Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 11:46 am
One wonders whether Drich is also against government aid for unwed mothers, sex education, and birth control, especially the kind covered by health insurance.
I mean, he's already admitted that if these "billions" of abortions had happened a thousand years ago he wouldn't care about them, so he can't put that much importance on these poor, poor children...
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 11:48 am
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 11:58 am by Drich.)
(December 11, 2013 at 11:40 am)Esquilax Wrote: Looks like somebody has never heard of dreaming! So you believe your conscious during the REM cycle?
Quote:Oh wait, you were just being obtuse and dishonest by pretending not to know the difference between a clump of cells and a sleeping person, weren't you? I forgot whose post I was reading for a second there.
Your speaking beyond the parameters of the discussion. The only qualifier the noob put in his arguement was a need for consciousness. Otherwise a woman's rights superceed the rights of the unconscious.
(December 11, 2013 at 11:46 am)Esquilax Wrote: One wonders whether Drich is also against government aid for unwed mothers, sex education, and birth control, especially the kind covered by health insurance. I do not care what a person's health care covers, so long as I am not asked to pay for it. The moment I am asked to pay for something I should have some say on how the money is spent.
Quote:I mean, he's already admitted that if these "billions" of abortions had happened a thousand years ago he wouldn't care about them, so he can't put that much importance on these poor, poor children...
Do you not see the malevolent hyprocrisy it takes to make a statement like this? 1.3 billion babies have been murdered with in your life time, and millions more this year and every year from now till people like you decide to wake up, and honestly look at what your doing putting the propaganda aside.
How can you or anyone else feign concern with a straight face over something that happened 4000 years ago, when you are not willing to something about this very same act occouring with in your life time?
Doing something to stop the killing now, puts you in a position to condemn the acts that happened 4000 years ago. Ignoring what happens now makes you a foolish hypocrite when you pretend to care what happened durning a flood you do not even believe happened.
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 11:59 am
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 12:04 pm by Esquilax.)
(December 11, 2013 at 11:48 am)Drich Wrote: So you believe your conscious during the REM cycle?
No, but your mind is still functioning, and your subconscious is active, two things that a pre-life clump of cells does not have.
Quote:Your speaking beyond the parameters of the discussion. The only qualifier the noob put in his arguement was a need for consciousness. Otherwise a woman's rights superceed the rights of the unconscious.
Ahh, so you're just being unpleasantly literal in the hopes of staving off being incorrect for a few more posts while other users correct misunderstandings that you're purposely committing in some form of argument blockade. No less dishonest, in the end.
Quote:I do not care what a person's health care covers, so long as I am not asked to pay for it. The moment I am asked to pay for something I should have some say on how the money is spent.
That's not how taxes work, though. How like a christian to demand special exemptions whenever it suits them, though. What disgusting privilege.
Quote:Do you not see the malevolent hyprocrisy it takes to make a statement like this? 1.3 billion babies have been murdered with in your life time, and millions more this year and every year from now till people like you decide to wake up, and honestly look at what your doing putting the propaganda aside.
How can you or anyone else feign concern with a straight face over something that happened 4000 years ago, when you are not willing to something about this very same act occouring with in your life time?
Because, no matter how much emotive language you throw into the mix, as though appeals to emotion mean anything, I don't think fetuses are alive, nor do I think you get to define them as such through fiat declaration. Moreover, I don't think the stories in the bible are true either, just indicative of the cognitive dissonance one such as you must indulge in, sacrificing any hope at a consistent moral framework in order to burble hysterically about abortions, despite worshiping a god that's like the biggest abortionist on the planet, according to your theology.
Quote:Doing something to stop the killing now, puts you in a position to condemn the acts that happened 4000 years ago. Ignoring what happens now makes you a foolish hypocrite when you pretend to care what happened durning a flood you do not even believe happened.
I could just refuse your ridiculous framing of a bunch of cells as life, and avoid your false dichotomy entirely. Oh look! I'm already doing that!
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 1322
Threads: 70
Joined: November 18, 2013
Reputation:
16
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 12:08 pm
(December 11, 2013 at 11:48 am)Drich Wrote: I do not care what a person's health care covers, so long as I am not asked to pay for it. The moment I am asked to pay for something I should have some say on how the money is spent. So the women should be coerced into having children, then left to their own devices to raise the child. If you really gave a shit about the children you would want them to be raised in a economically stable home. Or do they stop mattering after they are born?
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 12:29 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 12:30 pm by Drich.)
(December 11, 2013 at 11:59 am)Esquilax Wrote: No, but your mind is still functioning, and your subconscious is active, two things that a pre-life clump of cells does not have. If left to develop would it? Your "lump of goo" is still human, it's just in a earily stage of development.
Quote:Your speaking beyond the parameters of the discussion. The only qualifier the noob put in his arguement was a need for consciousness. Otherwise a woman's rights superceed the rights of the unconscious.
Quote:Ahh, so you're just being unpleasantly literal in the hopes of staving off being incorrect for a few more posts while other users correct misunderstandings that you're purposely committing in some form of argument blockade. No less dishonest, in the end.
There is nothing dishonest in what i have observed. I simply refused to look at the situation through the rose colored glasses i was being offered..
What does it say about an arguement that will not hold up to any level of scrutiny? It says it is an invalid arguement.
Quote:That's not how taxes work, though. How like a christian to demand special exemptions whenever it suits them, though. What disgusting privilege.
Actually it is in the US. If we do not like how our taxes are spent we ELECT new leaders.
Quote:Because, no matter how much emotive language you throw into the mix, as though appeals to emotion mean anything, I don't think fetuses are alive,
Because you unquestionably believe the propaganda.
Quote: nor do I think you get to define them as such through fiat declaration.
Your right nothing I can say will do this, but in page 1or 2 I posted a video of a sonigram of a baby screaming and reacting to pain while being aborted, This video and this baby does indeed establish the viablity or rather a fetus is indeed alive.
Quote:Moreover, I don't think the stories in the bible are true either, just indicative of the cognitive dissonance one such as you must indulge in, sacrificing any hope at a consistent moral framework in order to burble hysterically about abortions, despite worshiping a god that's like the biggest abortionist on the planet, according to your theology.
how so?
What is my theory?
Is 'my theory' based on the same scrutiny you lambasted me for in the start of this post? Are you 'being unpleasantly literal in the hopes of staving off being incorrect for a few more posts while other users correct misunderstandings that you're purposely committing in some form of argument blockade?'
Quote:Doing something to stop the killing now, puts you in a position to condemn the acts that happened 4000 years ago. Ignoring what happens now makes you a foolish hypocrite when you pretend to care what happened durning a flood you do not even believe happened.
Quote:I could just refuse your ridiculous framing of a bunch of cells as life, and avoid your false dichotomy entirely. Oh look! I'm already doing that!
with what wishful thinking? Your word?
(December 11, 2013 at 12:08 pm)MarxRaptor Wrote: (December 11, 2013 at 11:48 am)Drich Wrote: I do not care what a person's health care covers, so long as I am not asked to pay for it. The moment I am asked to pay for something I should have some say on how the money is spent. So the women should be coerced into having children, then left to their own devices to raise the child. If you really gave a shit about the children you would want them to be raised in a economically stable home. Or do they stop mattering after they are born?
Do you not have adoption in your country? In the US we are so appearently in need of babies to adopt we are importing them.
Posts: 7175
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 12:39 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 12:40 pm by Tonus.)
(December 11, 2013 at 11:11 am)Drich Wrote: (December 11, 2013 at 10:52 am)Tonus Wrote: But it is the same god, isn't it? They are his actions? And the reason for those actions?
Acts in of themselves are meaningless, it is why we do what we do that determines the 'moral value' of an action.
Which is why i keep point to the perservation of a life style as the primary reason for abortion. So intent can make an action moral or immoral?
Quote:That would make him god, once removed.
Quote:what are you talking about here?
You are comparing god (who kills people directly or through agents acting on his specific orders) with someone who expresses approval of the killing done by others. Thus, those people aren't directly comparable to god, they are comparable to the people who approve of god's actions.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 12:49 pm
(December 11, 2013 at 12:29 pm)Drich Wrote: If left to develop would it? Your "lump of goo" is still human, it's just in a earily stage of development.
So now we're just giving potential the complete run of the place? We're gonna let toddlers drive because eventually they're going to be old enough to do it right? Or are we smart enough to recognize that what something might become in the future doesn't shouldn't assert any pull on how we treat it now?
Quote:There is nothing dishonest in what i have observed. I simply refused to look at the situation through the rose colored glasses i was being offered..
That would mean taking off the blinders, and we know how you love the blinders!
Quote:What does it say about an arguement that will not hold up to any level of scrutiny? It says it is an invalid arguement.
It might also say that the person attempting to argue back has decided to literally interpret every word in order to obfuscate what the argument actually is, rather than discuss the intent behind it. Happily, that little dodge will only last you a post, at most: would you put the rights of something without any semblance of a functioning mind above a woman's rights?
There, now you've been asked what the argument actually was, in a way that won't let you tapdance around it. Happy?
Quote:Actually it is in the US. If we do not like how our taxes are spent we ELECT new leaders.
That's what happened; your side lost.
But the other interesting point, as the Raptor pointed out, is yet more of your amazing cognitive dissonance, where you care so much about abortions that you're unwilling to pay into any scheme that demonstrably lowers the rate of them, nor any scheme to care for the children your ban on abortions would produce, all the while still bawling about how precious you think those little lives are. Prime christian hypocrisy.
Quote:Because you unquestionably believe the propaganda.
Ah yes, the other christian deflectionary tactic: "If you don't agree with me, it's because there's something wrong with you as a person." Not gonna fly.
Quote: Your right nothing I can say will do this, but in page 1or 2 I posted a video of a sonigram of a baby screaming and reacting to pain while being aborted, This video and this baby does indeed establish the viablity or rather a fetus is indeed alive.
I'll give you a hint: I'm opposed to late term abortions too. Much better to get it done early... which is something your ilk is desperate to stigmatize anyway.
Quote:how so?
What is my theory?
Is 'my theory' based on the same scrutiny you lambasted me for in the start of this post? Are you 'being unpleasantly literal in the hopes of staving off being incorrect for a few more posts while other users correct misunderstandings that you're purposely committing in some form of argument blockade?'
It's very simple: do you worship god? Silly question, right? The god of the bible, the same one who, in the old testament, put many children to death, including ones in the womb, that you still consider to be righteous, for some reason. And I know, new covenant, Jesus and all that, but if you're really willing to forget all of that because the guy said "I changed my mind," and as you already admitted, you don't care about those children because they died a long time ago, then where, exactly, do you have a leg to stand on bitching about child murder now, even if I were to grant that that's what abortion is?
Quote:with what wishful thinking? Your word?
Science, observation, and actual thought about my position. And a recognition that, just because you want to ignore my position and insistently try to force your definition of abortion on me and make me argue from that instead of what I think, I'm not obligated to do so.
This is an argument. It's your job to convince me that that little clump of cells is alive enough to call abortion murder, not to just say that it is as though I'm honor bound to just take your word for it.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Posts: 30
Threads: 0
Joined: November 7, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 1:10 pm
(December 10, 2013 at 4:17 pm)Drich Wrote: without a common understanding of both view point nothing will be accomplished. i did not say you had to agree, only that you completely understand what you are attempting to intellegently discuss. Appearently in your personal version of a intellegent discussion knoweledge of the topic is frown upon.
This isn't really a response... just a veiled insult.
Quote:How did you come to this conclusion?
Because there is no evidence. Please... present it if you have such. We've all been waiting for thousands of years.
Quote:This is exactly why i was looking for the defination of God's Righteousness/Morality from you.
I cannot define something that doesn't exist. I cannot tell you what the easter bunny is thinking either. Or what unicorns taste like.
Quote:You still don't seem to understand the basic division between Man's morality and God's righteousness otherwise you would not have lead with this arguement.
Actually I do. Man's morality depends widely on the specific culture. There are very few universal morals. I think murder in cold blood is probably frowned upon in all cultures. Going back as far as Mesopotamian culture we find evidence that man has had laws about murder. However, what makes it murder, just, or unjust varies. If someone raped my daughter and then gave me 30 pieces of silver in attempt to buy her... I'd kill them. And in our culture there would be a strong case for my defense as a father emotionally disturbed by his child's assault. In Archaic Jew land I would have been in the wrong as the rapist did what was right to make up for the rape. And I'd probably be stoned to death for going against God's law.
So morality varies by culture. GOD... at this point... is an invention of man. No such being has ever been proven to exist. So any attributes of this character are simply a work of fiction and have no bearing on real world moral considerations.
Quote:No. God's righteousness is not based on what one does.
It isn't based on anything. It's fiction.
Quote:Meaning all acts are essentually netural. There are no inhearently good acts or bad acts.. It all has to do with why a person does what He does, not the act itself.
Not so. Is it ok to have sex with a child if the child goes willingly? Our culture says no.
Quote:Even Now at the age of 13 Jews consider Childhood to be over.
Talk to some American Jews. They honor the tradition but no Jewish mother is sending her 13 year old boy out in the wilderness.
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 1:13 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 1:39 pm by Drich.)
(December 11, 2013 at 12:39 pm)Tonus Wrote: (December 11, 2013 at 11:11 am)Drich Wrote: And the reason for those actions?
Acts in of themselves are meaningless, it is why we do what we do that determines the 'moral value' of an action.
Which is why i keep point to the perservation of a life style as the primary reason for abortion. So intent can make an action moral or immoral? Yes
Quote:That would make him god, once removed.
Quote:what are you talking about here?
You are comparing god (who kills people directly or through agents acting on his specific orders) with someone who expresses approval of the killing done by others. Thus, those people aren't directly comparable to god, they are comparable to the people who approve of god's actions.
[/quote]
:thumbsup:
(December 11, 2013 at 1:10 pm)I am God Wrote: This isn't really a response... just a veiled insult. there was no veil. Just an observation that points to a negitive attribute in the way you seem to think.
Quote:How did you come to this conclusion?
Quote:Because there is no evidence. Please...
God provides evendicence to all of those who A/S/K as we have been instructed.
Quote:present it if you have such.
I can show you where to look if you wish, but your receiving evidence is based on your ablity and willingness to follow instructions.
Quote:We've all been waiting for thousands of years.
You and people like you have been waiting. Me and people Like me have found what God offers.
Quote:This is exactly why i was looking for the defination of God's Righteousness/Morality from you.
Quote:I cannot define something that doesn't exist. I cannot tell you what the easter bunny is thinking either. Or what unicorns taste like.
Then how, oh how is it possiable for you to tell me what it isn't? How can you say anything for or against it? Yet isn't that what your efforts here are based on?
Quote:You still don't seem to understand the basic division between Man's morality and God's righteousness otherwise you would not have lead with this arguement.
Quote:Actually I do. Man's morality depends widely on the specific culture. There are very few universal morals. I think murder in cold blood is probably frowned upon in all cultures. Going back as far as Mesopotamian culture we find evidence that man has had laws about murder. However, what makes it murder, just, or unjust varies. If someone raped my daughter and then gave me 30 pieces of silver in attempt to buy her... I'd kill them. And in our culture there would be a strong case for my defense as a father emotionally disturbed by his child's assault. In Archaic Jew land I would have been in the wrong as the rapist did what was right to make up for the rape. And I'd probably be stoned to death for going against God's law.
So morality varies by culture. GOD... at this point... is an invention of man. No such being has ever been proven to exist. So any attributes of this character are simply a work of fiction and have no bearing on real world moral considerations.
Then why engage in this discussion if you understand that man's morality is an ever changing standard based on soceity and the times we live in?
Quote:It isn't based on anything. It's fiction.
Even if it were it is still based on the absolutes defined or provided by said fiction. If we were having a conversation about Thor verses the Hulk both are works of marvel fiction and as such if we were to remain true to the discussion we would have to observe the rules set fourth by the cannon in said fiction.
The discussion I am having here is not to discern the legitmacy of one 'morality' over another. I have said over and over again that man's morality is not a standard quipt to be used to judge God's morality. Take it how you like (Meaning this is your chance to dismiss what you do not know how to argue.) Because our moral standards are based on the idea that acts themselves have a right and wrong value. this is not the case with God's righteousness. God's righteousness is based on attonement leaving why you do what you do the deciding factor on what is and is not judged righteous.
Quote:Not so. Is it ok to have sex with a child if the child goes willingly? Our culture says no.
Our culture defines a child as anyone under the age of 18. If two 13 to17 years olds get married and have sex willingly there is nothing wrong with that despite what your culture says.
Quote:Talk to some American Jews. They honor the tradition but no Jewish mother is sending her 13 year old boy out in the wilderness.
I guess you are just not jewie enough, and just missed out. however that does not mean all jewish boys/men must follow your path.
http://www.wildernesstorah.org/programs/...f-passage/
Posts: 30
Threads: 0
Joined: November 7, 2013
Reputation:
2
RE: Man's morality
December 11, 2013 at 2:53 pm
(December 11, 2013 at 1:13 pm)Drich Wrote: God provides evendicence to all of those who A/S/K as we have been instructed.
No he doesn't. PEOPLE create a delusion they feel comfortable in. I was a devout Christian for the first 2/3rds of my life. It is why I have a wealth of knowledge of the bible. It is also the reason I came out the other side of my biblical studies an Atheist. I A/S/Ked a few too many questions and found it all to be just a lie with little substance.
And please spare me the No True Scotsman garbage.
Quote:I can show you where to look if you wish, but your receiving evidence is based on your ablity and willingness to follow instructions.
Nice dodge. So I'm gonna go ahead and assume you have no evidence other than your preferred delusion.
Quote:You and people like you have been waiting. Me and people Like me have found what God offers.
I had it too... then realized it's just smoke and mirrors force fed to me by my family and peers. It's the same reason most Christian children believe in Santa. Because it's jammed down their throats from birth and everyone around them tells them it's true.
Quote:Then how, oh how is it possiable for you to tell me what it isn't?
That's exactly how I can tell you what it ISN'T... it ISN'T reality. It's fiction.
Quote:You still don't seem to understand the basic division between Man's morality and God's righteousness otherwise you would not have lead with this arguement.
Quote:Then why engage in this discussion if you understand that man's morality is an ever changing standard based on soceity and the times we live in?
To point out that God is an irrelevant aspect to any discussion about morality or righteousness as he/she/it/they are a work of fiction. And like any other work of fiction only reflect the creator's ideas on morality and righteousness.
Quote:Even if it were it is still based on the absolutes defined or provided by said fiction. If we were having a conversation about Thor verses the Hulk both are works of marvel fiction and as such if we were to remain true to the discussion we would have to observe the rules set fourth by the cannon in said fiction.
And would only be a reflection of the writer's ideas on morality or righteousness. That is the limit of its scope and meaning. So if we are to take the bible... it's bronze age fiction and is only relevant to the culture that created it. For us in the year 2013 in America... it's meaningless for any purpose other than to study and bygone and archaic culture.
In fact Thor and the Hulk would be a more meaningful text on morality and righteousness as they are more closely linked with our own culture. The creators of these fictions are products of our culture.
Quote:I have said over and over again that man's morality is not a standard quipt to be used to judge God's morality.
Of course it is. God is a creation of man. His "righteousness" is a direct reflection of the ideas of his creators.
Quote:Because our moral standards are based on the idea that acts themselves have a right and wrong value.
No they don't. Our acts are neutral. Our culture judges whether they are good or bad. If I kill than man that hurt my little girl... most would think me morally just. If I kill the same man for no reason at all... I'm a murderer. The ACT was the same. The reason is moral or not. And God, Thor, or Hulks fictional stance on the issue has nothing to do with reality other than what their creators think about the subject.
Quote:this is not the case with God's righteousness. God's righteousness is based on attonement leaving why you do what you do the deciding factor on what is and is not judged righteous.
God's righteousness is based in fiction and only reflects the views of his creators.
Quote:Our culture defines a child as anyone under the age of 18. If two 13 to17 years olds get married and have sex willingly there is nothing wrong with that despite what your culture says.
And that is all that matters in reality. If we were on Mars... the rules might be different. But we aren't.
Quote:I guess you are just not jewie enough, and just missed out. however that does not mean all jewish boys/men must follow your path.
http://www.wildernesstorah.org/programs/...f-passage/
LOL, we have a different view of the wilderness. I wasn't talking about a jewish summer camp for Mitzvah prep.
|