Comment by no_fans_please | Hacker News Reader

Comment by no_fans_please | Hacker News Reader

I must say, I'm extremely worried about the USA, and this article demonstrates why.

Should we really commend someone for being unable to tell the difference between an electronic component & radio transmission system, and the magical 'mark of the beast'?

I'm also pretty sure that forcing people to wear tags is going to be overturned by a judge on the point of religious freedom, not based on a common sense decision.

And so we're overturning a practical cost saving practicality because:

1) One person believes in magical symbols, and can't tell an electronic component from magic.

2) Some people (commenters in this article) believe we're all magical special snowflakes that should never be treated as a 'group', despite the practicalities of dealing with a large group of people at the same time.

Now all we need is for a bunch of nudists to decide that clothes are the mark of the beast. Or concert goers to say that tickets are a mark of the beast. Or flight-attendents to decide that passports are a mark of the beast. Or Hacker News commenters to decide that login details are the mark of the beast.

Where does the insanity stop?

I think that this girl can tell electronic components from magic perfectly well. It is you, who is unable to understand what she is saying.

Yes, she is using language with religious roots and very expressive 'mark of the beast' phrase. But these are just words, part of the language and culture. Fact that she uses them doesn't make her stupid or insane.

I hesitate to use the words "stupid" or "insane", but she literally believes that a piece of plastic with some microchips is the work of an evil magical being who wants to wait until she dies and then torment her, based on something that sounds like a mistranslated mushroom trip.

People don't always research what's important to their beliefs. I'd even go so far as to say it's more common than not that a person hasn't adequately researched their beliefs, whatever they are. So she might not have even read the book she got this belief from. Also, people have very different conceptions given vague data. So your interpretation of her beliefs is absurd, as religious scripture is ambiguous. Or more accurately, it doesn't matter whether it is ambiguous or not, as people will make that decision regardless of the ambiguousness of the original text.

You mention 'cost saving practicalities' several times in your comment, however you haven't mentioned any. I'd be interested to hear them.

I think you've missed the point of my commentary, if you think that's key here. Neither you nor I have access to that information; the school board, teachers, government workers, and parent representatives do, and they made a combined choice to implement this.

They could be wrong (and they have been before, of course) - but this family isn't arguing that. They are arguing on religious and privacy grounds.

Reductio in absurdum: take the "I won't do it because it's the mark of the beast" to it's next level (hacker news comments, library membership, news articles, theaters), and you have a dysfunctional society.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com