Podcast: Play in new window
| Download (Duration: 1:53:14 — 52.0MB)
Me and Rachel. Really good show. Can’t type. Headache from junk food withdrawl.
CLICK THE ARTWORK TO PLAY THE GRUM
Categories: Rachel Kann
24 Comments »
24 Responses to “Yeast Radio 1159 Raw Hole”
I would have sex with Rachel if she had a penis!
I am all into shooting up testosterone to feel great it kicks ass.
Apples and carrots have to much sugar so eat in moderation.
Use MyFitnessPal app on iPhone and just use it to track what you eat and do the low carb low fat stuff.
How about sperm in the banana shake?
No one can be sure of God or No God as there is no proof either way but if there is a God I would kick their wimpy ass!
I love death it is the ultimate orgasm.
OMG ALBUM ORK OMGEEEEE JAMES ELKINS!!!!!! This is so amazing!!!!!!
BEST ALBUM-ARK EVUH !!
If I had a nickel for every time someone said they would have sex with me if I had a penis…
Hello everyone, the day after this podcast was posted, I created an indiegogo campain to issue a reprint for my poetry and fiction collection, 10 FOR EVERYTHING. Please please please support if you can, even just sharing the link would be a huge help. I have two weeks to raise over $1500! Thank you so very much. Here is the link: http://t.co/lY7HIr5s6k
Shockingly wonderful album artwork. The religion discussion was teetering on the verge of making me angry, but in the end I’m much less interested in that than I used to be. Great show Ms Kann & Ms Weinstein! A+++ would listen to again
I enjoyed this podcast, a very relaxing way to end my weekend! Madge, have you read Feeling Good by Dr. David D. Burns? It’s basically cognitive behavioral therapy in a book, I found it very useful. You might also enjoy The Velvet Rage by Alan Downs. The latter in particular is excellent, let me know if you don’t have it, I will buy it for you as a prezzy because I know you will get a lot out of it.
I’ve read feeling good not velvet downs. Would gladly accept as a gift & prefer kindle if available.
what is the difference between an atheist and a “pure atheist?” i was surprised to hear rachelle compare atheism to a fundamentalist belief. atheists don’t have a set of doctrines or dogmas. we just lack the belief in a higher power. my belief in a god is similar to that of a unicorn. i cant disprove its existence, but i’ve never been proved it does. but a unicorn to me is at least plausible.
Thanks so much for engaging in the conversation. I appreciate your perspective, very much so. This is simply about the definition of the word “atheism.”
If one is 100% positive that there is 100% NO GOD, then one is engaging in a fundamentalist belief, according to the definition of the word.
To each his own! Everyone must wrestle with these questions for him or herself.
I can not be 100% sure. I can not believe anyone who says they know for sure. We have no proof, as you so rightly mention!
PS Here are two of my favorite links on this topic. Enjoy:
to say atheists are fundamentalists is the funniest – if not sadest – thing i have heard this week.
i couldn’t stop myself from thinking about what your agenda was by saying this? it just seems to me that you are explicitly or subliminally trying to lower the bar on fundamentalism. like, sure, there are fundamentalist committing hideous crimes in the name of religious dogma, but aren’t we all fundamentalists in some way… like i.e. people that don’t believe in the easter bunny or santa claus or valhalla or spirtiual guides for that matter. Certainly a lot of people believe(d) in them.
just like brendan says above, what you fail to grasp is that there are people out there – where i come from 30 to 60% – who don’t think about religion at all, who certainly also don’t have an “atheist agenda” they live their life according to.
now, i would never blame you for assuming this, because religion obviously has been from young age on something you have been encouraged to take part in.
but trust me if i say this, these 30 to 60 %, they don’t go around debating inside whether they believe 100% not in god or perhpas 95% not. they don’t f-u-c-k-i-n-g care. they have no indication to even consider thinking about this, except of course if they are confronted by religious missionaries. iow. you can only be called atheist after being confronted by a religious missionary. how can you be a normal person in the physical cosmos one minute and the next minute because you do not doubt the physical laws before your eyes in one explicit religious way you are called a fundamentalist?
In fact, I would go as far as to say that in this day and age, the only person who would call such non-religious people or atheists fundamentalists are themselves religious fundamentalist.
I was raised by two atheists, and I do not consider myself religious.
Also, please watch my links. The first one especially.
Also: For instance, the Archbishop of Wales has criticized “atheistic fundamentalism” broadly and said “Any kind of fundamentalism, be it Biblical, atheistic or Islamic, is dangerous”.
…Just to show that this is not some shenanigans I am making up.
I am in support of moderation and centrism. Extremism is dangerous.
You can not prove there is or is not a God.
Your assumptions about my background and intellect only prove to highlight your limited perspective.
I encourage you to do some linguistic research.
Have a great day.
I don’t think my point has to do with linguistics. And since you are quoting wikipedia, how interesting that the english language page emphasizes the religious reference much more than ie. the german page.
imo, non-believers don’t have to prove that god exists or not. that is the celestial teapot argument. the burden of prove cannot be shifted away from the person making the scientifically unfalsifiable claim.
So, unless you have prove there is a god, you cannot possibly bring up atheists in the context of religious fundamentalism.
Btw. a missionary calling atheists fundamentalists, just seems to proove my point from the comment above, doesn’t it. who else would say something like this.
And please relax about false assumptions, this page is called yeast radio, after all. i’ll take it back than. (though it puzzles me all the more)
have a great day, too.
oy. i mean, i don’t care what anyone chooses to believe. but you just choose to declare facts about me as truth, when you have no evidence.
i know the name of the show.
i am a real human being.
i can in no way prove there is or is not a god, nor can you, nor can anyone.
i deeply regret that this is so triggering for you.
i wish you well.
Thank you so much for your kind words, what you gals said about me on the show was very touching.
Indeed I took my name from “Rosenkavalier”, I was actually hoping you’d notice, Madge. It’s one of my favorite operas as well. And yes, it’s pronounced in a French way in the opera (the Marschallin sings it several times during the first, post-coital dialogue in her boudoir in the opera). I’ll try to cut it out from a spoken recording of the libretto. But ultimately, you can pronounce it however you like, I don’t really care…
As for your diet, Madge, I’m pretty sure veganism would be good for your health (although I doubt that you’d have to go all the way to a raw vegan diet). I’ve been looking into veganism myself lately, but I doubt that it’s practical if you don’t/can’t cook every meal from scratch, since it seems that what you need to avoid is processed (and convenience) food (for all the obvious tranny fats and hidden salt and sugar as well as flavor enhancers which, in addition to artificial sweeteners, also enhance your appetite). I’m still reading into it, I still have a lot of questions about it that I’m hesitant to ask real vegans, since I’d kinda do it for the “wrong” reasons (my personal health, rather than avoiding animal cruelty or eniviromental issues, may seem a rather selfish approach). But I am contemplating trying to eat vegan for a month as an experiment, to see how I’m doing, how practical it is for my life.
However, I like Rachel’s positivistic approach in terms of “stop thinking about what you can’t eat, start thinking about what you can eat”. I’ve been putting apples, carrots and paprika into my lunchbox recently, maybe you could try that for snacks too.
QUINQUIN!!!!! Brilliant! Adding unto rather than subtracting. I’m happy to answer any dietary questions as best I can or guide you towards good answers. There’re plenty of vegans who do it for health-only now…
Rachel – glad you liked the ablum ark – i found some strong faceboook portraits that will be fun to use in future ark! Madge and Rachel – my dog of 13 just died and I have been in grieving downward spiral this week ?!? Any advice ? I moved outta the apartment where she passed as I thought I was gonna lose what little mind I have left. I don’t fit into any community or have family and having that little dog made me feel connected to something normal. I keep thinking of that line “what have i become, me sweetest friend, everyone i know, goes away in the end.” ugg. I too am working on becoming vegan – mostly based on two experiences – the first happened when I laying out chicken leg and it fit my hand same as my dogs leg. The second happened when I was taking back roads and at a stop sign next to an farm – two calves were bounding and one went into a play pose just like a dog would. I have cancer on one side of the family and heart disease on the other so I have to start considering how I want to end this. I am glad Im at the age im at now – I can say im half way through it – so far it seems like life is becoming nothing more than a tally of disappointments and failures. bleh
James, you sweet sweet thing. I’m so so sorry for your loss. I’m glad you reached out here. I’m holding your heart right now.
Without putting pressure on yourself, and following your already-awakened sensitivity, I encourage you to lean into vegan ism in the gentlest way possible.
I also want to recommend the writing of the amazing Dr. Robin Smith to you – she has written some amazing pieces about the loss of her dear dog-child.
And lord knows I relate to the NIN quote, and the feeling of not “being where I want to be” in terms of success/achievemens/relationship/EVERYTHING – I say this all to say you are not alone.
THE ALBUM ART IS AMAZING!!! Thank you so much.
Rachel – thanks for the kind words – I appreciate it. I will follow ur advice and see what I can find by Smith to make sence of this – thanks again – hope u and Madge grum soon.
I always love the shows with Rachel on, because there’s this chemistry between you two that’s not as harsh as it tends to be when (for example) Sheryl is on. The conversations are not always deep, but they’re always thought-provoking.
I also enjoy hearing about Madge’s opinions, which don’t necessarily always come out in the solo ‘grums (where half the show is her wrestling with the goddamned technology), or the Cheryl ‘grums (where it’s 60% wrestling with the technology, 20% calling Cheryl a dumb whore, and the rest a bit more rambly [though entertaining still]). I feel like Rachel knows how to pull Madge out of herself, and bring out some serious thoughts, while still being able to have a bit of light banter once in a while.
I’m not necessarily in agreement with Rachel’s concept of an atheist being one who is 100% sure that there is no creator, and I feel like our disagreement is a semantic one. In essence, it boils down to the difference between disbelief and lack of belief, if that makes sense? I’m not sure that I’m getting it across quite how I want, but there it is. For me, disbelief is a positive statement. “X does not exist, and I know this for certain”, whereas lack of belief is “Oh, you believe in X? That’s nice. I don’t acknowledge its existence, so I don’t feel the need to tell you that X doesn’t or does exist.”
Seriously though, love your shows together, Madge and Rachel! Hope you do more.
Love this episode so much. Listened to it a few times Always a delight to hear the two of you chat.
Just catching up with yeastcasts while commuting and I
heard the discussion on religion and atheism. I reject Rachel’s
suggestion that atheists are fundamentalist for one simple reason:
it fails to take account of the spectrum from atheism through to
theism. Just like the Kinsey Scale notes that there isn’t just
three positions when talking about sexuality (gay, straight and bi)
but a spectrum where one might be, say, predominantly straight but
also have some gay attractions – it’d put you at neither end of the
scale nor at the other, but lurking somewhere between one end and
the middle. To compound this, you might have two people who are at
the same place on the spectrum but use different names for that
same place. The same is true with religious belief, or rather the
certainty with which we hold our beliefs. I call myself an atheist.
Does that mean I’m dogmatically certain there is no god? No. It
means I’ve looked at the evidence and the ideas presented to me and
rejected them. Might I be wrong? Absolutely. I’ve looked in quite
some detail at religion: I studied religion and philosophy at a
Catholic college, took courses in comparative religion, read
Christian and Buddhist texts, read books on religion and atheism,
visited mosques and synagogues and listened to religious leaders.
And with a fallible human mind, I’ve made a call to live by: that
it doesn’t make sense to me, and that I need not try to live as if
the claims of the religious are true. I don’t have to go on
entertaining the claims of religion and God forever. There are
other things I have to do in life. We must all make calls on a lot
of things in our lives: the jobs we do, the relationships we go
into. We can be wrong on them: I’ve certainly been wrong on those
kinds of decisions before. But I can’t just say “well, I can’t
decide whether to be a doctor or a lawyer (or a psychic) so I’ll
just sit there and not make a decision because I can’t really know
whether I’ve made the right choice”, which is to me the position of
the agnostic. At a certain point, you have to decide whether to
live according to the strictures of the religion under
consideration: do I need to go to church or temple? Do I need to be
worried about the fact that the Church considers me “intrinsically
morally disordered” for being gay? Should I observe shabbat? Do I
need to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca? I can be agnostic all I want,
but the religious pose practical questions about how I live. I need
to make some kind of decision about those things. In order to
choose how I live life, I need to bring the debate about religion
to some kind of conclusion and call it as I see it. Atheism is at
heart a pretty simple proposition: when faced with the question “do
you think there is a God?”, you answer in the negative. It says
nothing about how much confidence you have in your answer, nor
about how much emotional investment you have in your answer. What
you then do with that conclusion is up to you. It is a testament to
the power of the religious to frame this debate that this, of all
philosophical questions, is one where when you disagree with them,
you are automatically considered a fundamentalist. If I come to the
conclusion that social contract theories in political philosophy
are wanting, I’m not suddenly labelled a “fundamentalist
anti-contractarian”. If I think that idealism is bullshit, I am not
a “fundamentalist realist”. But if I think theism isn’t a
compelling philosophical viewpoint, I suddenly am tarred with being
a “fundamentalist atheist”. Plenty of us have sat down and thought
about this and have come to our conclusions in reasonable awareness
of the facts available and following some kind of rational and
well-intentioned search for truth.
Care to comment?
Mail (will not be published) (required)