![]() |
OT Harmful Books
Just when you think the right wing whack jobs couldn't
possibly get any scarier something like this comes along. http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 OK, Marx, Hitler and Mao are the "usual suspects" but Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Rachel Carson ??!!?? And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Just when you think the right wing whack jobs couldn't possibly get any scarier something like this comes along. http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 OK, Marx, Hitler and Mao are the "usual suspects" but Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Rachel Carson ??!!?? And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? My guess is "harmful books" would be the ones you've been reading. Just look at the harm they've done. ;-) -- TL, Tim ------------------------ http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
wrote in message ... In article , says... Just when you think the right wing whack jobs couldn't possibly get any scarier something like this comes along. http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 OK, Marx, Hitler and Mao are the "usual suspects" but Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Rachel Carson ??!!?? And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? A book that happens to disagree with your beliefs. Looking at the list I wasn't exactly surprised. Sex, feminism, socialism, communism, evolution all the things the rabid right likes to fear. Not quite all. Um......not even close. Wolfgang that's the nice thing about "top 1000" lists. |
|
Ken Fortenberry wrote: And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? "POTUS For Dummies." Apparently read by one recently elected POTUS. Mark |
On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:29:56 -0400, "Tim J."
wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Just when you think the right wing whack jobs couldn't possibly get any scarier something like this comes along. http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 OK, Marx, Hitler and Mao are the "usual suspects" but Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Rachel Carson ??!!?? And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? My guess is "harmful books" would be the ones you've been reading. Just look at the harm they've done. ;-) Actually, you're not far off, given some of the ideas seemingly contained in Ken's postings. What these books seem to have in common is the promotion is the promotion of an unrealistic world view in that some man-desired force is substituted for natural outcome, such as socialism, communism, etc. Animals, including man, are simply not geared to have complete "equality" among all members (for example, the biological differences between males and females or the physical size and strength differences between males). Just as with other animals, nature dictates not only survival of the fittest, but the rule of the strongest - there are those "destined" to be leaders, those "destined" to be followers, and those "destined" not to survive, and no amount of wishing it were different or hand-wringing over that fact will change it. Essentially, these books convince those who are simply not destined for being "leaders" that they can be more and/or convince them that they would be "leaders," but for those who would "keep them down." The problem is that it isn't a "who," but a "what" that has kept, and in the end will "keep them down." TC, R |
wrote in message ... On Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:29:56 -0400, "Tim J." wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: Just when you think the right wing whack jobs couldn't possibly get any scarier something like this comes along. http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 OK, Marx, Hitler and Mao are the "usual suspects" but Darwin, John Stuart Mill and Rachel Carson ??!!?? And just what in the hell is a "harmful book" anyway ? My guess is "harmful books" would be the ones you've been reading. Just look at the harm they've done. ;-) Actually, you're not far off, given some of the ideas seemingly contained in Ken's postings. What these books seem to have in common is the promotion is the promotion of an unrealistic world view in that some man-desired force is substituted for natural outcome, such as socialism, communism, etc. Animals, including man, are simply not geared to have complete "equality" among all members (for example, the biological differences between males and females or the physical size and strength differences between males). Just as with other animals, nature dictates not only survival of the fittest, but the rule of the strongest - there are those "destined" to be leaders, those "destined" to be followers, and those "destined" not to survive, and no amount of wishing it were different or hand-wringing over that fact will change it. Essentially, these books convince those who are simply not destined for being "leaders" that they can be more and/or convince them that they would be "leaders," but for those who would "keep them down." The problem is that it isn't a "who," but a "what" that has kept, and in the end will "keep them down." Welcome to the late nineteenth century. Wolfgang hoo boy! |
|
The book they forgot to put on the list: The Pet Goat.
-- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:55 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter