The 21st Century World

  • Thread starter Thread starter dessert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to admit I always tend to think that the 50’s would be a nicer, more pleasant life. But when I think about it violence and sex has been around always.

I think we tend to want to think that the world is going crazy with immorality and violence, and paganism, but often its just so we feel better about our faith or ourselves. At least this is what Ive felt. Crime, indecency, people not living Christian lives etc has always been there.

But I think, these days we’ve got the technology and information to know what anyone on the globe is doing.
 
MH84 said:
But I think, these days we’ve got the technology and information to know what anyone on the globe is doing.
Click to expand...
Yep. It’s always happened – now it’s just easier to know about it.
 
MH84 said:
I have to admit I always tend to think that the 50’s would be a nicer, more pleasant life. But when I think about it violence and sex has been around always.

I think we tend to want to think that the world is going crazy with immorality and violence, and paganism, but often its just so we feel better about our faith or ourselves. At least this is what Ive felt. Crime, indecency, people not living Christian lives etc has always been there.

But I think, these days we’ve got the technology and information to know what anyone on the globe is doing.
Click to expand...
There has always been crime and violence. That doesn’t mean that every age, every culture is equal in its degrees of depravity. Some are worse than others. Simply compare teen pregnancies now, for example, to those in the 1950’s, or out of wedlock birthrates, or the general availability and dissemination of pornography.

Consider: in the 1950’s there was no Internet. Playboy magazine had yet to be published, let alone any of its successors. TV was a new medium, and kids grew up watching ‘Ozzie & Harriet’ or ‘Leave it to Beaver.’ Those may have not been high culture. But consider that having only those sorts of things available was in fact a great advantage to those growing up in the era. It meant they were not constantly bombarded with sexual imagery or violence or porn, every day in every way.
 
JimG said:
There has always been crime and violence. That doesn’t mean that every age, every culture is equal in its degrees of depravity. Some are worse than others. Simply compare teen pregnancies now, for example, to those in the 1950’s, or out of wedlock birthrates, or the general availability and dissemination of pornography.

Consider: in the 1950’s there was no Internet. Playboy magazine had yet to be published, let alone any of its successors. TV was a new medium, and kids grew up watching ‘Ozzie & Harriet’ or ‘Leave it to Beaver.’ Those may have not been high culture. But consider: having only those sorts of things available was in fact a great advantage to those growing up in the era. It meant they were not constantly bombarded with sexual imagery or violence or porn, every day in every way.
Click to expand...
Interesting. But I wonder how the “40’s and 50’s generation” would cope with the temptations the current generation is going through now. For instance, if the “information” that is available on the web was available then I would think that there would be more atheists running around, and probably more talk of sex, masturbation etc. A bit like what goes on in these forums. 😃
 
MH84 said:
Interesting. But I wonder how the “40’s and 50’s generation” would cope with the temptations the current generation is going through now. For instance, if the “information” that is available on the web was available then I would think that there would be more atheists running around, and probably more talk of sex, masturbation etc. A bit like what goes on in these forums. 😃
Click to expand...
Exactly! They would have responded to the culture, just as we do. It’s not that anybody back then was essentially better, it’s just that they had fewer temptations to resist. And as the decades wore on, they became subject to all the new temptations now available. Ask the old folks if they are more pious or religious now than they were in the past. Personally, I refuse to answer.🙂
 
edwest2 said:
This is quite accurate. The gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered have partnered with the media to present their lives as average. In the past, such things were personal and remained behind closed doors, now, it is very much in your face.

Fornication is all over TV. You might as well call ABC the fornication channel. Adultery, multiple partnes, gay encounters - it’s all there, and it’s presented as “entertainment”? Sure, people have sex but they should be married and it shouldn’t be discussed, especially with strangers.

Finally, at the end of the 1960s, the Hippies, Marxists and Communists began having children. The Soviet Union may not be around but certain very Marxist ideas are being promoted in this country. For those who don’t know, the ACLU was founded by a Communist. And illegal drugs were promoted as cool, even “mind expanding.” And how many lives, and families, were torn apart? Abortion on demand? No-fault divorce?

And as I wrote above, our “entertainment” choices are primarily immoral. We also have a TV show called Dexter, about a lovable serial killer. Are lovable cannibal next door neighbors next?

My fellow Catholics, please be careful about what you put into your heads. Give the devil an inch and he could end up in the driver’s seat.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
How right you are. It’s not that people are any better or any worse basically than they were generations ago, but it is what we are exposed to that is being presented as “ok” and “normal”. Society has be desensitized to every kind of moral deprivation all in the name of progress. We have progressed and in some ways very positively, but the complete moral colapse that we are headed for if not called to a halt will lead to our demise as a civilization…sure as I’m sitting here.
 
Is this really even debatable? Of course the world is more degraded now than it was 100 years ago. Religion is less important now to most people, and most people can’t live good lives without religion. (I disagree with the inevitable counter-argument that no people can live good lives without religion.)

I can also blame political developments, namely the upsurge in welfare, but they carry less weight than the death of God. Life just looks meaningless and synthetic to most people when God is removed from the picture.

I will grant, however, that medical technology is a tremendous benefit to humanity. It would be a much greater benefit, however, if life were worth living.
 
rabenbergm said:
Is this really even debatable? Of course the world is more degraded now than it was 100 years ago. Religion is less important now to most people, and most people can’t live good lives without religion. (I disagree with the inevitable counter-argument that no people can live good lives without religion.)

I can also blame political developments, namely the upsurge in welfare, but they carry less weight than the death of God. Life just looks meaningless and synthetic to most people when God is removed from the picture.

I will grant, however, that medical technology is a tremendous benefit to humanity. It would be a much greater benefit, however, if life were worth living.
Click to expand...
You sound like me who thinks life has no meaning, but I think the Singularity will solve everything. However, do everything you can to stay healthy so you can live to see the beatific Singularity.
 
ribozyme said:
You sound like me who thinks life has no meaning, but I think the Singularity will solve everything. However, do everything you can to stay healthy so you can live to see the beatific Singularity.
Click to expand...
Oh, no, you misunderstand me. I think life has meaning; I’m just saying that most persons don’t when God leaves the picture. Religion gives meaning to lives that would otherwise be hollow and bothersome.
 
rabenbergm said:
Oh, no, you misunderstand me. I think life has meaning; I’m just saying that most persons don’t when God leaves the picture. Religion gives meaning to lives that would otherwise be hollow and bothersome.
Click to expand...
You mean like mine? It seems my only purpose in live is to live long enough to live in a techno-utopia. Otherwise, life is simply not worth living. I also thought about using SSRIs, but it seems anecdotally, they are not that powerful and your body would simply adapt to them, reducing their effectiveness over long term dosing. I do not think that is an answer to despondency.
 
ribozyme said:
You mean like mine? It seems my only purpose in live is to live long enough to live in a techno-utopia. Otherwise, life is simply not worth living.
Click to expand...
For many religious people it seems the only purpose in life is to live righteous enough to earn an afterlife-utopia. Otherwise, life is simply not worth living.

For me my purposes in life is (a) to raise my kids rich in love & moral support and make them valuable contributors to humanity,(b) to witness mankind’s progression each day and (c) to experience the creative fruits of humanity (like music, videos & video games) 😃
 
I suppose the measurement of our century could be measured but it would be different depending on the country one lives in. There are many that don’t even have wells to drink good water or have to travel many miles to get “good” water.

And Germany doesn’t even have very good roads to deliver food,
if they can get enough, to many of the populace.

So technology may help but sometimes the basic elements are needed.
The technology would help us find the exact point where the water is to aid us in knowing how to place a well but still manpower and money has to get it there.
D.
 
AgnosTheist said:
For many religious people it seems the only purpose in life is to live righteous enough to earn an afterlife-utopia. Otherwise, life is simply not worth living.

For me my purposes in life is (a) to raise my kids rich in love & moral support and make them valuable contributors to humanity,(b) to witness mankind’s progression each day and (c) to experience the creative fruits of humanity (like music, videos & video games) 😃
Click to expand...
It is going to be a long horrible, painful, depressing wait for the Singularity for me, even if Kurzweil’s extremely optimistic time frames are correct (which I do not think so).

How come the Singularity was never mentioned in this thread until I brought it up today? I guess not to many people interested in Catholicism are futurists. It is one optimistic view of this horrible world.

I do believe if make it, you will see a beautiful world, a world where problems such as poverty and disease are eliminated. I think this epoch will make life something worth living.
b) to witness mankind’s progression each day and (c) to experience the creative fruits of humanity (like music, videos & video games)
Click to expand...
I think b) and c) are one and the same…

For example, I think it is immoral to buy a video game instead of giving the money to charity (assuming the charity doesn’t waste their money and uses it effectively like Oxfam). I would buy Unreal Tournament 3 when I buy a new computer that could play it. I will not enjoy that game because of its glorification of blood and gore (but in my opinion the more detailed the better for the reason I will explain later). Instead such a game will give me optimistic sentiments about humanity’s contemporary and future progress. I desperately need hope in a world mired in misery.

Look at this:

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/81/Unreal_Engine_Comparison.jpg

Look at the progress from the first Unreal Tournament to the third… Maybe technological progress will be advanced enough to assail the seemly redoubtable problems in the world.

It gives me hope that technology will eventually eliminate poverty. Maybe advanced hardware and software will form a benevolent entity that would eliminate poverty.
 
The last 150 years has seen a rapid development of technology with an explosion of inventions. The sad truth of our fallen world is that everything that has been invented has been used for both good and evil. It is like a giant poker game between good and evil and the stakes are raised each time a new invention or development is tossed in the pot.
Life in the west has been made easyer by this growth, but we have abandond our understanding of how things go. We now view suffering as evidence of God’s abondonment of us, and proceed to try and do away with suffering in the 21st century. We are trying to build our own heaven, or at least a Tower of Babel to reach God’s dealing.
In this fallen world of the 21st Century we are trying to eleminate Suffering, but we have forgotten that if you want the chance at pleasure, you must take the the chance of suffering. To eleminate one (here on earth) is to eleminate the other.
Can God eleminate suffering? Of course he can and he will in his time. What are we to do in response to the pain? Respond with prayer and charity (in the biblical sense).
Sorry if I rambled on a bit, Peace be with you!
 
I had an aunt who died at age 5 of diphtheria, early 20th century. In one century the main causes of disease switched from communicable diseases to lifestyle diseases that hit in later life.

So the old people hanging out in the senior centers freaking out about modern times didn’t exist a century ago. Average life expectancy just wasn’t that long.

OK, I’m on my third primary cancer, getting treatment now (breast cancer, ER/PR hormone receptor positive, HER2/neu positive, BRCA1/BRCA2/Cowden’s syndrome negative). My mom died of this same cancer four years after initial diagnosis, back in the late 80s. And you may have no idea what “ER/PR hormone receptor positive, HER2/neu positive, BRCA1/BRCA2/Cowden’s syndrome negative” means, and Mom wouldn’t have either, because the scientific knowledge, testing, and research-based customized treatment didn’t exist back then. Because of the lab geeks and scientists and doctors who do research, my prognosis is much better than Mom’s. I plan to lead the Survivor Lap at the Relay for Life wearing three (or more) memorial ribbons as an octogenarian.

So no, I have no wish to go back in time viewed through some rose-colored glasses. It would mean my early death.

And yes, I say rose-colored glasses. Nostalgia tunes out a lot of negative information. In Victorian times, there was a lot of prostitution and child prostitution! These things are now morally and legally unacceptable. A century ago, there were children working in underground mines, and the mine owners would save the mine ponies before the children because the ponies were more valuable. Workers had no rights and were basically defenseless against the abuses of their employers.

So what about the current rot?

As always–in every time and every age, among every contemporary version of the current rot–this is God’s world and it is good. Our role is to be salt and light and leaven. Take reasonable precautions, sure, I lock my doors even when I’m home. I don’t have to be willfully stupid. But I refuse to become a curmudgeon. People have such a desire to connect and relate and have the good in them recognized and encouraged. If you can talk about moral choices in secular, common sense terms, you can persuade people on moral issues without being dismissed automatically as some religious fundamentalist. Sin is its own punishment and virtue is its own reward. God’s way makes sense and is good for you even without the necessity of justifying it based on God.

BTW people of faith are outbreeding the atheists and commies, so have hope for the future.

God is with us in all times and through all circumstances. Emmanuel - God with us. Don’t lose hope.
 
kentuckyliz said:
OK, I’m on my third primary cancer, getting treatment now (breast cancer, ER/PR hormone receptor positive, HER2/neu positive, BRCA1/BRCA2/Cowden’s syndrome negative). My mom died of this same cancer four years after initial diagnosis, back in the late 80s. And you may have no idea what “ER/PR hormone receptor positive, HER2/neu positive, BRCA1/BRCA2/Cowden’s syndrome negative” means, and Mom wouldn’t have either, because the scientific knowledge, testing, and research-based customized treatment didn’t exist back then. Because of the lab geeks and scientists and doctors who do research, my prognosis is much better than Mom’s. I plan to lead the Survivor Lap at the Relay for Life wearing three (or more) memorial ribbons as an octogenarian.
Click to expand...
Presumably, you are taking aromatase inhibitors and trastuzumab, right, given the description of your cancer.

Best wishes
 
If you have this fear, elevate it up for help from Our Lady, and She will guide you and be with you… I’vedone this many times and it works. Believe me.
God Bless, Red Rider
 
ribozyme said:
Presumably, you are taking aromatase inhibitors and trastuzumab, right, given the description of your cancer.

Best wishes
Click to expand...
I am still having chemo (one more to go), then will start tamoxifen. I have to talk to my oncologist to see if I can go straight to aromatase inhibitors, because chemo has already brought on early menopause. I think I’m still supposed to do tamoxifen for a year or two anyway, before going to aromatase inhibitors. (My BrCa was pre-menopausal, there’s different treatment strategies for pre- or post-menopausal BrCa.)

I take a weekly biological treatment, Herceptin, for the HER2/neu. That will be 26 or 48 treatments (the literature is undecided about which is more effective), so through early February or early July.

I just feel sorry for my Mom, for getting dx’d and tx’d before the research and treatment advances…they didn’t know about hormone receptors and HER2/neu back then. 😦 It might have made all the difference…she might have survived.
 
kentuckyliz said:
I am still having chemo (one more to go), then will start tamoxifen. I have to talk to my oncologist to see if I can go straight to aromatase inhibitors, because chemo has already brought on early menopause. I think I’m still supposed to do tamoxifen for a year or two anyway, before going to aromatase inhibitors. (My BrCa was pre-menopausal, there’s different treatment strategies for pre- or post-menopausal BrCa.)

I take a weekly biological treatment, Herceptin, for the HER2/neu. That will be 26 or 48 treatments (the literature is undecided about which is more effective), so through early February or early July.

I just feel sorry for my Mom, for getting dx’d and tx’d before the research and treatment advances…they didn’t know about hormone receptors and HER2/neu back then. 😦 It might have made all the difference…she might have survived.
Click to expand...
I forgot tamoxifen wasn’t an aromatase inhibitor, but I remembered it is used in estrogen receptor positive cancers. I am not familar with treating breast cancer.

I prefer to use international non-proprietary names… Regarding trastuzumab, 9 weeks of treatment might be efficacious. (A disclaimer: I am only 18 years old and I am not offering any medical advice). This was based on a small trial (231 HER2-neu +) (bpac.org.nz/magazine/2007/april/herceptin.asp#tab1)).

I do not know if your mother would benefit from trastuzumab; I doubt it is possible to know if she was HER2-neu + too.

I hope you do not suffer cardiac failure (very risky if you are taking anthracyclines)…

I am glad that you are appreciating the affects of personalized medicine. I know tests can be offered to see if drugs such as erlotinib, and gefitinib would be efficacious (target the epidermal growth factor receptor) and imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib (to see if one has the bcr-abl kinase in CML).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top