Subject:
|
Re: Here we go again
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 31 Dec 1998 15:59:23 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
BEAKER@POBOXantispam.COM
|
Viewed:
|
280 times
|
| |
|
|
Also sprach Matt Hanson:
: much. I think that is what the real issue is. Some people just aren't
: willing to give up their cozy lifestyle for a better *quality*
: society...
Now we get to the heart of the issue. You want others to change their
lifestyle to conform with your ideas about morality, because you feel it
would make a better society. But you have never made the case that your
society would be of better quality.
I've already shown you one contemporary society that attempts this.
Afganistan is not in my upcoming travel plan, I assure you. There are
others I could point to throughout history, which is filled with the
abuses of theocracies attempting to force people to adhere to a
particular morality.
There are certain laws that have a 'moral' backing. Theft and murder
come to mind. But the reason has less to do with morality than with
selfishness. We give up our right to kill others at random in exchange
for the assurance that we will not be randomly killed. We give up our
right to take the possessions of others in exchange for the assurance
that we can keep our own stuff. If you want to make this case, Matt,
you have to demonstrate in real terms why your particular flavor of
morality is in our best interest, something you have thusfar failed to
do.
You talk about a lack of morality tearing our country apart, but you are
sketchy on the details. How, exactly, would jailing homosexuals for
violation of God's law benefit them? How would it benefit you or me?
If your only answer is that you disapprove of their lifestyle and would
like to see less of it, that answer is insufficient. How would
enforcing prayer in schools make the kids behave better? Can you show a
direct cause-and-effect between prayer and some desirable social
benefit?
Note: I am not saying you are in favor of either of the above examples.
I bring them up only as a guideline for the sort of case I'd like you to
make. I'm asking you to be specific about which elements of Biblical
moraliity you'd like to see enforced, how you think they could be
enforced, and what benefits you can logically associate with doing so.
I think being able to make this case is a reasonable request. You have
said in a previous post that 'there *must* be order' but you never said
*why*, nor explained why the current order, sufficient for many of us,
is lacking.
/ _ _ / _ _ RAM disk is *not* an installation procedure.
()(-(//((-/
============= Jim Baker -- Weather Weasel Extraordinaire ==============
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Here we go again
|
| Beaker wrote: <snip> Yup. Tangential but appropros: "those who would give up a little freedom in exchange for security are doomed to soon have neither" is a paraphrase of a famous quote. For 100 points, who said that? (26 years ago, 31-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Here we go again
|
| (...) <big snip> This group was trying to enforce religious code - I'm not in favor of that, at all... But if that's what they let rule them, so be it. We live in a society where money rules, not people. We are a profane and perverse people. You (...) (26 years ago, 30-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
