Too true...too sad. Don't forget that profits are evil too and "information just wants to be free."
Keep being true to yourself and THINKING for yourself...something these AC responders are apparently unable to do.
Windows owns Linux in Joe-Sixpack ease-of-use. Period. It is getting better...but not enough yet.
The funny part is that in the foreseeable future the OS as we know it will become meaningless (IMO)...it won't matter what the OS is...with CLR (mono and.NET) the OS just won't matter nearly as much...if at all.
You are right, it's me, Bill Gates, responding to a troll-reponder in hopes that I will sway the thousands of/.-reading Linux-zealots over to my side. I had such high hopes for that post too...oh well...back to spending my millions...OOPS, did I say millions? I meant BILLIONS of my personal wealth on stuff you could never dream of affording.
I completely agree...we have a rule in our house that we only go see movies in theaters if they are "theater-worthy". Theater-worthy movies are mostly action flicks...chick flicks are almost never theater-worthy (there are circumstantial exceptions to this rule...none of them are ever based on the movie however).
If I could get a PPV of a currently-in-theater movie that would be great.
Actually...if the person that shares the internet connection with *anyone* has a better chance of beating a criminal charge than someone with guards in place to keep everyone out. It gives a "shadow of a doubt" in these cases.
There was a case recently where someone was aquitted of kiddie pr0n charges because he claimed some spyware/malware/trojan program was the one that downloaded it to their computer and not them (no I don't have a link...I remember hearing about it on TV...I think).
Now, granted, if you aren't doing anything illegal in the first place then secure your wireless! If you are this is actually a nearly-perfect cover for it (unfortunately).
Workers with kids don't owe you anything. If the boss asks you to cover for someone with kids then it's the boss that owes you...not the other worker. Tell the boss no if you don't like it...but stop demanding or thinking that you are owed by someone who doesn't owe you a thing.
Now...if the worker with the kid(s) asks you to cover then you have a valid point.
Are there any sites that have software that will run on a TiVo? I have an old Phillips series one and would love to try out some software that runs on my existing TiVo hardware. Warranty is way-expired...so other than the lifetime subscription I have married to the box it would be neat to try something like that out.
I think I can see why people in the past have been unwilling to discuss this issue with you. You suggest to me that my beliefs cause me to have a closed mind. From your last response it sounds like your mind is the one that's closed.
Mocking me and my beliefs won't get you anywhere. If you want to have a normal, adult conversation you know where to find me. Speaking to me in a condesending tone just because you don't believe what I am saying is childish.
I haven't done anything but tell you of my beliefs of the topics we have been discussing. I have not insulted or belittled you because you don't share the same view I do. I find the fact you have resorted to the type of response you last offered insulting.
You have my e-mail address if you are truly interested in discussing anything along these lines in further detail. If you are going to offer more of the same then don't bother because I've had enough of it.
BTW, those authors you so quickly disregarded started out with the same type of beliefs you seem to espouse now...which is why I thought you may be interested in what they had to say. Do with the information what you wish. It's your choice.
The same reason I can't write a random bit generator and come up with a superior OS than what is available on the market. It just doesn't happen.
"chaos not require any motivator"
Not sure what you mean unfortunately. Chaos is what happens in the absense of order. It's what makes order possible I guess you could say...just like good cannot exist unless there is evil.
"What would imply that God does not exist?"
I haven't found anything yet that suggests to me that God doesn't exist. That doesn't mean I never will...but I doubt it will ever happen. Is that because of how I was reared by my parents? Some would say so...and I would have to agree to a certain extent, but I believe we all know instinctively whether we want to admit it or not.
If God didn't exist we there wouldn't be anything around to debate about nor anyone to debate in the first place.
There are two authors I know of that were "devout atheists" or "agnostics" that set out to prove, in their respective fields of study, that God does not exist. During their long and, to them, exhaustive searches, they both came to the conclusion there HAS to be a God. Hugh Ross and Josh McDowell. Search for them on Amazon.com to see what I mean...I am sure the snippets you can read on Amazon will give you a good idea of where they are coming from. Hugh Ross is an astrophysicist and I'm not sure what line of work Josh McDowell is in.
"are you really asserting that Rome fell because they became less moral?"
I do believe that played a large part in it, yes. They lost respect for life...just like what is happening around the world and in the US with abortion and euthanasia.
"provincials were free to practice their own religion; their was no significant attempt to impose the Roaman Gods, and whatever morals they implied"
The political climate and world domination of Rome at that time really played a key role in the ability of Christianity to spread like it did.
"I see some pretty good parralels to the growing attempts of Evangelical Christians in the US to impose their values on everyone else."
Christians are pretty tolerant of other's beliefs. We can be radical in the attempt to spread our beliefs to others...and there are those that embarrass me to no end because they are off the reservation. Lots of groups and individuals call themselves Christians that aren't. They give the rest of us bad reps.
"So it becomes important to me whether they realize they're just making stuff up like the rest of us."
I can assure you that I am not making this stuff up. I firmly believe everything I'm telling you now. I don't want to control anyone or tell them what to do. As a Christian my role is to share my beliefs when asked (as you did) and love others to as best I can. Emulate Jesus Christ is what we are called to do. Very tough assignment.
I'll leave you with this. Good exists as does evil. Evil rules this world because we allowed it in way back in the day. God is good. He sent Jesus to die on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins so we could build a relationship with Him. That is the sole purpose for which all humans were created...to have a relationship with God.
You have my e-mail address...if you ever want to ask more questions I will be happy to answer them as best I can. Check out those authors. I think you will be intruiged by their words.
You are either with God or you are against God...there is no neutral ground. You have to choose...and not choosing is a choice to be against God. It's the default for us unfortunately. Being a Christian isn't bondage...it's freedom.
Can you show me how relative moral standards have value and meaning for anyone other than the person who possesses them? As I stated before...we each do have our own morals...I guess I should have said the moral standard (i.e. absolutes) have to come from something outside of us. Nothing circular about it.
"Wow. I don't know what to say to that without implying your kids are some sort of twisted freaks"
Had you said that I wouldn't have been offended.:) What I meant by "mean" is played out in selfishness. My oldest is 5, middle is 3 and youngest is 16 months. The two older ones are "mean" to each other by being selfish. I don't mean they try to hurt each other or kill each other...just that they think of themselves only. To think of others (and, thus, be a "good person") is to think of others first. If you are only thinking of yourself then you don't care if something belongs to someone else. If you want it you take it (penalty of the law not withstanding). It takes training (by the parents) to teach kids to think of others before they think of themselves. That's what I meant by mean. My 16 month old is pretty oblivious to all of that but is just recently starting to get mad when something is taken from him.
Jesus did the ultimate selfless act when He died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sin. He didn't have to do it...He chose to because He knew that greater good would come out of it...to give us the opportunity to reconnect with God our Father.
"Say someone steals my car. I'd say that was wrong, and I assume you'd agree. But you'd say that God says it's wrong."
Actually we (God and myself) say it's wrong. I assume you are familiar with the Ten Commandments...one of them being "Thou Shalt Not Steal." Clearly there would have to be the concept of ownership in order to have such a command. In Biblical terms God owns everything since he was the original creator of all. He didn't build your car...but He created the material used by humans to create it. In the Old Testament section of the Bible he gives land to the Israelites that was occupied by other people. He told them to go take it. I can give many other examples where God acknowledges ownership but I think you get the point.
Just to clarify my previous posts a bit...when I say morals come from outside of us I mean the moral standard, by which all human morals are to be measured against, comes from outside of us. Without this absolute standard human morals are meaningless. Sorry to confuse this with my choice of words.
"I don't see how it could even possible to determine if such a being exists"
I guess I would fall on the other side of this. I don't see how it's possible God DOESN'T exist. Everything I've looked at and read about shows design and "authorship". The universe by itself degenerates into choas. Everything degrades...not improves...yet there is order and systems...design. That doesn't occur naturally IMO.
"Occams Razor would say it's unlikely, but certainty is clearly impossible"
Actually Occam's Razor would lean towards there being a creator because that is the simplest answer to how we got here in the first place. (IMO unless I don't understand the meaning of Occam's Razor).
"Speak for yourself"
I say this because humans were made perfect from the beginning and blew it because we went against God's command to stay way from that fruit! The whole Garden of Eden thing. Man allowed sin into our existance and we have been paying for it ever since.
"If you beleive that, then yes, they are meaningless"
I think you just agreed with me...but I'm not sure.:) How can morals have any meaning unless they come from outside of us?
"I'd say there is no absolute right and wrong. Perhaps it would be nice if there were, but that doesn't make it so"
There has to be absolute right and wrong...absolute truth...otherwise nothing means anything in the way of morals, period.
"Your apparent belief that the natural tendency of humans is to do evil strikes me as pretty pessimistic"
There are examples in history of civilizations that have grown mighty and fallen because they went into moral decay. Babylon and Rome are perfect examples. This decay came because humans are basically evil...the fallen nature I mentioned. These civs grew great because folks got together and worked towards a goal. The goal was necessitated out of need of these humans and superceeded the natural tendancy to do evil. Once all was built and they started to get fat and sassy and sit back then these natural tendancies had room to take root. The United States is headed in that very direction IMO.
"In my experiance and opinion, most people are pretty nice folks"
I agree...but my contention is most people are reared to be this way by their parents. These parents were reared in a time when morals were in a much lower state of moral decay than when their kids were born. Same with the parent's parents. Just because we have a fallen nature doesn't mean we are slaves to it. It's effects can be overcome. Still...at the base of us all is evil...look at kids...no one teaches them to lie, cheat, steal and be mean...they are born that way. We as parents (I don't know if you are a parent but I am) must teach them not to be OVER AND OVER (experience talking there!:p ) until finally they understand how to act. They must be trained to act differently than what their natural instinct is to do.
I don't know when this thread will become archived...so if you want to continue this via e-mail you can reach me at slashdot (@) jcsmp3s (.) com or just post here...whichever you prefer.
>How is this device part of a victim mentality? If I'm annoyed by a television, and, consulting my moral compass, determine that it is acceptable for me to turn the thing off (for example, no one else is watching it), than this device allows me to take responsibility for my own happiness and act.
I was just agreeing there are too many people willing to be victims...nothing to do with the device itself really.
>I would define a religion as a world view that includes some form of supernatural entity; but that's really just semantics. The definition that interest me is your definition of the word "God". Most "beleivers" I have asked about this are unable or unwilling to provide a definition, which makes any discussion of whether God exists pretty pointless. So if you can tell me what "God" means, I'll tell you if I'm an Atheist. (if you care)
I'm not sure what you mean by "what 'God' means"...God is an eternal being that created this universe. Please elaborate so I may respond as you desire.
>A moral compass is really not that hard to come by. Just ask yourself if what you are doing would seem OK to you if someone else were doing it. So, "Is it OK to steal? Well, gee, I'd be sad if someone stole from me..."
While this may work great for you and others with respect for themselves and their own property...what about someone who doesn't care about their stuff? It's morally right for them to steal? At this point "morality" doesn't really mean much since it's different for everyone.
>You say you get your morals from God. Which would seem to imply you have no morals of your own. I don't actually beleive that's the case. I'll assume (since I don't know you) that you are a good person. I don't think God has any more to do with it than Santa Claus. You choose to ascribe your goodness to something outside yourself, which, so far, is your business. But it frightens me. Because when it stops being exclusively your business is when our moral compasses are called upon to make some public decision, and we find that they disagree. At that point I'll be saying "I think X" and you'll be saying "God says Y". Which I think makes a poor basis for discussion, and hampers both your ability to consider alternative views, and my interest in hearing why you think Y.
When I say I get my morals from God I mean I choose to subscribe to His version of morality. I believe we all have a basic understanding of right and wrong inside of us. I believe that basic understanding was put there by God.
I have no goodness. Fallen human nature is evil. This is documented over and over in the Bible. All of us posses this fallen human nature. Even after becoming a Christian I am still subject to it.
I am open to alternate views...but I measure them against God's word to see what to do. Hasn't failed me yet.
>Hopefully I haven't just pissed you off yet, as that is not my intention. I too am genuinely interested in this question. I mention this now because the next paragraph is probably the most likely to piss you off. So once again, that's really not my intent.
Nope!:)
>So I say I get my moral compass by thinking about things and making my own decisions, for which I take personal responsibility, and which have no more authority than the considered decisions of anyone else. You say your moral compass comes from God, which I take to imply that you do not take responsibility for its dictates, it is objectively right, and any position disagreeing with it is wrong. Sorry, but I find that arrogant and frightening.
I have my own moral compass. Each of us do. I try to line mine up with what God says it should be as much as I humanly can. I take responsibility for my decisions.
I'm just saying you have to measure morals by something outside yourself or they are meaningless. You seem to have touched on this a bit (unless I misunderstood what you were trying to say) when you said "which have no more authority than the considered decisions of anyone else".
Man can't dictate to themselves because there there is no absolute right and wrong. Moral relativism will fail every time due to the nature of humans to do evil.
I agree with you on this...too many frickin' vitims around! Take responsibility for yourselves and have respect already!
OT: Not to pick a nit or anything...but if you define religion as a person's worldview (which I do) then technically atheism is a religion...but I know what you were trying to say.
Out of curiosity...from where do atheists get their moral compass? I am a Christian and mine comes from God (just so you know where I am coming from). I'm not trying to pick a fight...I am genuinely curious and interested in your answer.
" - you can't really toss someone out of such a place because you don't like what they're saying."
Sure you can. Ever see the signs that read "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?" Real property rights are what allow for this.
If I own a resturant and someone is swearing loudly and I don't like it I can make them leave though one of several methods.
Now if someone decides to refuse service to anyone with pink polka-dotted eye-color, and 50% of the population in the area falls into this category, they won't be in business very long.
Real property rights are where it's at. If they were respected by our current government and enforced by our current judicial system there wouldn't be nearly as many FUBARed lawsuits on the books.
Take the no-smoking laws. If I own a resturant and I want to let folks smoke there I should be able to. Inversely if I own a resturant and I don't want anyone smoking in there that should be my right as well. Real property rights enforcement pretty much eliminates the need for governmental intervention in a lot of these types of matters. This applies in other areas as well (Affirmative Action anyone?).
Couple that with the capitalistic system and that creates powerful forces for folks to do what society as a whole wants. Incetives galore.
Only public property is considered a free-speech zone really...and even then it only applies to the government...not individuals (which is beside the point you are making). If you are in my house and use language I don't approve of I can have you removed because I own the property (actually I would ask you to leave first...then have you removed if you didn't comply).
Real (as opposed to personal...i.e. land ownership) property rights are what should trump everything else.
Unfortunatly these rights are being eroded as well. Thst is why "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyiness" used to be "life, liberty, and property".
Vote the peeps out of office that erode these rights already!
How about monogamous relationships for everyone? While this may not totally erradicate HIV/AIDS it would drastically reduce the number of infected in just one generation of people...and it doesn't cost anything (from the government...individuals have to make a choice to do the right thing).
Slashdot Mirror
Well...if you love them so much why don't you move there and help them out instead of posting anonymously on /. like a giant wuss.
Murder is killing an innocent person with intent or pre-medidation.
Killing a human that wants to destroy your way of life or kill you first is not murder...not that you care anyway.
If I use this chip will it make my urine smell funny?
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Too true...too sad. Don't forget that profits are evil too and "information just wants to be free."
.NET) the OS just won't matter nearly as much...if at all.
Keep being true to yourself and THINKING for yourself...something these AC responders are apparently unable to do.
Windows owns Linux in Joe-Sixpack ease-of-use. Period. It is getting better...but not enough yet.
The funny part is that in the foreseeable future the OS as we know it will become meaningless (IMO)...it won't matter what the OS is...with CLR (mono and
CRAP! How did you see through my disguise???
/.-reading Linux-zealots over to my side. I had such high hopes for that post too...oh well...back to spending my millions...OOPS, did I say millions? I meant BILLIONS of my personal wealth on stuff you could never dream of affording.
You are right, it's me, Bill Gates, responding to a troll-reponder in hopes that I will sway the thousands of
Bill
Unfortunately for you my mod points expired yesterday or you would get a "+1 insightful" from me.
I have always used Windows and have never gotten a virus...EVER. I don't even use anti-virus either.
The only time I ever got 0wned was when I left my admin password blank. My bad and I deserved the 0wnage. Never again has that happened.
B
I completely agree...we have a rule in our house that we only go see movies in theaters if they are "theater-worthy". Theater-worthy movies are mostly action flicks...chick flicks are almost never theater-worthy (there are circumstantial exceptions to this rule...none of them are ever based on the movie however).
If I could get a PPV of a currently-in-theater movie that would be great.
Amen brutha! If I had mod points you would get one.
Actually...if the person that shares the internet connection with *anyone* has a better chance of beating a criminal charge than someone with guards in place to keep everyone out. It gives a "shadow of a doubt" in these cases.
There was a case recently where someone was aquitted of kiddie pr0n charges because he claimed some spyware/malware/trojan program was the one that downloaded it to their computer and not them (no I don't have a link...I remember hearing about it on TV...I think).
Now, granted, if you aren't doing anything illegal in the first place then secure your wireless! If you are this is actually a nearly-perfect cover for it (unfortunately).
Haha!
:)
Well...if I were that coworker you would be treated to lunch on a regular basis.
Workers with kids don't owe you anything. If the boss asks you to cover for someone with kids then it's the boss that owes you...not the other worker. Tell the boss no if you don't like it...but stop demanding or thinking that you are owed by someone who doesn't owe you a thing.
Now...if the worker with the kid(s) asks you to cover then you have a valid point.
...the Redsox won the World Series, breaking the "curse of the Bambino" so maybe this is a year of things not happening like they always do.
Are there any sites that have software that will run on a TiVo? I have an old Phillips series one and would love to try out some software that runs on my existing TiVo hardware. Warranty is way-expired...so other than the lifetime subscription I have married to the box it would be neat to try something like that out.
I think I can see why people in the past have been unwilling to discuss this issue with you. You suggest to me that my beliefs cause me to have a closed mind. From your last response it sounds like your mind is the one that's closed.
Mocking me and my beliefs won't get you anywhere. If you want to have a normal, adult conversation you know where to find me. Speaking to me in a condesending tone just because you don't believe what I am saying is childish.
I haven't done anything but tell you of my beliefs of the topics we have been discussing. I have not insulted or belittled you because you don't share the same view I do. I find the fact you have resorted to the type of response you last offered insulting.
You have my e-mail address if you are truly interested in discussing anything along these lines in further detail. If you are going to offer more of the same then don't bother because I've had enough of it.
BTW, those authors you so quickly disregarded started out with the same type of beliefs you seem to espouse now...which is why I thought you may be interested in what they had to say. Do with the information what you wish. It's your choice.
Peace,
B
"why does order require a designer"
The same reason I can't write a random bit generator and come up with a superior OS than what is available on the market. It just doesn't happen.
"chaos not require any motivator"
Not sure what you mean unfortunately. Chaos is what happens in the absense of order. It's what makes order possible I guess you could say...just like good cannot exist unless there is evil.
"What would imply that God does not exist?"
I haven't found anything yet that suggests to me that God doesn't exist. That doesn't mean I never will...but I doubt it will ever happen. Is that because of how I was reared by my parents? Some would say so...and I would have to agree to a certain extent, but I believe we all know instinctively whether we want to admit it or not.
If God didn't exist we there wouldn't be anything around to debate about nor anyone to debate in the first place.
There are two authors I know of that were "devout atheists" or "agnostics" that set out to prove, in their respective fields of study, that God does not exist. During their long and, to them, exhaustive searches, they both came to the conclusion there HAS to be a God. Hugh Ross and Josh McDowell. Search for them on Amazon.com to see what I mean...I am sure the snippets you can read on Amazon will give you a good idea of where they are coming from. Hugh Ross is an astrophysicist and I'm not sure what line of work Josh McDowell is in.
"are you really asserting that Rome fell because they became less moral?"
I do believe that played a large part in it, yes. They lost respect for life...just like what is happening around the world and in the US with abortion and euthanasia.
"provincials were free to practice their own religion; their was no significant attempt to impose the Roaman Gods, and whatever morals they implied"
The political climate and world domination of Rome at that time really played a key role in the ability of Christianity to spread like it did.
"I see some pretty good parralels to the growing attempts of Evangelical Christians in the US to impose their values on everyone else."
Christians are pretty tolerant of other's beliefs. We can be radical in the attempt to spread our beliefs to others...and there are those that embarrass me to no end because they are off the reservation. Lots of groups and individuals call themselves Christians that aren't. They give the rest of us bad reps.
"So it becomes important to me whether they realize they're just making stuff up like the rest of us."
I can assure you that I am not making this stuff up. I firmly believe everything I'm telling you now. I don't want to control anyone or tell them what to do. As a Christian my role is to share my beliefs when asked (as you did) and love others to as best I can. Emulate Jesus Christ is what we are called to do. Very tough assignment.
I'll leave you with this. Good exists as does evil. Evil rules this world because we allowed it in way back in the day. God is good. He sent Jesus to die on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins so we could build a relationship with Him. That is the sole purpose for which all humans were created...to have a relationship with God.
You have my e-mail address...if you ever want to ask more questions I will be happy to answer them as best I can. Check out those authors. I think you will be intruiged by their words.
You are either with God or you are against God...there is no neutral ground. You have to choose...and not choosing is a choice to be against God. It's the default for us unfortunately. Being a Christian isn't bondage...it's freedom.
Hugh Ross and Josh McDowell are two people who set out to prove that God didn't exist and found him.
Hugh Ross is an astrophysicist. Not sure what Josh McDowell's area is.
Check them out.
B
"It's entirely circular"
:) What I meant by "mean" is played out in selfishness. My oldest is 5, middle is 3 and youngest is 16 months. The two older ones are "mean" to each other by being selfish. I don't mean they try to hurt each other or kill each other...just that they think of themselves only. To think of others (and, thus, be a "good person") is to think of others first. If you are only thinking of yourself then you don't care if something belongs to someone else. If you want it you take it (penalty of the law not withstanding). It takes training (by the parents) to teach kids to think of others before they think of themselves. That's what I meant by mean. My 16 month old is pretty oblivious to all of that but is just recently starting to get mad when something is taken from him.
Can you show me how relative moral standards have value and meaning for anyone other than the person who possesses them? As I stated before...we each do have our own morals...I guess I should have said the moral standard (i.e. absolutes) have to come from something outside of us. Nothing circular about it.
"Wow. I don't know what to say to that without implying your kids are some sort of twisted freaks"
Had you said that I wouldn't have been offended.
Jesus did the ultimate selfless act when He died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sin. He didn't have to do it...He chose to because He knew that greater good would come out of it...to give us the opportunity to reconnect with God our Father.
"Say someone steals my car. I'd say that was wrong, and I assume you'd agree. But you'd say that God says it's wrong."
Actually we (God and myself) say it's wrong. I assume you are familiar with the Ten Commandments...one of them being "Thou Shalt Not Steal." Clearly there would have to be the concept of ownership in order to have such a command. In Biblical terms God owns everything since he was the original creator of all. He didn't build your car...but He created the material used by humans to create it. In the Old Testament section of the Bible he gives land to the Israelites that was occupied by other people. He told them to go take it. I can give many other examples where God acknowledges ownership but I think you get the point.
Just to clarify my previous posts a bit...when I say morals come from outside of us I mean the moral standard, by which all human morals are to be measured against, comes from outside of us. Without this absolute standard human morals are meaningless. Sorry to confuse this with my choice of words.
"I don't see how it could even possible to determine if such a being exists"
:) How can morals have any meaning unless they come from outside of us?
:p ) until finally they understand how to act. They must be trained to act differently than what their natural instinct is to do.
I guess I would fall on the other side of this. I don't see how it's possible God DOESN'T exist. Everything I've looked at and read about shows design and "authorship". The universe by itself degenerates into choas. Everything degrades...not improves...yet there is order and systems...design. That doesn't occur naturally IMO.
"Occams Razor would say it's unlikely, but certainty is clearly impossible"
Actually Occam's Razor would lean towards there being a creator because that is the simplest answer to how we got here in the first place. (IMO unless I don't understand the meaning of Occam's Razor).
"Speak for yourself"
I say this because humans were made perfect from the beginning and blew it because we went against God's command to stay way from that fruit! The whole Garden of Eden thing. Man allowed sin into our existance and we have been paying for it ever since.
"If you beleive that, then yes, they are meaningless"
I think you just agreed with me...but I'm not sure.
"I'd say there is no absolute right and wrong. Perhaps it would be nice if there were, but that doesn't make it so"
There has to be absolute right and wrong...absolute truth...otherwise nothing means anything in the way of morals, period.
"Your apparent belief that the natural tendency of humans is to do evil strikes me as pretty pessimistic"
There are examples in history of civilizations that have grown mighty and fallen because they went into moral decay. Babylon and Rome are perfect examples. This decay came because humans are basically evil...the fallen nature I mentioned. These civs grew great because folks got together and worked towards a goal. The goal was necessitated out of need of these humans and superceeded the natural tendancy to do evil. Once all was built and they started to get fat and sassy and sit back then these natural tendancies had room to take root. The United States is headed in that very direction IMO.
"In my experiance and opinion, most people are pretty nice folks"
I agree...but my contention is most people are reared to be this way by their parents. These parents were reared in a time when morals were in a much lower state of moral decay than when their kids were born. Same with the parent's parents. Just because we have a fallen nature doesn't mean we are slaves to it. It's effects can be overcome. Still...at the base of us all is evil...look at kids...no one teaches them to lie, cheat, steal and be mean...they are born that way. We as parents (I don't know if you are a parent but I am) must teach them not to be OVER AND OVER (experience talking there!
I don't know when this thread will become archived...so if you want to continue this via e-mail you can reach me at slashdot (@) jcsmp3s (.) com or just post here...whichever you prefer.
>How is this device part of a victim mentality? If I'm annoyed by a television, and, consulting my moral compass, determine that it is acceptable for me to turn the thing off (for example, no one else is watching it), than this device allows me to take responsibility for my own happiness and act.
:)
I was just agreeing there are too many people willing to be victims...nothing to do with the device itself really.
>I would define a religion as a world view that includes some form of supernatural entity; but that's really just semantics. The definition that interest me is your definition of the word "God". Most "beleivers" I have asked about this are unable or unwilling to provide a definition, which makes any discussion of whether God exists pretty pointless. So if you can tell me what "God" means, I'll tell you if I'm an Atheist. (if you care)
I'm not sure what you mean by "what 'God' means"...God is an eternal being that created this universe. Please elaborate so I may respond as you desire.
>A moral compass is really not that hard to come by. Just ask yourself if what you are doing would seem OK to you if someone else were doing it. So, "Is it OK to steal? Well, gee, I'd be sad if someone stole from me..."
While this may work great for you and others with respect for themselves and their own property...what about someone who doesn't care about their stuff? It's morally right for them to steal? At this point "morality" doesn't really mean much since it's different for everyone.
>You say you get your morals from God. Which would seem to imply you have no morals of your own. I don't actually beleive that's the case. I'll assume (since I don't know you) that you are a good person. I don't think God has any more to do with it than Santa Claus. You choose to ascribe your goodness to something outside yourself, which, so far, is your business. But it frightens me. Because when it stops being exclusively your business is when our moral compasses are called upon to make some public decision, and we find that they disagree. At that point I'll be saying "I think X" and you'll be saying "God says Y". Which I think makes a poor basis for discussion, and hampers both your ability to consider alternative views, and my interest in hearing why you think Y.
When I say I get my morals from God I mean I choose to subscribe to His version of morality. I believe we all have a basic understanding of right and wrong inside of us. I believe that basic understanding was put there by God.
I have no goodness. Fallen human nature is evil. This is documented over and over in the Bible. All of us posses this fallen human nature. Even after becoming a Christian I am still subject to it.
I am open to alternate views...but I measure them against God's word to see what to do. Hasn't failed me yet.
>Hopefully I haven't just pissed you off yet, as that is not my intention. I too am genuinely interested in this question. I mention this now because the next paragraph is probably the most likely to piss you off. So once again, that's really not my intent.
Nope!
>So I say I get my moral compass by thinking about things and making my own decisions, for which I take personal responsibility, and which have no more authority than the considered decisions of anyone else. You say your moral compass comes from God, which I take to imply that you do not take responsibility for its dictates, it is objectively right, and any position disagreeing with it is wrong. Sorry, but I find that arrogant and frightening.
I have my own moral compass. Each of us do. I try to line mine up with what God says it should be as much as I humanly can. I take responsibility for my decisions.
I'm just saying you have to measure morals by something outside yourself or they are meaningless. You seem to have touched on this a bit (unless I misunderstood what you were trying to say) when you said "which have no more authority than the considered decisions of anyone else".
Man can't dictate to themselves because there there is no absolute right and wrong. Moral relativism will fail every time due to the nature of humans to do evil.
B
I agree with you on this...too many frickin' vitims around! Take responsibility for yourselves and have respect already!
OT:
Not to pick a nit or anything...but if you define religion as a person's worldview (which I do) then technically atheism is a religion...but I know what you were trying to say.
Out of curiosity...from where do atheists get their moral compass? I am a Christian and mine comes from God (just so you know where I am coming from). I'm not trying to pick a fight...I am genuinely curious and interested in your answer.
B
...when he said "internets"!
" - you can't really toss someone out of such a place because you don't like what they're saying."
Sure you can. Ever see the signs that read "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?" Real property rights are what allow for this.
If I own a resturant and someone is swearing loudly and I don't like it I can make them leave though one of several methods.
Now if someone decides to refuse service to anyone with pink polka-dotted eye-color, and 50% of the population in the area falls into this category, they won't be in business very long.
Real property rights are where it's at. If they were respected by our current government and enforced by our current judicial system there wouldn't be nearly as many FUBARed lawsuits on the books.
Take the no-smoking laws. If I own a resturant and I want to let folks smoke there I should be able to. Inversely if I own a resturant and I don't want anyone smoking in there that should be my right as well. Real property rights enforcement pretty much eliminates the need for governmental intervention in a lot of these types of matters. This applies in other areas as well (Affirmative Action anyone?).
Couple that with the capitalistic system and that creates powerful forces for folks to do what society as a whole wants. Incetives galore.
B
Only public property is considered a free-speech zone really...and even then it only applies to the government...not individuals (which is beside the point you are making). If you are in my house and use language I don't approve of I can have you removed because I own the property (actually I would ask you to leave first...then have you removed if you didn't comply).
Real (as opposed to personal...i.e. land ownership) property rights are what should trump everything else.
Unfortunatly these rights are being eroded as well. Thst is why "...life, liberty, and the pursuit of happyiness" used to be "life, liberty, and property".
Vote the peeps out of office that erode these rights already!
How about monogamous relationships for everyone? While this may not totally erradicate HIV/AIDS it would drastically reduce the number of infected in just one generation of people...and it doesn't cost anything (from the government...individuals have to make a choice to do the right thing).