|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
"Bob the Cow" wrote in message ... "Edward Dolan" wrote in message ... How about the taking of innocent human life which is what abortion does. Liberals must eliminate this distinction. "Innocent", if it is to have a meaning, must imply the existence of "good" and of "evil". The concepts of "good" and "evil" come uncomfortably close to being religious constructs, and religion must at all costs be eliminated. As to morality, if someone can do something, then that thing is OK. So, there is no "guilt" and there is no "innocence" and there is no moral difference between capital punishment and abortion. Got that? I've got it to perfection Bob, but I do not think the liberal left wing wacko nuts (all one word) will ever get it. I am not into religion at all. In fact, I am a thorough going atheist. But I do not want to abandon the morality of the traditional religions. They save us from ourselves. Jeff Grippe is a Jew and he should embrace his Judaism for it's moral teaching just as I embrace my Catholicism for it's moral teaching. Any kind of relativistic thinking about morals (good and evil) scares the hell out of me. The past century was replete with various theories of human behavior and morality and it has been nothing but a horror show. We do not ever want to repeat the 20th century. That is why I believe liberals are unfit to ever rule again. I for one am weighed down with all kinds of guilt. I do not see how a thinking, feeling human being can be otherwise. There is surely much evil in the world. It is all I can do to avoid becoming permanently depressed by the human condition. I have always liked Jews for their gravitas and their serious approach to life's conundrums. Jeff continues to disappoint me mightily by his light weight liberal ideology. A Jew that is not firmly anchored in his religion, at least with respect to it's moral teachings, is a freak of nature to me. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
Edward Dolan wrote:
Jeff Grippe is a Jew and he should embrace his Judaism for it's moral teaching just as I embrace my Catholicism for it's moral teaching. ... A Jew that is not firmly anchored in his religion, at least with respect to it's moral teachings, is a freak of nature to me. Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota "It's" is a contraction of "it is." "Its" is the word you're looking for, Mr. genius librarian. For a primer, see this link: www.stormloader.com/garyes/its/#top (And no, Mr. Paranoid Dolan, the link will not download a virus to your computer.) --ROTB |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
Sorry about the top posting. I find it unpleasant to read messages where
there is a lot of old text sprinkled with new text in the middle. So the criteria is not just "taking of life" but "taking of innocent life". Lets explo 1. There have been innocent people executed in error. 2. There are innocent people killed during wars. If you are against the taking of innocent life then you must be against war completely and against capital punishment until there is a way to make sure that innocent people are never accidentally executed. Since that is not possible, you must then be against capital punishment as well. Regarding sexual behavior, what is the ethical principle which you are appealing to in your views? What is it that makes certain practices "unethical"? I have no problem with someone having this view if they have thought it out and can express it as the result of an ethical principle. For religious people the rule would be "I believe that it is commanded by God". While I don't agree I can certainly see that for someone who believes, it is a very important rule. You claim to not believe in God or God's rules. So, what is the principle that you are applying to arrive at your views on sexuality? Morality is not about having "deep roots in history". It is (from dictionary.com) 1. The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. 2. A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality. 3. Virtuous conduct. 4. A rule or lesson in moral conduct. Some of the key words here a 1. "standards of right or good conduct": I read this as principles. Rules are derived from principles. 2. "system of ideas of right and wrong conduct": Again this refers to principles. It doesn't say "ideas of right and wrong conduct" but rather "SYSTEM of ideas of right and wrong conduct". That extra word makes a big difference. Rather than read me your list of rules you should spend some time thinking about the principles from which those rules generate. I agree that it is more difficult to find a moral compass without religion but it can be done. It is done with principles. Some (but not all) of mine: Affirm the worth, dignity, and uniqueness of every human being. Reason, compassion, and responsibility are central. Deed is more important than creed Human life is most meaningful when lived ethically. Despite your assertions to the contrary Ed, I believe that your values are relatively unexamined (by you). You have rules but you don't understand the principles from which those rules come. This is one of the reasons that we are often talking about two different things. I talk about principles and you talk about rules. They are different. "Edward Dolan" wrote in message ... "Jeff Grippe" jeff@door7 wrote in message ... I quoted the whole thing because that seems to be important to you. Top posting is all wrong. Quoting the whole thing is not important to me, but posting the correct way is. That means bottom posting. Follow my example if you would be correct. As I said, your moral compass is poorly calibrated. You don't actually have a system of principles to guide you in ethical behavior. You say things like "There are certain human behaviors which ought to be hidden away..." but we know nothing of what priciples determine which behaviors you are talking about. You give examples and tell us that the list is long but there is no clear way to understand what makes the list and what doesn't. Don't even bother with terms like liberal and conservative. They are far to broad in scope to actually be called "a system of principles". How about the taking of innocent human life which is what abortion does. How about aberrant sexual behavior which is what promiscuity and homosexuality is all about. But who needs a list except someone who has never received any instruction in the elements of morality. All the traditional religions (including Judaism) will give you very strong clues about what principals to live by. You ignore class issues and simply rely on "this is how things have always been so it is perfectly ok if they remain that way". That may in fact be a principle but I would hardly call it ethical. You need to spend some time thinking about what your principles are and then work from there and take stands on issues based on your principles. You should also recognize the situations in which there might be some ambiguity although I realize this is very difficult for you. Traditional morality (mostly based on religion) solved all these problems thousands of years ago. It is only those who want to do what they want to do who ignore this traditional morality much to the detriment of the entire society. If you were more conservative and less liberal, you would not so easily fall into evil ways of thinking and doing. I have no problem with the person who takes an anti-choice stand because they have a principle which says that "human life is sacred" and that abortion is the taking of human life. I don't happen to agree but I completely understand the position. If that same person says that "human life is scared" but then they support capital punishment, or they support war, then I would say that they don't have a consistant set of moral values. If it is possible to hold that human life is sacred but that the intentional taking of human life is not always wrong, then you have no basis upon which to take an anti-choice stand. You have got it all backwards, but that is what liberals do all the time. It is totally consistent to be against the taking of innocent life and to be for the taking of guilty life. Normally, the guilty life has taken innocent life. It is precisely because life is regarded as so precious (sacred) that the guilty must be punished with the ultimate penalty. You take someone else's life, you forfeit your own life. Elementary, my dear Watson! Do you not realize that excellent arguments can be made for killing and murder. The way you think about abortion is not very far removed from the way many others think about getting rid of those who they would like to be rid of. Justifications are far easier than most think. This is where traditional religion comes in and saves us from our own follies. You become a thorough going secularist at your peril. Morality is all about having deep roots in history. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
I think we can find a "secular" definition of innocent which allows the rule
against "taking of innocent human life" to work for liberals. We liberals will argue (and do argue) about what is "human life" so the innocent part doesn't even come in to play. The concepts of "good" and "evil" are (as all concepts are) man made concepts. People have always made up new concepts and sometimes chosen to live by them. As to what is Ok and what isn't, that is at some level a personal decision and at other levels a societal decision. "Bob the Cow" wrote in message ... "Edward Dolan" wrote in message ... How about the taking of innocent human life which is what abortion does. Liberals must eliminate this distinction. "Innocent", if it is to have a meaning, must imply the existence of "good" and of "evil". The concepts of "good" and "evil" come uncomfortably close to being religious constructs, and religion must at all costs be eliminated. As to morality, if someone can do something, then that thing is OK. So, there is no "guilt" and there is no "innocence" and there is no moral difference between capital punishment and abortion. Got that? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
I think we can find a "secular" definition of innocent which
allows the rule against "taking of innocent human life" to work for liberals. We liberals will argue (and do argue) about what is "human life" so the innocent part doesn't even come in to play. Some folks consider me a liberal. Others seem to think I'm a conservative. Here's my take on it (as though that actually matters to anyone but me). I personally believe abortion is wrong so I won't pay for an abortion nor will I assist someone in seeking an abortion. I also believe that it would be wrong for me to enforce my personal convictions about abortion upon someone else. Therefore, I refuse to try to outlaw abortion and I will not try to prevent someone seeking an abortion from doing so in as medically safe a facility as is available. As some may already know at the moment I happen to be in Salvador, Brazil. This morning I was reading "A Tarde", a popular newspaper in this city. There was a front page article on abortion... among 10 to 14 year old children. In this city where abortion is pretty much banned a young girl is hospitalized on average every 28 hours due to complications arising from illegal abortion. Many of these children are rape or incest victims. Many of them die horrible, excruciating deaths due to the ravages of "back alley" abortions. One poor girl of 14 recently tried to abort by inserting rat poison. She died in the hospital a day later. I find the situation in my own country (the USA) horrific. Millions of babies are killed every year. Whatever you wish to call it, innocence must surely be a quality which one would attribute to an unborn child. Sadly, it appears tat the statistics would not change much if the so-called "Christian" right had their way. Roughly the same number of abortions would occur but there would be far more young women dead or mutilated as well. Find a viable solution and I'll back whoever comes up with it. Without any answers other than to send people to prison for abortion I will oppose any change. The concepts of "good" and "evil" are (as all concepts are) man made concepts... So are the concepts of murder, friendship, love, hatred and war. The fact that they ware man-made does not make them any less real. People have always made up new concepts and sometimes chosen to live by them. As to what is Ok and what isn't, that is at some level a personal decision and at other levels a societal decision. Agreed. For example, I personally choose not to abort babies. I also personally choose not to force my personal beliefs on you. -- Regards, Robert L Bass Bass Burglar Alarms The Online DIY Store http://www.BassBurglarAlarms.com |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
So the criteria is not just "taking of life" but "taking
of innocent life". Lets explo 1. There have been innocent people executed in error. 2. There are innocent people killed during wars. If you are against the taking of innocent life then you must be against war completely... 1. Agreed, sort of. I oppose making war against any nation that is not attacking or threatening me. That would include Iraq but not Afghanistan. It would not have included Vietnam, Grenada or most of the other places the US has invaded during my lifetime. ... and against capital punishment until there is a way to make sure that innocent people are never accidentally executed. Since that is not possible, you must then be against capital punishment as well... 2. This is a tough one for me. As a general rule I'm opposed to capital punishment for three reasons: a. I can't be 100% certain who is guilty since witnesses, cops and prosecutors sometimes lie. b. It is disproportionately used against the poor and minorities. c. Bush thinks it's great fun. OTOH, there are a few people whose presence on the planet remains a threat to everyone around them. Prisoners who kill again while serving life sentences know there is nothing that can be done to them. Regarding sexual behavior, what is the ethical principle which you are appealing to in your views? If you are speaking to Ed, please be advised that he has no interest in anyone's sexual behavior. His only purpose in posting here is to troll. As for me, I look at it this way. Anything one or more consenting adults want to do between themselves in the privacy of their own home or in the presence of other consenting adults is their business. Anything involving minors or incapacitated persons should be punishable by surgery. :^) ... For religious people the rule would be "I believe that it is commanded by God". I believe in God and I usually try to do what I think He would want me to do. Absent an audible commission from Him, I don't believe He wants me to tell you or anyone else what to do. I figure if He is able to speak to me about what I should do He can also tell you or Ed what to do. Whether you or Ed decide to obey Him is your business. Side note: As a Christian, I believe I'm supposed to tell others about God. I DON'T believe that I'm supposed to tell others how to live for God. That's His job. Second side note: A few of the folks who infest a certain other newsgroup seem to have a hard time reconciling my statement that I'm a Christian with the fact that I'm also of Jewish heritage. Posts like this may draw flames since one of the regulars of said other forum likes to post here too. C'est la "Net. :^) Some of the key words here a 1. "standards of right or good conduct": I read this as principles. Rules are derived from principles. I disagree. Much of the time rules are derived from personal advantage. Those in power often create rules to help them obtain more power and/or wealth at the expense of those who have less power. Rules, it seems, often have nothing to do with principles. Rather than read me your list of rules you should spend some time thinking about the principles from which those rules generate. I agree that it is more difficult to find a moral compass without religion but it can be done. It is done with principles. Many principles seem to emanate from religiosity. For example, the principle of charity is often ingrained in religious thought. Unfortunately, the *act* of charity isn't as often practiced as it is spoken of by religious zealots. Despite your assertions to the contrary Ed, I believe that your values are relatively unexamined (by you)... I suspect you're giving Ed more credence than he deserves or wants. His entire purpose in posting here is to troll. I seriously doubt he gives a rat's bunda about sexuality, morality or anything else other than the attention he can get by posting absurdities. -- Regards, Robert L Bass Bass Burglar Alarms The Online DIY Store http://www.BassBurglarAlarms.com |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 03:29:40 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote: -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota As I figured, eddieboy, you are NOT man enough to walk away. All too predictable. jim |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
On 5-Sep-2005, Robert L Bass wrote: Second side note: A few of the folks who infest a certain other newsgroup seem to have a hard time reconciling my statement that I'm a Christian with the fact that I'm also of Jewish heritage. Posts like this may draw flames since one of the regulars of said other forum likes to post here too. C'est la "Net. :^) Johnny ReBike sez, Bass's security alarm buddies need to get carbon fiber splitter plate bikes like Johnny NoCom [NoCon - Fastest Stock Bike in the Known Universe], then they be happy. -- Johnny ReBike ReBike - Slowest Bike in the Known Universe |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
"ROTB" wrote in message oups.com... Edward Dolan wrote: Jeff Grippe is a Jew and he should embrace his Judaism for it's moral teaching just as I embrace my Catholicism for it's moral teaching. ... A Jew that is not firmly anchored in his religion, at least with respect to it's moral teachings, is a freak of nature to me. Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota "It's" is a contraction of "it is." "Its" is the word you're looking for, Mr. genius librarian. For a primer, see this link: www.stormloader.com/garyes/its/#top (And no, Mr. Paranoid Dolan, the link will not download a virus to your computer.) --ROTB That is a mistake I have been making all of my life. I do not do that with other possessives but it has always seemed to me that "its" should have the apostrophe. I do know all the contractions of course, but "its" has just never looked right to me. However, ROTB is quite right about this and I should not be making this mistake ever again (let us hope). -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Milestone Day for ARBR Arrives!
"Robert L Bass" wrote in message ... So the criteria is not just "taking of life" but "taking of innocent life". Lets explo 1. There have been innocent people executed in error. 2. There are innocent people killed during wars. If you are against the taking of innocent life then you must be against war completely... 1. Agreed, sort of. I oppose making war against any nation that is not attacking or threatening me. That would include Iraq but not Afghanistan. It would not have included Vietnam, Grenada or most of the other places the US has invaded during my lifetime. All of the above wars were right and just. What we are going to see more and more of in the future are preemptive wars due to the nature of weapons of mass destruction. If wars were left up to the likes of Jeff and Robert the US would soon find itself demoralized and defeated. The era of a Pearl Harbor is over and done with forever. ... and against capital punishment until there is a way to make sure that innocent people are never accidentally executed. Since that is not possible, you must then be against capital punishment as well... 2. This is a tough one for me. As a general rule I'm opposed to capital punishment for three reasons: a. I can't be 100% certain who is guilty since witnesses, cops and prosecutors sometimes lie. They do not lie nearly so much as the criminals and their defense lawyers. I do not mind seeing an innocent man go to his death occasionally if it makes society safer for the rest of us. b. It is disproportionately used against the poor and minorities. It is disproportionately the poor and the minorities who are committing all the murders. c. Bush thinks it's great fun. Me too! I would like to throw the switch myself if it were allowed. OTOH, there are a few people whose presence on the planet remains a threat to everyone around them. Prisoners who kill again while serving life sentences know there is nothing that can be done to them. Regarding sexual behavior, what is the ethical principle which you are appealing to in your views? If you are speaking to Ed, please be advised that he has no interest in anyone's sexual behavior. His only purpose in posting here is to troll. I have stated repeatedly to this group that the ONLY purpose of sex is to make babies and if you are engaged in sex for any other purpose than that, then you are aberrant and immoral. You are hardly even a human being in my book if you are using sex as a recreation, whether hetero or homo. What is so difficult to understand about this? As for me, I look at it this way. Anything one or more consenting adults want to do between themselves in the privacy of their own home or in the presence of other consenting adults is their business. Anything involving minors or incapacitated persons should be punishable by surgery. :^) That consenting adults stuff is a bunch of rubbish. Once you believe crap like that, then anything is possible. ... For religious people the rule would be "I believe that it is commanded by God". I believe in God and I usually try to do what I think He would want me to do. Absent an audible commission from Him, I don't believe He wants me to tell you or anyone else what to do. I figure if He is able to speak to me about what I should do He can also tell you or Ed what to do. Whether you or Ed decide to obey Him is your business. What is right and good for one person is right and good for all persons. Anyone who thinks he can create his own morality is a fool. Now you know why we need religion. It is to protect us from fools who think they are smart enough to create their won morality. [...] Despite your assertions to the contrary Ed, I believe that your values are relatively unexamined (by you)... I suspect you're giving Ed more credence than he deserves or wants. His entire purpose in posting here is to troll. I seriously doubt he gives a rat's bunda about sexuality, morality or anything else other than the attention he can get by posting absurdities. I like to state things in an exaggerated way, but there is an underlying substance which is anything but an absurdity. You have to know how to read through the style to get to the substance. It is a shame so many here on ARBR are constantly tripping over words. But I refuse to temper my style for the sake of those who do not know how to read. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New milestone: metric century | rubic | Unicycling | 16 | September 21st 08 10:26 PM |
Approaching Milestone for ARBR | Edward Dolan | Recumbent Biking | 177 | August 25th 05 03:57 AM |
Milestone Day for ARBR Approaches | Edward Dolan | Recumbent Biking | 22 | August 12th 05 10:36 PM |
kh24 arrives; happiest day of my life | tennisgh22 | Unicycling | 16 | June 29th 04 06:10 AM |
Milestone | Mandell | Unicycling | 4 | August 23rd 03 09:02 AM |