Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discrimination against homosexuals carried into the 21st century
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 106 of 313 (378437)
01-20-2007 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by anastasia
01-20-2007 1:11 PM


Re: Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
quote:
to gain access to any job they would choose.
Just so you know...
In 41 states in the US, it is perfectly legal to deny a job to someone because they are gay, or fire them if it is discovered that they are gay.
It is also perfectly legal in many places to refuse to rent to or sell a house or apartment to someone because they are gay, or because they want to purchase the house with someone of the same gender. It is also perfectly legal to evict them because they are gay.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 1:11 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 11:30 PM nator has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 107 of 313 (378449)
01-20-2007 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by kuresu
01-20-2007 2:27 AM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
and as a personal question, why do you have to have someone constantly reminding you such and such an action is "sinful"? is your moral fiber so weak that you have to have "sin" and the retribution that comes with it?
If there is no eternal Justice (or being) to fear, then there is no reason to expect a Hitler or a Stalin to moderate their position. There is no reason for them to do what is 'right', since right becomes what ever benefits the individual and their desires.
If you want to throw out Justice (sins inevitable counterpart), then you are not giving yourself the foundation with which to rebel against anything.
there's a difference between mistake and wrong. Doing such things are wholeheartedly wrong. and yes, in my mind, what the Nazi's did to twelve million people was pure evil.
Well, you're the one who justifies Nazism (by implication) by agreeing with the social darwinism that Hitler explained quite matter-of-factly in his manifesto, 'Mein Kampf'.
You don't know what you're saying kid...
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by kuresu, posted 01-20-2007 2:27 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by jar, posted 01-20-2007 7:05 PM Rob has replied
 Message 109 by nator, posted 01-20-2007 7:06 PM Rob has replied
 Message 115 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 1:01 AM Rob has replied
 Message 122 by Larni, posted 01-21-2007 7:27 AM Rob has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 108 of 313 (378455)
01-20-2007 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Rob
01-20-2007 6:52 PM


Not just off topic but also just plain silly.
If there is no eternal Justice (or being) to fear, then there is no reason to expect a Hitler or a Stalin to moderate their position. There is no reason for them to do what is 'right', since right becomes what ever benefits the individual and their desires.
How utterly silly.
I guess that is why Hitler never invaded Poland, retired to a monastery and became a Monk.
Sorry Rob but believe it or not some of use try to do right just because it is the right thing to do. We do not need to fear some imaginary Big Daddy in the Sky.
Well, you're the one who justifies Nazism by agreeing with the social darwinism that Hitler explained quite matter-of-factly in his manifesto, 'Mein Kampf'.
Nonsense, Hitler justified the Final Solution on Christian Principles.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 6:52 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 7:34 PM jar has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 109 of 313 (378456)
01-20-2007 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Rob
01-20-2007 6:52 PM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
quote:
There is no reason for them to do what is 'right', since right becomes what ever benefits the individual and their desires.
Does the term "social pressure" mean anything to you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 6:52 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 7:39 PM nator has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 110 of 313 (378468)
01-20-2007 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by nator
01-20-2007 5:43 PM


Re: a newer, gentler misogyny
I mean, isn't that exactly what it says?
That is what it 'appears to say' if you are looking for a way to discredit it.
But you're leaving out the context in that chapter of the husbands assumed modeling of God.
It's an ideal Nator. One that would be feasible if we all obeyed. But we also can't wait for others, we must do so ourselves in spite of the failings of others.
I think the point is self sacrifice...
Your original question was:
Females should think of men the way men think of God.
Right?
It doesn't say that you should think of men as God. You don't have to think of men as god. Not even your husband.
You are exhorted to submit to your husband as to the Lord.
You do not have to submit to men in general. but if we love our neighbor as ourselves, then even their we have respect and honor as though a lord in some sense.
We are meant to be gods, and act like gods in a sense of the word. Godliness begets Godliness. That is also a reflection of the trinity.
It's like the passage that exhorts us to work for our employer as though working for God. Because in the greater scope of things, we are.
your keen and clever skeptical questions are only useful if you are seeking the truth of the scriptures. If you only scrutinize them for the sake of discrediting them, then this is a waste of time.
I don't know why you're so angry with men. We, as a gender have certainly been irresponsible, but a little forgiveness for whatever haunts you, might do some good. Especially if you don't believe in morality. You can't hate someone for doing nothing wrong.
But, in the name of frivolity, I am the best time you've ever had huh?
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by nator, posted 01-20-2007 5:43 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by nator, posted 01-21-2007 1:06 PM Rob has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 111 of 313 (378469)
01-20-2007 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by jar
01-20-2007 7:05 PM


Re: Not just off topic but also just plain silly.
good bye jar...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by jar, posted 01-20-2007 7:05 PM jar has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 112 of 313 (378471)
01-20-2007 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by nator
01-20-2007 7:06 PM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
Does the term "social pressure" mean anything to you?
Of course!
That is what society uses to silence the truth...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by nator, posted 01-20-2007 7:06 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by nator, posted 01-21-2007 1:09 PM Rob has replied

anastasia
Member (Idle past 5953 days)
Posts: 1857
From: Bucks County, PA
Joined: 11-05-2006


Message 113 of 313 (378505)
01-20-2007 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by nator
01-20-2007 5:57 PM


Re: Inalienable Rights...from now on, that is.
schrafinator writes:
In 41 states in the US, it is perfectly legal to deny a job to someone because they are gay, or fire them if it is discovered that they are gay.
Well, that is dumb. That is about all I can say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by nator, posted 01-20-2007 5:57 PM nator has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 114 of 313 (378520)
01-21-2007 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by anastasia
01-20-2007 1:24 PM


oops
sorry about that. i didn't may attention to the name, assummed it was rob/scotness. if sounded a lot like what he would/was/is saying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by anastasia, posted 01-20-2007 1:24 PM anastasia has not replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 115 of 313 (378521)
01-21-2007 1:01 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Rob
01-20-2007 6:52 PM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
you've never read a bit on utilitarianism or Kant's categorical imperitive, have you?
'cause if you had, you wouldn't have made that jackass, dumb, stupid, idiotic, whatever else it is comment.
Get this straight, once and for all:
SIN IS NOT THE BASIS FOR RIGHT AND WRONG. IT IS A RELIGIOUS LAYER ADDED.
You still haven't replied how I know right from wrong w/o sin. Since I don't believe in God or sin, then how can I know right from wrong, according to you? Guess what, I do. I just told you that I think that what Hitler did to those twelve million plus people is wrong and evil. I also make this judgement without the sin concept
Let me repeat some basic concepts here that you are having trouble with.
One: SIN IS NOT THE BASIS FOR RIGHT AND WRONG
Two: I DO NOT CONDONE THE ACTIVITIES OF HITLER< OR FOR THAT MATTER, SOCIAL DARWINISM, EUGENICS, AND A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER ACTIVITIES.
Three: YOU STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND RELETAVISM. READ UP ON IT.
now then, one more comment from you about how I approve of Hitler's "final solution", or anything similar to it, and I will ask for your suspension.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Rob, posted 01-20-2007 6:52 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Rob, posted 01-21-2007 1:20 AM kuresu has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 116 of 313 (378523)
01-21-2007 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by kuresu
01-21-2007 1:01 AM


Re: our thoughts must be discriminating.
now then, one more comment from you about how I approve of Hitler's "final solution", or anything similar to it, and I will ask for your suspension.
I didn't imply that you had any knowledge that you supported Nazisim. In fact, I impied that you are ignorant of the logical extensions of your own thinking. You're a puppet of philosophy that is beyond your current capacity to analyze objectively. You are too caught up emotionally and attached to your worldview to see it clearly.
You understand the terms, but your thinking is not disciplined (simple) enough to see clearly. You bought into the sophistry without the ability to peel the onion because it suits your agenda that is also likely subconscious.
you've never read a bit on utilitarianism or Kant's categorical imperitive, have you?
I know nothing! I'm not as smart as a proud and confident punk kid. I'm too busy blazing new trails only to find them a beaten path. How bout you?
Here is a quote that I ran accross in my studies on Kant that beautifully portrays the issue to me.
"How recognizable, how familiar to us, is the man so beautifully portrayed in the Grundlegung, who confronted even with Christ, turns away to consider the judgement of his own conscience and to hear the voice of his own reason. Stripped of the exiguous metaphysical background which Kant was prepared to allow him, this man is with us still, free, independent, lonely, powerful, rational, responsible, brave, the hero of many novels and books in moral philosophy. The raison d'tre of this attractive but misleading creature is not far to seek. He is the offspring of the age of science, confidently rational and yet increasingly aware of his alienation from the material universe which his discoveries reveal ... In fact, Kant's man had already received a glorious incarnation nearly a century earlier in the work of Milton: his proper name is Lucifer"
(Iris Murdoch/ 1970/ The Sovereignty of Good)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 1:01 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 1:44 AM Rob has replied
 Message 123 by Larni, posted 01-21-2007 7:30 AM Rob has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 117 of 313 (378527)
01-21-2007 1:44 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Rob
01-21-2007 1:20 AM


oh boy, here we go again
In fact, I impied that you are ignorant of the logical extensions of your own thinking
um . . .right.
My thinking . . .
Sin has nothing to do with right or wrong. your response: then how can you determine right or wrong. you, by accepting this, end up supporting Hitler's "final solution".
me:
no, read again. Sin is not the determination of right or wrong. it is a religious concept, that you are breaking god's law.
you:
you accept the "final solution" by that. because then all is relative and nothing right or wrong, and I can do whatever the fuck I want.
me:
no. no. no. read it again. no no no.
In utilitarianism, the determination for right and wrong rests in the how much good you do for the greatest number of people. in other words, its better to let the man drown than end up having the entire rescue crew (or many of them) drown with him. (Mill also argues that this is the basis of all morality--including judeo-christian. in other words, morality ain't religious)
In Kan'ts categorical imperitave, there are two questions you ask. First, would the world work if everyone did this? I can't recall the second question. the end effect, is that we do things becuase they are the right thing to do, and that is the most basic reason. the right thing to do is based off of the two questions (of which one is given).
now tell me, where does Kant (or Mill, essentially the father of utilitarianism), use sin in determining right and wrong? for that matter, the law of god?
the logical conlcusion of my statement that sin has nothing to do with the determination of right or wrong is this: sin is pointless for right and wrong determination.
It is not, accepting de facto that right and wrong are relative (and by that you mean I can do whatever the fuck I want w/o consequence, which is a misunderstanding of the concept of relativism), and that becuase it is relative (your defintion), Hitler is neither right or wrong. thus, I am forced to accept that I condone his activities because I can't declare them wrong.
I ask you again, how can I, who does not believe in Sin (by nature of being an atheist), determine right and wrong? To give you hint--I obviously can, since I declare Hitler's actions wrong and even evil. My basis isn't sin, so what is it?
you'll be surprised that you actually follow the same thing (unless you can only do what's right by fear of punishment).

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Rob, posted 01-21-2007 1:20 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Rob, posted 01-21-2007 2:07 AM kuresu has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 118 of 313 (378533)
01-21-2007 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by kuresu
01-21-2007 1:44 AM


Re: oh boy, here we go again
I ask you again, how can I, who does not believe in Sin (by nature of being an atheist), determine right and wrong? To give you hint--I obviously can, since I declare Hitler's actions wrong and even evil. My basis isn't sin, so what is it?
I never said you cannot be good or act morally as an atheist. I only made the case that there is no logical reason to be good. Anthony Flew finally understood after 80 some years that his philosophy cannot hold water. Why can't you see it? Because you don't want Christianity to be true for your own reasons.
C.S. Lewis said that when he was an atheist he did not believe God existed (hence the atheism). But he also said he was very angry with God for not existing, because life became meaningless.
Jesus did not come into the world to make bad people good. He came to make dead people live. To help those dead to God, to become alive to God. To open the eyes of the blind.
Without God, life is not being.... it is only existing. Hence Nietzche's philosophy of despair (nihilism) which Hitler promptly married with Darwinism to underscore the need for the strong to eliminate the weaker for the sake of humanity.
Hitler said it is the devils concoction that we are all equal.
And if there is no God or transcendant basis for morality, then he is right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 1:44 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 2:12 AM Rob has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 119 of 313 (378537)
01-21-2007 2:12 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Rob
01-21-2007 2:07 AM


Re: oh boy, here we go again
I only made the case that there is no logical reason to be good
you don't get it, do you?
I have a reason to act good. to do right. simply, it is the right thing to do
It has nothing to with wanting christianity or any other religion to be false. I personally don't see the need in my life for such concepts.
I do what is right because it is the right thing to do. I do good becuase such is. I use Kan'ts imperative, I use utilitarianism, I use my own compass.
why do I need a reason other than "it is the .... thing to do"?
why do you need more than this?
The simplest law in logic is this: A=A. I exist because I do. Doing right is the right thing to do. Good is good. that simple. that plain. that easy.

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Rob, posted 01-21-2007 2:07 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Rob, posted 01-21-2007 2:16 AM kuresu has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5848 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 120 of 313 (378538)
01-21-2007 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by kuresu
01-21-2007 2:12 AM


Re: oh boy, here we go again
why do I need a reason other than "it is the .... thing to do"?
Because in Germany, the 'thing to do' was kill Jews.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 2:12 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by kuresu, posted 01-21-2007 2:24 AM Rob 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