREF="http://www.blogger.com/profile/14818938" REL="nofollow">my blogger profile</A>. The anonymous troll's comment is not supported by what I stated here. It was not <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLR%2CGGLR%3A2006-03%2CGGLR%3Aen&q=How+Unitarians+are+mean+to+%22Robin+Edgar%22.+.+." REL="nofollow">"mean</A> and <A HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=How%20Unitarians%20are%20hateful%20to%20%22Robin%20Edgar%22.%20.%20.&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wg" REL="nofollow">hateful"</A> and certainly not <A HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=How+Unitarians+are+cruel+to+%22Robin+Edgar%22.+.+.&safe=off&qt_s=Search" REL="nofollow">"cruelty"</A>. Those words are much more appropriately used to describe the behaviour of rather too many U*Us towards Robin Edgar aka The Emerson Avenger, which is precisely why The Emerson Avenger blog came into existence in the first place. . . That is my last word on that subject in this thread although I may comment further on the subject raised in the original post.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for showing your fellow U*U*s that "memory holing" censorship is not the best way to deal with The Emerson Avenger Doug. You have earned my respect and even gratitude as far as that goes. The U*U pretense to being "opposed to censorship by church, state, or any other institution" while actually behaving more like "tyrannical fascists" in repeatedly trying to censor and suppress my legitimate criticism and dissent is just one example of why "liberals" and indeed U*Us have a bit of an image problem these days. . .Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164035522137842322006-11-20T10:12:00.000-05:002006-11-20T10:12:00.000-05:00Bill Baar's comment had a lot of content. Let me r...Bill Baar's comment had a lot of content. Let me respond to some of it. <BR/><BR/>First the easy one: Judge Alito should have been filibustered for reasons that have nothing to do with social issues. I think the biggest challenge facing the Court is the Bush administration's usurpation of the roles of the other two branches of government. Alito has an imperial view of executive power, which I think we'll see this year. He will join Thomas as the Court's fascist minority. Roberts' views are less clear-cut, but I worry about him.<BR/><BR/>As to marriage and abortion, liberal views are always going to look more muddled than conservative. We're much less inclined to impose a bright line of good-and-evil on a situation, which I think is to our credit. The root legal problem with respect to abortion is that the biology doesn't lend itself to a bright line. Conception is too soon to start protecting a fetus and birth is too late, but there's no discernible "moment of ensoulment" in between.<BR/><BR/>On marriage, we muddle along. Society has been muddling along with respect to marriage for centuries, maybe forever. The definition of marriage changes in every generation. Or rather, there has never been a clear definition that everyone bought into. Marriage stays traditional enough to remain coherent, but has never been sharply in focus. I don't see that as a problem.<BR/><BR/>I completely agree with Bill that we should think harder about the questions religion should be answering. I just don't think that we should shut up until we have all the answers.Doug Muderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164034278430187222006-11-20T09:51:00.000-05:002006-11-20T09:51:00.000-05:00I'd really appreciate it if commenters would try t...I'd really appreciate it if commenters would try to stay close to the topic.<BR/><BR/>I'd rather not start deleting comments other than spam, but I don't want to be hosting arguments that have nothing to do with my posts. It would be great if voluntary cooperation would take care of my concerns.<BR/><BR/>Two things bother me on this thread: First, Emerson Avenger's vague innuendo about "a large bunch of tyrannical fascists parading around pretending to be liberals." Readers either already know what this is about (in which case it's redundant) or they don't (in which case a vague stain spreads across their impression of a couple hundred thousand UUs).<BR/><BR/>Second, if you want to psychoanalyze Emerson Avenger, please do it on his blog. And especially don't do it anonymously here.Doug Muderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04666144843949850394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1164013070951544842006-11-20T03:57:00.000-05:002006-11-20T03:57:00.000-05:00Robin -- why are you so mean and hateful? Why do ...Robin -- why are you so mean and hateful? Why do you enjoy hurting people's feelings so much? Do you really get off on your cruelty? <BR/>You may or may not have been what your accusers called you when you started, but you are now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1163943968299226602006-11-19T08:46:00.000-05:002006-11-19T08:46:00.000-05:00"I'm so glad to hear you saying this: I've been sa..."I'm so glad to hear you saying this: I've been saying for years that the conservatives blame the liberals for the lack of morals and the liberals blame the conservatives, but it's really a third group that is responsible...."<BR/><BR/>Wrong Kim it is unethical and immoral liberals and conservatives who are mostly responsible for giving liberals and conservatives a bad name. Ditto for U*Us. . . <BR/><BR/>In fact I finally got around to printing out the "CHURCH" OF THE IMMORAL MAJORITY picket sign slogan that I dreamed up years ago and will be displaying it in front of a certain unmentionable Unitarian Church that definitely has a quite liberal majority of immoral "liberals" as members. . . <BR/><BR/>I recently came across a little known U*U blog that has the following very apropos words written in a recent post about why liberals have a bad name these days -<BR/><BR/>"I've learned that most people of all political leanings tend to be tolerant and understanding. Some conservatives actually are compassionate.<BR/><BR/>The problem is there are a large bunch of tyrannical fascists parading around pretending to be liberals.<BR/><BR/>Tyranny of the left is not liberalism. It's tyranny."<BR/><BR/>Needless to say I concurred and pointed out that there are a certain number of U*Us who are actually tyrannical fascists parading around pretending to be U*Us and that too many other U*Us allow them to get away with it. . . I've been exposing and denouncing <A HREF="http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-03,GGLR:en&q=%22Robin%20Edgar%22%20and%20Totalitarian%20Unitarians&btnG=Search&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wg" REL="nofollow">Totalitarian Unitarians</A> for over a decade now but how many U*Us have done anything about it? Virtually none as far as I can see but I will be doing my bit once again within the next hour or so. . .Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1163751400726522172006-11-17T03:16:00.000-05:002006-11-17T03:16:00.000-05:00I'm so glad to hear you saying this: I've been say...I'm so glad to hear you saying this: I've been saying for years that the conservatives blame the liberals for the lack of morals and the liberals blame the conservatives, but it's really a third group that is responsible....<BR/>I recently was introduced to Spiral Dynamics, which is about World Views, and it has another version of similar ideas -- it says that conservatives and liberals both are community oriented, but there is another group in between that is individual-oriented, more "every-man-for-himself" and very money-centric. Sounds very similar to your ideas here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13399254.post-1163594874288680512006-11-15T07:47:00.000-05:002006-11-15T07:47:00.000-05:00"You enclose a space that your religion can domina..."You enclose a space that your religion can dominate, because it can't dominate the world out there."<BR/><BR/>Yes, I have noticed how that plays out in some <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLR%2CGGLR%3A2006-03%2CGGLR%3Aen&q=%22Robin+Edgar%22+and+totalitarian+Unitarians&btnG=Search" REL="nofollow">rather totalitarian</A> Unitarian "churches". . . <BR/><BR/>I'll be back. . . ;-)Robin Edgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06208142626285495635noreply@blogger.com