Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Is Lord Ganesh eying the Earth Goddess' rack?
Women are the most valuable part of the man and woman creation, and borrowing a Woman's Image to become a goddess recieving worship and sacrifices for use by the High Priests and their associates is and ancient scam. If these objects represent meaningless myths, then throw them away. if they are supernaturally empowered objects, then throw them away even quicker.
Ah. Life among the candles and sandals crowd.
Surely there are some fabulous mountain-y place besides Boulder which could be graced by the Class Act Meadehouse. I mean, assuming you are interviewing Boulder.Denver?Boulder just seems too full of itself.Just sayin'.
While I have to wonder about the mindset of someone who would create such a sculpture, I wonder even more about anyone who would actually buy and display it. The word “hideous” doesn’t even come close to describing it. Ah, the good old “People’s Republic of Boulder.”
Is Lord Ganesh eying the Earth Goddess' rack?No, the limber one next to her.
What, did you visit Nederland? If you really want to see some hippies travel north on the Peak to Peak, turn east at the town of Ward. That's a hippie town!
When God was a Woman
I think 99% of the idiocy would leave this gender game if we accepted the scripture truth that God created man as man and woman. It takes a terrible ignorance to assert that they are separate categories in God's eyes. Not that there is anything wrong with terrible ignorance.
What the hell!
Ah, you are still in Boulder. The phot proves it!Nice beer in Boulder though! College towns always have good intoxicants.Trey
She looks fecund... and bloated.
GAIA has put on some weight! I wonder who the father is?! She is going to need a really big "Hooter Hider" made out of hemp...
Wow, that is some seriously ugly junk. But there's a market for it. Wherever you go there's a market for dreck. Let's you know that the average Jane/Joe you pass on the street is aesthetically challenged, big time. Of course the Janes that buy this stuff would laugh at the Janes who buy velvet paintings. Same tribe, different tepee.
Is that Sister Max? I don't even know if Sister Max is still open.
A cafe this early? You must be on the road again.Interesting that mountains and earth goddesses are going together the last couple of days. (theme?)Even more interesting, as the Lefty Boomers fade into history, that kind of woman - round, soft, fertile, nurturing - with hips and a round bottom and a graceful waist as well as breasts is coming back to the fore. Maybe the return of real women will herald a return of some real men. We could certainly use them.JAL said... Surely there are some fabulous mountain-y place besides Boulder which could be graced by the Class Act Meadehouse.There's always the road between Socorro and Phoenix (as you cross the AZ border (especially around sunset), right out of a John Wayne movie) or the one between Cheyenne and Laramie (just watch out for the wind).WV "goussed" When you catch the one you love unawares at Whole Foods.
Nature is Satan's church...
Derived: Venus of Willendorf.I know about derivation. Everything I do is hopelessly derived, which makes me think myself a failure and causes despair. * hangs head in shame * * lifts head, grins * Not really.
I had nothing to do with that woman, never met her, never slept with her. Unless you count camping in the wilderness, but even then I was wearing a condom 24/7.
"Nature is Satan's church..."Then let's burn it down, all of it. That will teach the little devil.
When god was a woman fecundity tended to be glorified. The "woman" was creator that way, but often also destroyer. An Earth Goddess would be both.As much as certain sorts fuss about a patriarchal god, not a single one of the fussers would be happy with the Earth Goddess... because she'd be the one insisting that wombs be full and productive. And the goddess as destroyer, like nature, harsh and unforgiving... do please recall the fuss over hurricanes having female names. The horror!
Trying to save the planet 'is a lot of nonsense'.
Oh, and she's fat, too. ;-)
Venus of WillendorfEarly women's tennis player.
What happened in that 15 year old girl suicide post: I never saw such poor logic or argument on both side before. From host to commenters just one big brain fart. Of course, I made perfect sense, it's a curse.
But more importantly, how long will Jessae James wait before returning to Monster Garage?
"But more importantly, how long will Jessae James wait before returning to Monster Garage?"Is that really what he calls her? That's rude.
Different strokes, I suppose. I think Mother Earth is beautiful. Her features look Asian, maybe even African? In any case, she's going forth and multiplying.Which reminds me, our census forms are due tomorrow.
Heeeyyy guys, funny, haven't I have seen a photo of her before over at Instapunk?Ah, yea, the wonderful Instapunk:"Intellectual Mush" http://www.instapunk.com/archives/InstaPunkArchiveV2.php3?a=2096
"Nature is Satan's church..."He's an unwelcome worshipper then... Nature is not his domain, after all. "You will go out in joyand be led forth in peace;the mountains and hillswill burst into song before you,and all the trees of the fieldwill clap their hands.Instead of the thornbush will grow the pine tree,and instead of briers the myrtle will grow.This will be for the Lord’s renown,for an everlasting sign,which will not be destroyed."
Alice in Wonderland 3-D is brilliant. The astonishing thing about the 3-D is objects appear to come right out of the screen and fly past your head and other times hover directly in front of your face. They ask you to recycle the glasses they give you. They're not the cool one lens red one lens blue kind, they're the polarized kind. I saw no immediate use for them so being a well-behaved person I complied. Being a good Christian, my sister kept hers. For what, I do not know, other than she deemed them somehow worth keeping.
I invented 3D. Before me, this universe was pathetic.
Bad Earth Goddess art -- the cliches invent themselves.At least they embrace the supple curves of Willendorf.If they hollowed this thing out and made a bong with it, at least it would have a purpose.
Paddy O., "nature is Satan's Church" is a quote from the movie "Antichrist."It's set mostly at a forest cabin retreat called Eden where a man and a woman have a bad time. Nature is portrayed as hostile.But theologically speaking, are you sure nature isn't Satan's domain? At least temporarily or partially?After the Fall, childbirth became difficult and man had to toil and sweat to earn his bread. And what about that Job business? And outside of the Bible, there is a lot of evidence that nature is awful – death, disease, famine, squirrels who eat their own babies...
Oh, yeah, this is terrible... horrible... much worse than the Catholics, for instance. I mean... the Catholics only have a large number of their institutional members sexually abusing children, aided and abetted by the whole hierarchy of the organization. And as the good God-fearing Bill Donahue and his Catholic League point out, it's not really the fault of the priests or the institutional... it's the GAY PEOPLE!Earth Goddess here is definitely gay. She's pregnant, but eh... you can ignore that... she's definitely gay.Therefore Catholicism is wonderful and shit like this Earth Goddess statue is going to bring about the end of the world through its gayness.
Fellow Republicans I was in Ogunquit Maine this weekend and guess who I saw?On Monday morning I was at the Village Market and Barney Frank was there. He was wearing a shirt saying, "Got Frank"-like "Got Milk".I shook his hand and told him I thought he was awesome.He was dressed sloppily, was with his boyfriend, I think and is really overweight.Thanks so much. Have a great day.We stayed at the Old Village Inn on Main Street-I highly recommend it. Only an hour from Boston, with a fabulous brunch. Also, they allow dogs.We went to the beach each morning and it was fabulous.
We also went to the Stonewall Kitchen which is absolutely fabulous. I recommend all of my fellow republicans to go there, although it is owned by a couple of mos.
When on the beach my rare clumbers tend to pinch multiple loafs. Not sure why that is but the ocean/sand seem to make them pinch quite a bit.
Lastly, I love the ocean. I don't think I could live anywhere that wasn't near the ocean.The ocean is so beautiful and rough and amazing.I feel bad for people that don't live near the ocean.No lake can compare to the ocean.After April 1 dogs cant walk on the ocean in Ogunquit which is depressing.I love Maine too. Soo beautiful, a slower pace and the people are so nice. I will probably retire there for the summer months while having a home in some exotic locale for the winter months.Did you know that only about 10 restaurants and a dozen hotels/b&B's were open in Ogunquit this weekend.Where do those business owners go in the off season I kept asking myself.I farted in bed with my husband this weekend. This was the fourth time I farted in bed with him. I was yelling at one of the rare clumbers and then a fart accidently escaped my rock hard ass.
Is it safe to say that in this case, idolatry is the safest form of stupidity?
Escaped or drove out?
Squirrels who eat their own babies? If we had single payer they would not be forced to do this. Obama, your work is not done!
Oh... More culture "war" shit. (Rolls eyes).Why not move on to the "news" item about Ricky Martin coming out of the closet? Did that catch all you cons by surprise? Your level of incredulity at that would be much more entertaining... and telling. Come on! It's the least all y'all could do. I mean, you are the ones who are proposing to run society and define it for everyone else. So 'fess up. Ricky Martin. Surprised or what took so long? Let your deep and intuitive understanding of human nature be your guide.
The only weird issue I had with the Village Inn in Ogunquit is you have to walk through the restaurant with your dogs in order to get to your room.Lots of Frenchie/Canadians there too.
So 'fess up. Ricky Martin. Surprised or what took so long?What about those that don't care about Ricky's sexuality. Can we vote for none of the above?
What about those that don't care about Ricky's sexuality. Can we vote for none of the above?Very noble of you to propose that such an integral part of identity as one's own sexuality is too unimportant for you to notice, Bushman. But arbitrariness doesn't equate to unimportance - at least, not when "preserving traditional marriage" is such an important plank of the conservative agenda. So I could say it is equally unimportant whether someone is wearing red or blue. But to pretend that because of that, I'm incapable of noticing the difference, is something different altogether. And that would say something about my ability to perceive reality. Again, conservatives are fuming about not being allowed to govern while daring to argue that they are the more knowledgeable party when it comes to understanding basic human nature. Clearly, if they can't even see something as obvious as Ricky Martin's decade of life in the closet, they are not.
"Is it safe to say that in this case, idolatry is the safest form of stupidity?"Frankly, I didn't see the Earth Mother statue as a form of idolatry, but since you did, and since you see it as the safest form of stupidity, "in this case", I'm wondering in what OTHER case would idolatry not be stupid?
No one sentient could be surprised at Ricky Martin's debut...If I were gay, I'd hope that the fact of one's sexual orientation would be of yawning interest to the public at large. Prurient obsessive need to know revolves more around whom with, these days, anyway,which is ridiculous gossip, too.We should get lives, and not so many People Mag subscriptions.
"Very noble of you to propose that such an integral part of identity as one's own sexuality is too unimportant for you to notice,..."There is only one other person in the whole world other than myself whose sexuality is important enough for me to notice.Sorry Ritmo. But a whole lot of things vitally important to me are yawn inducing to normal people. This is something every parent of a new baby must discover. I'm sure that there are parents out there who never do figure out that something profoundly important and integral to their existence does not automatically hold the same importance to other people.
It takes a terrible ignorance to assert that they are separate categories in God's eyes.Or a familiarity with Genesis and Leviticus.
Or we could test the notion this way..."Oh, wow! She's hetero? Who knew? Such an important element of her identity is something we should all care about and discuss!"No one cares about the all important element of self-identity of heterosexuality unless they're looking for a partner.Isn't this "normative" state what people want for homosexuals, too?
Lots of "lightweight religion" tags lately... Hmmm...I mean, I can understand it. The statue probably weighs, uh, maybe 5 or 6 pounds.Definitely lightweight.Where your average Catholic rapist priest weighs at least 160 pounds or so, I'd say. Probably more.So Catholicism is definitely heavyweight.Especially if you factor in the weight disparity between the rapist priests and their enablers like the pope, and the much lighter young people who they sexually abuse.With that, you could say that Catholicism is double-heavyweight.
There is only one other person in the whole world other than myself whose sexuality is important enough for me to notice.Then, bully for you. I assume you're talking about a spouse -- a state of affairs that is not exactly universal. But I'm glad you're so content to dismiss everyone who doesn't have what you have. That must feel liberating. Sorry Ritmo. But a whole lot of things vitally important to me are yawn inducing to normal people. This is something every parent of a new baby must discover. I'm sure that there are parents out there who never do figure out that something profoundly important and integral to their existence does not automatically hold the same importance to other people.And how fond are you of practicing what you preach?No one cares about the all important element of self-identity of heterosexuality unless they're looking for a partner.Which is such a small, insignificant even, segment of society, right?Isn't this "normative" state what people want for homosexuals, too?Well, it's helpful in advancing their rights to a level equal to that of heterosexuals when it comes to inheritance, visitation, military service, etc., and other things that you must take for granted - given your apparent unwillingness (as demonstrated above) to consider the cards that people unlike you are dealt.
Re the pregnant Shiva:I confess. I watched V last night.Ewwwww. Whatzherface reptile lady is going to birth a horde of reptiles to take over the earth, disguised, of course as humans. She has nasty fangs, and I think the male humanoid reptile thing didn't see the light of day. (Didn't National Enquirer cover this a couple years ago? You know, like they did the John Edwards thing?)Anyway -- the pregnant Shiva reminded me of that. And what I feel sometimes about what is going on in DC.wv whinesseA mistress of whining.
"Well, it's helpful in advancing their rights to a level equal to that of heterosexuals when it comes to inheritance, visitation, military service, etc., "But that is not what you said. You said that we all ought to care because it was personally important to the individual's identity.Now you're saying that we ought to care because it's important to advancing the interest of the group identity.These are not the same thing. I addressed the point you made, not the one you didn't make.
But that is not what you said. You said that we all ought to care because it was personally important to the individual's identity.Now you're saying that we ought to care because it's important to advancing the interest of the group identity.These are not the same thing. I addressed the point you made, not the one you didn't make.Quit quibbling. If you care to know why Republicans aren't trusted to govern, their inability to understand the basic needs of people might be a big part of the problem. It usually is in politics.People's needs are at the heart of their identity, but that's not the point. The point is one of rights. That's the "interest" you label as such - as if "rights" and "interests" are interchangeable... as if the word "interest" can't be used to water down the word "right" and make it sound so... "different"... so extraneous... so easily dismissed. And why do you do the same with the word "group"? Does imagining homosexuals (or single people? One never knows with your tangents...) as some big angry mob help you to be dismissive of them? One thing seems apparent to me. These are things that people who want to be successful in politics, or who just want to lead successfully, try to avoid doing.My point changed because you threw different variables into my assertion - and that changed the original argument into a different, if related, argument.
"But theologically speaking, are you sure nature isn't Satan's domain? At least temporarily or partially?"Yes. Well, death is. So, I'll give you 'partially'. There's just a whole lot of nature imagery in the Bible that suggests that while there's darkness and evil, and perversion of intended realities, there's nowhere that God is not. The Spirit is the Spirit of life--that's the testimony of the earliest passages in Genesis--so where there's life to be found, there's the domain of God. My whole spirituality is nature oriented, for the most part. I feel the closest to God in the midst of nature, and often feel the farthest from God in a church setting. So, while there are places and realities in which it is harder to see goodness and hope, I'd never wholly abandon anything to evil's reign. There's always hope. And where there's hope, there's the best place to worship God.
Ritmo, quite seriously it seems to me that if you're honestly wanting to understand the short commings of the other side it's best not to blatantly misrepresent them. You make assumptions that because I, or someone else, doesn't come to the same conclusions as you do that we've started with different facts. And the thing of it is that defending traditional marriage is no more about denying gay rights than pushing SSM is all about wanting to destroy marriage, yet you made a statement implying that defending traditional marriage was a code phrase that meant anti-gay. It's not.But you've more or less stated that your beginning assumption is that conservative values are anti-gay in an active way and then interpret not caring that some old celebrity is homosexual as evidence of that hostility and proof of your preconception, that conservatives don't understand human needs.That's circular.If you care to know why people don't trust Liberals to govern, it's because of this interpretation of the correct expression of caring taking the place of actual caring. I'd say with as much confidence as you say about conservatives that liberals don't understand human needs. They think they do because they make the right noises to prove to everyone how much they care. Care about people and freedom and liberty. But that ends up being so much about explaining how much other people don't care, are mean and hateful. Who could trust that sort of bluster? Particularly when you're on the receiving end of assumptions and slanders about motivations. "He meant well" is a phrase that only accompanies tragedy.Meaning well, having the right motivation, does nothing for anyone. So it just won't fly you know. Having everyone have to prove the right motivation by adhering to the right ideas about anything, in this case the rights of homosexuals, limits problem solving by limiting which ideas are allowed. It's not actually helping anything, but it makes liberals feel good.The first human need that involves people outside one's immediate attachments is for the simple courtesy of being believed in what you say about yourself.You don't do that.In order to understand other people and their needs you have to do that. Not just to those you are sympathetic with, but those you aren't sympathetic with. Make some basic assumptions about their honesty, good will, and self-awareness.I'm not just knee jerking around when I argue that, for example, the somewhat recent push to identify and confess to "white privilege" is actively harmful to the process of putting racism away at last. And I am not just code-talking some hidden homophobia when I express my belief that making a virtue out of refusing to let homosexuality fade into the ordinary keeps acceptance at bay longer.This is a difference of opinion, certainly, but it doesn't stem from a lack of desire for people to have what they need. It stems from a desire that we stop hanging on to the struggle to the extent that we prevent people from simply getting on with life. I've had too many conversations where I've been entreated to think properly about the horrible situation, whatever it is, and when I ask, "Okay, sure, but how does this get us where we want to go?" I get no answers because there are no answers in any demand to hold on to what we have to let go.Holding on only keeps us where we are.Letting go is victory.That's not a refusal to admit inequities or problems or human need. It's a refusal to cooperate in preventing the desired end goal.
Oh, ok. Then having bad motivations is swell and believing that a "defense" of "traditional" marriage (by, incidentally, doing nothing more than denying it to gay couples) is something gays shouldn't take exception/offense to. Have I restated your position concisely enough? I really don't see what you accomplish in 10+ paragraphs that the above sentence didn't.Also, I like the way you assert (without evidence or reasoning, I might add - a "blind" assertion is what it's called) that encouraging mass ignorance of aspects of racism is the most important way to "putting (it) away". Well, I'd say that I'd feel really, truly sorry for the needs of the beneficiaries of racism when it comes to the pain it causes them to acknowledge their role, passive or active, in perpetuating it. But sorry, I don't really care. Perpetuating callousness, lest I trample on the hypersensitivities of the beneficiaries of pain and injustice, does not conform to my understanding of what constitutes an end to the attitudes of injustice. And you can't say that my indifference bothers you, unless you're a hypocrite and believe that indifference is a luxury that only the beneficiaries of injustice should afford.
"Have I restated your position concisely enough?"Only the part where I give my impression of yours.
Post a Comment