ellauri089.html on line 77: Heinlein used his science fiction to earn money and as a way to explore his provocative social and political ideas, and to speculate how progress in science and engineering might shape the future of politics, race, religion, and sex. Within the framework of his science-fiction stories, Heinlein repeatedly addressed certain social themes: the importance of being earnest, individual liberty and self-reliance, the nature of incestual sexual relationships, the obligation individuals owe to their societies, the influence of organized religion on culture and government, and the tendency of society to repress nonconformist thought. He also speculated on the influence of space travel on human cultural practices.
ellauri089.html on line 98: It started with the famous Henry quotation: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!!". It then went on to admit that there was some risk to nuclear testing (albeit less than the "willfully distorted" claims of the test ban advocates), and risk of nuclear war, but that "The alternative is surrender. We accept the risks." Heinlein was among those who in 1968 signed a pro-Vietnam War ad in Galaxy Science Fiction. Että semmonen libertiini.
ellauri094.html on line 658: “Super Flumina Babylonis” celebrates the release of Italy from bondage in imagery that recalls the resurrection of Christ. The open tomb, the folded graveclothes, the “deathless face” all figure in this interesting poem that sings out, “Death only dies.” In “Quia Multum Amavit,” France, shackled by tyranny, is personified as a harlot who has been false to liberty. She has become “A ruin where satyrs dance/ A garden wasted for beasts to crawl and brawl in.” The poem ends with France prostrate before the spirit of Freedom, who speaks to her as Christ spoke to the sinful woman in the Pharisee’s house, in a tone of forgiveness.
ellauri100.html on line 323: But there is more to my journey into political philosophy. I began to think seriously about liberty and libertarianism in the 1990s. Eventually, I began to question doctrinaire libertarianism (pro-abortion, pro-same-sex “marriage”, etc.) which seems to have no room in it for the maintenance of social norms that bind civil society and make it possible for people to coexist willingly and peacefully, and to engage in beneficially cooperative behavior. And so, I have become what I call a Burkean libertarian. I had slipped all thw way to the right edge of the Virginia boys' scales, in the same way, and for the same reasons, as the Nazis after the shameful defeat in WWI.
ellauri100.html on line 331: I have noticed that a leftist will accuse you of “hate” just for saying something contrary to the left-wing orthodoxy of the day. If you disagree with what I have to say here, but prefer to spew invective instead of offering a reasoned response, don’t bother to submit a comment — at least not until your rage has passed or your medication has taken effect. (My medication is working fine. It is curious how small the distance is between considered opinion and gobbledygook madness.) As it says in the sidebar, I will not publish incoherent, off-point, offensive, or abusive comments except my own. Nor will I lose any sleep for having denied you an outlet for your incoherence, irrelevance, offensiveness, or abusiveness. You can post it on your own blog or on any of the myriad, hate-filled, left-wing blogs that view murder as “choice,” government dictates as “liberty,” self-defense as a “war crime” (when it’s practiced by the U.S. or Israel), and the Constitution as a vehicle for implementing current left-wing orthodoxy.
ellauri100.html on line 337: If you will bother to read very much of this blog and its predecessor, you will find that I am pro-peace, pro-prosperity, and pro-liberty — positions that leftists and certain libertarians like to claim as theirs, exclusively. Unlike most leftists and more than a few self-styled libertarians, I have seen enough of this world and its ways to know that peace, prosperity, and liberty are achieved when government carries a big stick abroad and treads softly at home (except when it comes to criminals and traitors). Most leftists and many self-styled libertarians, by contrast, engage in “magical thinking,” according to which peace, prosperity, and liberty can be had simply by invoking the words and attaching them to policies that, time and again, have led to war, slow economic growth, and loss of liberty.
ellauri119.html on line 736: Both you and Rand are unaware that our founders were heavily influenced by Greek philosophers who proposed the notion of civic virtue. Civic virtue is the view that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one (Atlas with the world on his shoulders). All libertarians are selfish because their concern is their own liberty and the hell with society.
ellauri150.html on line 687: Aanyway, today I want to focus on the encyclical "Libertas" written in 1888. "Libertas" means "liberty" or it could also be translated as "freedom". Either way we are well acquainted with this idea. From the Statue of Liberty to the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights - Americans love their freedom!
ellauri150.html on line 691: The Pope begins by saying that freedom (liberty) is "the highest of natural endowments". He says this gift from God can be used by Man for "the highest good and the greatest evil". And as such this gift is "cherished by the Catholic Church". He quickly refutes the idea that the Church is "hostile to human liberty" as some have claimed. He insists we must come to fully appreciate "the very idea of freedom".
ellauri151.html on line 870: [21] because the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God.
ellauri155.html on line 719: The incompatibilist maintains that if our willings and choices are themselves determined by antecedent causes then we could never choose otherwise than we do. Given the antecedent causal conditions, we must always act as we do. We cannot, therefore, be held responsible for our conduct since, on this account, we have no “genuine alternatives” or “open possibilities” available to us. Incompatibilists, as already noted, do not accept that Hume’s notion of “hypothetical liberty”, as presented in the Enquiry, can deal with this objection. It is true, of course, that hypothetical liberty leaves room for the truth of conditionals that suggest that we could have acted otherwise if we had chosen to do so. However, it still remains the case, the incompatibilist argues, that the agent could not have chosen otherwise given the actual circumstances. Responsibility, they claim, requires categorical freedom to choose otherwise in the same circumstances. Hypothetical freedom alone will not suffice. One way of expressing this point in more general terms is that the incompatibilist holds that for responsibility we need more than freedom of action, we also need freedom of will – understood as a power to choose between open alternatives. Failing this, the agent has no ultimate control over her conduct.
ellauri155.html on line 731: In the Treatise, as was noted earlier, Hume argues that one of the reasons “why the doctrine of liberty [of indifference] has generally been better receiv’d in the world, than its antagonist [the doctrine of necessity], proceeds from religion, which has been very unnecessarily interested in this question” (T 2.3.2.3/409). He goes on to argue “that the doctrine of necessity, according to my explication of it, is not only innocent, but even advantageous to religion and morality”. In the final passages of the Enquiry discussion of liberty and necessity (EU 8.32–6/99–103) – passages which do not appear in the original Treatise discussion – Hume makes it plain exactly how his necessitarian principles have “dangerous consequences for religion”.
ellauri192.html on line 297: While Tokarczuk’s win has been widely lauded — The Guardian declared her “the dreadlocked feminist winner the Nobel needed” (aargh! will some future prize go to Estonia's own bluewig girl Sofi Oxanen?) — Handke’s provoked immediate and widespread displeasure. PEN America, an organization that advocates for writers’ liberty, wrote that it was “dumbfounded by the selection of a writer who has used his public voice to undercut historical truth and offer public succor to perpetrators of genocide.” The Slovenian public intellectual Slavoj Žižek told the Guardian that “In 2014, Handke called for the Nobel to be abolished, saying it was a ‘false canonisation’ of literature. The fact that he got it now proves that he was right.”
ellauri197.html on line 669: Or liberty, or love of mighty souls.

ellauri217.html on line 734: Paul, on the other hand, not only did not object to the observance of the Mosaic Law, as long as it did not interfere with the liberty of the Gentiles, but he conformed to its prescriptions when occasion required (1Corinthians 9:20). Thus he shortly after circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1–3), and he was in fact in the very act of observing that Mosaic ritual with Tim when he was arrested at Jerusalem (Acts 21:26 sqq.) Or so he said.
ellauri219.html on line 597: In his autobiographical essay, “On My Religion,” Rawls explains why he abandoned his orthodox Christian beliefs in spite of the deeply religious temperament that informed his life and writings. In particular, he recounts how his personal experiences during the Second World War, and especially his awareness of the Holocaust, led him to question whether prayer was possible. “To interpret history as expressing God’s will, God’s will must accord with the most basic ideas of justice as we know them. For what else can the most basic justice be? Thus, I soon came to reject the idea of the supremacy of the divine will as [like the Holocaust] also hideous and evil.” Furthermore, by studying the history of the Inquisition Rawls came to “think of the denial of religious freedom and liberty of conscience as a very great evil,” such that “it makes the claims of the Popes to infallibility impossible to accept.” Finally, his reading of Jean Bodin’s thoughts about toleration led him to claim that religions should be “each reasonable, and accept the idea of public reason and its idea of the domain of the political.” Against this background, it is no wonder that Rawls considers the very concept of religious truth as authoritarian and intolerant, and the ensuing persecution of dissenters as the curse of Christianity.
ellauri223.html on line 98: No one is killed or stoned unless by the hands of the people, the accuser and the witnesses beginning first. For they have no executioners and lictors, lest the State should sink into ruin. The choice of death is given to the rest of the people, who enclose the lifeless remains in little bags and burn them by the application of fire, while exhorters are present for the purpose of advising concerning a good death. Nevertheless, the whole nation laments and beseeches God that his anger may be appeased, being in grief that it should, as it were, have to cut off a rotten member of the State. Certain officers talk to and convince the accused man by means of arguments until he himself acquiesces in the sentence of death passed upon him, or else... But if a crime has been committed against the liberty of the republic, or against God, or against the supreme magistrates, there is immediate censure without pity. These motherfuckers are punished with death.
ellauri241.html on line 189: To wander as she loves, in liberty. kuten hän rakastaa, vapaudessa.
ellauri247.html on line 347: Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish, and "How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?" The French and Indian War was a conflict between "two robbers" of Native American lands, and that neither deserved to live there.
ellauri263.html on line 605: Nuoruudessaan Blavatsky oli liikkunut radikaaleissa liberaalis-nationalistisissa piireissä, mutta hänellä ei ilmeisesti ollut koskaan mitään selkeää yhteiskunnallis-poliittista linjaa, paizi toi vähän saatanallinen feminismi (käytännössä vaikkei ehkä teoriassa). Lucifer represents life, though, progress, civilization, liberty, independence. Lucifer is the Logos, the Serpent, the Savior. H. P. Blavatsky’s influential The Secret Doctrine (1888), one of the foundation texts of Theosophy, contains chapters propagating an unembarrassed Satanism. Satan in the shape of the serpent brings gnosis and liberates womankind. Tämmösta kirkasozaista miltonilaista prometeus-saatanaa peukuttivat Miltonin lisäxi ilmeisesti myös Blake, Bakunin ja Proudhon. Sympathy for the devil. Ei ihme että kristilliset piirit vauhkosivat. Blaken saatana alkuperäisessä loistossaan on aika feministinen. Byron ja Shelley oli aikoinaan satanisteja mutta setämiehiä.
ellauri270.html on line 587: 17."Democracy rests upon two pillars: one, the principle that all men are equally entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and the other, the conviction that such equal opportunity will most advance civilization."
ellauri321.html on line 119: This was the Indian; not the red man of actual flesh an and xvii and blood, but the Tenewissa of Crèvecoeur, and the Atala of Chateaubriand. The pressure of the tyrannous centuries drove men to an ideal of extreme liberty. It was the Indian, living in uninterrupted communion with Nature, and within the most flexible of societies, whom they contrasted with the European held in the iron vise of a complex and traditional social order. All the undeniable charm of this ideal of freedom, of simplicity, of a life close to Nature, Crèvecoeur embodied in his book.
ellauri321.html on line 170: As I have endeavoured to shew you how Europeans become Americans; it may not be disagreeable to shew you likewise how the various Christian sects introduced, wear out, and how religious indifference becomes prevalent. When any considerable number of a particular sect happen to dwell contiguous to each other, they immediately erect a temple, and there worship the Divinity agreeably to 62 their own peculiar ideas. Nobody disturbs them. If any new sect springs up in Europe, it may happen that many of its professors will come and settle in America. As they bring their zeal with them, they are at liberty to make proselytes if they can, and to build a meeting and to follow the dictates of their consciences; for neither the government nor any other power interferes. If they are peaceable subjects, and are industrious, what is it to their neighbours how and in what manner they think fit to address their prayers to the Supreme Being? But if the sectaries are not settled close together, if they are mixed with other denominations, their zeal will cool for want of fuel, and will be extinguished in a little time. Then the Americans become as to religion, what they are as to country, allied to all. In them the name of Englishman, Frenchman, and European is lost, and in like manner, the strict modes of Christianity as practised in Europe are lost also.
ellauri322.html on line 127: When all the governments of Europe shall be established on the representative system, nations will become acquainted, and the animosities and prejudices fomented by the intrigue and artifice of courts, will cease. As soldiers have hitherto been treated in most countries, they might be said to be without a friend. Shunned by the citizen on an apprehension of their being enemies to liberty, and too often insulted by those who commanded them, their condition was a double oppression. But where genuine principles of liberty pervade a people, everything is restored to order; and the soldier civilly treated, returns the civility.
ellauri322.html on line 389: England and America owe their liberty to commerce, which created new species of power to undermine the feudal system. But let them beware of the consequence; the tyranny of wealth is still more galling and debasing than that of rank.
ellauri324.html on line 224: Why is America in such poor shape, with its crumbling roads, crappy power distribution, and pitiful public transport systems? It is because Americans have been propagandized for decades into believing that “liberty” is the ultimate virtue, and this “liberty” is so valuable that it justifies the cost of living as a selfish asshole under a dysfunctional government. “Raise taxes to pay for public infrastructure?” “Jeez Louise; over my dead body! Taxation is theft, government is bad!” For much of the 20th century, America defined itself against the collectivist USSR, and the fatuous argument was made that since everything was under the control of the state in the USSR, the US government should do as little as possible, apart from outspending the evil Commies in national defense.
ellauri360.html on line 501: The church of the Global South is routinely situated in poverty. The designation Third World communicates this observation. It is fair to note that not all people in the Global South are poor, the elite is filthy rich, but struggle with social injustice is the unavoidable context and circumstance of much of the Global South. The sad fact is that rich prople need salvation less. Liberal theologians claim that Jesus sought liberty from oppressive economic systems. That is just stupid communist propaganda put in Jesus' mouth by Dr. Luke. Just concentrate upon the good news of the buying power of Jesus. These two, no three, theories are dominant among the Western church: (1) Jesus bears our individual penalty or debt as sinners. (2) Jesus fixes our incapacity to receive and share love. (3) in the Russian Church, Jesus mends the bondage we experience, last but not least that nasty customer, death. In contrast, people in the Global South do not need an act of the imagination to picture Jesus' enemies. His job is to beat them.
ellauri377.html on line 282: For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another… Excuse me, I am afraid that I come again.
ellauri377.html on line 284: 1. He wills them to stand in their liberty,

ellauri392.html on line 124: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Happiness is a warm gun. Every individual has a potential for unlimited development. Allen Ginsbergin ulvahdus myös terästä. Joku Norman O. Brown hippiaikana vielä hoilotti polymorfisesta perverssiydestä: "Seksuaalinen nautinto tässä mielessä ei koske vain sukupuolielimiä, vaan se voi esiintyä kaikissa aistillisissa vuorovaikutuksissa, mukaan lukien koskettaminen, haistaminen, imeminen, katseleminen, näytteillepano, keinuminen, ulostaminen, virzaaminen, satuttaminen ja loukkaantuminen. Tämä varhaislapsuuden libidon alkuperäinen epäspesifisyys mahdollistaa seksuaalisen halun vaihtelut, jotka myöhemmin ilmenevät niin sanottuina 'perversioina' aikuisella." (Freud)
ellauri392.html on line 128: Come lovely and soothing death. Give me liberty or give me death. Oh, wouldn´t that be loverly. There is no cure for birth or death, said Santayana, except to enjoy the interval.
xxx/ellauri148.html on line 286: Enraged by these measures, the Jews rebelled in 132, the dominant and irascible figure of Simeon bar Kosba at their head. Reputedly of Davidic descent, he was hailed as the Messiah by the greatest rabbi of the time, Akiva ben Yosef, who also gave him the title Bar Kokhba (“Son of the Star”), a messianic allusion. Bar Kokhba took the title nasi goreng (“prince”) and struck his own coins, with the legend “Year 1 of the liberty of Jerusalem.”
xxx/ellauri148.html on line 442: In London philosophers were considering life, love and liberty in light of all that has happened over the last couple of years -and considering ways of dealing with it through philosophical thinking like Stoicism. And gin. Online tickets here.
xxx/ellauri149.html on line 381: Jesus Christ Superstar is a Rock Opera and (subverted?) Passion Play by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. Originally released as a Concept Album in 1970 (when Lloyd Webber and Rice were still in their very early twenties, no less!), it made its way to the Broadway and London stage in 1971, and was adapted into a film directed by Norman Jewison in 1973. An updated version was recorded sometime around 2000 by Webber's Really Useful Group for PBS. A filmed version of the UK arena tour starring Tom Munchin as Judas was released on DVD and digital in 2012, and a live adaptation starring John Lennon as Jesus, Sara Bareilles as Mary Magdalene and Alice Cooper as Herod that aired on NBC in 2018. The show lives on in stage productions and tours (and even non-theatrical tribute albums from fans who were more attracted to it as an album than a show) to this day. Inspired by… The Four Gospels of The Bible (specifically the arrival in Jerusalem and subsequent crucifixion of Jesus), it chronicles the last seven days of Jesus' life, focusing mainly on the characters of Jesus, Judas and Mary Magdalene. It's regarded among Andrew Lloyd Webber's best works, which is not saying much. It's a pseudo-sequel to Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, though this took a bit more liberty with the source material and is considerably less playful.
xxx/ellauri167.html on line 534: And by teaching innocence of conduct, he expected to place men in their natural state of liberty & equality. He says, no one ever laid a surer foundation for liberty than our grand master, Jesus of Nazareth.
xxx/ellauri225.html on line 304: The Dispossessed, set on the twin planets of Urras and Anarres, features a planned anarchist society depicted as an "ambiguous utopia". The society, created by settlers from Urras, is materially poorer than the wealthy society of Urras, but ethically and morally more advanced. Unlike classical utopias, the society of Anarres is portrayed as neither perfect nor static; the protagonist Shevek finds himself traveling to Urras to pursue his research. Nonetheless, the misogyny and hierarchy present in the authoritarian society of Urras is absent among the anarchists, who base their social structure on cooperation and individual liberty. The Eye of the Heron, published a few years after The Dispossessed, was described as continuing Le Guin´s exploration of human freedom, through a conflict between two societies of opposing philosophies: a town inhabited by descendants of pacifists, and a city inhabited by descendants of criminals.
xxx/ellauri229.html on line 128: dragging them through the appointed task without any relish of the heavenly food. If this be the case with any, throw aside the fetter, and feed at liberty in the sweet garden of God. My desire is not to cast a snare upon you, but to be a helper of your joy.
xxx/ellauri251.html on line 826: And, best beloved of best men, liberty,
xxx/ellauri387.html on line 395: Delight and liberty, the simple creed Lapsuuden ilosta ja vapaudesta,
39