|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
02-22-2014, 08:50 PM
|
|
Ready
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,167
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by icenine
I know this is contrary to all that Political Chat and AK stand for but I think we need to vote someone off the island
|
I'd need more evidence of bad faith and bad intent than I've seen from any current posters. But there are cases where this recourse should be available. If the posting behavior is extremely anti-social, or otherwise purposefully and effectively destructive of the ability of the forum to function as a place of free conversation, this option becomes a necessity.
|
02-22-2014, 08:51 PM
|
|
Admin
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain in California
Posts: 37,222
|
|
__________________
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
- Mr. Underhill
|
02-22-2014, 08:59 PM
|
|
Jigsawed
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,580
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke
If that's the only manner in which to survive in their environment, it's not immoral.
It's something, but not that.
|
Geez! You have no compass?
Last edited by Dondilion; 02-22-2014 at 09:02 PM.
|
02-22-2014, 09:07 PM
|
|
Sir Lord Vader of Cheam
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Lewiston, ID
Posts: 5,065
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dondilion
Geez! You have no compass?
|
A compass isn't universal, it's field and environment based.
Most blatant example -- meaning zero personal or specific disrespect -- is if you are posing imminent threat to my children and I have no alternative but to use deadly force in their defense.
1. You will die.
2. Your death is completely justified.
3. It's not immoral.
Morality is based in the options at hand.
__________________
"American" means calling everyone who disagrees with you a traitor?
|
02-22-2014, 09:23 PM
|
|
Ready
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,167
|
|
Morality is based on sentiment regarding what's right and what's wrong.
Most normal people across most cultures agree it's wrong to go around killing other people's children, and that deadly force can be used to stop that if necessary.
The really troublesome gap in the broad instinctive sentiments of right and wrong is that the sentiments, traditionally, only apply to 'our people.' Those 'others' are fair game for whatever you can get away with.
Some people, however, have more ability to include a wider set of people in the sphere of moral responsibility. They speak of human rights, which boil down to believing you should treat more and more people as you feel willing and obliged to treat family and neighbors. I hope this is evolution in action.
|
02-22-2014, 09:29 PM
|
|
Jigsawed
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,580
|
|
Kids shooting kids - a general statement.
If that is the only manner - a restricted statement.
And from that a bold statement on immorality/morality.
More like a tricky lawyer. No wonder the kids have no compunction.
Last edited by Dondilion; 02-23-2014 at 09:50 AM.
|
02-22-2014, 09:39 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,454
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
Of course you can. There are many laws laws that restrict the rights of one group or individual in favor of the rights of others. Democracy is a balancing act between these rights.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...reedom/283331/
Pew's research suggests that the "moderate" restrictions on religion in the U.S. aren't primarily abridgments of freedom; they're part of the complex puzzle of governing a pluralistic political community. The right to free exercise of religion may seem simple in principle, but in practice, it involves figuring out how one group's rights intersect with another's. On balance, that may mean more freedom, not less, is afforded to all.
For example, Fundamentalist Mormons do not have a right to multiple wives, even if their religion says they do. Also, if religious groups receive federal funding or tax-exempt status, both proselytizing and political activity are limited.
|
Thats true, and nobody thought of Gay rights in a Judeo Christian society to include their human rights. They would have been hung for blasphemy.
|
02-23-2014, 07:26 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,908
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4-2-7
Thats true, and nobody thought of Gay rights in a Judeo Christian society to include their human rights. They would have been hung for blasphemy.
|
They weren't too fond of blacks having their freedom or women voting either. Things change, -5.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
02-23-2014, 08:02 AM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
They weren't too fond of blacks having their freedom or women voting either. Things change, -5.
|
And, contrary to popular belief, not every change is for the worse. In fact most are for the better. Especially when the change is for the common good.
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
02-23-2014, 09:59 AM
|
|
Jigsawed
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,580
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by donquixote99
Most normal people across most cultures agree it's wrong to go around killing other people's children,
|
Hurray!
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 AM.
|