Is Woke a religion?

[McBell]

I think you will find man and woman used more often. Cis man. Trans man. Cis woman. Trans woman. I asked if you cared that your conceptions where out of sync with every major biological and psychological medical organization. Did you answer? Do you care?

From what I have seen, it appears they are mostly upset that they were not consulted about it.

 

[We Never Know]

Gin and tonic and lime slices baby! I'll be out soon. Then I will have to get woke again.

Drinking is bad for you. I drank liquor like schnapps, crown, jack, jim, jose, etc for many years. It took its toll over the years.
I quit about five years ago.
But in my 60's and still have never drank a beer

 

[McBell]

Do minds exist?

Depends entirely upon whom you ask.

 

[ppp]

Depends entirely upon whom you ask.

Obviously. That is a trivially silly observation.

Do minds exist?

 

[We Never Know]

Post #235:

View attachment 94119

Please continue.
I find your dancing most entertaining.

Look at my post.

"Both are having physical sex with their male parts not their minds."

Now tell me how you have physical sex(you might want to define that first) with your mind.

Wouldn't the mind be mental?

 

[Augustus]

I was struck by your use of the same ideas 60 years later.

I am struck by the distortions to rational thought it must have taken to think what I said had any meaningful parallels to justifying a violent act of overt racism.

If you require an analogy from that era that actually relates to what I said, then people could find the ideology and actions of the Nation of Islam or Black Panthers problematic whilst supporting the civil rights movement.

That is quite obviously true.

in a 2020 interview with Vox Magazine Karen Swallow Prior, a professor of English and Christianity and culture at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary recalls “In my conservative Southern Baptist community, the term has become an insult that is used against anyone who is concerned about justice and racism,” She relates how religious leaders were encouraged to push the new usage in their sermons and daily dealings to attack anyone and any idea from the left.

So?

My point was just because some people use the term like that, it’s inane to pretend that everyone is using it like that.

It is wilfully obtuse to pretend that is what is happening across the board.

Americans are remarkably parochial as they assume that people all over the world are taking their lead from the Southern Baptist community.

If you want to learn from history, look at how people of all political persuasions have always found many of the ideas promoted by the left wing intelligentsia to be a bit silly, and also have found those proposing them to be comically self-righteous.

Summed up by George Orwell as “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them”.

Many of the people criticising “woke” ideology and intellectuals are simply continuing in this tradition.

So yes it is perfectly possible for reasonable people to agree with the goal of reducing discrimination., but disagree with certain ideologies that isn't what happened

Of course it is happening. I’m not talking about a single episode but how various common usages exist.

It’s ironic you are misrepresenting and distorting meanings while complaining about others misrepresenting and distorting meanings.

 

[ppp]

Look at my post.

"Both are having physical sex with their male parts not their minds."

Now tell me how you have physical sex(you might want to define that first) with your mind.

Wouldn't the mind be mental?

How do you know they have male parts?
How do you know they have only had male parts?
Which male parts? Penis? Testes? Prostate?

 

[ppp]

I'm not a they.

I am he/him. You?

 

[We Never Know]

I often just use bigot. And apparently you missed where sometimes clarification is needed. As I said it's like race. Most of the time it's just not needed. It adds nothing of real value or use to the information being conveyed so it's just left out. But if you're telling someone who and what the NAACP is then it's an example where it becomes relevant and important to the information. It's as I have previously described with cis. I very rarely ever use it.
It's the same way with sexual relationships. Guys, girls, intersexed, nonbinary, people have sex.

Like it or not, there are some people who think a transgender female who stays physically male and has sexual relationships with men are avoiding the homosexual label by being transgender.
I have no clue so I ask. Its sad that when I ask I am attacked but how I am supposed to understand without asking questions?

 

[McBell]

Look at my post.

"Both are having physical sex with their male parts not their minds."

Now tell me how you have physical sex(you might want to define that first) with your mind.

Wouldn't the mind be mental?

You really should work on your back peddling skills.

 

[We Never Know]

I'm not a they.

In past times it was just sex. The focus on was on the active and passive roles.
There's actually no real need for labels such as homosexual and heterosexual. They are rooted in trying to control sexuality and shame people (not just queers) and we can get along just fine without.

If you look at my post, I refer to everyone, most everyone, probably 99+% here as they.

So its not just you.

 

[We Never Know]

You really should work on your back peddling skills.

Quit dancing tinkerbell.

Tell me how you have physical sex(you might want to define that first) with your mind.

Wouldn't the mind be mental?

You do know the difference between physical and mental don't you?
I sure hope you do. But that could explain a lot

 

[ppp]

If you look at my post, I refer to everyone, most everyone, probably 99+% here as they.

Like that matters.

 

[We Never Know]

Like that matters.

It must. They are the only one that complains.

 

[We Never Know]

Like that matters.

I use they and them all the time.

Here is a recent example and the other poster didn't complain.

Yep. I was trying to be fair help them out by taking the blame and letting you know I brought up Trump first, not them but all that did was lit the fuse on the liberal bomb lol

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's called me expressing my assessment or opinion on the matter; are you not aware of these concepts?

Are you not aware if what a debate is?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I am he/him. You?

She/her

 

[We Never Know]

I am he/him. You?

He/him isn't clear enough. Be clear... are you a cismale or transgender male?

Yeah its that label thing again. But hey, we all have one anymore.

 

[anotherneil]

Are you not aware if what a debate is?

That's what I'm wondering about with you.

We can debate about what a debate is too, but there's also this thing about going off topic, so at this point maybe this ought to go on its own thread.

Normally I'd probably do that now, but with this breaking & developing news about the attempted assassination of Trump, it's not what I'm focused on very much, right now.

Create a thread on debating what a debate is (or look for one, if it already exists), let me know about it, and we can continue the debate on debating there.

I pointed out my point of contention with the idea of wokeness being a religion, but I'll add that in general, to me, anything that isn't science is a candidate for being religion. Exceptions are things that are openly identified as fiction, entertainment, jokes/comedy, etc. To me there's a very dominant overlap between politics and religion.

I'm libertarian & I don't believe government ought to exist to the degree that it exists here in the US. Government should be little more than a referee. For example I'm ok with some things that might be considered socialist, such as government ownership of roads and a UBI (a certain version of it), but I'm opposed to things like central planning or command and control economies, particularly at larger scales; however, I don't consider these types of fiscal/economic policies as religious per se. Other than fiscal/economic policies, I can't think of how any other government policies that go beyond that referee role & these other examples are not motivated by religious beliefs, sentiment, etc.

I have a rather broad idea of what religion is; I've even started a thread where I'm arguing that climate change alarmism is like a religion (maybe if you take a look at my argument there you'll get some insight on my perspective of what religion is or means to me): How climate change alarmism laws are unconstitutional

If there's legislation defining the word "religion" as something different from its definition, then I may have a problem with that, since this "legal definition" for it might be designed to circumvent or undermine the 1st Amendment; such a law probably ought to be ruled unconstitutional. I also have a problem with activist judges or justices inventing their own definitions when their jobs are not to define words, only to interpret them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If there's legislation defining the word "religion" as something different from its definition, then I may have a problem with that, since this "legal definition" for it might be designed to circumvent or undermine the 1st Amendment; such a law probably ought to be ruled unconstitutional. I also have a problem with activist judges or justices inventing their own definitions when their jobs are not to define words, only to interpret them.

If religion is going to get protection from the government then it is required the government have a definition to establsih what exactly it is protecting. If it doesn't define what religion is then how can it grant the freedom to be whatever religion if it doesn't say what a religion is?
Saying activist judges just shows you really need to study this topic so you can make well informed posts rather than coming off as repeating an echo chamber.

I have a rather broad idea of what religion is; I've even started a thread where I'm arguing that climate change alarmism is like a religion

I know. I've seen you misrepresent the scientific consensus so I just stayed out.

We can debate about what a debate is too, but there's also this thing about going off topic, so at this point maybe this ought to go on its own thread.

If you like splitting hairs and hearing yourself talk.

Normally I'd probably do that now, but with this breaking & developing news about the attempted assassination of Trump, it's not what I'm focused on very much, right now.

I've been focused on it too and how the dude missed. So what?