Mathos wrote-
Quote:I'm totally anti ID
and
Quote:I'm not afraid to take the muzzle off.
Well thanks. That makes a change. Not that I believe you of course. Not the "totally" I mean. It's probably no more than a fad you picked up to suit your conveniences way back and you have never really thought of examining it in detail. Only probably mind you. I'll allow for you having intellectual integrity. It is possible.
In fact I will proceed on the basis that you do have intellectual integrity from now on and then we can get the total anti-ID position out in the open where it belongs, assuming you understand it, if we are going to be influencing the future generations through the educational process.
Perhaps you will comment on this-
When Europeans first encountered the Zulu in South Africa they found that a key dogma in their religious code was that a man could not have a woman until he had "dipped his spear in the blood of the enemy."
The point is that no matter how much the Colonial administrators deprecated this ferocity inducing religious custom,deriving from their God/s, it was in their face as a fact. It had evolved and there it was like a finch on an island. They saw, Rider Haggard reports, and he was one of them, that they needed to extirpate this doctrine and, as things stand today, they seem to have almost succeeded.
Now it is quite respectable to defend this practice as it existed in the circumstances on any number of grounds. It could, for example, be an easier way that we have now for getting laid. But all the grounds on which it is defensible are related to the social consequences of the practice and its function in the tribes survival and dominance in the area. Darwinian theology must approve of it as it must approve of the finch's wing feathers and colours or a turtle's shell. That is because Darwinian theology rests on non-Christian grounds.
Judging from your homily about us all going soft due to the ministrations of the Nanny state you approve of the Zulu practice here. And now. Copious blood flow is usually a sign of hard men about.
Would that be a reasonable conclusion? After all total anti-ID eschews Christian theology. It's superstitious bullshit they say. If not it is as half-baked as anti-ID in its non-total form and thus there would be no reason to add the word "totally". It then becomes another bloody empty assertion serving only to make you feel more macho than the wimpy anti-IDers we find in our company.
But it is the carriers of the Christian theology, forgetting the Boers, who have tamed this tribe and now they play cricket and pay through the nose to get laid. So who is toughest Mathos- The tamer or the tamed?
We have tamed lions and tigers to fake being ferocious. That's serious taming. I've seen them at the circus. 300 years from now the posh will have them as house pets like our cats and dogs. I bet a few do now somewhere in that wild world of incident.