How do you differ from your political label?

[westvirginia]

This is an interesting quote and I have seen it before. I disagree with it. It takes a pretty weak view of our Constitutional system and the rule of law. I dont think religion has anything to do with the Constitution--in fact, the only reference in it to religion is to separate it from government. Education is the key to our system as other Founding Fathers noted: the key to our constitutional republican form of government is an informed and participating citizenry. An educated citizenry is a moral one, in my opinion. Our system could work fine over a nation of atheists or over a nation of fundamentalist muslims, if they were an educated and informed citizenry who participated and respected the rule of law, our democratic ideals and individual freedoms.

 

870889[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Wow - your posts the last couple nights have actually shown some pretty deep and rational thought. C'mon, fess up. The Dr. adjusted or switched your meds, didn't he?

 

:pokesskinsfanwithsharpstick:

[skins]

Wow - your posts the last couple nights have actually shown some pretty deep and rational thought.   C'mon, fess up.  The Dr. adjusted or switched your meds, didn't he? 

 

:pokesskinsfanwithsharpstick:

 

870893[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Same old skins.

 

Surprise, surprise, surprise, that wasnt my bellybutton.

[10g_DBA]

This is an interesting quote and I have seen it before. I disagree with it. It takes a pretty weak view of our Constitutional system and the rule of law. I dont think religion has anything to do with the Constitution--in fact, the only reference in it to religion is to separate it from government. Education is the key to our system as other Founding Fathers noted: the key to our constitutional republican form of government is an informed and participating citizenry. An educated citizenry is a moral one, in my opinion. Our system could work fine over a nation of atheists or over a nation of fundamentalist muslims, if they were an educated and informed citizenry who participated and respected the rule of law, our democratic ideals and individual freedoms.

 

870889[/snapback]

 

 

 

So then knowledge is the source of morals? The more one knows, the better one behaves?

 

I know a high school dropout to whom I would entrust my life.

 

Ever hear the phase, "Evil Genius?"

[Azazello1313]

i thought the beginning of wisdom was realizing how little we know. lao tzu or wolfowitz or someone said that

 

i'm gonna answer those questions about religion and law and self-evident principles, 10q...but right now i don't feel like it (edit: mostly because i don't feel like beating skins off my nutsac right now)

Edited July 9, 2005 by Azazello1313

[skins]

So then knowledge is the source of morals?  The more one knows, the better one behaves?

 

I know a high school dropout to whom I would entrust my life.

 

Ever hear the phase, "Evil Genius?"

 

870900[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Nothing is absolute, but generally yes. And yes, I am something of an elitist, but not of education as measured by degrees. I am an elitist of knowledge. So yer high school dropout friend could be very "educated" and "informed" to me. One of my very best buddies--I am godfather to his second son--only has two years of college and is an entrepeneur who owns his own printing company. But he has an inquisitive mind. Thats the key.

 

Morals come from an understanding of right and wrong and an empathy for others, in my opinion. Those things can come from religion, upbringing, environment, education and learning and other sources.

[wiegie]

This is an interesting quote and I have seen it before. I disagree with it. It takes a pretty weak view of our Constitutional system and the rule of law. I dont think religion has anything to do with the Constitution--in fact, the only reference in it to religion is to separate it from government. Education is the key to our system as other Founding Fathers noted: the key to our constitutional republican form of government is an informed and participating citizenry. An educated citizenry is a moral one, in my opinion. Our system could work fine over a nation of atheists or over a nation of fundamentalist muslims, if they were an educated and informed citizenry who participated and respected the rule of law, our democratic ideals and individual freedoms.

 

870889[/snapback]

 

 

 

I agree with the quote (or at least the sentiment of the quote). I think it is impossible to write enough laws to make society function properly if laws are the only thing that constrains human behavior.

 

Furthermore, I see no reason to think that educated people will behave any more morally than uneducated ones.

 

I have asked the question repeatedly here and never received a satisfactory answer as to why an athiest would behave "morally" in a situation in which they could legally get away with doing something "immoral".

 

In the absence of an extralegal constraint their behavior, it just makes no sense for a person to not do what they consider best for themselves even if it may not be what is best for humanity overall.

 

Some of you have tried to argue that people will behave "morally" even if they don't believe in some extra-worldly reward/punishment because you would want people to treat you the same in return. This might work in a small community were you have repeated interactions. But in a larger community were one's reputation of being a cheat won't spread that far, quickly a few people will start to take advantage of others. And then these others will get sick of getting screwed over and start to do the screwing themselves (and why not? If they think they can get away with it and their is no supreme force to punish them, what's to stop them?)

 

Eventually trust falls apart in the society. And the society will cease to function on any grand level.

[skins]

I agree with the quote (or at least the sentiment of the quote).  I think it is impossible to write enough laws to make society function properly if laws are the only thing that constrains human behavior. 

 

Furthermore, I see no reason to think that educated people will behave any more morally than uneducated ones.

 

I have asked the question repeatedly here and never received a satisfactory answer as to why an athiest would behave "morally" in a situation in which they could legally get away with doing something "immoral". 

 

In the absence of an extralegal constraint their behavior, it just makes no sense for a person to not do what they consider best for themselves even if it may not be what is best for humanity overall. 

 

Some of you have tried to argue that people will behave "morally" even if they don't believe in some extra-worldly reward/punishment because you would want people to treat you the same in return.  This might work in a small community were you have repeated interactions.  But in a larger community were one's reputation of being a cheat won't spread that far, quickly a few people will start to take advantage of others.  And then these others will get sick of getting screwed over and start to do the screwing themselves (and why not?  If they think they can get away with it and their is no supreme force to punish them, what's to stop them?)

 

Eventually trust falls apart in the society.  And the society will cease to function on any grand level.

 

870906[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yer kidding, right? If I dont fear hell I cant understand that my acts harm another? Simple human empathy and understanding is the key to morality. That can be understood in the simplest interactions between two humans and dont require a large or small community or religion. Call me an idealist, but I think honesty and a desire to do the right thing are inherent and natural to us and psychologically healthy. That is one reason I have a problem with modern interpretations of the concept of sin in religion. I dont believe people are inherently bad and need to be "saved."

 

The default of no religion is not automatically immoral behavior.

[bushwacked]

If we are still following the nature of the thread and if anyone cares:

 

I'm extremely anti-govt. in personal affairs.

 

I love guns and republicans represent me more than dems on that issue.

 

I think the current dems are either spineless, confused, and/or have a hard time reasonating on issues for a number of reasons.

 

I vote Republican on local issues often. Fek, I live in Wyoming and drink beer with state representatives who crticize Bush more than me. I also know our democratic governer, but he is a Republican anywhere else in the nation.

 

I love to hunt, fish, and am really a redneck at heart.

 

Pro death penalty cause retribution is righteous.

 

I'm more of a rebel against the BS powers that be and my huddle name is a result of that and not being pro dem.

[skins]

If we are still following the nature of the thread and if anyone cares:

 

I'm extremely anti-govt. in personal affairs.

 

I love guns and republicans represent me more than dems on that issue.

 

I think the current dems are either spineless, confused, and/or have a hard time reasonating on issues for a number of reasons.

 

I vote Republican on local issues often.  Fek, I live in Wyoming and drink beer with state representatives who crticize Bush more than me.  I also know our democratic governer, but he is a Republican anywhere else in the nation.

 

I love to hunt, fish, and am really a redneck at heart. 

 

Pro death penalty cause retribution is righteous. 

 

I'm more of a rebel against the BS powers that be and my huddle name is a result of that and not being pro dem.

 

870921[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Traitor.

[bushwacked]

Traitor.

 

870925[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Balla H8's me, Perch H8's me, Spain H8's me, and H8 loves me!

[bushwacked]

Edit to add to my original post, affirmative action is flawed and BS but nationally it is a pea compared to the total BS to the like of no bid govt. funded contracts from one oil monkey to another.

['canes2004]

I'll throw down on this. I usually stay out of political discussions on here because I use the Huddle for purpose it was intended, FF. But here goes.

 

- I am a registered Republican and have been since I was 18. I bought into the program on promises of less goverment, fewer taxes and a strong military.

 

- I am as anti-religion as they come. I don't care what you or you or you believe in. Heck you can believe that a vacum cleaner is God, just don't shove it down my throat or make my kid pray to your god in class. Let him get his quadratic equations down pat thank you.

 

- I think most drug laws aren't just silly, they actually are stupid which as I get older I see that most laws are stupid or at least outdated. I cannot understand why a kid can get 4 years in prision for possesion and another guy can get 4 years as well for battery. Our prisions are busting at the seams and a good chunk of them are drug related offenses. If they want to make something illeagal, make tequila illeagal. Trust me.

 

- I am pro-gun and a card carrying member of the NRA. I have a concealed weapons permitt and I believe I have the right to defend myself and my family by whatever force neccessary.

 

-While I am not "pro-abortion" I do not believe we need the goverment telling us what to do and making laws against abortion. Most pro-lifers are religous wackos anyway. Trust me, we are a country full of unwanted kids walking the streets , commiting crimes, costing us billions of dollars in leagal, medical and other expenses. While it is sad, if there wasn't abortions just how many more of them would there be. And don't give me that adoption crap. There are 10's of thousands of kids waiting to be adopted. It just aint happening.

 

-I am anti-censorship on all forms especially media. Don't tell me what I can't watch or listen to. I'm 40 years old and if I want to watch something you find disgusting or crude, GFY. This FCC crap is friggin scary. If you don't want too see/hear it, turn it off. If you don't want your kids to do the same, talk to them, earn their trust, influence them on your beliefs but leave me and my vulgarity alone.

 

-I think immigration in this country is a joke. Sure let 10 million Mexicans in free of charge Dubya. I mean we have so many social services we can't find enough of our own to spread it out too.

 

-Not a big fan of social services. Get up, get out, get a job and support yourself.

 

-I could care less what gays do or do not do. Go ahead let them get married. Why should us straight people be the only ones miserable. I don't care what you do in the privacy of your home. I'm more worried about the increase of weirdo's taking away our kids. Those are the people who we need to find and kill.

 

-I am pro death penalty. But please lets make sure all the ducks are lined up before we off someone.

 

-I'm a big fan of the space program. I mean have you checked out some of the stuff the Hubble has found? Amazing.

 

-I'm a big opponent of foreign aid. We ship off billions and billions to other countries yet we had to raise money so my son's school could get new computers for his classes. Go figure.

 

-Pro enviornment. I'm not a nut job who thinks we should go back to the Flintstone days, but some of the stuff we do is way beyond resonable. I mean we let cruise ships dump all their crap in the ocean as soon as they get far enough out to sea. It's the only Earth we've got people.

 

-The war is Iraq is stupid. You know it, I know it, the world knows it. Let's get the real people responseable for 911. Lets invade Saudi Arabia. And while were there, some oil would be nice.

 

Whew, I could go on.............

Edited July 9, 2005 by 'canes2004

[Jimmy Neutron]

You guys have started to drill into a meaningful discussion.  What is the purpose for civil law?  Why is it needed?

 

Can I ask you guys a few questions?

Jimmy, ..err, I mean Mr. President elect Neutron,

I'm interested in the relationship between right/wrong and legislation - assuming that there is one.  If something is deemed wrong, when and how should this be reflected in a society's rules?  Robbery is wrong, should we repeal the laws against it?  If not, then what wrongs do we disallow and which rights do we protect?

 

Here are a couple quotes.  What does everybody think?

"From a Judeo-Christian perspective, it should be noted that objective truth does not constitute law without grace. In fact, law in the absence of grace is meaningless -- little more than oppression. However, grace in the absence of law is, likewise, meaningless -- little more than licentiousness. Law and grace are, in fact, different sides of the same coin."

--Mark Alexander

 

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

--John Adams

 

870885[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I would never run for office, but I do think we could start a cool party with the cats on this board. Posts in this thread have been amazing in the breadth of ideas we actually agree on. Who'd a thunk it?

 

There are generally accepted norms of right and wrong in every society. Crimes against person and property are nearly universal throughout the world, though some are perverted to exclude by race or gender. Murder and robbery are considered wrong even in societies that do not recognize the existence of a higher being.

 

We can throw around quotes from the founding fathers for decades. They all had a lot of different ideas. Our Constitution is the result of a lot of hotly contested debate and compromise.

 

There is no place in the Bible or U.S. Constitution that instructs us to make decisions for and project our own will onto our brothers. Az wisely pointed out that Christ himself said:

 

17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?

 

18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why atempt ye me, ye hypocrites?

 

19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.

 

20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

 

21 They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto bCaesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.

 

22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way. - Matt. 22:17-22

 

Word.

 

The great thing about this country is that you can worship as you see fit. Nobody is going to force you to join a state endorsed church, kill you kid upon delivery if it's not the right gender or decide your occupation for you. It's simply not anyone's place to exert their will; religious, right or wrong upon another.

 

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another. Galations 6:4

[10g_DBA]

Nothing is absolute, but generally yes. And yes, I am something of an elitist, but not of education as measured by degrees. I am an elitist of knowledge. So yer high school dropout friend could be very "educated" and "informed" to me. One of my very best buddies--I am godfather to his second son--only has two years of college and is an entrepeneur who owns his own printing company. But he has an inquisitive mind. Thats the key.

 

Morals come from an understanding of right and wrong and an empathy for others, in my opinion. Those things can come from religion, upbringing, environment, education and learning and other sources.

 

870904[/snapback]

 

 

 

You defeated yourself the first three words.

 

"Nothing is absolute" is an absolute statement. You must either admit that some things are indeed absolute or concede that an argument built upon this premise is invalid/not sound.

Edited July 9, 2005 by 10g_DBA

[skins]

You defeated yourself the first three words.

 

"Nothing is absolute" is an absolute statement.  You must either admit that some things are indeed absolute or concede that an argument built upon this premise is invalid/not sound.

 

870998[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yer wrong.

[10g_DBA]

This is an interesting quote and I have seen it before. I disagree with it. It takes a pretty weak view of our Constitutional system and the rule of law. I dont think religion has anything to do with the Constitution--in fact, the only reference in it to religion is to separate it from government. Education is the key to our system as other Founding Fathers noted: the key to our constitutional republican form of government is an informed and participating citizenry. An educated citizenry is a moral one, in my opinion. Our system could work fine over a nation of atheists or over a nation of fundamentalist muslims, if they were an educated and informed citizenry who participated and respected the rule of law, our democratic ideals and individual freedoms.

 

870889[/snapback]

 

 

 

This doesn't seem to be the case in Iraq, as you're fond of pointing out. The new democracy faces a stiff insurgency. Are you suggesting that the reason our democratic ideals are not embraced in the Middle East is because they are too ignorant to know a good thing when they see it?

 

The answer then is simple. Send in the teachers. Peace and stability will be realized when every Arab earns their GED.

[10g_DBA]

i thought the beginning of wisdom was realizing how little we know.  lao tzu or wolfowitz or someone said that

 

i'm gonna answer those questions about religion and law and self-evident principles, 10q...but right now i don't feel like it (edit: mostly because i don't feel like beating skins off my nutsac right now)

 

870903[/snapback]

 

 

 

coward

 

 

 

 

 

kidding....

[10g_DBA]

Yer wrong.

 

871014[/snapback]

 

 

 

even less convincing.

[10g_DBA]

I agree with the quote (or at least the sentiment of the quote).  I think it is impossible to write enough laws to make society function properly if laws are the only thing that constrains human behavior. 

 

Furthermore, I see no reason to think that educated people will behave any more morally than uneducated ones.

 

I have asked the question repeatedly here and never received a satisfactory answer as to why an athiest would behave "morally" in a situation in which they could legally get away with doing something "immoral". 

 

In the absence of an extralegal constraint their behavior, it just makes no sense for a person to not do what they consider best for themselves even if it may not be what is best for humanity overall. 

 

Some of you have tried to argue that people will behave "morally" even if they don't believe in some extra-worldly reward/punishment because you would want people to treat you the same in return.  This might work in a small community were you have repeated interactions.  But in a larger community were one's reputation of being a cheat won't spread that far, quickly a few people will start to take advantage of others.  And then these others will get sick of getting screwed over and start to do the screwing themselves (and why not?  If they think they can get away with it and their is no supreme force to punish them, what's to stop them?)

 

Eventually trust falls apart in the society.  And the society will cease to function on any grand level.

870906[/snapback]

Wiegie can shine the light of truth.

[10g_DBA]

Yer kidding, right? If I dont fear hell I cant understand that my acts harm another? Simple human empathy and understanding is the key to morality. That can be understood in the simplest interactions between two humans and dont require a large or small community or religion. Call me an idealist, but I think honesty and a desire to do the right thing are inherent and natural to us and psychologically healthy. That is one reason I have a problem with modern interpretations of the concept of sin in religion. I dont believe people are inherently bad and need to be "saved."

 

The default of no religion is not automatically immoral behavior.

870913[/snapback]

You're a well read man. How long has it been since you read 'Lord of the Flies?' It's a story about what happens to a community when our human nature runs unchecked.

 

The default of no religion is not automatically immoral behavior

in the same way that

the default of no light is not automatically darkness.

[skins]

You're a well read man.  How long has it been since you read 'Lord of the Flies?'  It's a story about what happens to a community when our human nature runs unchecked.

 

The default of no religion is not automatically immoral behavior

in the same way that

the default of no light is not automatically darkness.

871060[/snapback]

 

Years. Its ok. I understand you feel a need to justify how you think. You say no religion is no light. I say religion can be light and no religion can be light.

 

It depends on whether you feel that a ladder is necessary to get to heaven.

[10g_DBA]

If we are still following the nature of the thread and if anyone cares:

 

I'm extremely anti-govt. in personal affairs.

 

I love guns and republicans represent me more than dems on that issue.

 

I think the current dems are either spineless, confused, and/or have a hard time reasonating on issues for a number of reasons.

 

I vote Republican on local issues often.  Fek, I live in Wyoming and drink beer with state representatives who crticize Bush more than me.  I also know our democratic governer, but he is a Republican anywhere else in the nation.

 

I love to hunt, fish, and am really a redneck at heart. 

 

Pro death penalty cause retribution is righteous. 

 

I'm more of a rebel against the BS powers that be and my huddle name is a result of that and not being pro dem.

870921[/snapback]

Who are you and what have you done with Bushwacked?

[10g_DBA]

Years. Its ok. I understand you feel a need to justify how you think. You say no religion is no light. I say religion can be light and no religion can be light.

 

It depends on whether you feel that a ladder is necessary to get to heaven.

871064[/snapback]

it didn't necessarily have to be light. It could have said:

...in the same way that the default of no heat is not automatically cold.

or

...in the same way that the default of no money is not automatically poverty.

 

I wasn't saying anything about ladders or heaven. I was just trying to express that I think it is nonsensical to say, "just because something isn't present, doesn't automatically mean that it's absent."

[10g_DBA]

  I would never run for office, but I do think we could start a cool party with the cats on this board.  Posts in this thread have been amazing in the breadth of ideas we actually agree on.  Who'd a thunk it?

Sure. Why not? Please reconsider accepting the Huddlecratic nomination.

 

There are generally accepted norms of right and wrong in every society.  Crimes against person and property are nearly universal throughout the world, though some are perverted to exclude by race or gender.  Murder and robbery are considered wrong even in societies that do not recognize the existence of a higher being.

Virtually all societies across the globe have the same sense of right and wrong. Morality is, as you pointed out, universal. We're hardwired with knowledge of natural law. How do you explain that?

 

Evolution can offer no explanation for the origin of human consciousness. In fact, it runs contrary - killing off the competition and taking resources for yourself is what survival of the fittest is all about. Yet, the generally accepted norms of right and wrong in every society say it's wrong to kill and it's wrong to steal.

 

Where did our spirit of morality come from? Who or what wove this into the fabric of our being?

 

EDIT: Thanks to billay for this link.

 

We can throw around quotes from the founding fathers for decades.  They all had a lot of different ideas.  Our Constitution is the result of a lot of hotly contested debate and compromise.

I'm willing to bet that if we throw around enough quotes, we'll start to see a common theme.

 

There is no place in the Bible or U.S. Constitution that instructs us to make decisions for and project our own will onto our brothers. Az wisely pointed out that Christ himself said:   

17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?

18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why atempt ye me, ye hypocrites?

19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.

20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

21 They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto bCaesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.

22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.  -  Matt. 22:17-22

Word.

 

The great thing about this country is that you can worship as you see fit.  Nobody is going to force you to join a state endorsed church, kill you kid upon delivery if it's not the right gender or decide your occupation for you. It's simply not anyone's place to exert their will; religious, right or wrong upon another.

Perhaps there is some confusion around the meaning of this excerpt. The Pharisees were looking for an excuse to arrest and discredit Jesus. They tried to trap Him into saying something against Rome so they could hang Him for treason.

He simply said obey God and obey the governmental rulers. This passage does not say anything about imposing our will on others. Perhaps, they're not the best verses to prove your point because they actually instruct us to submit to authority and pay our taxes.

 

They left Him alone cuz they couldn't get Him to say something that could be used against Him.

 

Incidentally, this verse is why the US passed a law stating that no living person can appear on our currency.

 

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.  Galations 6:4 

870957[/snapback]

It's not readily apparent to me why this verse was included with your post. Let's get a contemporary translation and add some context.

Galatians 6:1-10

 

Doing Good to All

 

1Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. 2Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, 5for each one should carry his own load.

 

6Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.

 

7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature[a]will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

Edited July 9, 2005 by 10g_DBA

[SuperBalla]

So if I write in small blue font...I can be President?