Letters to the Editor
rodian
Published Letters: 134 Editor's Choice: 9
-
pure hallucination
[Read the article: The atheist delusion]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Mr Haught merely concludes his ability to ask questions without answers, along with science's refusal to follow gadflies, implies a universe larger than science. I think no-one would deny that fulminations may erupt sans observation, hypothosis, prediction, or affirming the consequent. But really, does every belch deserve a benediction? If not, where do you draw the line, and how? Science does not claim to know everything, it only claims to know something. Why is that worse than laying claim to the meta, the alpha and omega? Science asks no one to bow, but only to question the authority of those who purport to have answers. If it's not apparent to John Haught why Priests in their Temples deserve special scrutiny, then I suggest he's neither the historian nor theologian he claims to be. Delusions indeed.
-
@NYCGrrrl
[Read the article: How to survive singlehood]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a married man with children, and I know exactly what you're talking about. Am I "pathetic"? Well, sometimes it feels that way; but I like to think not. I'm just doing my best to slog it out - mostly on account of my kids. If it weren't for them, I'm sure my wife and I would have parted ways long ago. I'm quite sure that's not a unique predicament. Although a big part of me would like to see the anachronistic institution of marriage curtailed or eliminated altogether, I understand why it exists.
Leaving another grown adult to find their own way is one thing. But kids need one-on-one adult attention constantly for quite some years, and need adult assistance and supervision in almost everything they do for years after that. Splitting up makes meeting those obligations much more difficult. When people work in pairs, they can handle kids more efficiently, because one can watch them while the other gets something done. (I must add, I don't consider my kids an obligation, but a blessing - I'm just making a point.)
If we don't want a world full of unattended to street urchins, we need to grant certain concessions to their parents, like tax breaks and public schools. In exchange for these societal favors, people get married. You see, marriage isn't really a blessing for couples, but a kind of a curse, just like you describe it. But it's a blessing for a society, because it curtails society's need to help out with the kids.
If I could pick any lifestyle I wanted, I would be a single parent with kids who has enough money to afford a nanny so I could enjoy some freedom without neglecting the children. I don't have that luxury.
Please don't call me "pathetic" because I put up with a less than ideal relationship on account of my kids. I'm just doing the best I can for myself and my family. My best isn't always that great, but I try.
@fetboy:
While you may have a lot of fun breading gerbils, I suspect most people would find a breaded gerbil quite abhorrent. :)
-
ultra-right
[Read the article: "We're all fascists now"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]An interesting analysis. The question that comes to my mind is, if it's incorrect to describe ultra-right orthodoxy as fascism, then what meaning _should_ we ascribe to the term 'far right'? I would surmise from reading this article (I haven't read the book, and I agree with Jonah that the shallow blogosphere in which I'm right now participating could stand a little edification) that Jonah would describe the far right as those folks who put laissez-faire free market principals at the center of their moral universe. That certainly seems to fairly accurately describe a large swath of the US Republican party, at any rate.
The usual argument against such thinking, which I agree with, is that pure unrestrained capitalism quickly leads to vast social inequality and a society in which political power derives to only the very few people at the top of the pyramid. It's a positive feedback loop which creates political structures completely out-of-whack with foundational constitutional principals. You know, that old-fashioned "all men are created equal" kind of thing. So would Jonah say the US constitution is a fascist document?
I think the big problem with the left vs. right dichotomy which completely dominates political discourse is that it presents an oversimple view of political, economic, and moral structures which describes all positions as beads on some kind linear string. If it were up to me, I would banish the words "left" and "right" from such discourse altogether.
I'm a Ron Paul libertarian myself, and here's why. The libertarian ethos addresses the totalitarian tendancies of pure capitalism without resorting to nanny state doctrines. It's quite simple, really. As Jonah quite rightly puts it in this interview, the proper role of the state is to protect us from each other. Your right to swing your fist stops at my nose, etc. It's well within the precepts of such a philosophy to believe the state should be responsible for restraining excessive abuses of power, to level gross economic inequality, and to otherwise take the rough edges off of a capitalist economy.
I'm afraid, though, that our political discourse has been so dumbed down by our incessant "left" and "right" name calling that the damage done to our collective minds won't be undone for generations. People just don't get it. This election cycle at least we're doomed to elect yet another nanny or another Wall Street whipping boy. Bah.