Author Topic: State of the Nation  (Read 12601 times)

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #270 on: February 14, 2020, 04:08:47 AM »
Paul,
If you feel that man does not make your morality, and that only God makes your morality, then why does it upset you that Obama gave a medal to Harvey Milk?  Did God say that it is immoral to have consensual sex with 16 yr olds?

If God didn't make 16 an immoral age of consent, why do you find it upsetting?  Where else (if not God) could you be getting these morals from other than from our evolutionary instinct of not upsetting society's norms?
Eric

Are you really trying to justify pedophilia?  :o

I think it's quite clear that pedophilia is immoral. Remember Eric...he had them as young as 15.


Is Vatican City immoral then?  The age of consent for a woman in Vatican City is 14!!!!  Where do you get your morality from if not from God?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe

15 was the age of consent at the time in many US states, but it was 18 in California then and still is today.

I don't get my morality from God, but I think 16 is too young for me.  Maybe you should teach morality in Vatican City where they apparently don't have it?  I believe I get my morality from contemporary society, not from God.


As Paul said:

"To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." 1 Corinthians 7:8-9

And the baker should only bake his bread with cowchips!!!

Today contraception, tubal ligation, vasectomy, antibiotics, abortion, and women with careers all render the Bible's viewpoints on marriage on equal terms with Ezekiel and his cowchip-fired bread.

There are a lot of immoral people in Vatican City (even atheists agree with that!). I think a prudent way to look at age of consent is by the age of the person they're with. For instance 15 and 17 isn't as bad as 15 and 35. I'm quite sure you would rather your kids be going out with someone close to their age instead of 20 years apart (though I might be wrong). Older people should not be taking advantage of kids. I don't think kids should be sexually active at any age but I think it's especially wrong when it's with someone significantly older.

The bread verse is from the Old Testament. Christians follow the New Testament.

You may very well get your morality from contemporary society but then why not admit that it's just luck? If the south had won the Civil War you would probably be going on and on about how it was moral to discriminate because the white man is the superior race (and I would still be single!).

Most non-Catholic Christians are okay with birth control in some form. Most Christians (Catholic or otherwise) are not okay with abortion (I think it should be classified as a human rights violation personally).

Why do you think that women working away from home is against the Bible? The only verses I'm familiar with are from Titus and Timothy (both whose authorship is disputed - though traditionally attributed to Paul). My wife works in medicine is and one of the hardest working people I know.

So, Eric, personally why do you not believe in God?
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 06:03:24 AM by stahleyp »
Paul


stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #271 on: February 14, 2020, 04:11:57 AM »
Like I said, I'm not very creative so I'm still waiting for a better explanation from you. ;)
]

Well if 'better' means 'agrees with what you think' you aren't going to get it from any free-thinking people.


I don't mean whether they agree with me. I simply mean something that is commonly accepted or reasonable.
 
Might I suggest you tone down your trumpet of "free-thinking" people? If "free thinkers" were really as free as they think would like to think, they wouldn't be a slave to their evolutionary instincts or social norms.
Paul

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #272 on: February 14, 2020, 04:18:10 AM »
Our Creator has given us inalienable rights that no government can take away.


Including the right to marry 14 yr old girls.  You'll have to move to Vatican City for religious freedom!

Or can you claim "religious freedom" in this country Paul?

I think we need to use common sense here, Eric. For instance the religious freedom of the baker is not hurting the gay couple (perhaps their feelings but we all get our feelings hurt). A 35 year old marrying a 14 year old (most likely) hurts her in far more severe ways.

As for the pedophilia definition, do you think it's okay for a 5 year old to have sex with an older man if she is no longer prepubescent and if she consented? While she was raped there was actually a situation where a child gave birth a 6 (she was raped at 5). But if she said consented, that would be okay (assuming there were no age of consent laws)?


Paul

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #273 on: February 14, 2020, 06:12:24 AM »
Like I said, I'm not very creative so I'm still waiting for a better explanation from you. ;)
]

Well if 'better' means 'agrees with what you think' you aren't going to get it from any free-thinking people.


I don't mean whether they agree with me. I simply mean something that is commonly accepted or reasonable.
 
Might I suggest you tone down your trumpet of "free-thinking" people? If "free thinkers" were really as free as they think would like to think, they wouldn't be a slave to their evolutionary instincts or social norms.

Oh you mean like democratic law? Perhaps laws ensuring one group can't discriminate against other groups just because their book says so? Gimme a break! ::) ::)

And personally, I'll blast the trumpet as loud as possible, it keeps the religiously-lobotimized (of which all true believers are) from taking over.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | t | v

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #274 on: February 14, 2020, 06:57:43 AM »
Like I said, I'm not very creative so I'm still waiting for a better explanation from you. ;)
]

Well if 'better' means 'agrees with what you think' you aren't going to get it from any free-thinking people.


I don't mean whether they agree with me. I simply mean something that is commonly accepted or reasonable.
 
Might I suggest you tone down your trumpet of "free-thinking" people? If "free thinkers" were really as free as they think would like to think, they wouldn't be a slave to their evolutionary instincts or social norms.

Oh you mean like democratic law? Perhaps laws ensuring one group can't discriminate against other groups just because their book says so? Gimme a break! ::) ::)

And personally, I'll blast the trumpet as loud as possible, it keeps the religiously-lobotimized (of which all true believers are) from taking over.

Democratic law is just an arbitrary political system - just like monarchism or fascism or communism. Your evolutionary instincts and social norms only make you think discrimination is wrong (if atheism is correct, there is no reason to think it's wrong - any more or less than sexual orientation, let's say or the color green). If you can provide a better explanation, I'm happy to hear.

Being the "free thinker" that you are, I'd imagine you might be telling me how "whites are the superior race" and that it was good to discriminate assuming WWII or the Civil War had ended differently. Free thinking, indeed.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 07:13:04 AM by stahleyp »
Paul

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #275 on: February 14, 2020, 08:15:39 AM »
Quote
Democratic law is just an arbitrary political system - just like monarchism or fascism or communism. Your evolutionary instincts and social norms only make you think discrimination is wrong (if atheism is correct, there is no reason to think it's wrong - any more or less than sexual orientation, let's say or the color green). If you can provide a better explanation, I'm happy to hear.

So on one hand you demand "something that is commonly accepted or reasonable" and on the other hand you claim democratic law is arbitrary. The pigeon wins at chess!

There are tons of better explanations for morality than "god = right and wrong exist ; atheism = nothing matters"; you simply refuse to entertain them.

Quote
Being the "free thinker" that you are, I'd imagine you might be telling me how "whites are the superior race" and that it was good to discriminate assuming WWII or the Civil War had ended differently. Free thinking, indeed.
More of the same nonsense that I have already reputed here: https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/politics/state-of-the-nation/msg395575/#msg395575

I'm sorry to say but your arguments are as tiring and as useless as your religion. Feel free to justify your bigotry under "the word of god (even typing that out makes me chuckle with nonsense)" but know that society has and will continue to move past appeals to (imaginary) authorities.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | t | v

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #276 on: February 14, 2020, 10:45:44 AM »
Quote
Democratic law is just an arbitrary political system - just like monarchism or fascism or communism. Your evolutionary instincts and social norms only make you think discrimination is wrong (if atheism is correct, there is no reason to think it's wrong - any more or less than sexual orientation, let's say or the color green). If you can provide a better explanation, I'm happy to hear.

So on one hand you demand "something that is commonly accepted or reasonable" and on the other hand you claim democratic law is arbitrary. The pigeon wins at chess!

There are tons of better explanations for morality than "god = right and wrong exist ; atheism = nothing matters"; you simply refuse to entertain them.

Quote
Being the "free thinker" that you are, I'd imagine you might be telling me how "whites are the superior race" and that it was good to discriminate assuming WWII or the Civil War had ended differently. Free thinking, indeed.
More of the same nonsense that I have already reputed here: https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/politics/state-of-the-nation/msg395575/#msg395575

I'm sorry to say but your arguments are as tiring and as useless as your religion. Feel free to justify your bigotry under "the word of god (even typing that out makes me chuckle with nonsense)" but know that society has and will continue to move past appeals to (imaginary) authorities.

You've said several times that I'm "not creative" enough to come up with an alternative. I've asked you to come up with one and you've said things like aliens and undiscovered particles. So, if morality doesn't come from God or evolution, what commonly accepted or reasonable explanation do you have?

As for democracy, you don't think it's arbitrary? Do you feel that it is more "true" than communism or fascism? Do you think you would feel the same about it's merits if WWII had a different outcome? Your "progress" that you claim is simply due to luck. The losers of WWII would probably not consider our current social structure as progress. The victor goes the spoils - and the writing of history.



Indeed, your "morality" is arbitrary if your worldview is accurate (but for some reason you don't admit it). For instance, let's say the environment had been different on earth and there were other creatures that were human like but not quite homo sapiens (which there were at one time). But let's say those folks still exist today.

Let's say that homo sapiens were in virtually every way superior. I'm quite sure most folks (and probably yourself included) would consider it okay to discriminate against them. It's human nature after all.

Yet you disbelieve in God due to lack of "evidence" but you gleefully accept that discrimination "bad" without evidence.

Which of these two are you more sure of: that God doesn't exist or that there is a moral law that we ought to try to follow? You can't have the second without the first if evolution is the sole source of our morality.

I can assure you, religion (and in particular Christianity) will last far longer than you can imagine. ;)

« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 10:50:58 AM by stahleyp »
Paul

ERICOPOLY

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7249
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #277 on: February 14, 2020, 11:32:26 AM »
Our Creator has given us inalienable rights that no government can take away.


Including the right to marry 14 yr old girls.  You'll have to move to Vatican City for religious freedom!

Or can you claim "religious freedom" in this country Paul?

I think we need to use common sense here, Eric. For instance the religious freedom of the baker is not hurting the gay couple (perhaps their feelings but we all get our feelings hurt). A 35 year old marrying a 14 year old (most likely) hurts her in far more severe ways.

As for the pedophilia definition, do you think it's okay for a 5 year old to have sex with an older man if she is no longer prepubescent and if she consented? While she was raped there was actually a situation where a child gave birth a 6 (she was raped at 5). But if she said consented, that would be okay (assuming there were no age of consent laws)?

Paul,
From the Vatican’s point of view, Milk’s only crime was that his lover was not female and the consentual rape occurred without a marriage ceremony preceding it.  They are scholars of the bible and I will assume that’s Christianity’s morality.  I guess I have found a higher source of morality in California where it is 18.

The label you are looking for with Milk is ‘Ephebophilia’.  That’s the proper term for somebody who favors post-pubescent teens.  He was not a pedophile.

Eric

LC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4016
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #278 on: February 14, 2020, 11:50:02 AM »
Frankly you're getting off the point of legal discrimination and changing to your favorite topic, i.e. the source of morality, of which Google will do a far better job of providing you with well-articulated perspectives that do not include aliens.

To the topic, I stand by my position: In a secular society (thank god!) that values liberal ideals of humanism and democracy, religious beliefs are not a valid reason to discriminate against someone else - or much of anything else, for that matter.
"Lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
brk.b | irm | mo | nlsn | pm | t | v

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3320
Re: State of the Nation
« Reply #279 on: February 14, 2020, 11:51:19 AM »
Our Creator has given us inalienable rights that no government can take away.


Including the right to marry 14 yr old girls.  You'll have to move to Vatican City for religious freedom!

Or can you claim "religious freedom" in this country Paul?

I think we need to use common sense here, Eric. For instance the religious freedom of the baker is not hurting the gay couple (perhaps their feelings but we all get our feelings hurt). A 35 year old marrying a 14 year old (most likely) hurts her in far more severe ways.

As for the pedophilia definition, do you think it's okay for a 5 year old to have sex with an older man if she is no longer prepubescent and if she consented? While she was raped there was actually a situation where a child gave birth a 6 (she was raped at 5). But if she said consented, that would be okay (assuming there were no age of consent laws)?

Paul,
From the Vatican’s point of view, Milk’s only crime was that his lover was not female and the consentual rape occurred without a marriage ceremony preceding it.  They are scholars of the bible and I will assume that’s Christianity’s morality.  I guess I have found a higher source of morality in California where it is 18.

The label you are looking for with Milk is ‘Ephebophilia’.  That’s the proper term for somebody who favors post-pubescent teens.  He was not a pedophile.

Eric

The Vatican also allowed many (innumerable) children to be raped and turned a blind eye. So the question becomes is that "really" wrong or were the priests simply satisfying some evolutionary instinct? You know one person's opinion vs another. Obviously, I find it the former.

His actions were still immoral, Eric. Or do you think he was fine since the post-pubescent teen made it "consensual"? Let's ignore that he was looking for a father figure and people will do plenty of things while being manipulated. 

There is evil in this world and Milk and many in the Vatican and others (among folks like Epstein) savor it.
Paul