I our world that is ok with labels and who is right and who is wrong ..we have to search to find what brings us together;;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us-TV...&feature=email
Printable View
I our world that is ok with labels and who is right and who is wrong ..we have to search to find what brings us together;;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us-TV...&feature=email
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xjPO...eature=channel
my friends it would be so much easier if we found ways to come together...have agreat weekend
Better by far is to stick to convictions and moral absolutes, not to just "unite" for the sake of uniting.
:)moral absolutism...is anything that is ism really that good...uniting for repect and peace seems to me the best reason to "get togther"... the divisions of absilutism is ultimately theloss of individual...for how canwe claim to love purselves if we can't extend humanity to all
Gibran? What is up? I can't make heads or tails of that post.
Absolutes are, well....absolute. Divisions are incongruent with the concept of absolutes.
Did I make any claim to having a religious basis in asserting the value of these moral absolutes?
Moral absolutes are part and parcel of the Ayn Rand cult. actually, the sense of absolute rightness that permeates Bats' posts, including the absurd notion of moral absolutism, is a classic hallmark of cultic behavior/brainwashingQuote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
Bats, define your "moral absolutes." If there is anyone here who feels that your "absolutes" aren't absolutes or aren't themselves moral, it disproves you. do you have the guts to do so?
There are no universal moral absolutes. There are moral authorities: religion, government, society, culture, tribe, etc. These authorities establish the moral code by which adherents or members are to live. It is the absence of universal moral absolutes, and the presence of diverse [[and therefore often conflicting) moral authorities that cause some [[and certainly not all) of the divisions among men. And so it shall be until the end of time.
Fortunately, these differences can be set aside, however briefly, to allow men to come together for a common purpose. But forget about it being permanent as long as there are these very complex social creatures on the planet called humans.
Here is a good example of an absolute...slavery, defined as taking by force and without consent, that which is the just and rightful property of an individual derived from his/her labor [[intellectual and otherwise), is wrong.
With that definition, why limit it to slavery? With slight tweaking, you've got the broader category of theft.
...Only as long as it is PRIVATIZED and the government, only protects the contracts [[or some other nonsense).Quote:
Originally Posted by Speramus Meliora
Bats, you and I and anyone else who has ever read Rands crap knows that is not what the randian moral absolutism is about. and, frankly, the bible sanctions slavery and it has been the norm throughout history. the fact that you endorse wage slavery -- where in order to earn a minimal living, the worker must put up with whatever an employer wishes to impose or lose his job, whether it is dangerous work conditions, extremely long hours, etc., simply because to your mind capital always trumps people, also shows the falsehood of your statementQuote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
ccbatson's definition of slavery is not even accurate. It addresses the taking of a person's property but does not address the limitations on the freedom or liberty of the person. With that definition, not only could you include theft, but taxes as well.
Anyway, there are some cultures where people are selling their daughters into slavery. They might call it an arranged marriage, but it is slavery nonetheless. No moral universal absolutes exist for slavery. Try again.
Even though I have very strong beliefs, I do recognize that morality is subjective.
SM, Indentured servitude is still legal in at least one case. Military enlistment contracts are a legal form of indentured servitude. The enlistee agrees to give up certain civilian rights for the duration of the contract. The government promises the enlistee various benefits.
Good point about how military members have the option of going to jail if the military doesn't want to break their enlistment contracts. Funny!Quote:
Originally Posted by Speramus Meliora
Yes, there are some rights that soldiers give up like quiting and getting another job and making public statement about what a &*%*! the captain or president is. Or maybe the way you look at it, soldiers can call their superiors names although they might wind up in the brig for awhile. I was thinking about the indentured servant contracts that early American settlers entered into. Since they couldn't afford passage, they might agree to work for a number of years to pay off their passage. Some wound up with evil bosses but most moved on to a new life after the passage was paid off. This has a lot of similarities to the military enlistment contract that offers college money, pensions, and so forth in exchange for a number of years of service. Conditions, particiapation, and obligations vary among indentured servant contracts.
The rates of voluntary military personnel reneging is very very low.