Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,584 Year: 4,841/9,624 Month: 189/427 Week: 102/85 Day: 7/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Haggard Scandal
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1484 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 256 of 302 (361978)
11-05-2006 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Dr Adequate
11-04-2006 11:43 AM


Re: nemesis_juggernaut's moral standard refuted by Haggard ... et al
I see ... being honest is immoral and lying is moral.
got it.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-04-2006 11:43 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5928 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 257 of 302 (361979)
11-05-2006 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by ringo
11-05-2006 5:58 PM


Psalm 14:3
All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.
Psalm 53:3
Everyone has turned away, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.
Except Ringo...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by ringo, posted 11-05-2006 5:58 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by ringo, posted 11-05-2006 7:05 PM Rob has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3370 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 258 of 302 (361981)
11-05-2006 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Hyroglyphx
11-05-2006 4:26 PM


Re: We're not dogs, you moron!
nemesis_jug writes:
I can see that you are a homosexual and that I offended you.
He wasn't the only one offended... and I'm not even gay.
If homosexual marriage is okay, relatively speaking, then so is marriage between a man and a child or a woman and a dog.
Yes, and I take it that in your little fantasy world consenting adults include little children and dogs too, right? Why don't we just throw in cars to be part of the "consenting adults" group? I've been driving my car for years now and have been for some time wanting to marry it.
The bottom line is, I was not referring to gays as dogs and children. I'm sorry if I had anything to do with that confusion.
Let me tell you something, I don't think you can be a christian and good person at heart at the same time. At least I have the guts to admit it. If you think gay people are like children and dogs, just say so.
I'm merely showing that moral relativism is a bit absurd when you view it in these contexts.
This same argument was used when interracial marriage was ruining the good christian society of America. Personally, I'm still waiting for fire and brimstones raining down on us from the whole giving the black man basic human rights thing.
Edited by gasby, : No reason given.

Place yourself on the map at http://www.frappr.com/evc
The thread about this map can be found here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-05-2006 4:26 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-06-2006 12:00 PM Taz has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1484 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 259 of 302 (361982)
11-05-2006 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Archer Opteryx
11-04-2006 10:16 AM


Re: nemesis_juggernaut's moral standard refuted
... would exhibit far less violent crime than Taiwan or Japan, where the majority observe Eastern religions or are agnostics and atheists.
Or european countries.
Given that the rate of incarceration in the USof(N)A is second highest in the world (only Russia rates higher), ...
... one could easily claim that the high proportion of christian morality within the population ...
... where various polls say 80% to 90% of american claim to be christian ...
... is a contributary factor to the high rate of crime.
After all, it absolves people of responsibility for their actions: it's not their fault, they are just another failed sinner.
It would be interesting to compare societies based on the rates of violent crimes and see what the correlaries are.
I do know that the rates of crime in the USof(N)A is much higher than in Canada and that correlating factors may include:
  • higher rate correlates with noise levels in urban areas
  • higher fundamentalist christianity in US
  • higher proportions of readily available weapons of personal destruction in the US.
The first is from a study that I was involved in running in the '70's, and the correlation between noise levels and violent crime was linear in both populations, but the slope was much steeper for the USof(N)A than for Canada.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Archer Opteryx, posted 11-04-2006 10:16 AM Archer Opteryx has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 260 of 302 (361983)
11-05-2006 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Hyroglyphx
11-05-2006 12:57 PM


Don't have time to respond to the rest, but...
quote:
We already know his sense of humor about his own military is about as funny as a swift kick to the genitals.
He never disparaged his own military.
Also, he never sent them into battle underequipped, undermanned, and with no clear strategy for how to get them out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-05-2006 12:57 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

tudwell
Member (Idle past 6058 days)
Posts: 172
From: KCMO
Joined: 08-20-2006


Message 261 of 302 (361984)
11-05-2006 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by Rob
11-05-2006 4:14 PM


Matthew 25: 41 "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' 44 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' 45 "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' 46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
There are two groups of people here. One group will not be expecting their good deeds to be good enough. And the other will be shocked at how little their deeds meant.
I can see how you get that idea through the single bolded sentence you took out of context. In context, it's the group on the right that helped his fellow man ("one of the least of these my brethren"). The group on the left didn't, even if they were good to Jesus himself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by Rob, posted 11-05-2006 4:14 PM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Rob, posted 11-05-2006 6:40 PM tudwell has replied
 Message 272 by jar, posted 11-05-2006 7:08 PM tudwell has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 262 of 302 (361985)
11-05-2006 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Hyroglyphx
11-05-2006 12:57 PM


Re: Drugs
quote:
Aside from which, can I marry a little boy or girl? Can I marry my dog? Are the forces of oppression working against me?
What part of "consenting adult" do you have trouble understanding?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-05-2006 12:57 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Taz, posted 11-05-2006 6:47 PM nator has not replied
 Message 269 by Silent H, posted 11-05-2006 7:00 PM nator has replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5928 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 263 of 302 (361986)
11-05-2006 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by tudwell
11-05-2006 6:06 PM


When did I ever say I was a good person?
Jesus is saying the righteous are already saved
Who is righteous?
There is only one begotton Son of God.
The difference between created and begotton. We cannot create that which is identical to us. We create machines and art work. We beget humanity.
God creates humans, and begets God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by tudwell, posted 11-05-2006 6:06 PM tudwell has not replied

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5928 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 264 of 302 (361987)
11-05-2006 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by tudwell
11-05-2006 6:34 PM


I can see how you get that idea through the single bolded sentence you took out of context. In context, it's the group on the right that helped his fellow man ("one of the least of these my brethren"). The group on the left didn't, even if they were good to Jesus himself.
Then why is the group on the left, the one's trying to justify themselves? The one's on his right asked, "when did we do these things?" Certainly such do-gooders would remember their service to the poor.
If you can get this... your life will change!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by tudwell, posted 11-05-2006 6:34 PM tudwell has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by tudwell, posted 11-05-2006 7:20 PM Rob has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1484 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 265 of 302 (361989)
11-05-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Rob
11-04-2006 11:56 AM


Re: nemesis_juggernaut's moral standard refuted by Haggard ... et al
Show me a moral absolutist, and I will show you a moral relativist who absolutely wants to impose his relative morals on everybody else
So... Can you shed light on what is wrong with that...
No one will accept it as valid. Morals are personal values and cannot be imposed from without. Your morality and ethics govern what you do when no one is looking, as demonstrated by Haggard.
All it creates is more laws being broken and less respect for laws overall, less compliance with them.
Can you shed any light on what is beneficial about that?
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Rob, posted 11-04-2006 11:56 AM Rob has not replied

Taz
Member (Idle past 3370 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 266 of 302 (361990)
11-05-2006 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by nator
11-05-2006 6:35 PM


Re: Drugs
schraf writes:
What part of "consenting adult" do you have trouble understanding?
I think he thinks the word "adult" means anything that has mass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by nator, posted 11-05-2006 6:35 PM nator has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5898 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 267 of 302 (361992)
11-05-2006 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by berberry
11-05-2006 4:34 PM


Re: We're not dogs, you moron!
He just said what I told you he would say. You need to stop and think about this carefully as you are talking past him.
In the very quote you cited he sets the context for his statement as "relatively speaking". He is saying that the comparison would be true for relativists, which he most clearly is not.
No it is not, because there is no valid comparison between them.
If you are claiming that there is an absolute true criteria that everyone must use regarding marriage such that no one can make a comparison between all of those situations... remember, situations and not the entities within the situations... then you are engaging in moral absolutism, and you are in fact conceding the very point NJ was trying to make.
If you are claiming that he is wrong because even relativists would be unable to compare those situations, then you would be wrong. Relatively speaking those situations could (it would depend on the cultures one is looking at) be compared as identical. It all depends on the criteria used to judge them based on the culture.
Perhaps an example taken outside the US will make this more clear.
Theoretically there could be a society which allows any and all marriages as long as the two (assuming monogamy) appear to be happy together as judged by village elders (or a shaman). And one could find adults married to what we would call minors, as well as hetero, homo, and bestial marriages. There could even be marriages to trees and plants in that culture. Thus in their culture all of these are equivalent.
A relativist would say that that particular society has a valid concept of marriage, whether the relativist enjoyed such a concept or not.
NJ is arguing for the absurdity of such a situation, and that there are criteria that are universal or somehow obvious and those people's ways should be viewed as wrong based on those criteria.
Further, denial of gay marriage, by absolutists (including NJ), would not require assumptions that gay and bestial marriage would be equal. They could use wholly different criteria, and it just so happens that both cases are denied legitimate status. Hell, you could easily have an absolutist that allows for marriage to some animals and not others, and still deny gay marriages.
I hope you can see then, that you are pulling a direct insult out of a statement viewed out of context. He is making a much broader statement about relativists, not about gays.
The irony being that it is in relativists that you are more likely to find allies for gay marriage than with absolutists such as NJ. That is indeed the strength of his argument and why it is used. It is an emotional appeal to get people to reject relativism based on inherent biases (tastes), and so undercut relativist arguments for such things as the legitimacy of gay marriage.

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 248 by berberry, posted 11-05-2006 4:34 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by berberry, posted 11-05-2006 7:05 PM Silent H has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2249 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 268 of 302 (361993)
11-05-2006 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by Hyroglyphx
11-05-2006 1:05 PM


Re: nemesis_juggernaut's moral standard refuted by Haggard ... et al
quote:
Being physically disgusted at the sight of blood and internal organs is not the same as recognizing when a person is being killed.
Ah, now you are moving the goalposts.
quote:
The child may associate bloody knives with killing the wo/man on the table until told what surgery is.
Maybe.
quote:
Can you explain little severed heads coming out of the birth canal as just apart of surgery?
Most abortions are performed in the first trimester when the embryo is around an inch and a half long. Nobody's going to see "severed heads coming out of the birth canal" during a typical abortion.
quote:
You've mentioned this specious argument before which can only make me conclude that pregnancy terrifies you. Perhaps you should do yourself a favor and just never procreate.
What, you don't think women die from pregnancy?
From the Wiki:
Maternal Mortality Ratio is the ratio of the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. The MMR is used as a measure of the quality of a health care system. Sierra Leone has the highest maternal death rate at 2,000, and Afghanistan has the second highest maternal death rate at 1900 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, reported by the UN based on 2000 figures. Lowest rates included Iceland at 10 per 100,000 and Austria at 4 per 100,000. In the United States, the maternal death rate was 17 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in 2000. "Lifetime risk of maternal death" accounts for number of pregnancies and risk. In sub-Saharan Africa the lifetime risk of maternal death is 1 in 16, for developed nations only 1 in 2,800.
According to my math and after looking up some numbers, almost 700 women died from complications of child birth in the US in 2002.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein.
AdminPD
Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-05-2006 1:05 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5898 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 269 of 302 (361995)
11-05-2006 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by nator
11-05-2006 6:35 PM


Re: Drugs
What part of "consenting adult" do you have trouble understanding?
Berb is already going through this same mistake.
If you agree that there are universal standards then NJ has made his point, regardless of if you happen to disagree which criteria are the universal standard.
If you believe there are no such things as universal standards, and in fact morals are relative, then you will have to concede that "consenting adult" is not a true absolute criteria and the situations he is describing could be considered equally valid.

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 262 by nator, posted 11-05-2006 6:35 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by nator, posted 11-05-2006 8:50 PM Silent H has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 491 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 270 of 302 (361997)
11-05-2006 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by Rob
11-05-2006 6:30 PM


Rob writes:
Psalm 14:3
Psalm 53:3
Haven't you heard the "good news"? There's a New Testament.
Why are you using the Old Testament to supercede the New?

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Rob, posted 11-05-2006 6:30 PM Rob has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024