boomshakra: The World is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide just because we can't agree on whose fairy tales to believe. In the end, Religion will kill us all. ~Ed Krebs

I respect that many members of my family are Christians - I choose to think for myself, but that quote above pretty much sums up where we're headed...

That's bullshiat. The world is divided into armed camps ready to commit genocide because we are killer apes, and that's our nature. Religion and ideology are just excuses, and if we didn't have those, we'd find others. We have only improved very gradually over time, as we have evolved towards being a higher species. and we still have a looooooong way to go.

Khanmots: In short, to believe or disbelieve in something whose existence is unknowable requires faith. Doesn't matter if that's the aforementioned unicorn, the tooth fairy, God, or even an undetectable califlower...

What leads you to believe that there are people reading your text? Or even that you're posting at all?

reklamfox: That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different.

The religion of the missionaries is moot. It was brought forward only to show that this was a functioning society in recent history.

I find it most amusing that the natural state of man is assumed to be a cooperative form of social altruism. It's not. We are cruel and violent and savage.

The Z Spot: The Z Spot: I remember back from school that I was a ENT J/P ... this fits me bout right, haha.
On that note, I wonder what would happen if there were a giant Myers-Briggs test for all the users on Fark. I wonder what the average personality is...

I think, the more interesting study might be: How many people are the "wrong" religion for their personality type. ;)

I always suspected it would begin in Florida but by a obese black santa I never saw that one coming. Now the Easter Bunny I could totally see him causing trouble.

theorellior: His surname is Le Trôle.

Does he need you to repeat that for him in every thread that he trolls?
Oh, I get it.
He's your alt. Or you're his. I haven't figured out which yet. I'm guessing letrole is the alt, since he trolls every single farking thread like this with the exact same copy/paste posts. And funny enough, you come in and defend him every time with the "Oh no, Le trole is just his surname, he's not really trolling."

Farking stop already.

vertiaset: It is nothing like that. What I am doing, and not very subtly I might add, is pointing out that"Good" and "Evil" exist and are universal. They are universal, only because men, as possessors of free will, share certain universal characteristics which many of you wrongfully put down as "genetic".

If they're universal among men, and men share a comment heredity, then it sounds like they might be hereditary, therefore genetic. If this is not the case, then do other species carry these universal characteristics? If not, then why man and only man? What is the criteria for being worth of free will? If it is not genetic, then why is a single species the only one to be so bestowed?

James F. Campbell: Excen: There is fluoride in a majority of water systems in the US.

Precious bodily fluids, etc.

My fluids are about as precious as quartz. And not that healing-crystal quartz neither.

Regarding the whole debate thing, I'll just leave this here:



/I jizz buckets. Seriously. Ever seen a bath sheet that looks like a board?
//It only took me fifteen loads too!

My religion commands that that I bite off the penis of all liters.

*bites own penis*

Zombalupagus: vertiaset: So, all of you "moral" atheists. Where does your sense of morality come from anyway? Is there "good" and "evil". Are these universal or do they vary from person to person or society to society?

This is a sincere query and is not intended as sarcasm.

I don't consider myself an atheist now but I have been one in the past.

I would say that the reason an atheist would be inclined to do good to others is that if there is no afterlife then this life is all we have. Once you are dead that's it, it's done. It sounds callous at first but if you think about it it means there is nothing more precious than life, this life. When someone dies needlessly it can be seen for the real tragedy that it is. That person will never again get to experience life; the precious gift gas been stolen from them.

Even if you don't believe that yourself think about it for a minute. Imagine a "what if" existence without a creator. The mere fact of our existence itself, by random chance alone, and the existence of the universe itself suddenly seems much more amazing and marvelous.

Atheist =/= Nihilist. It also does not cause a lack of wonder or lack of morality. People as individuals of course can see things any number of ways, though.

Hope that answers some questions or gives a new perspective.


For the record, I myself am torn on the matter. I guess you could say I'm 50% atheist and sometimes this percentage varies. But my moral foundation does not rely on religion. I had a friend who "found" Jesus and that went well enough for awhile. But when he fell out of it he went right back to "sinning". Religion was his moral foundation and once it was gone his morals flew right out the window to some degree. This is something that scares me about the hardcore fanatics. If all that is keeping them moral is their religion, what happens if they lose their faith? Or their "fear of God"?

Look at it this way: I tell you there are fire-breathing unicorns 1,000 light years from Earth who judge humans in the after life based on how much corn they eat during their lifetime.

You have no way of knowing if I'm right, but it sounds ridiculous. So you either start eating lots of corn out of fear or accept that what I told you sounds improbably stupid and live your life to the best of your ability. That's pretty much been my experience with religion; I can't disprove old myths, but I'm sure as hell not going to acquiesce to their dogmas because I'm afraid they might be right. People came up with this stuff. Fear-based faith, plain and simple.

TFA: Kids are out here killing each other, kids are here using drugs. Who else are they going to believe in?"

Well, God doesn't seem to be doing the job, so how about themselves?
One of the biggest disservices religion does for people, IMO, is to make them believe that they have no strength of their own. All strength comes from the Lord, you're just a powerless conduit that he plays like a marionette. All glory be to God, none left for yourself. Then what happens when hardship comes and God lets go of the strings? If prayer doesn't work, people despair of ever helping themselves.

jso2897: letrole: reklamfox: That's not atheism that's anarchy. "No rules" does not sum up atheism, it sums up what you like to think atheism is.

Not true. The Eskimos, when we still called them Eskimos, had some very harsh practises. It was only in the last century that the following began to be discouraged, mainly by Christian missionaries.

If I want something that you have, and I take it by force in public, it is not theft.

If I do not like you, and I bash your brains in public, it is not murder.

If you are old or infirm and you become a burden, you are left to die on the ice.

If her firstborn is a girl, the mother must smother the infant.

The Inuit had plenty of religion before the Christians came. they worshiped gods. But they were mean gods. Kind of like the one that told medieval Christians to burn innocent women at the stake for witchcraft. It occurs to me that maybe nice people worship nice gods, and mean people worship mean gods. almost as is the problem sprang from human nature, rather than particular beliefs.
Naa - that's just too far-fetched :D

By the way, boys, it's time for PC Seminar!

Eskimo is NOT a dirty word.

Canadian Inuit demand to be called Inuit, true. They dislike the connotation and the fact that the word originated from outside of their language.

But Alaskans have two main clans of people, the Inupiat of the North Slope region, and the Yupik on the West Coast. They call themselves Eskimo, reflecting their common Arctic subsistence culture.

Canada = Inuit
Alaska = Eskimo

khonshu: The Z Spot: The Z Spot: I remember back from school that I was a ENT J/P ... this fits me bout right, haha.
On that note, I wonder what would happen if there were a giant Myers-Briggs test for all the users on Fark. I wonder what the average personality is...

I think, the more interesting study might be: How many people are the "wrong" religion for their personality type. ;)

Oh, not even that one...I just meant a real version of the test. I would be interested in the legitimate results...though its too many questions and would be a pain to gather.

People whose faith is so easily threatened really don't have much faith.

letrole: reklamfox: That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different.

The religion of the missionaries is moot. It was brought forward only to show that this was a functioning society in recent history.

I find it most amusing that the natural state of man is assumed to be a cooperative form of social altruism. It's not. We are cruel and violent and savage.

Exactly. Which is why faith and atheism are both moral null-states. Neither will make a bad person good, or a good one bad.

theorellior: There's a theory hypothesis that religion and religious feeling developed in the human species for exactly this reason: to curb the sociopaths who would otherwise fark up the system and make them productive members of society.

Benchmark SC.3.N.3.1: Recognize that words in science can have different or more specific meanings than their use in everyday language; for example, energy, cell, heat/cold, and evidence.
Benchmark SC.6.N.3.1: Recognize and explain that a scientific theory is a well-supported and widely accepted explanation of nature and is not simply a claim posed by an individual. Thus, the use of the term theory in science is very different than how it is used in everyday life.
Benchmark SC.912.N.3.1: Explain that a scientific theory is the culmination of many scientific investigations drawing together all the current evidence concerning a substantial range of phenomena; thus, a scientific theory represents the most powerful explanation scientists have to offer.

DamnYankees: I really wish atheists would resist the urge to be defensive about the atheist-motivated killings by people like Stalin. The truth is it did happen, often due to a belief that religion was evil and harmful, and that atheism was required. The point that atheists should be making is not to deny that it happened, but merely to recognize that atheism is a necessary condition to rationality, but not a sufficient one. Atheists are not perfect and can be motivated to do bad things in the name of atheism.

I think the key is understanding that theism does improve societal ethics over "universal war of extermination". However, theism is not the only alternative to such. The effort spearheaded by Stalin was an attempt to replace Theism with Marxism as the ultimate basis for morality; it did not work especially well for the long term.

Even atheists who are "moral relativists" don't seem to understand that religion can only be considered Good or Bad when compared to some alternative.

vertiaset: Churches as competing form of government. Absurd.

Did you ever study history of Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire?

Perhaps you might also talk to an anthropologist about what the differences between "religions" and "governments" are... and are not.

genner: To the second question, if you want to prove that atheists can have morality it would helpful to explain why.

Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Although as a quibble, I'd like to distinguish "morality" as the scale of good and evil (similar to temperature) as opposed to "ethics", which are the rules/constructs such as "thou shalt not kill" used to give approximations to morality.

vertiaset: So, all of you "moral" atheists. Where does your sense of morality come from anyway?

Ibid.

vertiaset: Is there "good" and "evil".

In the same sense as "hot" and "cold".

vertiaset: Are these universal or do they vary from person to person or society to society?

Both; the exact character of choices being good/evil have an absolute universal measure, but this measure is a function of the entity choosing and environment of the choice.

Uncle Tractor: Morals are Ethics evolved, just like our opposing thumbs and bulging heads.

FTFY.

ReverendJasen: Does he need you to repeat that for him in every thread that he trolls? [Extra deleted]

Dude, chill the fark out. It's rare that letrole and I are in the same threads, and it's rarer still that I engage him at all. Did you read the rest of my posts in the thread, or did you just notice my mockery posts and go apeshiat?

Poppa Boner: My religion commands that that I bite off the penis of all liters.

*bites own penis*

MY religion dictates that all people flexible enough to suck their own dick are witches, and as such, must be burned at the stake.

/And that, folks, is why people put on C4 vests and commit suicide in farmers markets

letrole: reklamfox: That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different.

The religion of the missionaries is moot. It was brought forward only to show that this was a functioning society in recent history.

I find it most amusing that the natural state of man is assumed to be a cooperative form of social altruism. It's not. We are cruel and violent and savage.

I'm none of those, but also an atheist. So... am I a robot?

The Z Spot: khonshu: The Z Spot: The Z Spot: I remember back from school that I was a ENT J/P ... this fits me bout right, haha.
On that note, I wonder what would happen if there were a giant Myers-Briggs test for all the users on Fark. I wonder what the average personality is...

I think, the more interesting study might be: How many people are the "wrong" religion for their personality type. ;)

Oh, not even that one...I just meant a real version of the test. I would be interested in the legitimate results...though its too many questions and would be a pain to gather.

but still, yea, your's is pretty funny.

vertiaset: What I am doing, and not very subtly I might add, is pointing out that"Good" and "Evil" exist and are universal.

You are not at all close to doing this. You simply just noted a culture of people all willing to cheer wildly at the act of sacrificing humans, which seems to ignore the premise that morality is universal. This certainly doesn't begin to establish the faintest notion.

vertiaset: Ideas, such as "beauty", "truth", "liberty" or "good and evil" belong to the higher, more refined realm of Philosophy.

Really, these do not. All are in the eye of the beholder, which is determined by our genetics, our upbringing, and our perspective based on the situation. Beauty especially, since we have a great deal of chemical reactions surrounding lust and love, as well as predispositions towards symmetry and more.

All of those appear to be well grounded in the natural, boring old world of neurology and similar. People enjoy believing the world is ethereal and mystical, despite the reality being vastly more complex and captivating.

Lenny_da_Hog: jso2897: letrole: reklamfox: That's not atheism that's anarchy. "No rules" does not sum up atheism, it sums up what you like to think atheism is.

Not true. The Eskimos, when we still called them Eskimos, had some very harsh practises. It was only in the last century that the following began to be discouraged, mainly by Christian missionaries.

If I want something that you have, and I take it by force in public, it is not theft.

If I do not like you, and I bash your brains in public, it is not murder.

If you are old or infirm and you become a burden, you are left to die on the ice.

If her firstborn is a girl, the mother must smother the infant.

The Inuit had plenty of religion before the Christians came. they worshiped gods. But they were mean gods. Kind of like the one that told medieval Christians to burn innocent women at the stake for witchcraft. It occurs to me that maybe nice people worship nice gods, and mean people worship mean gods. almost as is the problem sprang from human nature, rather than particular beliefs.
Naa - that's just too far-fetched :D

By the way, boys, it's time for PC Seminar!

Eskimo is NOT a dirty word.

Canadian Inuit demand to be called Inuit, true. They dislike the connotation and the fact that the word originated from outside of their language.

But Alaskans have two main clans of people, the Inupiat of the North Slope region, and the Yupik on the West Coast. They call themselves Eskimo, reflecting their common Arctic subsistence culture.

Canada = Inuit
Alaska = Eskimo

Well excuuuuuuse me! Didn't mean to offend your delicate little anti-pc sensibilities, Nancy.
You'll get over it.

So then why, letrole, should we turn to God for the answers? What makes you so much better then me, an atheist who walks the straight and narrow? You made it clear you believe that atheists have no second thoughts about killing raping and stealing, and yet here we are as a minority in the country still alive and well. If I lack morals, what exactly did I use to fill it's place? How can you say you and I are so different if we are both good people? How are you any better then me? Because you are afraid the angry hand of God will reach down and smite you if you don't drag you ass to church every Sunday?

Well then smite me now! Because I'm sleepin in on Sunday.

The Icelander: Fitness has more to do with ability to survive than ability to hurt others. Humans don't have claws or big teeth. They're not particularly strong or particularly fast. The secret to our success is our ability to cooperate to achieve a goal.

No. You're treading very close to the idea of the noble savage. The secret to our success is that we're descended from those who were stronger and able to take what they wanted and impose their will.

Your view of society being "cooperative" reminds me of a child who assumes that eggs come from the grocery. In a sense, that's true, but only recently.

Maybe we should make Oklahoma a penal colony for fundies.

abb3w: Both; the exact character of choices being good/evil have an absolute universal measure, but this measure is a function of the entity choosing and environment of the choice.

I'll give you a golf clap for that summary posting--the whole thing, not just the quoted part.

So Big Mama's religious brood is out there on the streets killing each other and atheism is the militant belief?

abb3w: Both; the exact character of choices being good/evil have an absolute universal measure, but this measure is a function of the entity choosing and environment of the choice.

You're always much better at expressing those concepts than myself. Thank you.

Cheron: I don't understand, "blessed are the cheese makers?"

It's not meant to be taken literally; it refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.

Vangor: vertiaset: What I am doing, and not very subtly I might add, is pointing out that"Good" and "Evil" exist and are universal.

You are not at all close to doing this. You simply just noted a culture of people all willing to cheer wildly at the act of sacrificing humans, which seems to ignore the premise that morality is universal. This certainly doesn't begin to establish the faintest notion.

vertiaset: Ideas, such as "beauty", "truth", "liberty" or "good and evil" belong to the higher, more refined realm of Philosophy.

Really, these do not. All are in the eye of the beholder, which is determined by our genetics, our upbringing, and our perspective based on the situation. Beauty especially, since we have a great deal of chemical reactions surrounding lust and love, as well as predispositions towards symmetry and more.

All of those appear to be well grounded in the natural, boring old world of neurology and similar. People enjoy believing the world is ethereal and mystical, despite the reality being vastly more complex and captivating.

snap.

vertiaset, may I reply for you? "Oh."

/reading up on Taoism these days
//but amused by the sign

letrole
If you're an Atheist, then there is no moral difference between killing a man and blowing out a candle.

WTF?
Wow. I blew out birthday candles a few days ago. Oh the huge manatee.

jso2897:
Well excuuuuuuse me! Didn't mean to offend your delicate little anti-pc sensibilities, Nancy.
You'll get over it.

Psst. I was giving you freedom. You were locking yourself into an unnecessary PC term.

Ailurophile: People need to know there are other people like them around, some even like to know them in person

My wife and I are friends with a couple who are also atheists. It's nice when we're around them because we can talk about things more openly than with our other friends.

letrole: Your view of society being "cooperative" reminds me of a child who assumes that eggs come from the grocery. In a sense, that's true, but only recently.

Your explanation here reminds me of a child who believes that chickens poop their eggs out. Incorrect, but understandable.

Minsky:What leads you to believe that there are people reading your text? Or even that you're posting at all?

As snarky as you may think you're being, it's a good question, and one that's been asked countless times by philosophers throughout history.

What is reality? Is it what we perceive? If so, how do we know that what we perceive is real? Do we even exist? Perhaps we're nothing more than a construct of something's dream...

The Z Spot:
Oh, not even that one...I just meant a real version of the test. I would be interested in the legitimate results...though its too many questions and would be a pain to gather.

but still, yea, your's is pretty funny.

I think there is a least a little truth in the fact that people who tend to be atheistic/theistic/agnostic are a certain personality type.

I myself grew up as a United Methodist, but I'm an ENFP. Methodists and other "dry and structured" Protestant groups are great for ISTJ's but it didn't work for me. That may not be because my personality type is different, but it's not hard to see why it's a distinct possibility.

Khanmots: What is reality? Is it what we perceive? If so, how do we know that what we perceive is real? Do we even exist? Perhaps we're nothing more than a construct of something's dream...

Duuuuuuuude..... Whoa. Pass me the Cheetos.

MorganFreeman: letrole: reklamfox: That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different.

The religion of the missionaries is moot. It was brought forward only to show that this was a functioning society in recent history.

I find it most amusing that the natural state of man is assumed to be a cooperative form of social altruism. It's not. We are cruel and violent and savage.

I'm none of those, but also an atheist. So... am I a robot?

No. Just self deceiving, and possibly not too well acquainted with history and anthropology. Unless what you mean is that you are a civilized person who has chosen to be more and better than his mere biology made him to be. Man can transcend his animal nature - but he must know it and own it to do so, in the long run. And no system of belief can guarantee that outcome.
the Golden Rule may be hackneyed and cliched - but finally, it's all we've got.

The Icelander: Ailurophile: People need to know there are other people like them around, some even like to know them in person

My wife and I are friends with a couple who are also atheists. It's nice when we're around them because we can talk about things more openly than with our other friends.

That's kind of like us and our Neocon neighbors. Well she's nice, but we really can't be around him for more than 20 minutes before he brings up Obama.

What a way to ruin a perfectly good BBQ.

theorellior: Khanmots: What is reality? Is it what we perceive? If so, how do we know that what we perceive is real? Do we even exist? Perhaps we're nothing more than a construct of something's dream...

Duuuuuuuude..... Whoa. Pass me the Cheetos.

You'll have to ask all those long-dead dudes for the cheetos. I'm not the one who asked those questions.

Although I'm sure that you'd recognize the names of a lot of those who did. They were rather famous people...

khonshu: The Z Spot:
Oh, not even that one...I just meant a real version of the test. I would be interested in the legitimate results...though its too many questions and would be a pain to gather.

but still, yea, your's is pretty funny.

I think there is a least a little truth in the fact that people who tend to be atheistic/theistic/agnostic are a certain personality type.

I myself grew up as a United Methodist, but I'm an ENFP. Methodists and other "dry and structured" Protestant groups are great for ISTJ's but it didn't work for me. That may not be because my personality type is different, but it's not hard to see why it's a distinct possibility.

Yea, that is really interesting...I can definitely see what you're saying. I always liked looking at group dynamics; and religion is just as good a place as any other... are you basing your thoughts just generally off of your own observations, or has there ever really been a big study done on religions by personality type?

letrole: The Icelander: Fitness has more to do with ability to survive than ability to hurt others. Humans don't have claws or big teeth. They're not particularly strong or particularly fast. The secret to our success is our ability to cooperate to achieve a goal.

No. You're treading very close to the idea of the noble savage. The secret to our success is that we're descended from those who were stronger and able to take what they wanted and impose their will.

Your view of society being "cooperative" reminds me of a child who assumes that eggs come from the grocery. In a sense, that's true, but only recently.

Uh, I don't have the picture of the alien newscaster from Futurama handy, so I will just have to say: "That is not how natural selection works!"
But if it makes you feel any better, he's wrong too.

vertiaset: Sorry this is a cop out and I suspect, intelligent person that you are your realize it.

The question is a rather meaningless one, but I did express the fact that the practice and praise by people was abhorrent. In essence, I am saying I do not find the act to be good, and were I in such a culture I would be an utterly different person.

vertiaset: So, all of you "moral" atheists. Where does your sense of morality come from anyway? Is there "good" and "evil". Are these universal or do they vary from person to person or society to society?

This is a sincere query and is not intended as sarcasm.

From our parents and our socialization as children.
Fortunately, virtually all societies on Earth share certain values. Murder is bad. Being nice to people is good. Generosity and empathy are desirable and commendable. Any parent from any culture wants to foster a sense of humanity in their child. There are clearly cultural differences and, interestingly enough, those cultural practices that we might consider "immoral" are often done for religious reasons (women's rights in muslim countries, for instance). But on the whole, the world continues to push towards a position of greater equality and less violence.

I'd say that "good" and "evil" do not exist independent of society, but it is not an accident that most humans have similar concepts of good and evil: we are social animals, and a social species does not survive long without ingrained, instinctual rules to preserve the society that we rely on. These ideas are not an invention of religion, they are essential to being human.

jso2897: MorganFreeman: letrole: reklamfox: That's exactly it, they were told by CHRISTIAN missionaries. That doesn't mean it was right, it was just different.

The religion of the missionaries is moot. It was brought forward only to show that this was a functioning society in recent history.

I find it most amusing that the natural state of man is assumed to be a cooperative form of social altruism. It's not. We are cruel and violent and savage.

I'm none of those, but also an atheist. So... am I a robot?

No. Just self deceiving, and possibly not too well acquainted with history and anthropology. Unless what you mean is that you are a civilized person who has chosen to be more and better than his mere biology made him to be. Man can transcend his animal nature - but he must know it and own it to do so, in the long run. And no system of belief can guarantee that outcome.
the Golden Rule may be hackneyed and cliched - but finally, it's all we've got.

Let's not get catty. I don't lack education, I just recognize that what people call the "natural state of man" is malleable. The savagery letrole talks about would be completely unnatural in my life. I'm not too stupid to know things would be different if I was fighting wolves for food scraps in the forest. letrole talks about social altruism like it's a stupid concept, which is something only a stupid person would believe.

The Z Spot: Yea, that is really interesting...I can definitely see what you're saying. I always liked looking at group dynamics; and religion is just as good a place as any other... are you basing your thoughts just generally off of your own observations, or has there ever really been a big study done on religions by personality type?

No, I don't think there's ever been a big study done. I found that chart here at FARK once, but I don't know who came up with it. I kept it because it seems so very very true! :)

theorellior: Dude, chill the fark out. It's rare that letrole and I are in the same threads, and it's rarer still that I engage him at all. Did you read the rest of my posts in the thread, or did you just notice my mockery posts and go apeshiat?

That's apeshiat?
I noticed a repeated trend and offered my opinion of it.
"le trole" comes into every single atheism thread we have and posts the same thing, verbatim. "Atheism is a religion"--knowing exactly the response it will receive.
Every time, someone goes "oh, haha, your name is letrole, we get it!" and you have personally defended him in at least three threads now that I can remember, saying the same thing. "oh, no, his surname really is le trole!"

First, why would you care, and second, how do you really know?
If that's apeshiat, then call me King Kong.

MBK: To play devil's advocate...

If you are going to complain about signs that are pro-religion, then you shouldn't complain about the protesters who dislike "anti-religion" signs. If you do, doesn't it make you hypocritical?


More like, the X-tians that complain about such billboards should get equally offended by the "-God" Billboards.

I don't complain about pro-religious signs, and the purchaser didn't seem to complain about them either - instead, he just bought space on his own.

vertiaset: It is no coincidence that Christianity appealed first to women, the poor and slaves of the ancient world. Its message of universal love, equality for all men and women before God and forgiveness of one's enemies was a huge step forward for mankind.

Theeeeen it was exploited politically, used to build nations and conquer others, the framework for enslaving others, established hierarchical divisions in society, limited the growth of knowledge, furthered serfdom, acted as a method of extracting 'taxes' from the poor... Jesus, I haven't even broke into 11AD yet.