Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 9/6/2005 12:10:37 PM EDT
Rather than hijack a topic that XxSLASHERxX has specifically requested we not I will answer the questions of MRW here from this topic:GANG rule in New Orleans

And because he has raised the same ridiculous notion again here: 7-year-old with her throat cut

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools. To me this is as absurd as blaming Bush for the hurricane like DUh.com is. I guess he really believes if all those shitbags had just a little more Sunday school they would all be good citizens. Well I ain't buying it. I furthered my point by noting I am not religious and I'm not robbing, raping and looting at every opportunity.

To which he replies as follows:

Can you give a morally compelling reason why not? "it's just not right" is not good enough. WHY is it not right? And the answer to that question must not only be sound, it must be a compelling reason, a reason that forces other folks to accept it.

You may well decide that robbing raping and killing is not right for you, and you may even have nice reasons why. But do those reasons impose themselves on your neighbor? Would you like them to? What if your neighbor decides that robbing and killing you IS right for him or is in HIS best interests, what moral right do you have to tell him that it's wrong?

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.

It really is just that simple to determine right from wrong in most cases. I don't need a big invisible guy to scare me away from those things I only need to understand right from wrong.

And I beg to differ that "it's just not right" is certainly GOOD ENOUGH. It is ALL I need.

Perhaps MRW is not a very good person and needs a angry God and the threat of Hell to keep him from being a murdering shitbag. I don't know him but that seems to be what he is saying.

As for my neighbor, again I don't know for sure but he doesn't seem to be a murdering shitbag. I don't know if it is God, human decency or common sense that keeps him in line but he seems to be ok.

And I know my state is LOADED with murdering shitbags. And I don't think God, church or the Bible is going to change them in any way shape or form. They are, and probably always will be murdering shitbags with no human decency at all.

And finally if a person is "moral" and "decent" only because they fear God and his judgement then they are NOT "moral" or "decent" and they have learned NOTHING from their religion. They are just murdering shitbags waiting to happen who are only afraid of getting caught (judged).

I originally posted this in the religious forum (where it belongs) but it was locked for "disrupting the forum."
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:12:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:15:05 PM EDT by legalese77]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?

I tend to concur with Thomas Hobbs' assessment of the natural state of man, myself. Even social contract theory is not enough to keep men civilized and positive law has done a great deal to undermine some of the previous fundamentals of social contract theory.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:16:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools.



So is he advocating Buddhism in schools? Maybe a little Zen, mixed with some Hindu stuff and the threat of being reincarnated as a cockroach?

Good stuff.

Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:16:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?



All civilization is artificial including religion. All are the creation and product of man.

Civilization and morality are the product of being "human." On can choose to NOT be civilized just as one can choose to NOT be "human."

As humans we have the "capacity" to determine right from wrong. This is why we don't eat our children (well most of us anyway).
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:16:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools.



So is he advocating Buddhism in schools? Maybe a little Zen, mixed with some Hindu stuff and the threat of being reincarnated as a cockroach?

Good stuff.




Pastafarianism. When people learn the benevolence and goodness of FSM we will finally have world peace. Pass the garlic bread.

Ramen.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:17:15 PM EDT
If "it's just not right" is not good enough, then no answer ever will be for him.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:18:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:25:03 PM EDT by mobius]
most poeple are not murders and rapists, not because of some "god" or other such nonesense, but the compelling reason is that some folks don't want to be locked up and have their freedom taken away...society and laws is more of a deteriment for people not to run amock, then any so called "god"...to blame a lack of teaching about "god" in schools is just a religous zealot answer to force "god" on people.

I was raised a atheist, and I am just as moral as any "christian"....maybe more, I don't go arouind fleecing people of their life saving, or molest children.

Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:18:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools.



So is he advocating Buddhism in schools? Maybe a little Zen, mixed with some Hindu stuff and the threat of being reincarnated as a cockroach?

Good stuff.




Pastafarianism. When people learn the benevolence and goodness of FSM we will finally have world peace. Pass the garlic bread.

Ramen.




No kidding - if you can't motivate people with the promise of a beer volcano and a stripper factory, then there is NO motivating them, and they are truly lost.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:18:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:19:34 PM EDT by VBC]
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:18:57 PM EDT
I guess to some the thought of morals without theism behind it is an absurd idea.

I don't understand them either.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:19:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?

I tend to concur with Thomas Hobbs' assessment of the natural state of man, myself. Even social contract theory is not enough to keep men civilized and positive law has done a great deal to undermine some of the previous fundamentals of social contract theory.



Thats funny, I always considered law to be a part of social contract theory. Enforcement of the social contract is necessary simply because people don't always follow the social contract.

People being assholes doesn't invalidate social contract theory any more than it invalidates the teachings of Jesus or Buddha.

Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:20:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.



Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:22:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:37:08 PM EDT by EPOCH96]
Stole this little gem from the other thread...

Originally Posted By MRW:
WAKE UP AMERICA! It's not race or poverty or even behavior that is the ROOT issue, it's THEOLOGY! A persons theology determines their philosophy, and their philisophy determines their morality, and their morality THEN determines their behavior.


according to that logic, these are the most dangerous people on the face of the earth...

American Atheists

Funny, I don't hear about them running around chopping off heads

EPOCH
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:22:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mobius:
most poeple are not murders and rapists, not because of some "god" or other such nonesense, but the compelling reason is that some folks don't want to be locked up and have their freedom taken away......to blame a lack of teaching about "god" in schools is just a religous zealot answer to force "god" on people.

I was raised a atheist, and I am just as moral as the next "christian"




Actually - it is more than just a pure calculation of risk and benefit, but also the fact that humans are inherently a social animal, and have a tendency to want to cooperate (in addition to a countervaling tendency to compete), and this, combined with a social contract kind of thing is often what keeps people in check.

After all - as an example - there is NO rational reason whatsoever to pull over to the side of the road when an ambulance comes up behind you. A rational person would refuse to incur the cost of a slight delay and inconvenience in exchange for no benefit. Yet we all generally do pull over, because we intuitively understand that a society where we all free-ride and only do things for personal benefit woudl gradually unravel.

There are all kinds of instances where I could steal and it would benefit me greatly, wiht virtually no risk. I still don't do it, because I accept the notion of right and wrong, and because I know that free-riding ultimately undermines society.

Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:22:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.



Horsehit.

Millionaire celebrities who are worshipped are often complete pieces of shit.

And I know plenty of people who grew up with NOTHING and came from SHIT FAMILIES who got it together because they knew....right from wrong.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:26:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:31:42 PM EDT by Da_Bunny]

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals. BULLSHIT, PEOPLE KNOW BETTER

People who are not respected do not respect others. AGAIN BULLSHIT, YOU EARN RESPECT



What about people who are kept all their lives? Housed, fed, clothed, medically treated and walked through every major decision they must face. They seem to act like animals too.

If somebody treats you poorly, you have the ability to go out on your own and provide for yourself. That's why many people leave home in the first place, to provide for themselves.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:31:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:31:36 PM EDT by ANGST]

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:
What about people who are kept all their lives? Housed, fed, clothed, medically treated and walked through every major decision they must face. They seem to act like animals too.



Hey that sounds like the military ....
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:31:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:33:19 PM EDT by VBC]

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

What about people who are kept all their lives? Housed, fed, clothed, medically treated and walked through every major decision they must face. They seem to act like animals too.



I would say those people are treated more like babies.



Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Horsehit.

Millionaire celebrities who are worshipped are often complete pieces of shit.

And I know plenty of people who grew up with NOTHING and came from SHIT FAMILIES who got it together because they knew....right from wrong.



There are always the exceptions to the case, but for the most part society is set up against the black man due to a vicious cycle that began during slavery. I'm not even black and I can see that. Of course they can work their way up the ladder but they start at the lower rung. Think GWB would have been to Yale with his grades if he was a poor black kid from NO. If NO was a rich black city you wouldn't have seen that type of behavior in the dome. Most black men are born into crime and poverty, so that's their school.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:35:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:38:27 PM EDT by legalese77]

Originally Posted By Dino:

Thats funny, I always considered law to be a part of social contract theory. Enforcement of the social contract is necessary simply because people don't always follow the social contract.

People being assholes doesn't invalidate social contract theory any more than it invalidates the teachings of Jesus or Buddha.




It certainly is a part of the social contract. What I'm getting at, however, is that much of modern law eviscerates much of the motivation for one to take part in the social contract.

Example: Social contract theory says that you won't harm me or my family out of fear that there will be retaliation, or that I will kill you in the course of your attempt to destroy me for your own gain. In places where, at times, the law has been "an eye for an eye" or where justifiable retribution has been overlooked, this is a system that can work.

However, if I am a law abiding guy with something to lose, I have two options 1) Place my faith with the system that is designed to remedy those who fail to abide by the positive law or 2) Become a criminal myself and engage in those acts for which man has a propensity (retribution, individual punishment, etc.) If you are more likely to engage in your behavior because you know that retribution will not be visited upon you but that you only have to risk being dealt with through the system of positive law, has not positive law eroded the deterrent effect of the social contract?

You can debate whether or not a person is more likely to engage in criminal conduct because of the protections and procedures of positive law but you can guess my position. If you raped a memeber of my family, and I acted as I would wish for those similarly situated to act, your punishment would be summary execution. However, under our current system of positive law, a rapist stands a decent chance of being acquitted and stands no chance of execution, much less summary execution.

In this way, I suggest that positive laws have eroded the efficacy of the social contract. I really don't see the theory as viable under our current system of positive law. Sure, we still have a social contract of sorts but I'm not a fan.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:36:07 PM EDT


Originally Posted by MRW
WAKE UP AMERICA! It's not race or poverty or even behavior that is the ROOT issue, it's THEOLOGY! A persons theology determines their philosophy, and their philisophy determines their morality, and their morality THEN determines their behavior.




That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read.

I haven't been to church in 20 years, and even back then I wasn't paying attention. Someday, when I get married, it will be in Vegas. I haven't prayed for as long as I can remember, and don't believe that any God has any bearing on our lives whatsoever.

According to that "logic," I'm way overdue for a killing spree, my co-workers better watch out.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:37:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals. BULLSHIT, PEOPLE KNOW BETTER

People who are not respected do not respect others. AGAIN BULLSHIT, YOU EARN RESPECT



What about people who are kept all their lives? Housed, fed, clothed, medically treated and walked through every major decision they must face. They seem to act like animals too.

that is what is happening in NO right now. The majority of people that stayed there were on welfare. Not to mention the people released from prison.... It's sad and now these people will be re-dispersed around America instead of executed like they deserve
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:38:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HRoark:

Originally Posted by MRW
WAKE UP AMERICA! It's not race or poverty or even behavior that is the ROOT issue, it's THEOLOGY! A persons theology determines their philosophy, and their philisophy determines their morality, and their morality THEN determines their behavior.




That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read.

I haven't been to church in 20 years, and even back then I wasn't paying attention. Someday, when I get married, it will be in Vegas. I haven't prayed for as long as I can remember, and don't believe that any God has any bearing on our lives whatsoever.

According to that "logic," I'm way overdue for a killing spree, my co-workers better watch out.



+1

love the Bucky avitar!
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:38:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?



All civilization is artificial including religion. All are the creation and product of man.

Civilization and morality are the product of being "human." On can choose to NOT be civilized just as one can choose to NOT be "human."

As humans we have the "capacity" to determine right from wrong. This is why we don't eat our children (well most of us anyway).



You lost me there.
If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.
Only what is good for each individual person. You are basically the most intelligent animal on the planet, and once you die, you will not be held accountable for your actions.
Get what you can now, because you will not have another go at it.

If you do not believe that you will be held accountable for anything, how do you pass judgement on a rapist.
You do your will, he does his.

..."and quit JUDGING people"
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:38:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VBC:

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:

What about people who are kept all their lives? Housed, fed, clothed, medically treated and walked through every major decision they must face. They seem to act like animals too.



I would say those people are treated more like babies.



Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Horsehit.

Millionaire celebrities who are worshipped are often complete pieces of shit.

And I know plenty of people who grew up with NOTHING and came from SHIT FAMILIES who got it together because they knew....right from wrong.



There are always the exceptions to the case, but for the most part society is set up against the black man. I'm not even black and I can see that. Of course they can work their way up the ladder but they start at the lower rung. Think GWB would have been to Yale with his grades if he was a poor black kid from NO. If NO was a rich black city you wouldn't have seen that type of behavior in the dome. Most black men are born into crime and poverty, so that's their school.



Are you implying that society is setup FOR somebody else? It's tough for 90% of the population. The only people who get a break are the protected classes. Those include, homosexuals, blacks and other minorities, and women. White males have been getting pushed to the fringes of the work force, or out all together, for decades.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:39:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
...
And finally if a person is "moral" and "decent" only because they fear God and his judgement then they are NOT "moral" or "decent" and they have learned NOTHING from their religion....



A person whose behavior is based on avoidance of punishment is really in a primitive state of personal moral development.

Kohlberg's stages of moral development
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:39:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JBowles:

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.






+
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:40:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:
...
If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.
Only what is good for each individual person....



Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:42:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.



Horsehit.

Millionaire celebrities who are worshipped are often complete pieces of shit.

And I know plenty of people who grew up with NOTHING and came from SHIT FAMILIES who got it together because they knew....right from wrong.



I agree.

Although everyone would prefer to learn what TO DO from a good example...(naturally )
You can still learn what NOT TO DO from a bad example.

You can learn from both. There is no excuse.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:46:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Rather than hijack a topic that XxSLASHERxX has specifically requested we not I will answer the questions of MRW here from this topic:GANG rule in New Orleans

And because he has raised the same ridiculous notion again here: 7-year-old with her throat cut

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools. To me this is as absurd as blaming Bush for the hurricane like DUh.com is. I guess he really believes if all those shitbags had just a little more Sunday school they would all be good citizens. Well I ain't buying it. I furthered my point by noting I am not religious and I'm not robbing, raping and looting at every opportunity.

To which he replies as follows:

Can you give a morally compelling reason why not? "it's just not right" is not good enough. WHY is it not right? And the answer to that question must not only be sound, it must be a compelling reason, a reason that forces other folks to accept it.

You may well decide that robbing raping and killing is not right for you, and you may even have nice reasons why. But do those reasons impose themselves on your neighbor? Would you like them to? What if your neighbor decides that robbing and killing you IS right for him or is in HIS best interests, what moral right do you have to tell him that it's wrong?

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.

It really is just that simple to determine right from wrong in most cases. I don't need a big invisible guy to scare me away from those things I only need to understand right from wrong.

And I beg to differ that "it's just not right" is certainly GOOD ENOUGH. It is ALL I need.

Perhaps MRW is not a very good person and needs a angry God and the threat of Hell to keep him from being a murdering shitbag. I don't know him but that seems to be what he is saying.

As for my neighbor, again I don't know for sure but he doesn't seem to be a murdering shitbag. I don't know if it is God, human decency or common sense that keeps him in line but he seems to be ok.

And I know my state is LOADED with murdering shitbags. And I don't think God, church or the Bible is going to change them in any way shape or form. They are, and probably always will be murdering shitbags with no human decency at all.

And finally if a person is "moral" and "decent" only because they fear God and his judgement then they are NOT "moral" or "decent" and they have learned NOTHING from their religion. They are just murdering shitbags waiting to happen who are only afraid of getting caught (judged).

I originally posted this in the religious forum (where it belongs) but it was locked for "disrupting the forum."



Well good.

I'm not a murdering shitbag for the same reasons. And I'm glad to hear that another 'regular' here isn't the only one getting posts locked. Keep up the good work SA
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:49:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.



that is a big load of horseshit
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:50:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EPOCH96:
Stole this little gem from the other thread...

Originally Posted By MRW:
WAKE UP AMERICA! It's not race or poverty or even behavior that is the ROOT issue, it's THEOLOGY! A persons theology determines their philosophy, and their philisophy determines their morality, and their morality THEN determines their behavior.


according to that logic, these are the most dangerous people on the face of the earth...

American Atheists

Funny, I don't hear about them running around chopping off heads

EPOCH



Atheists are much more dangerous than fundamentalist Muslims.

Atheists are attempting to destroy religion which means the damnation of ALL of humanity. Radical Muslims only kill individuals who "if Christian" will still go to heaven.

Scary part is there are a LOT of folks who actually buy that shit.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:51:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:52:58 PM EDT by distributor_of_pain]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Rather than hijack a topic that XxSLASHERxX has specifically requested we not I will answer the questions of MRW here from this topic:GANG rule in New Orleans

And because he has raised the same ridiculous notion again here: 7-year-old with her throat cut

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools. To me this is as absurd as blaming Bush for the hurricane like DUh.com is. I guess he really believes if all those shitbags had just a little more Sunday school they would all be good citizens. Well I ain't buying it. I furthered my point by noting I am not religious and I'm not robbing, raping and looting at every opportunity.

To which he replies as follows:

Can you give a morally compelling reason why not? "it's just not right" is not good enough. WHY is it not right? And the answer to that question must not only be sound, it must be a compelling reason, a reason that forces other folks to accept it.

You may well decide that robbing raping and killing is not right for you, and you may even have nice reasons why. But do those reasons impose themselves on your neighbor? Would you like them to? What if your neighbor decides that robbing and killing you IS right for him or is in HIS best interests, what moral right do you have to tell him that it's wrong?

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.

It really is just that simple to determine right from wrong preferrable from not preferrable in most cases. I don't need a big invisible guy to scare me away from those things I only need to understand right from wrong.

And I beg to differ that "it's just not right" is certainly GOOD ENOUGH. It is ALL I need.

Perhaps MRW is not a very good person and needs a angry God and the threat of Hell to keep him from being a murdering shitbag. I don't know him but that seems to be what he is saying.

As for my neighbor, again I don't know for sure but he doesn't seem to be a murdering shitbag. I don't know if it is God, human decency or common sense that keeps him in line but he seems to be ok.

And I know my state is LOADED with murdering shitbags. And I don't think God, church or the Bible is going to change them in any way shape or form. They are, and probably always will be murdering shitbags with no human decency at all.

And finally if a person is "moral" and "decent" only because they fear God and his judgement then they are NOT "moral" or "decent" and they have learned NOTHING from their religion. They are just murdering shitbags waiting to happen who are only afraid of getting caught (judged).

I originally posted this in the religious forum (where it belongs) but it was locked for "disrupting the forum."



Please stop contradicting yourself.
I fixed it for you though
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:54:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:56:48 PM EDT by DuBri]
+1000000 bazillion for the social contract theory! For the most part it depends on your upbringing. I was not raised in a religious household, but I was taught to respect others and treat them how I would like to be treated. So far I havnt killed, raped, or stolen from anyone. Either way, sometimes good people come from shitty upbringings, and shitty people come from good upbringings. I think its still up to each person to decide what path they'd prefer to follow.



edit. I suppose the way a person behaves in society has a lot to do their ability to empathize with others.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:57:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 12:58:54 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]

Originally Posted By VBC:

There are always the exceptions to the case, but for the most part society is set up against the black man due to a vicious cycle that began during slavery. I'm not even black and I can see that. Of course they can work their way up the ladder but they start at the lower rung. Think GWB would have been to Yale with his grades if he was a poor black kid from NO. If NO was a rich black city you wouldn't have seen that type of behavior in the dome. Most black men are born into crime and poverty, so that's their school.



Black men INVENTED slavery.

Africans were the FIRST to enslave their own people and the last for officially outlaw slavery.

It was Africans who SOLD slaves to Europeans.

Slavery, as cruel as it was, was probably the best thing to happen to those slaves. Not only did it prevent them from being SOUP (as would be their fate if left in the hands of African slavers) it allowed their decendents to grow in a CIVILIZED country and have opportunity that still doesn't exist in that shithole we call Africa.

Despite the opportunity of the fortunate circumstance of being brought to this country (even under such barbaric circumstances as slavery) too many decendents of slaves STILL cannot get their shit together.

And that is mostly because of dumbass apologists, such as yourself, who don't know jack shit about slavery and see it only as a crutch for why modern people who know jack shit about slavery can feel sorry for themselves.

Early Christians were fed to the lions by Romans and that is why they can't get their shit together either...no wait.

I also didn't get to go to Yale. In fact the ONLY chance I'd have to go to such a school would be if I was BLACK.

Sell your bullshit on DUh.com.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 12:58:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:03:38 PM EDT by Grunteled]
It's a chicken or the egg argument:

His side will claim that even thought you do not accept religion it none-the-less shaped your vision of right and wrong. That the ethics and basis of what you have grown to accept as right and wrong are based on religious teaching and that without that base eventually all will be questioned and lost as people one by one turn away from that morality. Right and wrong are universal and woven into the fabric of life by forces outside man.


The other side said that man basically understands that in order to live a life outside the law of the strongest taking from the weaker that laws are needed. It must be ingrained in people that certain behavior is 'wrong' and some is 'right'. That over time most societies have in some way adopted those basic ideas and certainly integrated them into religion. Religion in fact acts like an anchor for those beliefs because religion is naturally resistant to the effects of social flux.


There is merit in both arguments and I don't honestly know which is more correct. Moral relativity is a sink hole. Over time each moral tenant comes under attack by a group that wants to live outside it. That fractures society into enclaves of people with deep seated anger towards each other. A society based on religion has that natural anchor to prevent the decay as it is very difficult to attack the moral framework from within.

On the other hand there is a relative aspect to what moral people do. There are plenty of tribal people in small societies that kill babies because there will not be enough to provide for them within the group. They face the choice of keeping several babies and possibly weakening everyone in a place where weakness means death, or kill a baby. Are they evil? Can we say the life they otherwise lead is immoral and universally wrong?

As an athiest I'm in the odd position of being married to a very religious wife. We have a daughter and I have to say that I would rather have her compass set by those of my wife's church than the bickering clan of non-religious friends I have known. They hold no direction nor can they all agree on what is and is not right. Whatever unifing force they lack.... it's effects are evident. It would be impossible to reinforce our moral base if my daughter were to use them as a model. They are a small scale example of the fractured society I spoke of. They share some core with me, but all around the edges we disagree. Sex, drugs, homosexality, profanity in public, dress, conduct in public, responcibilty are all areas where we have vastly different views.

This is not whats wrong with the thugs in NO. Even the most ungrounded of my friends are aware that killing is wrong. They know that stealing from other's homes is wrong. They know that raping women and killing children is wrong. These thugs do to... they don't care. Rules are simply there to keep the 'bitches' in line and weak so they can prey on them. We are weak cause we wont take when we can. In short they are evil, and thier culture in many ways exhaults that behaviour. It's morals in reverse and anyone who calls it out is a racist.

Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:00:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By VBC:

There are always the exceptions to the case, but for the most part society is set up against the black man due to a vicious cycle that began during slavery. I'm not even black and I can see that. Of course they can work their way up the ladder but they start at the lower rung. Think GWB would have been to Yale with his grades if he was a poor black kid from NO. If NO was a rich black city you wouldn't have seen that type of behavior in the dome. Most black men are born into crime and poverty, so that's their school.



Black men INVENTED slavery.

Africans were the FIRST to enslave their own people and the last for officially outlaw slavery.

It was Africans who SOLD slaves to Europeans.

Slavery, as cruel as it was, was probably the best thing to happen to those slaves. Not only did it prevent them from being SOUP (as would be their fate if left in the hands of African slavers) it allowed their decendents to grow in a CIVILIZED country and have opportunity that still doesn't exist in that shithole we call Africa.
Despite the opportunity of the fortunate circumstance of being brought to this country (even under such barbaric circumstances as slavery) too many decendents of slaves STILL cannot get their shit together.

And that is mostly because of dumbass apologists, such as yourself, who don't know jack shit about slavery and see it only as a crutch for why modern people who know jack shit about slavery can feel sorry for themselves.

Early Christians were fed to the lions by Romans and that is why they can't get their shit together either...no wait.

I also didn't get to go to Yale. In fact the ONLY chance I'd have to go to such a school would be if I was BLACK.

Sell your bullshit on DUh.com.





I'm with you 100%. (on this anyway )
I've been saying that for years.
Although people look at me like I have 3 heads when i say it
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:01:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.


That was a pretty lame statement.....
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:01:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:02:25 PM EDT by EPOCH96]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Atheists are much more dangerous than fundamentalist Muslims.

Atheists are attempting to destroy religion which means the damnation of ALL of humanity. Radical Muslims only kill individuals who "if Christian" will still go to heaven.

Scary part is there are a LOT of folks who actually buy that shit.



[Lumberg] Yeah...Mmmmm... Going to have to kinda disagree with you on that...[Lumberg]

While I would concede there are plenty of wacko atheists out there trying to tear down religion, I also believe there are plenty of wacko christians, muslisms, flying spaghetti monster believers, etc. pushing their own beliefs to an extreme...

Personally, I don't consider myself more dangerous that Bin Laden.

EPOCH
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:02:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:03:28 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?



All civilization is artificial including religion. All are the creation and product of man.

Civilization and morality are the product of being "human." On can choose to NOT be civilized just as one can choose to NOT be "human."

As humans we have the "capacity" to determine right from wrong. This is why we don't eat our children (well most of us anyway).



You lost me there.
If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.



Yup, you are lost.

If there is NO God there is still good and bad. We DON'T need a God to determine this for us.

For example, if you DON'T eat you will starve to death. And that, in our experience, is something we call "bad."

We made similar determinations about murder and rape.

If you really need a God to figure this stuff out for you then you are NOT a good person.

And there is NOTHING wrong with judging others. If a person is a murder I will judge him as such as murder is wrong to ANYONE with any amount of humanity.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:02:21 PM EDT

Why I'm NOT A Murdering, Rapists POS...


You're not???





Just kidding, old buddy.

I'd tell you more, but I don't want your thread to get moved to the Segregated Religion Forum.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:02:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Lon_Moer:

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.


That was a pretty lame statement.....



I'll consider the source.
Thanks!
Enjoy yourself now...
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:04:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By VBC:
People who are treated like animals act like animals.

People who are not respected do not respect others.



Horsehit.

Millionaire celebrities who are worshipped are often complete pieces of shit.

And I know plenty of people who grew up with NOTHING and came from SHIT FAMILIES who got it together because they knew....right from wrong.



I agree.

Although everyone would prefer to learn what TO DO from a good example...(naturally )
You can still learn what NOT TO DO from a bad example.

You can learn from both. There is no excuse.



And I completely agree.

But those teaching can come from ANY source, religion is just one of them.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:06:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Rather than hijack a topic that XxSLASHERxX has specifically requested we not I will answer the questions of MRW here from this topic:GANG rule in New Orleans

And because he has raised the same ridiculous notion again here: 7-year-old with her throat cut

He is blaming the New Orleans Gang Activity on the fact that religion is NOT taught in schools. To me this is as absurd as blaming Bush for the hurricane like DUh.com is. I guess he really believes if all those shitbags had just a little more Sunday school they would all be good citizens. Well I ain't buying it. I furthered my point by noting I am not religious and I'm not robbing, raping and looting at every opportunity.

To which he replies as follows:

Can you give a morally compelling reason why not? "it's just not right" is not good enough. WHY is it not right? And the answer to that question must not only be sound, it must be a compelling reason, a reason that forces other folks to accept it.

You may well decide that robbing raping and killing is not right for you, and you may even have nice reasons why. But do those reasons impose themselves on your neighbor? Would you like them to? What if your neighbor decides that robbing and killing you IS right for him or is in HIS best interests, what moral right do you have to tell him that it's wrong?

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.

It really is just that simple to determine right from wrong preferrable from not preferrable in most cases. I don't need a big invisible guy to scare me away from those things I only need to understand right from wrong.

And I beg to differ that "it's just not right" is certainly GOOD ENOUGH. It is ALL I need.

Perhaps MRW is not a very good person and needs a angry God and the threat of Hell to keep him from being a murdering shitbag. I don't know him but that seems to be what he is saying.

As for my neighbor, again I don't know for sure but he doesn't seem to be a murdering shitbag. I don't know if it is God, human decency or common sense that keeps him in line but he seems to be ok.

And I know my state is LOADED with murdering shitbags. And I don't think God, church or the Bible is going to change them in any way shape or form. They are, and probably always will be murdering shitbags with no human decency at all.

And finally if a person is "moral" and "decent" only because they fear God and his judgement then they are NOT "moral" or "decent" and they have learned NOTHING from their religion. They are just murdering shitbags waiting to happen who are only afraid of getting caught (judged).

I originally posted this in the religious forum (where it belongs) but it was locked for "disrupting the forum."



Please stop contradicting yourself.
I fixed it for you though



No contradiction. I meant right and wrong. Neither of which require a God to exist.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:07:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:10:02 PM EDT by distributor_of_pain]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

And my answer is as follows...

I know I don't want to be stolen from so I don't steal.

I know I don't want to be murdered so I don't murder.

I know I don't want to see my loved ones raped so I don't rape.




social contract theory?



All civilization is artificial including religion. All are the creation and product of man.

Civilization and morality are the product of being "human." On can choose to NOT be civilized just as one can choose to NOT be "human."

As humans we have the "capacity" to determine right from wrong. This is why we don't eat our children (well most of us anyway).



You lost me there.
If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.



Yup, you are lost.

If there is NO God there is still good and bad. We DON'T need a God to determine this for us.

For example, if you DON'T eat you will starve to death. And that, in our experience, is something we call "bad." not preferrable
We made similar determinations about murder and rape.

If you really need a God to figure this stuff out for you then you are NOT a good person.

And there is NOTHING wrong with judging others. If a person is a murder I will judge him as such as murder is wrong not preferrable to ANYONE with any amount of humanity.



there you go again
I fixed it for you...again

You cannot say right and wrong. It insinuates an absolute, which you cannot claim. Only YOU would know what's good for YOU.
Just because someone does something that isn't good for YOU doesn't mean it wasn't good for THEM. Obviously it WAS, or they wouldn't have done it.

ETA: YOU...are a closet Christian.
When you are ready, I would be glad to host a "coming out party" for ya!
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:08:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EPOCH96:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Atheists are much more dangerous than fundamentalist Muslims.

Atheists are attempting to destroy religion which means the damnation of ALL of humanity. Radical Muslims only kill individuals who "if Christian" will still go to heaven.

Scary part is there are a LOT of folks who actually buy that shit.



[Lumberg] Yeah...Mmmmm... Going to have to kinda disagree with you on that...[Lumberg]

While I would concede there are plenty of wacko atheists out there trying to tear down religion, I also believe there are plenty of wacko christians, muslisms, flying spaghetti monster believers, etc. pushing their own beliefs to an extreme...

Personally, I don't consider myself more dangerous that Bin Laden.

EPOCH



Might wanna re read that last line.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:09:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By Dino:

Thats funny, I always considered law to be a part of social contract theory. Enforcement of the social contract is necessary simply because people don't always follow the social contract.

People being assholes doesn't invalidate social contract theory any more than it invalidates the teachings of Jesus or Buddha.




It certainly is a part of the social contract. What I'm getting at, however, is that much of modern law eviscerates much of the motivation for one to take part in the social contract.

Example: Social contract theory says that you won't harm me or my family out of fear that there will be retaliation, or that I will kill you in the course of your attempt to destroy me for your own gain. In places where, at times, the law has been "an eye for an eye" or where justifiable retribution has been overlooked, this is a system that can work.

However, if I am a law abiding guy with something to lose, I have two options 1) Place my faith with the system that is designed to remedy those who fail to abide by the positive law or 2) Become a criminal myself and engage in those acts for which man has a propensity (retribution, individual punishment, etc.) If you are more likely to engage in your behavior because you know that retribution will not be visited upon you but that you only have to risk being dealt with through the system of positive law, has not positive law eroded the deterrent effect of the social contract?

You can debate whether or not a person is more likely to engage in criminal conduct because of the protections and procedures of positive law but you can guess my position. If you raped a memeber of my family, and I acted as I would wish for those similarly situated to act, your punishment would be summary execution. However, under our current system of positive law, a rapist stands a decent chance of being acquitted and stands no chance of execution, much less summary execution under the positive law.

In this way, I suggest that positive laws have eroded the efficacy of the social contract. I really don't see the theory as viable under our current system of positive law. Sure, we still have a social contract of sorts but I'm not a fan.



I see what your saying, but I disagree.

the rise in the number of concealed carry states and new laws allowing legal use of force for self defense make the social contract much more effective in those states.



as an aside, our social contract takes into account that the punishment should fit the crime. Rape has seldom ever been punished by death. Its more often been the case that monetary damages were awarded or the rapist was flogged and/or castrated. In some cultures the rapist is forced to marry his victim.

.


Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:10:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:


there you go again
I fixed it for you...again

You cannot say right and wrong. It insinuates an absolute, which you cannot claim. Only YOU would know what's good for YOU.
Just because someone does something that isn't good for YOU doesn't mean it wasn't good for THEM. Obviously it WAS, or they wouldn't have done it.



Nope, even if "I" do wrong, I know it is wrong when I do it.

Now if you find somebody who really thinks it is RIGHT for them to be murdered then get back to me.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:11:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:12:17 PM EDT by distributor_of_pain]

Originally Posted By Dino:

Originally Posted By legalese77:

Originally Posted By Dino:

Thats funny, I always considered law to be a part of social contract theory. Enforcement of the social contract is necessary simply because people don't always follow the social contract.

People being assholes doesn't invalidate social contract theory any more than it invalidates the teachings of Jesus or Buddha.




It certainly is a part of the social contract. What I'm getting at, however, is that much of modern law eviscerates much of the motivation for one to take part in the social contract.

Example: Social contract theory says that you won't harm me or my family out of fear that there will be retaliation, or that I will kill you in the course of your attempt to destroy me for your own gain. In places where, at times, the law has been "an eye for an eye" or where justifiable retribution has been overlooked, this is a system that can work.

However, if I am a law abiding guy with something to lose, I have two options 1) Place my faith with the system that is designed to remedy those who fail to abide by the positive law or 2) Become a criminal myself and engage in those acts for which man has a propensity (retribution, individual punishment, etc.) If you are more likely to engage in your behavior because you know that retribution will not be visited upon you but that you only have to risk being dealt with through the system of positive law, has not positive law eroded the deterrent effect of the social contract?

You can debate whether or not a person is more likely to engage in criminal conduct because of the protections and procedures of positive law but you can guess my position. If you raped a memeber of my family, and I acted as I would wish for those similarly situated to act, your punishment would be summary execution. However, under our current system of positive law, a rapist stands a decent chance of being acquitted and stands no chance of execution, much less summary execution under the positive law.

In this way, I suggest that positive laws have eroded the efficacy of the social contract. I really don't see the theory as viable under our current system of positive law. Sure, we still have a social contract of sorts but I'm not a fan.



I see what your saying, but I disagree.

the rise in the number of concealed carry states and new laws allowing legal use of force for self defense make the social contract much more effective in those states.



as an aside, our social contract takes into account that the punishment should fit the crime. Rape has seldom ever been punished by death. Its more often been the case that monetary damages were awarded or the rapist was flogged and/or castrated. In some cultures the rapist is forced to marry his victim.
.





OH F'N SWEET!!!

...the next time I see Nicole Kidman I'm gonna ......mmmmmm....BOY!
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:13:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/6/2005 1:15:24 PM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:

You cannot say right and wrong. It insinuates an absolute, which you cannot claim. Only YOU would know what's good for YOU.
Just because someone does something that isn't good for YOU doesn't mean it wasn't good for THEM. Obviously it WAS, or they wouldn't have done it.



Nope, there are actions that while preferrable for one and not preferrable to another are wrong in the context of a society. I can steal from you beacuse you are not always at home to protect your wealth. Good for me, not so good for you. Wrong for society. You can't have a functional society and economy if everyone is either staying at home to act a sentury or having his stuff looted away. It won't function... ever. It falls back to every man for himself and no such society does great things. Therefore it is the wrong approach, absolutely and without question. You teach your kids that and so on and... tada.... you have a society that does not value it and punishes it when discoverd.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:15:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:
...
You cannot say right and wrong. It insinuates an absolute, which you cannot claim. Only YOU would know what's good for YOU....



distributor_of_pain,

By assigning the responsibility of determining right vs. wrong to a God whose existence (or non-existence) is unprovable, you are merely shifting the interpretation of morality from your own belief about what is right and what is wrong to your own beliefs about what God thinks is right and wrong. There isn't a whole lot of difference between the two; YOU are still the one making the decisions.
Link Posted: 9/6/2005 1:16:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By distributor_of_pain:
You lost me there.
If there is no GOD, there is no Evil/GOOD - right/wrong - good/bad.



the stupidity of that statement is astounding

I take it you believe in right and wrong. If you didn't believe in God would you behave like an animal?

Anyone who is only held in check by fear of punishment isn't a good person. They are simply animals in a cage. When the cage is removed you get what is happening now in NO.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top