[Vision2020] A level playing field for knights and knaves
ophite at gmail.com
Sat Sep 16 18:08:26 PDT 2006
> The level playing field of the internet is creating what is really a
> different world. The kinds of "hierarchical, patriarchal, and exclusive
> modes of story telling that have gone on in homes and churches" are getting
My objection, and the objection of anyone that isn't an anarchist, is
not that all heirarchies are unjust. It is that there are some
heirarchies -- the ones, for instance, that you most avidly promote --
that are founded in total nonsense, operate without the consent of the
people they oversee, and are ultimately accountable to no one
> If the people who are reveling in (or perhaps I should say,
> *rebelling in*) all this get their way, there will no longer be a hierarchy
> in either the family or the church. They think this is a good thing, because
> they are at least as talented as, if not smarter and better than, the people
> who have been placed over them as rulers, but the rulers refused to
> recognize that by sharing power with them.
This is interesting. Tell me, Taro, about the decision-making inferiority of:
(1) women in the home
(2) laypeople in the church
(3) slaves in the plantation
Please show your work.
> The idea is, "If the existence of
> the hierarchy means I have to submit to *that* idiot, it is better that the
> hierarchy be destroyed. A hierarchy that refuses to put me at its apex is
> inherently unjust."
A heirarchy that depends on the constant presence of divine
intercession to function in a just manner is fundamentally unjust.
Whatever his other superlative qualities may be, God Almighty, Creator
of Heaven and Earth is a bit of an absentee manager. While I would
most certainly appreciate an angel with a flaming sword battering
people out of the way of the door to the Logos gym, or a plague of
asps, frogs, lice, or lions smiting those with whom I would disagree*,
the Almighty no longer takes such a micromanagerial approach with
Creation. It is the very depth of presumption to expect that, without
any other forms of accountability built in, that He would intervene to
rain misfortune on your church if you were to, for instance, deviate
seriously from Christian orthodoxy.
> Of course, they can't take this approach vis-a-vis the last remaining
> government institution -- the institution of the State -- because the State
> carries a bigger gun than any individual could wield.
> The family and the church don't have guns to enforce their authority, so it's open season.
> Thus protected, every knave feels confident in attacking knights with their words, calling > it "leveling the playing field."
There is no such thing "the family" and "the church." You are making a
categorical error. There is "your family"; "your church." If the State
interposes to protect my family from your church, and the presumption
your church has that the state is its subordinate, then it is
correctly performing its duties.
Tell me, Taro, about the First Amendment. How do you feel about it? My
suspicion is that your opinions vis-a-vis free speech mirror,
somewhat, those of orthodox Muslims on the Mohammad cartoons.
> How noble.
> -- Princess Sushitushi
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
More information about the Vision2020