Like many or any remotely interested in thse things, I trotted right on over to the conversative website that broke the CBS forgery scandal. Good for them. As an aside, it was collectively 'discovered' by their readers but what's a little credit-spreading when the spotlights are on?
Anyway, once there, I spent way more time than I should have reading articles and following their recommended links. Then, I'm the one that actually read Celestine Prophecy. In its execrable entirety. Because you just have to if you intend to lodge any criticisms. My little personal rule. :)
My. Oh my. What to say when highly trained and clearly agile minds fix themselves on arch conservative philosophy and reasoning. What to say when they knowingly, deliberately stir up racism and - yes - my big one - fear. One of the blog's founders, an attorney, authored an article on religious tolerance and the obligations to a state. His primary source, used to establish the legitimacy of his position, no, wait. WORSE - in fact - his entire position rests on this source. John Locke, one of the stars of the Enlightenment. The Age of Reason. He should be ashamed of himself. Any conservative reader who puffs up with pride and thinks: OOee, the guys on my side sure know what they're talking about would be well advised to educate themselves. Cosmetically, I can't say I don't agree with Mister Attorney's point - that we should expect religious leaders who enjoy the protection of our form of government to not engage in sedition. (Although, will you be surprised that Locke was perfectly willing to concede that under some circumstances, revolution is perfectly acceptable? Well, maybe you would be surprised if you didn't know the contemporary history of England, the Reformation and Civil War, heading into the interesting 18th Century).
As an entire piece, though, and considered in light of the oh-so-popular tasks they've set themselves to - racial profiling - it is an argument of some dishonesty.
I might agree to racial profiling if we also implement idiot-profiling, asshole-profiling, and men-who-can't-think their ways out of paper bags-profiling. Hold on. I'm not through. I want liar profiling, I want greed profiling. I want men with tiny dicks profiling. I want women who only want to please their men profiling. I want illiteracy profiling and I want got-there-by-your connections profiling. I certainly want manipulation profiling - this is an outrageous example of people willing to seize their power from a constituency of the not very well educated. And I think Mister Attorney should submit himself immediately to sophistry-profiling.
This man was educated in the Socratic method. You can be sure he knows what he's doing. You can be sure he knows that his 'perfect' audience will not be asking questions and figuring it out for themselves. If you're a Republican, it OUGHT to piss you off.
Oh. Whoops. I never got to my new project. When I do, though, it's a project inspired by the above, intolerable misleading.
