David Grossman's article "Trained to Kill" brings me back to a continuing concept of human developement, or simply evolving.


-got Liedloff?

~C~

-- Critt Jarvis (middleground@critt.com), May 02, 1999

Answers

Thanks for the link...

If there was any doubt about getting cable TV in our new, rural (bad TV reception) home for our 3-year-old to get her dose of media violence from.... now, NO WAY!

(Now to convince the other parents in friends' homes she'll soon be visiting...)

-- jor-el (jor-el@krypton.com), May 02, 1999.

Thanks for re-mentioning that excellent article, Critt. It's vital information for those who take part in the struggle against the forces of darkness.

I'd like to urge everyone out there to join me in ordering reprints of this article and distributing them to friends, family, teachers, politicians, anyone who might put David Grossman's findings to good use.

Reprints of this article may be obtained by writing to:

CT Reprints, Attn.: Paulette DePaul, 465 Gundersen Drive Carol Stream, IL 60188

or by e-mailing PDePaul@aol.com and requesting "Trained to Kill."

The cost (including postage and handling) is $8 for 10 copies, $18 for 25 copies, $32 for 50 copies, $57 for 100 copies, $105 for 500 copies, $165 for 1,000 copies. Prices good for one year from the date of this issue.

-- Max Dixon (mcdixon@konnections.com), May 02, 1999.

Well I guess it is time to burn the Constitution, what we need in this country is a nice theocracy. That will stop all of this freedom nonsense. Yup, it works good in Iraq and Iran.

-- Mr Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), May 02, 1999.

Mr. Deedah, may I respectfully inquire as to what's got your panties in a twist?

Was it the reference to an article at a Christian website? "Christian" does not automatically equal intolerance. "Christian Reconstructionist", you bet.

Was it my sentence "It's vital information for those who take part in the struggle against the forces of darkness."? Would you not call Hitler-idolizing teenage goths committing mass murder a part of "the forces of darkness"?

I'm not advocating censorship ala Donald Wildmon. I do think that parents should closely control what young children are exposed to; garbage in, garbage out. It seems to me that "Trained to Kill" has important insights into why so many children are killing children these days.

Children killing children. How depraved and horrible!

-- Max Dixon (mcdixon@konnections.com), May 02, 1999.

Great article, which I've printed and saved (and as I see it, the religious aspect isn't forced on anyone who doesn't want it).

Got Liedloff? (If you mean Jean, then yes!) This seems to me relevant. There is now a backlash to regain "control" of children, and parents are resolving to stop being "permissive," and "show" children that actions have "consequences." But aren't "punishment" and "anything goes" two sides of a false coin?

Who 's in Control? The Unhappy Consequences of Being Child-Centered (by Jean Liedloff)

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), May 02, 1999.

Mr. Deedah,

You said...

"Well I guess it is time to burn the Constitution, what we need in this country is a nice theocracy. That will stop all of this freedom nonsense. Yup, it works good in Iraq and Iran."

-- Mr Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), May 02, 1999.

This is not a "religious" forum but when you attack I will counter that with a bit of fact, that is if you believe in what Christians believe and if not then this will mean nothing to you.

(2 Cor 3:17 KJV) "Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

And the de-constructors have been tearing at our liberty for decades and..."You sow the wind, reap the whirlwind."

(Psa 16:11 KJV) "Thou wilt show me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore."

This is my view of Christianity which may seem strange to the "hell fire and damnation" crowd. I kinda like the "fulness of joy" and "pleasures for evermore part." Also seems to me that there will be a definite end to war, slavery, injustice, and fill in the blanks as you wish.

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com), May 02, 1999.

What I find ironic is that the protagonist in Clockwork Orange (mentioned in the article), before he became re-sensitized to violence through chemical therapy, loved to read the bible.

TyphonBlue

and a line to be cu

-- TyphonBlue (typhonblue@hotmail.com), May 02, 1999.

Max my ol' chum,

You ought to know by now that having wadded up panties is my normal state of mind.

First come the calls for "something to be done" about this or that, then come the badly conceived laws brought about by the elected whore- mongers. But the thing that really irked me about this article was the call for the "Media" to be hauled into court and sued. Wonderful, just what we need, a further assault on the First Amendment. More scum sucking lawyers enriching themselves at the public trough. Watch out smokers it's getting near the end for you. Next thing is for the cockroaches to go after Burger King and Mickey D's. "Can't have folks destroying their bodies on all of that fatty food." It's coming, I garrone-tee! Gun troubles? Sue the makers of the firearms, not the crimminals. No body is responsible for the actions they take anymore, the blame is always somewhere else. The fingers are pointed everywhere except at the party that committed the act and I'm sick of it.

Does it strike anyone else strange that our culture glorifies violence, and it is OK for teen viewing, but God forbid that any nudity be shown? Killing is fine, but don't show any boobies on TV, that's bad. Comes from our puritain ethics, onward Christian soldiers, glorious battle is a good thing, but sexuality is sinful, and to be kept behind closed doors. Guns good, peckers bad.

I do agree that television violence is not good for kids. Young ones even more so than teens. Hey, if we as a culture decide to keep certain things away from children, and we can do it without trampling the rights of adults in the process, it is fine by me. Until then let the parents police their kids, and if they do a bad job of it and little Johnnie becomes a crook or killer, fry 'im or throw away the key. But put the final responsibility where it belongs, on the individual.

The last thing we need is more lawyers suing more and more entities, and politicians making more and more laws restricting more and more of our freedoms. With freedom comes some chaos, there will never be a perfect world.

And yes Max, gun toting killers are the forces of evil, whether they are killing students or abortion doctors.

-- Mr Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), May 02, 1999.

May I respectfully suggest that to the extent one believes in "god" and is religious is an measure of their pathology? Any ability for believers to function in real life is merely an indication of hypocrisy and/or ability to "comparmentalize."

The prevalence of belief in "god" and religion is an indication of the actual primitiveness and infantile psychology of believers.

-- A (A@AisA.com), May 02, 1999.

"The prevalence of belief in "god" and religion is an indication of the actual primitiveness and infantile psychology of believers."

Oh yeah, how about this...The prevalence of belief that technology will solve all of our worldly problems and enrich our lives with meaning, peace, and prosperity is an indication of Modernity's arrogance and bankrupcy of conscience. Sometimes what you call "primitive," naive or childlike isn't so bad, considering the mess that so many "mature and rational" adults--convinced above all else of their own righteousness--have left this world in.

Surely you should know that around here with all the conservative Christian-types, that your comments will be little more than flame bait.

But let me address you rationally...atheism is no more rational than a belief in God. Why? It is beyond us mere mortals to answer unanswerable "chicken and egg" questions of the sort.

Possibility A, the Atheist spin: The universe as we know it--in all its complexity and even self-awareness--has always existed. Even if it did not *always* exist, it is probably a mere bubble off some other universe, which is in turn part of another universe-bubble, and so on and so on. These bubble-universes, of which ours is merely an infinitesmal fraction, don't need a creation event because they've *always* been birthing each other. The fact that we live in a very "special" universe only means that we are "lucky" to be in one with physical parameters to support life...since the Multiverse gets an infinite amount of chances to "get it right," we happen to in one of the universes who won the cosmic "lottery" to allow intelligent life.

Possibility B is that there is a great cosmic Mind out there--or in you--(depending on your notion of Divine Transcendence or Imminence) Who is behind the subtle handiwork of the Universe or Multiverse and wants to be known or understood. This Creator, this unmoved Mover, this uncaused Cause, ultimately set(s) things in motion according to parameters and constraints of the Creator's own design. Wherever there is Reality and existence there is God, beyond time yet always in the present moment.

Alternative "B" makes more sense to me and to a lot of people even though it falls slightly short of complete logical proof. That is because it Just Makes More Sense, intuitively, that there was Something Watching-- Something Aware--that was(is) behind and beyond and within the very first stirrings of the multiverse if not our own universe. Otherwise, why would we humans instinctively want to reach out towards things of Perfection: love, truth, and beauty? Such things, it can be argued, are (in their purest form) elements that are consistent with themselves and with each other and cannot be "canceled out" eroded by billions of years of consequences, therefore being Divine and timeless. Why do we foolish humans spend so much time reaching for the Divine (or in your case, trying to disprove and deny the Divine) when we could be simply striving for satisfaction instead of greatness? Why do we have a universe with sameness and difference in the precise, seemingly optimal balance to allow commmunication of ideas. Because no idea is "worth it?" Hardly. God is out there. I can feel it. G

I realize this is not as clear as it could be but do take the time to think this over. Now it is time to take a neap.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), May 02, 1999.

Mr D, I agree, We don't more legislation, which is primarily of the lawyers, by the lawyers, and for the lawyers. We need more personal responsibility and you've stated it well. I don't want to live in a childproof world either. As to violence vs nudity... here's a message from a website that I used to visit often before this Y2K business took center stage:

WARNING: SOME of these public pages MIGHT display some form of NUDITY

( GASP !!! )

Here in the U.S., any form of nudity is considered HARMFUL, and a SHAMEFUL sin. But ANY form of VIOLENCE, like shooting, stabbing, rape, dismemberment, etc., is OKAY. In the U.S. we entertain ourselves and our children with these lessons of accepted brutal behavior...

But to display the full sight of God's own creation... That's BAD !!! US network censors will allow no more than TWO SECONDS of love making, but will permit continuous HOURS of murderous axe hacking. Go figure...

If you are one of these pathetic hypocrites, don't go away mad...

JUST GO THE F*CK AWAY !!!

-------------------------------------------------------------

"A"-- Pathology? You must have trouble dealing with authority.

-------------------------------------------------------------

coprolith, Pretty clear, I'd say!

-- Max Dixon (mcdixon@konnections.com), May 02, 1999.

Max - I know what you mean. I like action movies, but get really tired when they show up on TV with every tender moment ripped out so they come off as one continuous violent montage.

To those who wish for theocracy - go form your own group or whatever and live by yourselves. If you fear the US govt. go live in Costa Rica or Guyana. But don't tell me all the stuff about how peaceful the New Testament is - it may promote peace and love, but the practice of large organized Christian groups of every sort has been very contrary to promotion of peace and love. If you insist on examples I suggest you spend some time in the public library - look up Crusades, Albigensian, St. Bartholomew's Day massacre (SP - ask the librarian), Merrymount, the organized attempts to steal Indian land by various church groups (continuing even today), the Inquisition - and don't miss trying to find a copy of Torquemada's 'Confessions of the Jew'. Don't leave out the continuous persecution of men of science - from the burning of Bruno, the threats of torture to Galileo - all the way up to the Scopes Monkey Trial and the attempts to persuade the Supreme Court that 'Creationism' - a totally bogus attempt to make a religous belief sound scientific - deserved a FORCED placement in high school science texts. We can add in the witch burning and hanging craze that swept the world several times before it finally wore itself out in Salem.

I honestly would rather suffer under the likes of Hitler than a theocracy - at least Hitler was an honest despot who admitted he would do anything or kill anyone to further his ends, instead of torturing someone to death under the excuse of trying to improve the poor SOB and save his soul.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), May 03, 1999.

Uh..er...mmmm... yuh, well...

Paul, here's the link again: "Trained to Kill". I think you missed it the first time.

~C~

-- Critt Jarvis (middleground@critt.com), May 03, 1999.

Paul,

Well said! I, for one, am glad that you stick around.

All I have to add right now is this silliness:

"No one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Put him in.....The Comfy Chair!"

Regards,

-- Mr Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), May 03, 1999.

Mr. Davis said:

>>I honestly would rather suffer under the likes of Hitler than a theocracy - at least Hitler was an honest despot who admitted he would do anything or kill anyone to further his ends, instead of torturing someone to death under the excuse of trying to improve the poor SOB and save his soul. <<

I have read some poorly composed messages with Paul Davis' name attached, but this one tops them all. Next time, think before you write. If this sentiment exemplifies the quality of your thought processes in general, then your stance on Y2K is easily understood. How odd that one can be polly concerning a real, imminent problem like Y2K but doomer regarding some personal concept of a theocracy. "Honest despot" indeed.

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), May 04, 1999.