MSNBC host apologizes after panel makes fun of Romney photo with black grandchild – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs:
Schadenfreude - pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others.
Science has actually "proven" what we all already know (by brain scans and tricky questionnaires with eye movement / etc) . People are ALL prejudiced in MANY ways, and especially prejudiced to our own perspective. We like our family better, our group better, our race, our religion, our sports team, our type of car .... and on and on. One hopes they didn't spend to much on studying this, it is sort of like proving that men like to look at female bodies. Prejudice is built into our systems because it was, and to most degreed still is, extremely adaptive since it lets us simplify (sometimes OVERsimplify) a very complex world so we limited brain creatures can deal with it.
Humanists like to revel in PARTS of human nature. They love to reward sloth, they seriously love many forms of sexual perversion and drugs are absolutely wonderful. They hate prejudice against certain groups (Gays, Muslims, Blacks), but rather like it against Christians, Conservatives, and "stupid people". Oddly, this latter seems to actually extend to the mentally handicapped, as in the case of Sarah Palin's son Trig, whom they really enjoyed calling a "retard".
Even a very amateur psychologist can see the problem with the Palin - Trig or Romney black grandbaby case. The abject hatred of Palin / Romney washes over to their offspring, so the "humanists" say what comes to their mind.
The true mark of "Progressives / Humanists" is INconsistency without concern, and a major part of tje reason for that is that their creed demands they go against features that God gave them. For example, the Muslim religion demands their women run around in burkas and it's objective is for the whole world to live under Sharia Law in a global Muslim state. The marrying of girls less than 10 years old is allowed, gays are to be put to death (burning, stoning, or throwing from a high place are suggested) ... to name a few things that you would assume that "liberals" would certainly find abhorent.
They do not. Islam activates their "pluralist mode", and they become giddy over things like Keith Ellison being elected the first Muslim in the US House, and the liberal mayor of Boston is fine with helping Muslims get a new Mosque, but goes nuts over Chick-fil-A.
When something like the black Romney grandbaby shows up, they act like humans, which humans tend to do from time to time, no matter what the strictures. Orwell understood the "humanist / progressive / statist / collectivist / liberal" impulses maybe best of all. When you listen to a "liberal", just think of the exact opposite of what they are saying. When they say "liberal", they mean "everyone must be FORCED to think EXACTLY like me" ... only since they are completely inconsistent (man's natural state), that is more than a bit of a mess.
A humanist HATES truly natural (God given) human characteristics. Thus heterosexual drives are highly suspect, and normal teen interactions that could have formerly been handled by a good slap become "criminal sexual harassment", while same sex practices that are wired into the brain to be cringe-worthy are supposed to be celebrated. The book "The Righteous Mind" (written by a liberal scientist) pretty much proves (via brain scans) that even when "liberals" are celebrating those gay kisses, their brains are saying "yuck!" very loudly,
"One of these things is not like the other things" is pretty much done by the snake brain inside our larger brains. If we are constantly on conscious guard, we MAY be able to avoid "saying the wrong thing", but we WILL think it ... at least for a few 10's of thousands of years, even if we make sure that people that notice differences in race are instantly removed from the gene pool. Ideally along with their offspring if we want this to go away any time in the next few thousand years. How much of our difference discriminator DNA has to be removed before this works, and the subsidiary question of if the resulting creature is viable is left to the "humanist" ... but it MAY be possible to actually modify even human thought if they truly think it is worth it!
Note this DOES NOT mean that "natural human behavior" is somehow sacred, it clearly is not. That is why religion is adaptive, and one wants to be very careful as to what religion. So the modern choices in the west are "Statism / materialism / scientism", Christianity, Islam, Buddhism ... etc. Right now the quoted religion is "winning" in the west, but it has the huge negative of not realizing it is a religion.
But it is. When one walks around living in an abstract model worldview inside a brain that we don't understand, that model IS the territory! We don't have a choice but to live by a whole lot of faith, because we are not running around with an objective scientific instrument behind our eyes, we are walking around with a very dimly understood set of cells doing electro-chemical operations that seem to produce "us" ... or that ineffable part of us that we call consciousness.
Religion formerly gave us a good way to admit that we were all flawed and to allow for forgiveness and redemption. Now days, if you are a "liberal" and you "go too far" on a Sarah Palin or a Mitt Romney attack and maybe even have some "collateral damage", you can usually apologize and it is "no harm no foul" because "your heart is in the right place". If you are a Paula Deen, or probably a Phil Robertson eventually (they keep trying to find some old tape to get him on), there is often no forgiveness ... you didn't "get your mind right", so now you have to pay!
That is one of the really good things about God. He doesn't change ... so you know what to count on. Now, with the "elite" believing that they are "god" and busily deciding on venial or mortal sins by the second via #hashtag, it is a very uncertain universe! Even though schadenfreude is a sin, it is hard not to feel a little of it when the lefties are hoist on their own petard.
'via Blog this'