Given the direction this thread is taking, I feel compelled to write the following as essentially a neutral third party:

I wrote for Amerika for a short period, but ultimately stopped because I didn't feel my material was up to the standards of the site and thus I didn't want to drag it down. During my time there, I was essentially given complete autonomy. I could write about whatever I wanted. Criticism was always constructive, and the people there were always direct, honest, and polite. Furthermore, it was assumed that complete agreement would never be a reality, so content was not reviewed to make sure it fit completely in line with some ideology. In no way is Brett a control freak or egomaniac. If you are competent and not an asshole, you can basically contribute as you see fit, which is far more generous than pretty much any other organization on the net.

My experience has essentially been the same with helping to "keep" the audiofile. Even in times when I was flaky or temporarily retarded, the worst I ever got from anybody was indifference.

With regard to the change in this site specifically, I would present the following. The old website had an incomplete version of the Dark Legions archive, was focused mostly on the history of death metal, and did a lot of "lost gem" reviews, etc. The new version has the complete Dark Legions archive and has a front page dedicated to news and original content, including interviews. It seems quite clear that the new approach is more likely to be effective in drawing in people to the relevant content.

I don't know anything about the internal bickering going on, but I know, based on the character of the individuals involved in running these sites, that it takes quite a lot to get under their skin. Given that there is a looming impression of a drastic need to purge this place, I can only assume that some serious bullshit has been happening.

I don't know if I'm considered a defective or not, given some of my previous behavior, but if I'm deemed so I can only conclude the following:
1) I'm a grade A asshole
2) I need to do some serious introspection

I don't consider the people running this place perfect. But they certainly aren't incompetent, backstabbing, or dishonest. They know what they're doing. I can't imagine how they put up with all the negativity. They are certainly better men than I.

Go on: go with it.
What other ideas occur to you, on this?
They don't have to 'make sense' in everyday terms.
This is cutting edge spiritual research.

This could go all over the place, so I'll stick to the immediate:
Assuming the hypothesis is true, this means wisdom is associated with a structural aspect of the mind and that knowledge emerges from the conscious mind and other unconscious elements utilizing this structure.

Another immediate extension: Since nature is a cruel bitch that bends everything towards her will, there should be a natural tendency towards properly tuning the filters with age and experience. However, the influence of culture (and related phenomena) could vary. Culture "in tune" with reality will aid this process and help maintain the integrity of the structure; culture "out of tune" will compromise the integrity of the structure.

This could naturally be extended to spread light on certain things. Given that there is a general tendency of this process associated with age, we can see that certain politics (specifically conservative) are correlated with this phenomenon. Similarly, others (like liberalism) are inversely related. The conflict between a naturally forming conservative structure with liberal ideology will create internal cognitive dissonance. This will produce bizarre thought patterns and possibly suffering. It's known that conservatives generally report being happier than liberals. (This thread of thought could obviously be continued.)

This also raises a question about how artificial environments could affect this process. This would directly explain the need for certain institutions (especially universities) to have an insulated and isolated nature. In order to counteract the natural tuning, people must be isolated and forced into narrow environments that only (and constantly) reinforce whatever ideology is being used for indoctrination (e.g. political correctness). (This too could continue.)

There are a number of questions that arise. However, without proper empirical investigation, it's difficult to know where to go with it. I'll have to consider this more before making another contribution of thought. I think alternate perspectives might also help shed some light.

I haven't been to church in over a decade and have seen many churches filled with ideological garbage, but the remaining sane ones may be the answer. Churches are one of the last places where traditional culture and heritage don't have a bad name. At the very least, this would imply they are the institutions for which the effort to restore is minimal. Also, they have some of the most interconnectedness to other institutions (e.g. schools) and have an inherently social dynamic.

Who is "we"?
What qualifies you to speak for others "getting it"?
This isn't about you.

And what is "old as fuck"?
Does saying that immerse you in perceived coolness?
It makes you seem, to me, like a childish halfwit.
So much for "no offense".
If you're gonna be offensive, then at a minimum, do it honestly.

That statement was an attempt at humor. Apparently a poor one. Think of me what you will from that. Like you said, "this isn't about [me]."

I am approaching 60, and when (if) you arrive there, yourself, you will discover it really isn't anything like you thought it was from your own distant youth.

I don't doubt it.

By the way, broken families are broken without divorce. It's true that divorce is stressful for the children, but it's even more stressful to endure domestic conflict.

I have to agree with this viewpoint. Divorce per se is a side issue. The real issue is fucked up people and their fucked up children.

As for abortion, I'm 100% pro-abortion. Choice is essentially irrelevant. Abortion is only bad if you promote a "life at all costs" moral view of the world.

Abortion, well, I could say many things in favor, but following what you said, I will say something that many here would agree with: birth control and abortion keep slutty women out of the genetic pool.

This, too.

Unlike most people, on pot I am incredibly motivated and passionate.

{snip}

Everyone will tell you that pot wastes your time, or makes you lazy, but it merely seems these people have no will.

First, you just explained that your experience is the exception and not the rule. Second, how pot affects you depends on how much you use, what strain(s) you typically use, and your individual body chemistry. The general consensus is regarding long term abuse.

This is typical of the deeply entrenched Kipling-esque ideologies of the paternalistic left. They are the truest and purist racists with any type of political power. They should, in theory, be the absolute enemies of the so called anti-racists of academia. Yet, they aren't. Why?

In what way do these points tell us that religion and science are not opposites?

I believe his point is that from either perspective, the other exists logically within. Ergo, they are not antithetical but complementary.

Of course if they are proper complements of each other, they are in some sense opposites. However, that seems to be nitpicking.