Won’t someone execute the children?!?

[Askold]

Yeah no offense Finland you've had some dickheads leading you in the past.  Like when you struck down gay rights.

Also the fascists. Maybe that's what the folk saying is referring to?

Also, too: the Russians. How does that fit into that little theory? Did Finland deserve to be dominated by foreign powers for centuries?

The saying was originally referencing Russia. Joseph de Maistre visited Russia and felt that the Czars attempts to change the asian empire into a "modern" european nation were doomed but he also felt that the Russians pretty much deserved to be ruled by a despot since nothing else would work on a nation like that.

And technically we haven't been ruled by fascists. Not really. They had some approval in the 1930's but lost most of it when their goons attacked our former president and his wife. And their armed revolution was over in a few days, basically the army showed up and the right wing militia was stunned to realize that our army would rather stand with the goverment than them and after the president told them on the radio to go home and stop this foolishness they did.

[Lt. Fred]

Yeah no offense Finland you've had some dickheads leading you in the past.  Like when you struck down gay rights.

Also the fascists. Maybe that's what the folk saying is referring to?

Also, too: the Russians. How does that fit into that little theory? Did Finland deserve to be dominated by foreign powers for centuries?

The saying was originally referencing Russia. Joseph de Maistre visited Russia and felt that the Czars attempts to change the asian empire into a "modern" european nation were doomed but he also felt that the Russians pretty much deserved to be ruled by a despot since nothing else would work on a nation like that.

At least the second bit was pretty much right!

And technically we haven't been ruled by fascists. Not really. They had some approval in the 1930's but lost most of it when their goons attacked our former president and his wife. And their armed revolution was over in a few days, basically the army showed up and the right wing militia was stunned to realize that our army would rather stand with the goverment than them and after the president told them on the radio to go home and stop this foolishness they did.

Oh? Am I misremembering the White government that fought the Winter war, besieged Leningrad and so on? Those guys weren't actual fascists?

I don't mean to be sarcastic here, though it might be read that way. I just don't know much Finnish history.

[SCarpelan]

And technically we haven't been ruled by fascists. Not really. They had some approval in the 1930's but lost most of it when their goons attacked our former president and his wife. And their armed revolution was over in a few days, basically the army showed up and the right wing militia was stunned to realize that our army would rather stand with the goverment than them and after the president told them on the radio to go home and stop this foolishness they did.

Oh? Am I misremembering the White government that fought the Winter war, besieged Leningrad and so on? Those guys weren't actual fascists?

I don't mean to be sarcastic here, though it might be read that way. I just don't know much Finnish history.

The post-civil war governments weren't "White" despite Whites winning the civil war. They were democratically elected with the Social Democratic Party being a part of several coalition governments and even forming one by itself. Like askold mentioned there were pro-fascist opinions during the '30s and '40s which is seen in the lenient treatment of the rebels but they never reached an officially sanctioned level.

Edited to clarify: even the civil war Whites weren't fascist. They were right-wing royalists who wanted a constitutional monarchy with the German prince Friedrich Karl as the first king of Finland. When Germany lost the WWI this plan was buried.

[Askold]

And technically we haven't been ruled by fascists. Not really. They had some approval in the 1930's but lost most of it when their goons attacked our former president and his wife. And their armed revolution was over in a few days, basically the army showed up and the right wing militia was stunned to realize that our army would rather stand with the goverment than them and after the president told them on the radio to go home and stop this foolishness they did.

Oh? Am I misremembering the White government that fought the Winter war, besieged Leningrad and so on? Those guys weren't actual fascists?

I don't mean to be sarcastic here, though it might be read that way. I just don't know much Finnish history.

The post-civil war governments weren't "White" despite Whites winning the civil war. They were democratically elected with the Social Democratic Party being a part of several coalition governments and even forming one by itself. Like askold mentioned there were pro-fascist opinions during the '30s and '40s which is seen in the lenient treatment of the rebels but they never reached an officially sanctioned level.

Edited to clarify: even the civil war Whites weren't fascist. They were right-wing royalists who wanted a constitutional monarchy with the German prince Friedrich Karl as the first king of Finland. When Germany lost the WWI this plan was buried.

And some of the people on the "white" side were there merely because they didn't want the communists to win and some of them just wanted to support the democratically elected parliament. (The white side were lead by the autonomy era parliament.) I still consider the "Civil war" / "Freedom war" / "Red rebellion" / "1918 happening" to be communists vs everyone else who bothered to join in.

The goverment before and during our participation in WW2 was warmongering but reasonably democratically elected. Communists were being discriminated against and their party outlawed, but there were some left leaning parties. Though we sometimes like to pretend fascism wasn't as widespread as it was in Finland they failed in their coup 'detat and never actually ruled the country. Centrists and moderate right wing parties still had the majority.

[SCarpelan]

And technically we haven't been ruled by fascists. Not really. They had some approval in the 1930's but lost most of it when their goons attacked our former president and his wife. And their armed revolution was over in a few days, basically the army showed up and the right wing militia was stunned to realize that our army would rather stand with the goverment than them and after the president told them on the radio to go home and stop this foolishness they did.

Oh? Am I misremembering the White government that fought the Winter war, besieged Leningrad and so on? Those guys weren't actual fascists?

I don't mean to be sarcastic here, though it might be read that way. I just don't know much Finnish history.

The post-civil war governments weren't "White" despite Whites winning the civil war. They were democratically elected with the Social Democratic Party being a part of several coalition governments and even forming one by itself. Like askold mentioned there were pro-fascist opinions during the '30s and '40s which is seen in the lenient treatment of the rebels but they never reached an officially sanctioned level.

Edited to clarify: even the civil war Whites weren't fascist. They were right-wing royalists who wanted a constitutional monarchy with the German prince Friedrich Karl as the first king of Finland. When Germany lost the WWI this plan was buried.

And some of the people on the "white" side were there merely because they didn't want the communists to win and some of them just wanted to support the democratically elected parliament. (The white side were lead by the autonomy era parliament.) I still consider the "Civil war" / "Freedom war" / "Red rebellion" / "1918 happening" to be communists vs everyone else who bothered to join in.

The goverment before and during our participation in WW2 was warmongering but reasonably democratically elected. Communists were being discriminated against and their party outlawed, but there were some left leaning parties. Though we sometimes like to pretend fascism wasn't as widespread as it was in Finland they failed in their coup 'detat and never actually ruled the country. Centrists and moderate right wing parties still had the majority.

You caught me making a generalization I usually try to avoid but sometimes do when talking/typing. The White leadership became pro-monarchy after the war but this doesn't mean that all the Whites were monarchists. The same way all the Reds weren't Communists and the Red leadership gave up its pro-democracy agenda becoming dictatorial when they were losing the war.

Which side represented the legal government is a matter of interpretation: the 1915 parliament made a law in 1917 that in practice made Finland independent and gave most of the power to the parliament (ignoring the idea of separation of powers). The Russian temporary government with the support of many Finnish politicians declared this illegal and ordered new elections which resulted in the Socialists losing their majority in the new parliament. This is a major reason for the rift between the Left and the Right to having exploded into an actual warfare. If the Reds had won the war the 1915 parliament would be seen as the one that declared independence and the 1917 one would be seen as an illegal one.

[Thejebusfire]

Education is inherently religious activity. Some religion will be taught in schools. Because God has been banned from public schools by our court system, the religion taught in public schools is secularism. If we decide to continue to fund education with public funds, the only way to have an educational system that gives parents the freedom to have their children taught the religion they desire is to have a voucher system that enables the parents to select the school the parents desire. 

"But don't make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can — we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems." - Bill Nye

Public schools may not be perfect but they're much better than telling your child that humans were farted into existence by your God of choice with no other reason other than to just worship him.

[Canadian Mojo]

Public schools may not be perfect but they're much better than telling your child that humans were farted into existence by your God of choice with no other reason other than to just worship him.

But the notion that we were farted into existence through random chance for no purpose or reason at all is scary.

[RavynousHunter]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm94Lb2mz4s" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm94Lb2mz4s</a>

Relevant video is relevant.

[Witchyjoshy]

Public schools may not be perfect but they're much better than telling your child that humans were farted into existence by your God of choice with no other reason other than to just worship him.

But the notion that we were farted into existence through random chance for no purpose or reason at all is scary.

I know you're probably speaking in jest, but to them, it is scary.

To me?  The universe itself is something I actually consider to be above the gods.  It's telling that I don't believe in any of the creation stories in spite of my polytheism.

The fact that we were just "farted" into existence, the fact that our world is one where life came to be, the fact that we have accomplished the things we have accomplished... the fact that life has come this far at all...

It's beautiful and awe-inspiring to me.  The universe itself is divine, and we're a part of that.

To quote Delenn from Babylon 5, "We are star stuff."

[Canadian Mojo]

I do jest... but only so far as to mock them for craving to be at the center of the universe yet at the same time only wanting be bit players so they don't actually need to try and do anything to be worthy of being in the limelight.

[Witchyjoshy]

I do jest... but only so far as to mock them for craving to be at the center of the universe yet at the same time only wanting be bit players so they don't actually need to try and do anything to be worthy of being in the limelight.

I'd hate to be the center of the universe.  It's boring there.

[TheUnknown]

I do jest... but only so far as to mock them for craving to be at the center of the universe yet at the same time only wanting be bit players so they don't actually need to try and do anything to be worthy of being in the limelight.

I think it's part that and part trying to convince themselves that humanity won't just suddenly end.  Think about all the ways the universe could suddenly kill us, or all the ways we could suddenly kill ourselves.  For fundie Christians especially, believing we were "farted" into existence with a divine purpose means we can't just be killed off by a random occurrence because "God will protect us/it doesn't say it will end that way in the Bible."  We won't die out from an asteroid, that doesn't fit with the Bible.  We won't flood our own planet from global warming, God promised he wouldn't flood the Earth again.  If there's nothing there, if there is no divine purpose, then there's nothing protecting us from the unknown.

[lord gibbon]

I'm gonna echo a lot of the sentiments here. I honestly would hate it if I did have a destiny or fate, or if their was a meaning or purpose to life. It would be so boring.

[Ironchew]

The universe itself is divine, and we're a part of that.

I prefer to call a spade a spade and not bog down "the universe" with labels that were clearly invented to represent something else. I can have awe and wonder without having to imagine supernatural influence.

To quote Delenn from Babylon 5 Carl Sagan, "We are star stuff."

I like to think of us as nuclear waste, but "star stuff" has a more poetic ring to it.