MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
No bio...
User ID: 896
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
13hr ago
"A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse!"
That isn't a nice thing to say about Camilla Parker-Bowles.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
13hr ago
As far as I'm aware marriage for love was quite rare in the era before the suffrage.
In cisHajnal societies, middle-class and below young men and women chose their own partners, and presumably took sexual attraction into account when choosing. The date this pattern arises is not clear, but definitely before 1400. Dating pools were much smaller and there was more pressure to settle, but it was closer to the modern system immediately before dating apps than it was to parentally-arranged marriage.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
13hr ago
And they are possibly being outbred by low-IQ women
While the end-Baby-Boom-to-1990s fertility decline was dysgenic, the post-2010 decline in coupling and fertility is eugenic, in that the lower classes are being hit harder than the middle class and above. It is only dysgenic relative to the parts of sub-Saharan Africa where people still use flip phones.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
13hr ago
Consensus building.
Not really. "We" here is a reference to the kind of blue-collar worker @Goodguy was talking about (i.e. someone who puts a lot of their identity into being the kind of person who works hard in a physically demanding job), a demographic which is underrepresented here. If @hydroacetylene's "we" is accurate and he is indeed a regular blue-collar guy, he is providing the Motte with useful information we wouldn't otherwise have access to.
Whenever we say "this thing is sacred, it shall not be traded for profane goods"
People who actually think sex has a sacred element don't just think it should not be traded for profane goods - they think it should not happen outside marriage at all (de jure) or with a narrow exception for relationships where the parties are ready, willing and able to be shotgun married (de facto).
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
13hr ago
Interestingly, standard British usage is that "Lego" is a mass noun (like "water") - it is always used in the grammatical singular with non-counting quantifiers like "some Lego" or "$1000 worth of Lego" or no quantifier as in "models built of Lego". We would never say "Legos" and a single brick would be a "piece of Lego" or a "Lego brick". Whereas standard US usage is as a countable noun (like "coin") with each brick being an individual Lego.
Lego Corp want Lego to be an adjective because that makes it easier to protect their trademark. Like Rollerblade wanting their inline skates to be called "Rollerblade skates" and not "Rollerblades", and with about as much chance of success.
I have no idea why BrE and AmE diverge on this point, particularly as neither is following the Lego Corp position.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Herodias' daughter got the head of John the Baptist, which by most accounts is worth rather more than half the kingdom. (Note that this isn't Herod the Great, it's his younger son Herod Antipas who ruled a postage-stamp size kingdom in Galilee as a client of the Roman Empire).
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Cross-checking your link against this one on euthanasia more generally and a quick google of individual churches suggests that the ELCA does oppose euthanasia, but not the removal of feeding tubes. Essentially all the major Protestant denominations support withdrawal of medical treatment in this type of case, but most make a distinction between medical treatment (which can be withdrawn) and food and water*(which should never be), or weasel out of taking a side on food. The SBC, for example is explicit that food is not medical treatment and should never be withdrawn, and the local SBC congregation excommunicated the judge in the Schiavo case.
Interestingly, even pozzed denominations like the Episcopalians still oppose euthanasia.
* A major part of the case against the Liverpool Care Pathway was that it was euthanasia by dehydration
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
If nobody wants it, it won't happen.
I'm not sure why randos are telling opinion pollsters that they expect a civil war in the next 10 years, but "they have carefully thought about the issue and made a considered judgement call, such that the wisdom of crowds applies" is not a credible answer.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
In the UK, the number of people who want the culture war to go hot is indistinguishable from zero. In America day-of-the-rope poasters exist, and Musk amplifies their social media posts so they look more visible than they are, but my impression is that the actual numbers are Lizardmen-tier - and I am not even sure if they actually mean it rather than shitposting.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
but that abortion for a life long disability is much more relatable
Most sane people think this. The thread is overindexing on social media disability activists, most of whom are mentally ill themselves.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Choosing not to actively prolong someone else's life is different than choosing to intentionally end a life. Your hypothetical situation here would not be murder.
Although euthanasia opponents consider something like the Liverpool Care Pathway to constitute euthanasia. So they draw the distinction between "actively prolong" and "intentionally end a life" somewhere other than where most medics would draw it. In particular, Christian euthanasia opponents consider withdrawing artificial feeding and hydration from a patient who can't eat and drink for themselves to be murder rather than "choosing not to actively prolong" - hence the Terri Schiavo case and numerous other less famous cases.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
"Sophia" wasn't seeking MAID because she was homeless - it isn't even clear that she was homeless at the point she started the process. She was seeking MAID because she had a squirrelly illness which she (almost certainly wrongly) believed was caused by sensitivities to large numbers of common household chemicals, and the authorities refused to give her a chemical-free home.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Christians adopted their views about children when infant mortality was still around 50%.
The idea that "save every child" is something that might actually be achieved, rather than an expression of heroic virtue in the face of impossible odds, is something you start to see in the 19th century.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
People should be able to abort for any reason except sex selection is a pretty standard lefty viewpoint.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
although TradCaths should supposedly be quite down for criticizing the pope for being too ${CurrentYear}
TradCaths are willing to criticise the Pope for deviating from Catholicism. They aren't willing to criticise the Pope for deviating from secular conservatism. The idea that the Christian thing to do can be determined by considering secular conservative political theory is pretty much exclusive to American evangelicals.
Christianity is a universalising religion. You are going to struggle to get a Christian to endorse "Now the Good Samaritan has come to the attention of the authorities, time to deport him back to Samaria, ideally after a few weeks in a deliberately squalid prison camp to deter imitators" or "Actually it would have saved the Roman Empire a lot of trouble if the authorities in Roman Egypt had shipped the Holy Family back to King Herod" - even though the latter is probably correct. You can find Biblical prooftexts for "Rulers should do the politically prudent thing, not the WWJD thing" to go along with the usual secular arguments that immigration restriction is prudent. But immigration restriction isn't Christian doctrine. My understanding of modern Catholic teaching is that the only secular political questions which are a matter of doctrine are right-to-life issues.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
If we're edgelording, I prefer "Mong". It's the term that was used in British school playgrounds when I was in school, though as with all such terms more for people who acted like they had Downs than for people who actually did.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Downs is a trisomy, not a mutation, so there are no healthy carriers in the sense that there are for e.g. haemophilia or cystic fibrosis.
(There are genes which somewhat increase the odds of a Downs baby, but the effect is small compared to maternal age).
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
The first historical pagan reference to Christianity is from ~112 CE by Pliny the Younger, governor of northern Turkey, asking the Emperor his advice on dealing with recalcitrant Christians.
Technically true because Josephus doesn't call it Christianity, but Josephus writes about Jesus in around 93AD, saying that he was hailed as the Messiah and that he was executed by Pilate. This implies the existence of a group of people doing the hailing - i.e. Christians.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
common understanding of Jesus's message
It's not just a common understanding if Jesus' message, it's an obviously correct one.
The historical Jesus was, whether he was God the Son or not, an apocalyptic preacher who at the least didn't correct his followers' belief that the Second Coming and Last Judgement would happen during their lifetimes. Jesus' teaching on politically-sensitive topics is a combination of heroic personal virtue on one hand and political quietism/obedience to secular authority on the other - he is teaching in a context where the Roman Empire is what it is and rebelling against it is obviously stupid (which did not prevent the Jews rebelling, or suffering the consequences). And with that background, "regardless of what ICE is or is not doing, you, personally, should show love for the illegal immigrants as a display of self-sacrificing personal piety" makes perfect sense.
The Gospel simply isn't trying to be a source of secular wisdom for princes (or democratic citizens) - hence the consistent attempts by Christian political theorists to find Christian political wisdom in the Old Testament and needing a way round the fact that Solomon definitely was not Christian and was subject to ritual laws that we are not because they have been fulfilled in Christ. But most Christian political movements get their secular politics from secular sources.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Eugenics is broadly popular unless:
- You call it eugenics or
- It involves State coercion to remove people from the gene pool
Think about attitudes to choice of donor gametes in the IVF industry.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
Agreed - it would be less scandalising for a middle-class woman in most places to have an illegal abortion than to use a Baby Moses law.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
I think it's been a soap opera staple all the way back to Roe in the US and the 1967 Abortion Act in the UK. But the first time the abortion actually happened in a British soap was surprisingly late - before Emmerdale in 2020 all abortion plotlines ended with the mother keeping the baby, or the issue being defused by a miscarriage.
MadMonzer
Temporarily embarassed liberal elite
1d ago
But medical abortions, including if the child has Down's Syndrome, are always allowed. If your child has Down's Syndrome, that's a valid reason for abortion, and pretty much nobody would say otherwise, including conservatives.
Abortion of sufficiently disabled fetuses (up to and including completely nonviable ones such as anencephaly) are where the views of pro-life Christian conservatives diverge from normie social conservatism in a way which has driven some of the nastiest post-Dobbs rows. Christian conservatives support a reasonably broad physical health of the mother exception and want it to work for the small number of women who need it - the reason why it doesn't in some red states is incompetence rather than malice. But Christian conservatives, for reasons which are good and sufficient if you accept their view of Christian morality, want no exceptions whatsoever for fetal illness, and the post-Dobbs abortion bans don't include them.
If he is a sufficiently atypical example that his views are not representative even when he thinks they are, that would be stolen valour (which while scurvy, is not moddable) rather than consensus-building.
I take @hydroacetylene's "we" seriously in the absence of evidence that he is not what he claims to be, and I would hope that my "we" is taken similarly seriously when I claim to speak on behalf of British liberals (in the British sense - the word has subtly different meanings in BrE and AmE). Given the unreliability of the MSM, the only ways the Motte gets to benefit from the perspectives of people who are not MAGA-supporting disgruntled grey tribers is to listen to the ones it has.
More options
Context Copy link