Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Right wing conservatives are evil? Well, I have evidence that they are.
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 16 of 302 (195398)
03-30-2005 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Silent H
03-30-2005 5:11 AM


Not to go too far off topic...
I'm still carrying a lantern looking for an actual relativist at EvC
How would you tell?
Also, are you looking for somebody who is a relativist in action (i.e. unconscious, non-logical, "gut"), or somebody who is a relativist in thought (conscious, logical, "head")?
Relativist in action is tough. Dalai Lama is probably your best best? I wonder if he posts here... Anyway. Finding somebody who is a relativist in thought doesn't seem SO hard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 5:11 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 10:28 AM Ben! has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 17 of 302 (195406)
03-30-2005 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Ben!
03-30-2005 8:37 AM


How would you tell?
Relativism means that one understands there is more than one valid moral worldview. Essentially they all depend on initial feelings or understandings. A filter is formed from these and the world is viewed from that perspective.
Although any morality might have internal problems (consistency), or faulty inputs (incorrect information about the world), one is not able to condemn another morality as objectively wrong, and another objectively more correct.
As an aside, subjectivism is simply a stronger form of relativism (admitting it can come down to the individual level).
A person can have a preferred moral system and use it to label activities for themself, as well as try and get people to follow that same moral system based on appeals to shared beliefs (emotions), and still be a relativist.
Absolutism is the belief that there is one objectively true or best moral system which others are either following and so right, or defying and so wrong.
A person who relies on their "gut" and so simply wings it, is not a relativist at all. They are amoralist in action, and usually ad hoc sophists in reasoning their motives afterward. Indeed in action they may appear to be more absolutist, than relativist since they usually demand that people fulfill their own expectations.
People however may be intuitive, or have a moral system which does not rely on moral dictates (event proscribed right/wrong). That is a bit different. Taoists, animists, and many pagans in the past (including Greeks) would have used that system. I do as well. These are not necessarily relativist though may look to be.
It is how one treats OTHER moral systems which determines if one is a relativist, not how one treats one's own actions.
At EvC I have seen numerous examples of people decrying absolutism, completely ridiculing creos that stand up for it, and then turn around to announce that their own system is in fact the absolute standard. Hypocrites.
This thread has so far provided a couple of good examples, though they are not as blatant as in the threads specifically devoted to discussions of moral abolutism/relativism.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Ben!, posted 03-30-2005 8:37 AM Ben! has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Ben!, posted 03-31-2005 3:22 AM Silent H has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 302 (195411)
03-30-2005 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by LinearAq
03-29-2005 8:55 PM


Re: Sins
Book and verse please.
Aren't all sins equal in the eyes of Christ?
1. This's not a homosexual thread. Go to the archives and look up the threads that have been on this topic. The scriptures are there in both OT and NT. In Leviticus it's depicted as "abominable" by God and in Romans as "un-natural."
2. No, not all sins are equal in the eyes of Christ. John 19:11 "Jesus answered, 'You would have no power at all against me, unless it were given to you from above. Therefore he who delivered me to you has greater sin." WEB
3. Under Jewish law, some sins received greater punishment than others as prescribed by God.
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-30-2005 10:50 AM

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by LinearAq, posted 03-29-2005 8:55 PM LinearAq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by LinearAq, posted 03-30-2005 11:26 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 21 by joshua221, posted 03-30-2005 11:27 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 22 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 12:54 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 108 by satrekker, posted 04-02-2005 2:13 AM Buzsaw has not replied

joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 302 (195416)
03-30-2005 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by nator
03-30-2005 8:23 AM


Re: thanks man, thanks alot
I believe humans are set apart from nature, we are something more. This is a main reason why I can't accept darwin's ideas as truth. Although adaptation is there.
quote:
Uh, lots of gay folk have found a life companion.
As in man and woman. These life companions are very different.

Social Darwinism enjoyed widespread popularity in some European circles, particularly among ruling elites during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. During this period the global recession of the 1870s encouraged a view of the world which saw societies or nations in competition with one another for survival in a hostile world. This attitude encouraged increasing militarization and the division of the world into colonial spheres of influence. The interpretation of social Darwinism of the time emphasized competition between species and races rather than cooperation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 03-30-2005 8:23 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by nator, posted 03-30-2005 10:15 PM joshua221 has replied

LinearAq
Member (Idle past 4676 days)
Posts: 598
From: Pocomoke City, MD
Joined: 11-03-2004


Message 20 of 302 (195419)
03-30-2005 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Buzsaw
03-30-2005 10:49 AM


Re: Sins
buzsaw triumphantly writes:
This's not a homosexual thread. Go to the archives and look up the threads that have been on this topic.
Well, I guess I'll just have to pack up and leave.
No, not all sins are equal in the eyes of Christ.
All sins lead to the same punishment (....wages of sin is death...) and required the same sacrifice for forgiveness of them.
oh...off topic again...sorry (winces from slap on wrist)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Buzsaw, posted 03-30-2005 10:49 AM Buzsaw has not replied

joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 302 (195420)
03-30-2005 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Buzsaw
03-30-2005 10:49 AM


Re: Sins
quote:
John 19:11 "Jesus answered, 'You would have no power at all against me, unless it were given to you from above. Therefore he who delivered me to you has greater sin."
This reference I think, was making it clear that people in general as a race, were responsible for his delivery. Who's sin is worse is really trivial, strive to be holy and not to sin at all. If one does sin, that should mean nothing to you, remember the prostitute that was going to be stoned?
Sometimes we miss the important message for such little details.
quote:
Under Jewish law, some sins received greater punishment than others as prescribed by God.
Law is of man's design. I saw a great movie yesterday called "The Motorcycle Diaries". It went into the lives of unfortunate people who are suppressed by another human's government. Pointless it becomes to get a better form of government. Nothing will be perfect, to the contrary of what people may think of the US's democracy. Not realizing the lives that have been taken for an effort to convert those to our culture. Our culture is nothing to them, we are a monster industrializing other areas that were once truly beautiful. Libraries, museums destroyed.
Peace out, im addicted to world of warcraft :-(
This message has been edited by prophex, 03-30-2005 11:29 AM

Social Darwinism enjoyed widespread popularity in some European circles, particularly among ruling elites during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. During this period the global recession of the 1870s encouraged a view of the world which saw societies or nations in competition with one another for survival in a hostile world. This attitude encouraged increasing militarization and the division of the world into colonial spheres of influence. The interpretation of social Darwinism of the time emphasized competition between species and races rather than cooperation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Buzsaw, posted 03-30-2005 10:49 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 03-30-2005 1:50 PM joshua221 has replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 302 (195438)
03-30-2005 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Buzsaw
03-30-2005 10:49 AM


Re: Sins
buzsaw writes:
quote:
This's not a homosexual thread.
Indeed, so why didn't you drop it there? Couldn't resist the temptation to damn somebody, huh?
quote:
In Leviticus it's depicted as "abominable" by God...
Yes, as are shrimp and lobster. I hope you don't eat them; you wouldn't want to offend this intolerant, genocidal beast you call God, would you?
quote:
and in Romans as "un-natural."
Which is absurd. It happens in nature, doesn't it?
quote:
Under Jewish law, some sins received greater punishment than others as prescribed by God.
But you were responding to the statement that all sins are equal in the eyes of Christ. What do silly Jewish laws have to do with that? I thought Jesus brought a "new covenant" or something.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Buzsaw, posted 03-30-2005 10:49 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 2:37 PM berberry has replied
 Message 26 by Phat, posted 03-30-2005 2:45 PM berberry has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 23 of 302 (195463)
03-30-2005 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by joshua221
03-30-2005 11:27 AM


Re: Warcraft, Reality, Role-playing,and Religion
prophex writes:
Law is of man's design. I saw a great movie yesterday called "The Motorcycle Diaries". It went into the lives of unfortunate people who are suppressed by another human's government. Pointless it becomes to get a better form of government. Nothing will be perfect, to the contrary of what people may think of the US's democracy. Not realizing the lives that have been taken for an effort to convert those to our culture. Our culture is nothing to them, we are a monster industrializing other areas that were once truly beautiful. Libraries, museums destroyed.
In order to save space, I want to refer everyone to this link: (Browse it briefly)
AAPL - American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
The eternal and constant "battle" within humanity has been the ideas of justice defined by psychiatry, (human wisdom) vs justice defined by spirituality (intrinsic evil) Legislation of morality vs allowing things to play out the way that they need to play out.
Prophex, I cannot begin to explain to you everything that I want you to think about, but I will say that there are many things to consider. You say that Law is of man's design. True Dat. We need law, and we always have. The issue that many conservatives are "evil" stems from the origin of conservative thought.
AAPL writes:
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in 1881 in The Common Law 46 wrote: "It may be said, not only that the law does, but that it ought to, make the gratification of revenge an object. The first requirement of a sound body of law is,is that it should correspond with the actual feelings and demands of the community, whether right or wrong.
The community! Not only the religious people. After 9/11, the conservatives tapped into national fear and made us want to punish the enemy. Quite the character, Oliver was. Speaking of characters, what do you think of this?
In role-playing games, you create a character -- one that's not necessarily like you, but one that suits your style. This character can be one of many different races, and it can be many different things -- a wizard or mage, a thief or rogue, or just a plain fighter. The goal of the game is to go on adventures with groups of friends, finding treasure and gaining experience that makes your character more powerful as he attains new levels. All the while acting like this character -- and not necessarily you -- would act.
My question is this: If a man gets elected president, does he begin to see himself as "The President" and not who he is as an individual? In other words, when humans in real life become characters...such as "The Pope" or "The President" or even locally as "The D.A." or "The Judge" or "The Cop" or even as "The Gangster/Crip, MS 13, Blood, skinhead, or even "The Christian"...whatever...do we divorce ourselves from our own identities and take on a larger role as a character?
The conservatives took a good idea, Christian morality, and hijacked it as representative of our national character.
The reason that I ask this is because of the topic thread on conservatism as evil. There is a good book that I have yet to read.
"Why the Right gets it wrong and the Left doesn't get it." The right has always tried to legislate morality, but at least they don't feel ashamed about proclaiming an absolute morality. The left has championed freethinking yet is hopelessly undecided on any course of action. They need an absolute focus but shy away from proclaiming one. Lets get back to role playing.
Robert Holt writes:
A large part of role-playing games involves calculations, and that takes the person out of the role. When you say, "I attack the gnoll" -- you then need to roll a die, and then make calculations as to whether you actually hit the beast, and how hard.
What about the war in Iraq? If you are an American officer, you use computers and graphic simulations to "hit" the enemy. Very similar to the role playing game that you love. If we have an army like that, where the individual accountability is lost in "game playing" and then we have a president whose individual accountability is lost in his role as "President".....is it any wonder that we have a world of contradictions? A world where, as you say...
prophex writes:
Nothing will be perfect, to the contrary of what people may think of the US's democracy. Not realizing the lives that have been taken for an effort to convert those to our culture. Our culture is nothing to them, we are a monster industrializing other areas that were once truly beautiful. Libraries, museums destroyed.
God loves ALL people. The Muslim world is not simply a place of "hordes of infidels and shrouded women." They were and are a cultural center of thought. Perhaps our U.S. culture is nothing to them because they think it odd that even as our leaders proclaim us a nation of Christian morality, the evidence shows us to be the horde of idolators. They see us as the horde and we see them as the horde!
Our nation was not founded on Christian principles but on Enlightenment ones. Many of us are Christians, but Christianity should never become the national character! The U.S. dare not play a role if we expect Islam to do likewise. The legislation of morality sets up a self fullfilling apocalyptic scenario in world affairs.
We need to think as individuals and interact with God on a daily basis. He gives us our character...ourself...our role to play in life. We should never try to act like who we are not. (Unless we are playing a game! )
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 03-30-2005 12:35 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by joshua221, posted 03-30-2005 11:27 AM joshua221 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by joshua221, posted 03-30-2005 4:07 PM Phat has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 24 of 302 (195471)
03-30-2005 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by berberry
03-30-2005 12:54 PM


Re: Sins
Which is absurd. It happens in nature, doesn't it?
Can we please put this one to rest at EvC? You are equivocating. It has already been explained that the word "natural" is being used as "God's intent/expectation for how people should act in the world he created", not "what does in fact happen in nature".
I have no problem with the rest of the challenges (though he's free to ad hoc his way out, or have a differing personal interpretation), but this one has been debunked as simply talking past buz.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 12:54 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 2:45 PM Silent H has replied
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 03-30-2005 2:54 PM Silent H has replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 302 (195474)
03-30-2005 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Silent H
03-30-2005 2:37 PM


Re: Sins
holmes writes me:
quote:
Can we please put this one to rest at EvC?
I don't see any need to put it to rest; people like buz should find another word besides 'unnatural'. I object to it. Why can't they use the word 'ungodly', since that would be more to the point they're trying so feebly to make.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 2:37 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 3:06 PM berberry has replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 26 of 302 (195475)
03-30-2005 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by berberry
03-30-2005 12:54 PM


Re: Sins
Schraff writes:
It happens in nature, doesn't it?
Murder or killing happens in nature. Murder happens among human animals. Does "natural" mean that an act is right? I will concede any attempt to legislate morality, however. Conservatives attempt to legislate morality under the assumption that Gods way is the best way. I do not disagree that God is the best way. Others assume Him to be a tyrant or an irrational god. They would also assume, however, that God is a construct of the human mind and that Gods character was defined by humanity. I would say that humanity was created perfect by God and then became corrupt. Our character was foreknown by God. Of course, some blame God for corrupting us...others say that we did it to ourselves.(which I think)
Irregardless of all that, I want to make my point:
Humanity will never successfully craft or design a perfect government.
America....OF....BY....and FOR the people is the best model that the world has got. The evil of America is not only the conservative agenda. The evil of America is the evil of humanity. Evil exists.
Scraff, would you agree with me that evil within humanity exists? Is it natural?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 12:54 PM berberry has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by nator, posted 03-30-2005 10:28 PM Phat has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 27 of 302 (195477)
03-30-2005 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Silent H
03-30-2005 2:37 PM


Coppin a Buzz yet avoiding responsibility
holmes writes:
It has already been explained that the word "natural" is being used as "God's intent/expectation for how people should act in the world he created", not "what does in fact happen in nature".
Hold up. So what you mean is that to act natural or to behave natural means to behave and/or act like God wants us to act?
I would say that to act natural means to act under the assumption that we are our own law. Which proves the point that conservatives are evil. They run the country and they run it naturally.
Not to say that everyone else is not evil also....because we ALL do what we do quite naturally.
A Christian by definition goes against the grain of natural.
NIV writes:
1 Cor 15:44-49=If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.
In a pluralistic nation, believers and non believers should coexist. Neither side should legislate morality and ethics against the beliefs of the other.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 2:37 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 3:03 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 31 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 3:15 PM Phat has not replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 302 (195481)
03-30-2005 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Phat
03-30-2005 2:54 PM


Re: Coppin a Buzz yet avoiding responsibility
Excellent post, Phat. I very often disagree with you, but I have to say that you seem to give these issues a lot of thought. You don't give knee-jerk reactions the way so many of us on both sides do.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Phat, posted 03-30-2005 2:54 PM Phat has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 29 of 302 (195484)
03-30-2005 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by berberry
03-30-2005 2:45 PM


Re: Sins
I don't see any need to put it to rest; people like buz should find another word besides 'unnatural'. I object to it.
So you are going to continue to throw a fit, pretending like you don't know what he means, until he changes words, simply because you don't like the fact that the word natural can have more than one meaning?
Yeah, that's pretty mature and likely to work.
Why can't they use the word 'ungodly', since that would be more to the point they're trying so feebly to make.
Could I point out that the term "unnatural" in that context is already in the Bible and predates YOU? Maybe you should just live with it and if they try to equivocate then hold their feet to the fire?
Yes I see they could use ungodly, but they don't. They use unnatural with a different context. Its English, they can do that as long as they don't equivocate.
In this case you make yourself the person who is incorrect.
Do you go into fits when homosexuals refer to themselves as gay?

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 2:45 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by berberry, posted 03-30-2005 3:14 PM Silent H has replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 302 (195487)
03-30-2005 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Silent H
03-30-2005 3:06 PM


words
holmes, get a goddamned grip. You are the one throwing a fit, not me. You or anyone else can use whatever words you like. I reserve the right to point out any disagreement I may have. Deal with it.

Keep America Safe AND Free!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 3:06 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Silent H, posted 03-30-2005 3:20 PM berberry has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024