The "Cultural Context" Excuse

[Drich]

You get called a bunch of stuff because you're a moral monster.

If Killing unborn babies is moral, but spanking is wrong, or if saying we need slavery in some form or fashion is evil, but hypocritically living a life that benfits from it is ok. Then know I will not shed many tears over the loss of your prized title.

Ah, so you were equivocating between low paying jobs and slavery again; you were being dishonest, not an idiot. It's so hard to tell with you.  

Slaves have ALWAYS been paid in some form or fashion! Even the galdiators of Rome were given a wage.
Modern slavery is no different. What makes a slave a slave is the mandate to work beyond resaonable hours for less than a living wage. to be Forced to work against one's own will in unsafe conditions and/or to be made to sign on one's whole family as being apart of the 'contract.'

So your position is: some websites say so, so I'm automatically bound to agree? Specifically, with your position, which I doubt is one that those self same websites would have?

Seriously?  

Not some web sites sport.. the definition of hypocrisy 'says so.' The web sites I've referenced simply detail and outline the argument in douche bag speak, so you can better understand how it is you and people like you are being hypocritical.

You: Slavery bad M'kay? slavery bad.. But $100 Super HD 75" curved flat screen smart TV, made by slaves in china or India good!

Do you not get that if the people responsible for creating the parts and assembling and shipping that TV were all union paid $40.00 hr people, you would not be able to afford to buy that TV?

Now apply that to absolutely everything else including your basic need items like food.

If the rich cannot afford to pay what you acknowledge to be a fair wage for work received, then they got to be rich by stealing labor and their businesses are untenable.

Hey sport... If the 'rich' were made to pay everyone a living wage/rich wage. there's be no 'rich.' therefore not everyone could be paid (unless it was at a poverty level pay scale) as demanding that the 'rich' pay everyone fairly would bankrupt the world economys.

Part of resolving this complex political and economic situation such that low paid worker production is no longer required is to recognize this fact, stop subsidizing businesses that are so unable to make a profit that the only way they can do so is by robbing their workers of fair compensation, and to force businesses to quit relying on models of operation that maximize profits for the owners by relying on that labor theft.

This would work in a dream world where government who did subsidize these companies were not completely interdependent on these big companies success. Or do you not get that the GDP (what gives a country's currency value) is largely based on the extreme success of these monster companies? Sufficiently reduce a countries GDP and reduce their currency then all your little give away programs cease, and the money that funds them is useless.

Which I guess is the difference between you and I, Drich: you're happy to feed off of a system you acknowledge needs work because then you can pretend that everyone else is just as bad as you are, and so you defend the status quo. I'm at least willing to thoughtfully engage with the problems and propose solutions for them, which I'm sure horrifies you because with your false equivalence stripped away, you're still left with your horrifying beliefs, at the bottom of the moral totem pole.

by "thoughtfully engage" I guess you mean to say you read what ever socialist swill is the most popular and then fantasize how much the better the world would be if only things followed what you believe...

If you go back and take note I did provide the only solution that will work and that is robotics. We are on the cusp of a robotic revolution at least where manufacturing and service is concerned. If say in 20 years robotic are replacing existing slaves, how then/what will the current slave population do for a living wage? "go to school and get a degree?" like China and India where everyone has a degree and it means nothing? What does your socialist feel good doctrine say about that? or has it not "thoughtfully engaged" that far into the future?

Here is a point of reality: Taking away slavery is a far bigger problem than having it. It is a problem that can not wait 10 years to find an answer if all slavery were be legitimately ended tomorrow. World economies would topple and billions would die.

If we ever manage to build a utopia, my moral principles will still hold up, and yours will still be disgusting. That's the difference.

I guess it really depends on who the 'we' are that builds the utopia.

Sorry for the late reply it has been a very busy week

[Faith No More]

At some point you'll come to the realization that YOU believe the universe either appeared out of nothing or has always existed; either way, which belief is crazier? Giants, or a self existing universe?

Asks the guy that believes in a "self-existing" man in the sky...

I actually don't claim to know how the universe began, because I've actually read science books and know that the universe's origins are difficult for us to even conceptualize, let alone understand.  But yes, I find the universe having always existed much easier to believe in than a magic man in the sky drowning nearly everything on earth because there were giants running around.

By creating a creature able to act of it's own free will, how is that so hard to understand?

Because even if we have free will(which you can't prove), god would have known exactly how everything was going to turn out.  What you're saying is god had certain intentions, could see that those intentions would not come to fruition yet decided to go ahead with his creation anyway, because free will.  Then he blames t he whole mess on his creation despite the fact that he knew it was going to turn to shit before he created anyone and could have easily created a perfect world that didn't turn to shit, because apparently, this infinitely wise being values the ability to make a choice over little Suzie getting raped and murdered or little Timmy dying of cancer. If god didn't intend it to be this way, why did he go ahead with a plan that he knew was going to end up in a state he didn't intend?

What's hard to understand is that someone could be so gullible as to believe this nonsense.

[Huggy Bear]

Yeah, none of that tells us that the Serpent fucked Eve.  You'll need to actually throw down the words.

Also, citing yourself as a source for your own claims is laughably amateurish, entirely unconvincing, and causes me to fight my lesser nature, because after so doing you only deserve mockery, and lord knows that's a talent of mine.

*emphasis mine*
Here's what you stated a few pages back.

I sure do wish you'd make up your mind. Also, it'd be nice if you quit shitposting Bible quotes and speak your own thoughts ... if you have any that haven't been programmed into you. You should be able to formulate your own thoughts in your own words to continue this discussion.

*emphasis mine*

So which is it thump? Do you want me to post the scriptures or not?

Do you really want to wander into the shooting range here?

Put it this way, I have far more ammunition than you do, I've been more than cordial with you given our past history. If you want to try me (which you will), go ahead, but know that whatever happens you brought upon yourself.

Furthermore this should end up being a teachable moment to those confused about why foreknowledge has no bearing on free will.

I'd suggest you think more and post less ... but I don't know that you're capable of either.

That the best you got?

[Huggy Bear]

Provide the book, chapter and verse.

Numbers 5:11-31

What part is supposedly speaking of abortion? You know you can actually post the relevant scripture...

[Nihilist Virus]

Numbers 5:11-31

Thanks, NV.  Gonna quote this just in case Huggy missed it, since he hasn't addressed it yet.  Ya know, since he's so busy knocking all those other balls out of the park, lol.

You can't expect a response. How can he talk with his foot in his mouth?

[Huggy Bear]

What the actual fuck? Eve has sex win the serpent?

Erm, no. It doesn't say that. It doesn't even imply it. This is fan fic.

You sure about that?

[Edwardo Piet]

Huggy, you're so silly

[Nihilist Virus]

So since Huggles won't respond despite issuing a challenge, we can all assume that he's fine with abortion now.

[Cyberman]

You can't expect a response.  How can he talk with his foot in his mouth?

That's not his mouth. Nor his foot.

I rarely bother with scripture spam, myself. To borrow from Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Dead, "half of what it says means something else; and the other half doesn't mean anything at all!"

[Edwardo Piet]

Let me guess let me guess..... it's that he can't talk with his armpit up his nose right?

Ohhhhh head up ass!