(July 27, 2016 at 12:33 pm)robvalue Wrote: Yeah we know Drich, you're a slavery apologist. And weirdly proud of it. We're not, now matter how much you tell us we are. This has been explained to you endlessly. Just because something is happening, it doesn't mean everyone who is alive condones it.

You have to be a slavery apologist to justify your beliefs to yourself. We have no such requirements.

Yeah, that called being a hypocrite.

Like "protesting" how veal is raised and eating it twice a week.

Or saying you do not believe is spanking,  but you beat the crap out of your own kids.

You can't say you are against slavery if, EVERY Aspect of your life depends on it.

If you like and will not willingly give up the life you live that is provided by modern slavery, that is the same as you endorsing it despite how you might protest.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/beyondslav...dual-consu

The above website agrees in that being complacent about your current goods and life style.

But the real question you should be asking is what would the current slaves do if they did not have their slave jobs? how would they support themselves and live?

You know nothing about me. Stop projecting.

(July 29, 2016 at 10:45 am)Drich Wrote:

(July 27, 2016 at 12:33 pm)robvalue Wrote: Yeah we know Drich, you're a slavery apologist. And weirdly proud of it. We're not, now matter how much you tell us we are. This has been explained to you endlessly. Just because something is happening, it doesn't mean everyone who is alive condones it.

You have to be a slavery apologist to justify your beliefs to yourself. We have no such requirements.

Yeah, that called being a hypocrite.

Like "protesting" how veal is raised and eating it twice a week.

Or saying you do not believe is spanking,  but you beat the crap out of your own kids.

You can't say you are against slavery if, EVERY Aspect of your life depends on it.

If you like and will not willingly give up the life you live that is provided by modern slavery, that is the same as you endorsing it despite how you might protest.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/beyondslav...dual-consu

The above website agrees in that being complacent about your current goods and life style.

But the real question you should be asking is what would the current slaves do if they did not have their slave jobs? how would they support themselves and live?

Ummm...no. Making excuses for something generally accepted as morally wrong to make it seem like it's NOT really that wrong is completely different from not being an [i]activist[i/] against the thing. I'm not an activist against pedophilia. I don't spend my days with the police trying to hunt down and capture child molesters. But, that doesn't mean that I, as an individual, morally condone child molestation. That's ridiculous.

If you are morally justifying slavery, you're an asshole. If I sit on my ass and don't try to do a damn thing to abolish the world of all existing slavery, maybe I'm an asshole too, but for completely different reasons.

Guys guys guys... Drich is an idiot. Why are you humoring him by responding?

I DON'T know....lol.

That guy...he just makes my:

(July 29, 2016 at 10:45 am)Drich Wrote: Yeah, that called being a hypocrite.

Like "protesting" how veal is raised and eating it twice a week.

Or saying you do not believe is spanking,  but you beat the crap out of your own kids.

You can't say you are against slavery if, EVERY Aspect of your life depends on it.

If you like and will not willingly give up the life you live that is provided by modern slavery, that is the same as you endorsing it despite how you might protest.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/beyondslav...dual-consu

The above website agrees in that being complacent about your current goods and life style.

But the real question you should be asking is what would the current slaves do if they did not have their slave jobs? how would they support themselves and live?

1: Even if you're correct, that still makes you a worse asshole, so you really have no reason to be smug.

2: "You do it too!" is a logical fallacy, not an argument.

3: Complicity in something we're against, where that complicity comes as a result of buying into a complex, multi-tiered system of interconnecting business partnerships over multiple countries, the nature of which is so complex it takes teams of people working for each business to properly keep track of, in which the thing we're supposedly complicit in is actively and consistently hidden from view by the machinations of immense corporate forces pouring sums of money so large many of us will never get close to seeing them in our lifetimes into that endeavor is not hypocrisy. It's a simple acknowledgement that there are limits to what we are capable of keeping track of. It's simply dishonest conflation to pretend that this is the same as active complicity in slavery... which is kind of your stock in trade, so it's hardly surprising. If you didn't have oversimplification of complex geopolitical ideas that you both don't understand and aren't particularly interested in beyond how they can be used to leverage your own sense of smug satisfaction, what would you have?

We've been through this so many times. Drich won't rest until he's dragged everyone down to his level. He can't seem to believe some of us hope and strive for a better world.

He's doing a bang up job of showing how dangerous it is to base your morality on a grim fairy tale though. We should thank him, really.

That Drich thinks he's moral is the biggest joke of them all.

(July 27, 2016 at 12:45 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: This is a red herring.  You're correct; some people hurt other people, and in doing so forfeit their right to live completely free.  How we deal with those kinds of people versus how other societies deal with those kinds of people is an entirely separate discussion, and it's not at all what I'm talking about in my OP.

It's not a red herring if you consider nation states like ISIS. It is true individuals when given the chance would set the world ablaze and watch it burn... but the same is true with nations. take a step back if you can acknoweledge this and apply it to nations like Nazi germany, Or the Islamic STATE.

Not all 'men are crated equal.' Do you really think you can take an entire race of people living in a 'modern' bronze age and fast forward them to the line of thought and thinkng, a philosphy that took literally thousands of years to develop from the time these people are currently living in?

So if the answer is no, (and it is) and these people are hell bent on killing everyone like you, or enslaving you, I want you to honestly take the time and give me 5 no 3 realistic alternatives that is consistent with your every life is precious and everyone deserves to be free mentality, and list out how to deal with these murderous monsters.

Quote:Again, I'm not talking about how the US deals with criminals and terrorism.  I'm talking about the basic human rights that your alleged God either forgot, or chose not to afford to all folks when making out his laws of "right living".  Things that I can't imagine would be disputed by any rational person, including (but certainly not limited to):

But you are only talking about how the US views or see people. God never said all people were equal. He said we all have roles to play and each one is different. The self absorbed are the ones who put value on said roles thus mandating a need for the sense of equality. or the elimination of said roles.

Quote:*Don't own people

That's crap, and if you were honest you could admit to that... Or would you allow you child to go with someone who promised them a trip to disney world? Your authority to deny your child's decision to go with a stranger to 'disney' COMES from a place of ownership even if you do not like that word.

It is ok to own our children even if it is not ok to phrase it that way. So then what other forms of 'ownership' are accepting of minus the phrasing?

If you want to speak on a national level I'd say the government 'owns' those on government assistance. Is that not ok? Vote for this party and we will give you more/we will include you in our giveaways.. Or vote for the other party and they will take away your health care, and send you back to your own country... Do what we say or we will cut your livelihood.. That is ownership, if you roll in government housing, now there is nothing the individual cant be made to do, less he is willing to be clad in chains and raped in prison.

The more the government gives the more freedom they take.

Quote:*Don't kill women and children during warfare

what if they are enemy combatants?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o70G8oZBkHU

What people like you fail to understand is there is the philosophy in which you live, then there is the rest of the world. THE VAST Majority of the rest of the world does not hold to your hippy system of values. Because of this they have to be met on equal terms. If you hide your war efforts behind women and children they become targets. simple as that.

This scene depicted an actual event according to chris kyle in his book. That happened just a few years ago. Meaning women and children are currently being used to fight us. Now imagine an unrefined (no allah to put the brakes on the few times he does) That is what the Jews faced 4000 years ago, but not across an ocean, but just miles down the road. (A more savage version of the people we are currently facing, and a whole heck of a lot closer) So then why would they be commanded to hold to your current standard of douche bag hippy morality when the country you live in today does not?

Quote:*Women are people:  don't force them into marriage, don't trade them as property for goods and services, don't rape them.  If a woman is raped, don't prolong her suffering and trauma by forcing her to marry her rapist.  

Again women like men played a role, and what you failed again to understand in that culture a wife had far more control over the man and the house hold than you seem to give credit to. Telling a man who wanted 'free sex/rape' that he was going to have to marry/buy/pay or be enslaved or sold into slavery to pay for a woman he wanted a few mins of fun with was the ultimate deterrent. nothing like paying with 7 years of your life for something you only got to use once maybe for a few mins.. You kinda missed the whole point of that law.

Quote:*Never kill children as punishment for anything

that just stupid. What if you Really don't want them right now? what if you are planning to be a doctor and only have one more year and then.. but instead you got pregnant.. which would ruin your life plan?!?!? I guess it's ok then huh?? Just not when they threaten a society's way of life.

Quote:The enemies of the Israelite (most of them) were only enemies because the Israelites ambushed them for their land and spoils.  "You have stuff; we want it; we get to have it cuz God likes us better!"  So...it's kind of their own fault they didn't get along with most of the Middle East.  And considering they had a prophet spoon-feeding them all the rules on how to live and behave, they should have had a MUCH easier time living in peace than "us" today.  But again, how countries deal with war and terrorism is another topic.  Maybe you should start a thread on it.

maybe go back a little further in your reading.. The land belonged to Abraham and his son Isaac and g-son Jacob and his families first.

Quote:Let me ask you a couple of questions that are at the heart of the point I'm trying to make here, Drich:

What kind of person would you be today without laws in place that prohibit things like rape, slavery, and killing people for property?  

I would be (like you) the product of my society (minus my God hang ups/unlike you as you have no God.) IF you are not currently standing against society now, that means you have been conditioned/indoctrinated to accept society warts and all. which potentially means you being a lemming can be programmed to accept anything if the training starts when your did..

So then if you were born in 1920's Germany you would be marching jews into ovens if directed to do so. It does not take an evil person to do that, it just takes someone willing to believe they are the 'good guy' while they are doing it. That is the core message of my last big morality thread. Without God being a foundation point of out 'morality' we are subject to society's whims or wishes of society, and again if you do not buck the current system (because their is indeed much evil in it) you would not buck Hitler's Germany if you were brought up under that system of propaganda and indoctrination.

Again not that you would have to be a bad person, you just needed to be 'trained to follow orders' first which makes you a 'good guy.'

Watch the sniper video again.. "good guys" can shoot women and children, even if your hippy douche bag morality says this is never ok to do.

But again without God how do we know what id good? AND if you mind is not blown yet, ask yourself if God IS good and you see Him as evil, then is it God who is really evil? Why? because pop morality/hippy douche bag moral logic says so? God is/was also evil to the real woman and boy Chris Kyle had to shoot to save those marines. Meaning are you currently living a 'moral code' that makes you a 'good guy' like the nazi jew/death chamber gaurds were 'good guys?'

How could you possibly know any better if you were indeed indoctrinated?

Quote:Q 1. If you wanted to have sex with your wife and she didn't happen to be in the mood, would you rape her?  Would you hold her down and force her while she screamed and wept?

wait, that's not how it goes?
Geese how does a guy expect to be married if not for raping the woman you've been stalking, and then as I'm sure you would imagine, if she had to be raped the first time.. (It's not like I get better looking with age.)

Quote:Q 2. I know you have children, but do you have daughters?  If so, would you sell her into a marriage against her will to a strange man neither of you have ever met before that day for...let's say...$20,000 and a new car?  

again it would depend on soceity I like you (because there would be no hang up here with God) would follow societal rules.. Oh, and it depends on the car. I know not every girl will bring a porche or BMW M7, but dude better not show up with a broken down dump truck.

Quote:Q 3. Would you keep a person prisoner on your property for manual labor, and beat the shit of him if he tried to escape?

Again it depends on soceity. if no then no. if yes, I'd probably beat them if grounding/time out did not work first.

Quote:Q 4. Would you murder your neighbor and his family because he has a bigger yard and nicer house than yours, and you want it?

Well here there's the whole "thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house wife or 'back yard.' however I am now and shall ever be willing to vote in someone willing to fight/take land for cheap oil.
oh, and democracy or whatever it is we are selling. (unless the majority are IS Muslims.)

Quote:If there were NO legal or..."godly" repercussions for any of the above; if you KNEW God really wouldn't care or even notice so long as you believed and worshiped properly, would you do them?  Are mortal laws the only thing keeping you from committing such acts against other humans?  

If i were you/no god then I would be a soulless hippy douche bag in this society hypocritically spreading my 'morality' all over the place, then going back on it when ever it suited me.
If I were born in Nazi Germany with no God I'd march jews into ovens. If I were born under the ISIS god I fly planes into buildings

Again, I don't pretend to be able to rise above, nor can I pull myself up by my moral boot straps, because I understand that without God ALL MORALITY COMES FROM SOCIETY AND POP CULTURE!!!

BUT, because I was one of the elect and was born in a place where the Knowledge of God was easily accessible I found Him right where He said he'd be and I follow his precepts first and buck society's morality where ever they cross paths.

(Kinda like what you are trying to illustrate here but in reverse)

Quote:If your answer is "no, I wouldn't do those things to people," then you've got a big, stinky problem to deal with:  You are better than your perfectly "good" God.  

and if I answered honestly and said yes????

The problem with your little test?
It was one of self righteousness. Meaning if you think yourself better than the sum of your parts/up bringing, and everything that has ever told you right from wrong.

I know that without God I like millions of Germans, and Russians, and Chinese, Japanese, and Muslims would ultimately be no more than the sum total of my life experiences raised up in these cultures or even this one. Why? because I like everyone else would have no anchor on what a 'good guy' was, therefore being a 'good guy' only would ever amount to whatever the goals of that society wants for itself. So then I would indeed say yes to all of those things without God so long as soceity would allow it, and so would you even if you'd die before you'd admit it.

It takes a real delusional person to think that by her indoctrination she is free from all indoctrination, never once asking from where her core 'freeing' values came from.

(July 29, 2016 at 12:48 pm)Esquilax Wrote: 1: Even if you're correct, that still makes you a worse asshole, so you really have no reason to be smug.

the smugness comes from years of being called all sorts of stuff and you guys just now starting to get it.

Quote:2: "You do it too!" is a logical fallacy, not an argument.

"I do it too" is the other 1/2 of the argument you guys still don't get. I do it because without it 1/3 of the world starves and dies. THEY NEED These Slave wage jobs. Is it the best thing for the planet? who knows, however it is the only societal model we have that has ever worked. That being the case until we can develop slave/cylon robots, we have to have a slave class, as the world societies all operate on a big pyramid scheme.

Quote:3: Complicity in something we're against, where that complicity comes as a result of buying into a complex, multi-tiered system of interconnecting business partnerships over multiple countries, the nature of which is so complex it takes teams of people working for each business to properly keep track of, in which the thing we're supposedly complicit in is actively and consistently hidden from view by the machinations of immense corporate forces pouring sums of money so large many of us will never get close to seeing them in our lifetimes into that endeavor is not hypocrisy. It's a simple acknowledgement that there are limits to what we are capable of keeping track of. It's simply dishonest conflation to pretend that this is the same as active complicity in slavery... which is kind of your stock in trade, so it's hardly surprising. If you didn't have oversimplification of complex geopolitical ideas that you both don't understand and aren't particularly interested in beyond how they can be used to leverage your own sense of smug satisfaction, what would you have?

Actually it is complicity and hypocrisy... the web site i linked to earlier is just one of dozens that put responsibility of modern slaves onto western society. There's even a test one can take that estimates how many slaves were used in providing your current lifestyle. I somehow use 53 i personally think that number is high, but on the other hand I see it as my money is being used to keep 53 people from starving to death..

Which is the other side of the coin. If ALL slavery ended where then would this revenue/housing come from? Even if burney was elected i don't think raising taxes on the rich nor educating everyone will make a dent in this problem, because if all the slaves are gone and everyone is getting paid a fair wage then so go the rich.