Moral Questions ...and No Answers

No one is looking for a 'solution' to anything, other than moral decay!

So you are looking for a solution, to what you percieve as moral decay. You maintain an absolutist position of morality, but morality isn't fixed, it moves, changes and evolves. You percieve any deviation from your absolute moral position to be moral decay...

Those moral conditions no longer exist because morality has been ostracized and shamed into a fucking closet, and is not allowed to see the light of day.

Morality is like energy, is doesn't 'disappear'. It simply evolves. As I mentioned above, it is only because society has moved from the moral code that you consider absolute that brings you to percieve morality as 'gone'...

History is pretty vivid and clear on this, when a society loses its morality, it crumbles and falls every time.

No society has ever lost its morality. Even Stalin operated under a moral code, even though the majority of people wouldn't find that moral code attractive.

Most moral absolutists point to the fall of Rome as an example of a society that 'lost its morality' and collapsed, when the real reasons for the collapse of Rome was the consolidation of political power into a sole 'princips', over extension and economic mismanagement.

You are simply frustrated because morality has moved on, evolved with society, and no longer corresponds to your absolute notion of what morality should be.

Oh yeah, it's real politically correct these days, to throw the religious right overboard, to ridicule and criticize those who promote decent morality, call them names and make fun of their message, when we should be listening to their message and following it.

Ridicule the RR? Are you still sore about the 'god in the shower' thing? You've got to see the comedy in that?

Personally I try to not simply ridicule the religious, rather attack the notions they present. Nothing to do with being PC, that's a scapegoat the right uses as a shield, or as an excuse not to present a counter-argument.

It's simply the fact that religion is no longer relevant, the 'god of the gaps' has eroded into the see, its moral codes are absolutist, contradictory and hopelessly irrelevant and 'god the great comforter' is sickly and weak, battered by the illness of its own inability to give decent answers to the big questions.
 
I'm about half way through Barack Obama's The Audacity of Hope and must admit to being more impressed than I expected. It's far from great literature but it does reveal a mind of some considerable insight.

He'd dispose of this thread quite readily, for example.

The entire American constitutional experiment -- and English Common Law, it's direct ancestor -- hinges on the need to mitigate and diffuse Man's tendency toward moral absolutism.
 
HipLew said:
you dont' really think HE wrote it do you????
Click to expand...

Of course not hip. That would be ridiculous /sarcasm off



The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream (Hardcover)
by Barack Obama (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Audacity-Hope..._bbs_sr_1/102-9796205-8528926?ie=UTF8&s=books


______________________________________________

5 results for: author1. a person who writes a novel, poem, essay, etc.; the composer of a literary work, as distinguished from a compiler, translator, editor, or copyist.
 
So you are looking for a solution, to what you percieve as moral decay. You maintain an absolutist position of morality, but morality isn't fixed, it moves, changes and evolves. You percieve any deviation from your absolute moral position to be moral decay...

Uhm, moral is moral, it can't be anything else. I am an absolutist on air and water, they do exist, and nothing I believe will ever change that fact. Morality is fixed, moral 'right' and 'wrong' is the same today as it was 5,000,000 years ago. Your perception changes, not morality itself.

Morality doesn't evolve, it either thrives and grows, or it decays and crumbles. You've twisted logic to fit your needs, and think that you control morality. This is the first step toward moral decay.

No society has ever lost its morality.

This is just a false statement, devoid of any historic knowledge. The Great Roman Empire, would be the best example of a society which lost morality and crumbled. There have been others as well. When a society loses it's ability of self-control with regard to morality, it's never a good thing.

when the real reasons for the collapse of Rome was the consolidation of political power into a sole 'princips', over extension and economic mismanagement

This is bullshit, and a great example of how you like to support your idiocy with nothing but fallacies you've concocted in your mind, and not with legitimate facts and truths. The political power in Rome resided in the Emperor, and had been the same for centuries, the economic mismanagement was the result of moral decadence and lack of self-control regarding morality. Go study the reign of Nero, and tell me it was anything BUT the decay of morality which destroyed the great empire! The evidence is clear, the results are clear, the only one who isn't clear on it is you, because you refuse to accept facts and truth, and want to concoct excuses to continue destroying morality. This is a common human trait, and the primary reason for the trend we are on, we lack the ability to comprehend our own stupidity and correct our mistakes. It's always easier to find someone else to blame, and continue behaving as we have.

You are simply frustrated because morality has moved on, evolved with society, and no longer corresponds to your absolute notion of what morality should be.

I'm not frustrated a bit, I fully understand the cycle and accept it. We will continue to deny morality and refuse to conform to it, we will continue to let sycophants like yourself, brainwash us into believing everything is fine, until it's too late to change it, and we will continue to spiral down the proverbial toilet with our morals and ethics, until one day, we have no more left, and our entire society and civilization will crumble. I would be frustrated if I knew there was something that I could do to change this, but I fully realize it is the human condition, and beyond my ability to change it.

Personally I try to not simply ridicule the religious, rather attack the notions they present.

No, you ridicule, criticize, attack, berate, belittle, refute, discount, deny, and outright lie and slander, on anything pertaining to spiritual belief of any kind. It is your 'mission' in life, as ascribed in your own self-description beneath your avatar. It's funny that you would take umbrage with this charge, as you seem to otherwise be quite proud of your work. I've never seen you refute ANY point with anything of substance, it's always based on your profound opinion that people have misunderstood the facts and truth, and you have some enlightened wisdom the rest of us just don't have, and can state things with certainty and absolutism, and we are too lowly to question them. This is how you perceive yourself as "winning" debates, and it's void of logic and reason, but whatever. In your mind, you are right, and everyone who disagrees is wrong, and that's all there is to it! Screw the facts, screw the truth, you don't acknowledge those anyway, you've already refuted them with your enlightened pinhead rhetoric and opinion, and there is no need to argue about it.

It's simply the fact that religion is no longer relevant, the 'god of the gaps' has eroded into the see, its moral codes are absolutist, contradictory and hopelessly irrelevant and 'god the great comforter' is sickly and weak, battered by the illness of its own inability to give decent answers to the big questions.

If it were irrelevant, we wouldn't be having a discussion about it, would we? Certainly, there wouldn't be more people of religion on the planet than any time in the history of the world, if religion were irrelevant. Apparently, religion is very relevant to a great number of people, and your transparent attempts to try and refute this with absolutely nothing but empty words, is further evidence of it.

society has moved from the moral code that you consider absolute

How can society move from something that is evolving? Wouldn't morality have evolved along with society, thus negating any reason for society to 'move' from it? I think you reveal a lot in this sentence, and I think it makes my point in a way I could never have done alone. Yes, our society is currently moving away from morality, because morality doesn't evolve or change, and this is nothing more than an excuse to not conform to morality, and continue in denial of what is happening.

The interesting thing is, it's been tried before. You are not the first moron who thought that morality evolved and changed, many men before you have thought the same sort of things, and failed to make societies work. I suppose there will always be folks in denial of the truth, this is part of the human condition, and what makes us all different from God.
 
boy..do I ever love reading the pontifications on morality from a guy who accuses folks of fucking their own children.... not to mention guys who make bets and then don't pay up.

Kinda like Mark Foley lecturing on the evils of pedophilia or Newt Gingrich lecturing on the virtues of marital fidelity.
 
boy..do I ever love reading the pontifications on morality from a guy who accuses folks of fucking their own children.... not to mention guys who make bets and then don't pay up.

And do I ever love reading the constant lies and filthy trash coming out of a washed up pedophile perverted ol fahht from Mehyn. Seems like a guy who threatens to rape peoples daughters at gunpoint and has such sick twisted disease-ridden biker fantasies, would refrain from making such slanderous allegations against me, but apparently he doesn't care to drop the past, and wants to revisit the whole thing over and over.

I am only going to say this one more time, you need to grow up and drop this schoolyard bullshit with me, I am tired of it. You don't intimidate me, you don't scare me, I am not threatened by you, I am not afraid of you, I am not apologizing to you, I don't owe you anything, and you are not getting anything from me. I am about one post away from putting you back on ignore and not acknowledging your existence again, and this time will be the last for you. If you are playing a game, this is checkmate. I have had enough.
 
Dixie said:
boy..do I ever love reading the pontifications on morality from a guy who accuses folks snip ... not to mention guys who make bets and then don't pay up.

snip.....
Click to expand...



from the obamaism thread


Dixie: Either have the balls to admit you flagrantly lied about this, or that your hearing is seriously impaired.

Again, just fastforward to 9:45 on the video at the link I gave you - he pronounced the word presumptuousness perfectly.



http://www.barackobama.com/tv/
 
Hey dixie.... go ahead and put me on ignore.... and put cypress on ignore too..... whether you like it or not, the fact remains that most folks only read your posts to watch you get your ass handed to you - it's great theater...and Cypress and I get to play the role of asskickers.... and you get to play the role of the hapless smarmy gadfly. Now I realize that you might not PREFER to have that sort of "attention" paid to you, but really..... it is about the only attention you are going to get. YOu have pretty much blown your credibility a long time ago.... so if you want any attention at all, you need to realize that it will have to be getting slapped around by two guys who are way smarter than you, or it will be little else. Oh, care4you might stop by once in a while to throw you a bone, and damo, of course, will not want to lose you....but really.... you are a fucking joke... a slanderous bigoted racist welching joke...and everyone knows it.
 
Jarod said:
I love when a divorced guy starts ranting about morality toward the rest of us!
Click to expand...
It would depend entirely on the reason for divorce in order to determine if it was an immoral act in itself. Do we know why Dixie got a divorce. According to the Bible, if you divorce your wife because of infidelity it is a moral act. Otherwise you are still married regardless of the legal status of the marriage and any remairrage afterward, before the death of the spouse in question, would be adultery. However, divorce in and of itself is not a moral or immoral act. It would be the actions either before or afterward that could be considered immoral, not getting a legal document.


Therefore, if you divorce your wife legally for whatever reason and she picks up a new dude you could then "dismiss" her for adultery and remarry and be entirely within that moral code.

If you divorce your wife legally, again for whatever reason other than adultery, then pick up some chick and mess with her and your previous legal wife had not gone out to get her some, you would be committing adultery regardless of the legal status of your marriage. Even if you married the woman.
 
Damocles said:
It would depend entirely on the reason for divorce in order to determine if it was an immoral act in itself. Do we know why Dixie got a divorce. According to the Bible, if you divorce your wife because of infidelity it is a moral act. Otherwise you are still married regardless of the legal status of the marriage and any remairrage afterward, before the death of the spouse in question, would be adultery. However, divorce in and of itself is not a moral or immoral act. It would be the actions either before or afterward that could be considered immoral, not getting a legal document.


Therefore, if you divorce your wife legally for whatever reason and she picks up a new dude you could then "dismiss" her for adultery and remarry and be entirely within that moral code.

If you divorce your wife legally, again for whatever reason other than adultery, then pick up some chick and mess with her and your previous legal wife had not gone out to get her some, you would be committing adultery regardless of the legal status of your marriage. Even if you married the woman.
Click to expand...

That is based on some positions on morality... not mine.

IN my opinon divorce when you have children is only moral if you are confident it is would be better for the children for you to divorce. Truely belive that, not use it as a cop out.

That is to say, if my wife had a one time affair and I was able to keep that information from the kids and I was able to forgive her to the extent that the home was a healthy enviroment, I think it would be immoral to divorce her until the kids were 18.
 
I think we all owe it to our children to do whatever possable to not let our personal problems harm their childhoods!
 
Jarod said:
That is based on some positions on morality... not mine.

IN my opinon divorce when you have children is only moral if you are confident it is would be better for the children for you to divorce. Truely belive that, not use it as a cop out.

That is to say, if my wife had a one time affair and I was able to keep that information from the kids and I was able to forgive her to the extent that the home was a healthy enviroment, I think it would be immoral to divorce her until the kids were 18.
Click to expand...
It is based on the rule of which Dixie uses himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top