Canadian cogitations about politics, social issues, and science. Vituperation optional.
Enjoy this by the numbers take down of religious tomfoolery. The Thinking Atheist’s video is a wonderful reference for everyone who has to deal whatever happens to be the religious lie of the day. Failing that, one could just dig the groovy ’70’s vibe going on throughout the video.
 | The Arbourist on Shouldn’t We Be Deportin… |
 | SM on Shouldn’t We Be Deportin… |
| The Arbourist on Life Has to Be Fought For… |
| The Arbourist on University Encampments –… |
 | tildeb on University Encampments –… |
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Ben Eastaugh and Chris Sternal-Johnson.
Religion. Politics. Life.
Solve ALL the Problems
Art, health, civilizations, photography, nature, books, recipes, etc.
Independent source for the top stories in worldwide gender identity news
LESBIAN SF & FANTASY WRITER, & ADVENTURER
A fine WordPress.com site
herstory. poetry. recipes. rants.
Communications, politics, peace and justice
Transgender Teacher and Journalist
Conceptual spaces: politics, philosophy, art, literature, religion, cultural history
Loving, Growing, Being
A topnotch WordPress.com site
Life After an Emotionally Abusive Relationship
No product, no face paint. I am enough.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Observations and analysis on survival, love and struggle
the feminist exhibition space at the university of alberta
About gender, identity, parenting and containing multitudes
Spreading the dangerous disease of radical feminism
Not Afraid Of Virginia Woolf
The Evolution Will Not BeTelevised
writer, doctor, wearer of many hats
Teaching Artist/ Progressive Educator
Identifying as female since the dawn of time.
A blog by Helen Saxby
A blog in support of Helen Steel
Where media credibility has been reborn.
Memoirs of a Butch Lesbian
Radical Feminism Discourse
deconstructing identity and culture
Fighting For Female Liberation from Patriarchy
Politics, things that make you think, and recreational breaks
cranky. joyful. radical. funny. feminist.
Movement for the Abolition of Prostitution
These are the best links shared by people working with WordPress
Gender is the Problem, Not the Solution
Peak Trans and other feminist topics
if you don't like the news, make some of your own
Musing over important things. More questions than answers.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
5 comments
January 20, 2013 at 7:47 am
Reneta Scian
I have a question in regards to argumentative denial, but it’s not about evolution this time, but about gun control. I keep hearing the “Hitler confiscated guns” argument several times recently, as a justification against the recent executive orders Obama made, and against legislation restricting access to assault weapons, banning their outright sale, and closing the “Gun Show” loop holes. This all sounds mighty familiar if you ask me… It would seem to me that the same logical fallacies and arguments follow around with religious belief, and none of them want to actually discuss it. When I ask pointed questions most of them either repeat the mantra or shut down.
Recent events in the US really, really, really, really make me wish I didn’t have to deal with religious people. I guess I am an idiot for making a bold statement showing a reasonable position on gun control, and expecting those who are religious to get how off their feelings about gun control are. I get barraged by religious friends with religious nonsense on Facebook so much that I can’t help but speak up. It’s rather frustrating. No one has countered the points, or made a logical rational argument for why I am wrong. Well, other than one person. Admittedly I was offering the “If you want guns, you have to find a way to be smarter with them” position, like specialized training, registration, et cetera. Sigh. I don’t like talking with the religious, on any topic.
LikeLike
January 20, 2013 at 8:14 am
The Arbourist
Good Morning Reneta,
Like most fear mongering bullshite, its fairly easy to dismiss. People take what they need from Hitler to demonize what they are fighting against. The German Chancellor did nothing of the sort to German citizens. So most likely, the people you are talking to have Nazi Tourettes.
Would you want to discuss the negative points of your fluffy happy security blanket? :) People don’t like it when you make fun of their woogie (woogy?).
It is almost like the world isn’t logical or rational. :) Being flip aside, peoples’ minds won’t change unless they are ready to change them. When threatened our first response is to defend what we know, whether it is right or wrong. Overcoming this tendency is difficult, even if we are aware of it.
Consider our conversations when I started looking into Shelia Jeffreys and others radical feminists. As I recall you had a fairly strong reaction, and probably still do. I experience similar feelings when people start tearing into Chomsky and Howard Zinn.
The mere act of owning a gun makes the owner more likely to die by gun violence. I have trouble going past this point while discussing gun regulation. Personally speaking, the purpose of most guns is to murder other people. I’m not really on board with the whole murdering other people thing so…
It can be difficult at times. It would be nice if they kept it private, but they seem to think that we should also believe in their fairy tale of the day and that is where the problem starts.
LikeLike
January 20, 2013 at 9:01 am
Reneta Scian
Arbourist, you indeed have a very valid point. And yes, when it comes to stuff about gender, gender identity, and the often times ciscentric transphobia of those like Jeffreys, Et Al. So, yes… I’ll always respond that way. The points the make are sometimes triggering, as most trans people have had to deal with some sort social blow back. Anytime people dismiss that, engage in discrimination or speak of it in terms we know to be false personally, it can be incredibly triggering considering how painful the experience of being trans can be. We are easily reminded of how the world is, and what we’ve been through when that occurs. Emotional response is inevitable. Likewise, to realize things about reality, to have speakers who abbreviate that for you, it would be hard to dismiss people calling them names, or disregarding their words.
We as humans do indeed internalize ideas, and take offense when they are trespassed. However, the phenomenon while connected to the same emotional phenomenon is quite different when dealing with a rational person verses an irrational one, or one who maintains ignorance for the sake of a belief. A rational person will generally listen, and comment on likewise rational criticism of an idea. Meaning, you may get irritated, but as long as someone voices a rational argument you are okay with discussing it without it being emotional distressing. Speaking first hand, this defensive stance take on an entirely different place when it is about a sacrosanct belief. This can occur in someone who is religious, or non-religious, of any class, race, gender or creed.
The defense tends to take on a “one-sided” approach, where they speak at you, and then ignore your responses. This is generally not the approach of people with a reality based point of view. We don’t ignore the things others say when we discuss these things so long as it meets a reasonable criteria. Mind you, that standard itself is obviously based on that same emotional connection to ideas. I had a comment on my gun control statement, then refused to read the responses. This as been the general nature of arguments with a wide range of people when it comes to sacrosanct beliefs or ideas. So it would seem to be, that those sorts of compartmentalized beliefs are the antithesis to logical, rational and civil discourse, not so much our beliefs or emotional investment in them, but our willingness to challenge them and discuss them.
In that light, you and I may disagree, but our conversations would be unlike to devolve into the sorts I have with those unwilling to challenge, understand, or evaluate their own beliefs. And in that sense, that is what truly frustrates me, not necessarily the topics I discuss in that light. What is your take? We have certainly had some strong debates, but I think I adequately demonstrated that I was indeed listening, and later came to different hypotheses on the basis from what I processed according to that information. It seems though that many of these people, whether it be on God, or Guns (which ironically go hand in hand) are unwilling to discuss the topics openly, creating a one-sided exchange.
LikeLike
January 20, 2013 at 9:26 am
The Arbourist
At least not yet. :) To be skeptical, one must at least allow other points of view and evidence in. Changing a worldview is difficult for anyone because most people tend to like stable, predictable notions of how things work.
I hope I also demonstrated a commitment to listening to what you were saying. That is the thing, the blog is an imperfect medium for conversation. However, it would seem to me that we’ve both benefited from the discussions we’ve had.
LikeLike
January 20, 2013 at 10:36 am
Reneta Scian
Most definitely. More than benefited, I enjoyed it even to some degrees the scary parts. I am weird though, being that thinking deeply is something I enjoy even if the territory is unsettling. In the vein of what you said about skepticism… I have always had a great deal of curiosity, but because of the fact that I was raised in a spiritualistic manner the way in which I interpreted the world around me had “holes”. When those holes started coming under skeptical inquiry it was kind of scary. All the comfortable things I believed when I wasn’t interpreting the world that way anymore made me feel vulnerable.
But now the unknown doesn’t bother me anymore, and more than ever before my curiosity has grown from it, rather than shrank. But for me, I think I am not really the example of most people, rather the exception than the rule. I already had a template ready for skepticism, rationalism, and as a result atheism. The things you shared with me just put the final pieces into place, and once the final cog was fixed the machine began to move. I imagine there are probably others like me, but considering the amount of indoctrination that religions and other irrational philosophies depend on for existence makes that less likely the case.
My religious step family made a mistake if they wanted me to believe the world was as they saw it, with God Goggles. They gave me access to knowledge about the world at a young age, and instilled in me (not on purpose) the value of science, rather than facilitating my ignorance. As a result, the foundation I needed was already there. And indeed you have, you have been a great person to discuss things with and debate with. Furthermore, you are willing to give rational feedback, something I find far to lacking in a lot of people. Honesty, integrity, intellectual honesty, and willingness to speak directly to issues, and not dodge rational inquiry are all things I have come to admire. Thus why it’s been enjoyable for me. Now if the rest of the world would get on that band wagon.
LikeLike