lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Christian right looks to rebound
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 09-26-2007, 07:43 PM   #41
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
Silent, You seem to have been thinking too much about my specific example. My point was that it is reasonable for Joe to make Bill pay for the damages. Similarly, it would be reasonable to argue for one side in religious arguments, particularly if the options allow no real middle-road view. If someone said a (pure) rock was made out of granite, and another said it was made out of limestone, would it be correct to say that it is a grimestone rock? Somehow, I don't think so. The rock is either limestone or granite. God either exists or it doesn't. What people say doesn't necessarily correspond to reality. I don't think it's extremist to pick one side to argue for.
Neither do I believe that it is extermist to align yourself with one side or another, but there is also no evidence that the two answers are in fact correct (that God exist or that God does not exist). It is possible that both people are wrong, that the rock is neither limestone nor granite, but rather alien rock or something else enteirly. After all, how smart are those people? Are they really intelligent enough to decide what the rock is? Or it is possible that both people who claim God exist and God does not exist are wrong: God may exist but is so weak that he supposed to be laughed upon.

There is no logical reason why it has to either be "x" or "y". Presenting a false delimma is itself a logical fallacy. That doesn't mean that a combination of x and y must be right, it is probraly stupid to think that way. But it could. Or prehaps z might be correct.

Since I might was well throw links, here's a webcomic series that illustrates this point. The main guy, "TQ" is a person who comes up with ideas that showcase that the two prevailing choices aren't the only choices. He's not for "moderatism" at all, in fact his choices are pretty radical.

Quote:
The phrase "tertium quid" (or "third option" in Latin) refers to something that exposes a dichotomy as false. A tertium quid is not somewhere between the two options (grey is not a tertium quid to the dichotomy of black vs. white), but rather something entirely new, something that escapes the one-dimensional line between two options.
Due to the fact that the site doesn't collect all the TQ in one easy place, please forgive me for spamming direct links, but eh.

Intro
Poverty
Global Warming
Abortion
In a car I
In a car II
Gay Marriage
Unemployment
Nader


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-26-2007, 11:42 PM   #42
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilentScope001
Neither do I believe that it is extermist to align yourself with one side or another, but there is also no evidence that the two answers are in fact correct (that God exist or that God does not exist). It is possible that both people are wrong, that the rock is neither limestone nor granite, but rather alien rock or something else enteirly. After all, how smart are those people? Are they really intelligent enough to decide what the rock is? Or it is possible that both people who claim God exist and God does not exist are wrong: God may exist but is so weak that he supposed to be laughed upon.

There is no logical reason why it has to either be "x" or "y". Presenting a false delimma is itself a logical fallacy. That doesn't mean that a combination of x and y must be right, it is probraly stupid to think that way. But it could. Or prehaps z might be correct.
The definitions of the words we are using don't change during an argument, however. If a rock fits the definition of limestone, then it is limestone. If it doesn't, then it's simply not limestone. The definition of god is more interesting because monotheists generally regard a definition of him as including such terms as "omnipotent, omniscient" etc. If the entity being talked about did not fit these definitions, then it would not be God, whatever its other attributes may be. An entity that is so weak to be laughed at simply is not God, because that would contradict the definition. Were any theists to compromise on the matter and say that God isn't omnipotent - just VERY powerful - then they just wouldn't be talking about the same God anymore (and they'd have to start the argument over again). So yes, I would say that God either exists as it is defined - typically as that of the Christian god - or it does not, and to pick one side of this argument is still not extremism, nor is it a false dilemma.

I liked those TQ links, SS. Thanks.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 05:08 AM   #43
Rogue Warrior
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Geelong Australia
Posts: 207
When I say extremism I refer to condemning others for their views rather than making the paper for new Star Wars novels.
Rogue Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 12:35 PM   #44
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
The definitions of the words we are using don't change during an argument, however. If a rock fits the definition of limestone, then it is limestone. If it doesn't, then it's simply not limestone. The definition of god is more interesting because monotheists generally regard a definition of him as including such terms as "omnipotent, omniscient" etc. If the entity being talked about did not fit these definitions, then it would not be God, whatever its other attributes may be. An entity that is so weak to be laughed at simply is not God, because that would contradict the definition. Were any theists to compromise on the matter and say that God isn't omnipotent - just VERY powerful - then they just wouldn't be talking about the same God anymore (and they'd have to start the argument over again). So yes, I would say that God either exists as it is defined - typically as that of the Christian god - or it does not, and to pick one side of this argument is still not extremism, nor is it a false dilemma.
Gotcha. So the question at hand is: "Does the Chrisitan God exist?" I know agnoists could just say: "I don't really know, maybe?", but that is due to a belief that they don't have all the facts to make a final choice, and they aren't really pushing for others to believe.

Alright, I can accept that definition. You win the argument yet again.

Quote:
When I say extremism I refer to condemning others for their views rather than making the paper for new Star Wars novels.
Sad to say, I think you need to condemn others for their views. Otherwise, how else can you force them to change their views...or at the very least, inform indepedents that the view is wrong and that you have to believe in the correct view? Views affect world views, views affect what people do, views can affect world government. If you believe that one view is wrong, then if they continue down that view, they could do incredibly stupid things. Condemnation, hatred is necessary to make sure the people see the "truth". "Extermism", or, more correctly, "intolerance", is popular presically because it works.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 09:21 PM   #45
John Galt
Junior Member
 
John Galt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Galt's Gulch
Posts: 474
I think that ideas, no matter how extreme, should never be condemned for their own sake. The primary hallmark of true intelligence, in my opinion, is the ability to entertain ideas contrary to your own without necessarily accepting them.

Acting on extremist, especially violent extremist, ideals and carrying out physical violence against other people or repressing ideas contrary to the worldview you espouse, IS morally wrong.





Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein. -Friedrich Nietzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse
John Galt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 09:23 PM   #46
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
Acting on extremist, especially violent extremist, ideals and carrying out physical violence against other people or repressing ideas contrary to the worldview you espouse, IS morally wrong.
So you are claiming that the US Army, fighting to promote democracy in Iraq, is morally wrong?

I think it's not morally wrong to kill for your cause, but only morally gray. What decides if the killing is okay is if the cause you are killing for is morally right or wrong. That, well, we can't really decide.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 10:40 PM   #47
John Galt
Junior Member
 
John Galt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Galt's Gulch
Posts: 474
YES. Even though I have a tremendous amount of respect for the US military(moreso than the rest of the government) and love democracy, I think that if we went to war with Iraq JUST to overthrow Saddam and set up a Democratic government, it was morally wrong. Now that we have found no weapons of mass destruction and Saddam is out of power (which were the first and fallback reasons for being there, respectively), I think we have absolutely no reason to be there and the American people are seeing that and have largely stopped supporting the war now that "victory," whatever the administration chooses to define it as now, in Iraq will no longer have any tangible benefits for the American people, other than soldiers no longer serving in combat and being able to come home, which would happen anyway if we were to pull most of our forces out of Iraq and withdraw the rest to the north of the country to protect Kurdestan.





Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein. -Friedrich Nietzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse
John Galt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 11:24 PM   #48
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
YES. Even though I have a tremendous amount of respect for the US military(moreso than the rest of the government) and love democracy, I think that if we went to war with Iraq JUST to overthrow Saddam and set up a Democratic government, it was morally wrong.
Huh. Understood. I guess I'm okay with violence, only because it's the only thing that has worked for us in the past, and animals use violence as well. We are still living due to the slaughters and the murders that previous generations of the human race has pulled off, after all. Since the hands of all nations in existance or in the past are, well, pretty bloody...I would be very uncomfortable calling every one of them immoral. Still, I see your point. To each their own.

Still, following your logic, I would be a bit iffy about even having the US military protect Kurdistan. It will make Turkey, another ally of US, and a democracy, pretty angry about us protecting the Kurds, and many members of the Kurds are sympathetic to the PKK, a terrorist organization that occasianlly pull off car bombs and terror attacks in both Iran and Turkey. And what about the Kurdistan's claim over Kirkuk and all its precious oil? The Kurds are willing to relocate the Arabs who live there, because they "were there first". And if the Arabs don't want to leave, then the Kurds will just move in anyway and force the Arabs to sell. If I follow your logic, if the Kurds are pulling off immoral stuff, should we even help them?


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-27-2007, 11:49 PM   #49
RobQel-Droma
Blah
 
RobQel-Droma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Up yours. X0
Posts: 2,216
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
I really don't want to get into this, but I want to just ask....

Why are you dead-set against "Conservative Christians" doing what is perfectly ok for them to do? You keep coming back very antagonistic/sarcastic when someone says something like this, but I'm just wondering why the heck do you take 10 minutes of your time to complain if you don't intend to do anything about it. I may not agree with what they are doing, but its not like everyone else does the same thing. Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Christian Conservatives, Anarchists (well ok, I don't know about them), everyone. Who cares?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
They aren't benefiting mankind. They aren't furthering our general knowledge. It doesn't take long to realize who is being truly dogmatic and who is simply percieved as such.
Neither are you by posting this, last time I checked. Neither am I by responding. In fact, a whole host of things fall in that category. Doesn't mean a thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Faith: firm belief in something for which there is no proof.
Not trying to split hairs, but that is *Blind* Faith.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
The biggest one on the Christian agenda is abortion (which I happen to agree with them about, but I not willing to force my beliefs onto someone that has a different opinion). Another example is their attempt to circumvent the Constitution by disguising creationism as “intelligent design.”
Ahem. Wasn't the Constitution written by men who were Christians? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but....

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
YES. Even though I have a tremendous amount of respect for the US military(moreso than the rest of the government) and love democracy, I think that if we went to war with Iraq JUST to overthrow Saddam and set up a Democratic government, it was morally wrong. Now that we have found no weapons of mass destruction and Saddam is out of power (which were the first and fallback reasons for being there, respectively), I think we have absolutely no reason to be there and the American people are seeing that and have largely stopped supporting the war now that "victory," whatever the administration chooses to define it as now, in Iraq will no longer have any tangible benefits for the American people, other than soldiers no longer serving in combat and being able to come home, which would happen anyway if we were to pull most of our forces out of Iraq and withdraw the rest to the north of the country to protect Kurdestan.
And here you totally ignore the horrors and brutality that innocent people endured that occured under Saddam's reign. You also seem to forget that Saddam was in close contact and was even helping the people that killed thousands of our people on 9/11. Also, I think your viewpoint is selfish - you say that since it has no tangible benefit for us, we should leave. What about the people over in the Middle East that are being murdered by these crazy Iraqi terrorists?
RobQel-Droma is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 12:12 AM   #50
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
I really don't want to get into this, but I want to just ask....

Why are you dead-set against "Conservative Christians" doing what is perfectly ok for them to do?
Is this for me? I'm not "dead set" against their right to their opinions. I find it disturbing (there I go with that word again), that they feel justified in opposing the rights of others based on their beliefs. I thought I made that clear earlier in the thread, but my apologies if that's not the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
You keep coming back very antagonistic/sarcastic when someone says something like this, but I'm just wondering why the heck do you take 10 minutes of your time to complain if you don't intend to do anything about it.
Perhaps I consider bringing the matter to the forefront of discussion (if only for a while in this limited forum) "doing something". It takes less time than writing a strong letter to my congressman and generates more awareness. But perhaps you'd rather I burn a church down or something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
I may not agree with what they are doing, but its not like everyone else does the same thing. Liberals, Conservatives, Republicans, Christian Conservatives, Anarchists (well ok, I don't know about them), everyone. Who cares?
Obviously, I do. If you don't that's your business and you're welcome to it. If you truly don't care though, why are you wasting your time in this thread? Seems a bit hypocritical, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Neither are you by posting this, last time I checked. Neither am I by responding.
Perhaps not. Then again, perhaps I am.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
In fact, a whole host of things fall in that category. Doesn't mean a thing.
I don't find your apathy persuasive if that was your intent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Not trying to split hairs, but that is *Blind* Faith.
Whatever adjective makes you happy. Please feel free to address your letter to Merriam-Webster.

Out of curiosity, what does "sighted" faith look like? Also, how is it related to religion? Looking forward to your response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Ahem. Wasn't the Constitution written by men who were Christians? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but....
Please show me where the Constitution makes any reference to god? Also, many of the Framers were deists.
Here is a link you might find beneficial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
And here you totally ignore the horrors and brutality that innocent people endured that occured under Saddam's reign. You also seem to forget that Saddam was in close contact and was even helping the people that killed thousands of our people on 9/11.
Says the man that accuses me of watching too much news.

Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Also, I think your viewpoint is selfish - you say that since it has no tangible benefit for us, we should leave. What about the people over in the Middle East that are being murdered by these crazy Iraqi terrorists?
You mean the Iraqi civil war?
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 12:28 AM   #51
RobQel-Droma
Blah
 
RobQel-Droma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Up yours. X0
Posts: 2,216
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Is this for me? I'm not "dead set" against their right to their opinions. I find it disturbing (there I go with that word again), that they feel justified in opposing the rights of others based on their beliefs. I thought I made that clear earlier in the thread, but my apologies if that's not the case.
It just seems a bit.... Oh, forget it. To each his own, I guess. I can condemn you for making a thread about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
But perhaps you'd rather I burn a church down or something.
Again, the sarcasm. And exaggeration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Obviously, I do. If you don't that's your business and you're welcome to it. If you truly don't care though, why are you wasting your time in this thread? Seems a bit hypocritical, no?
True. But in answer to your question, I was trying to figure out why you cared.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Perhaps not. Then again, perhaps I am.
OK.......

?

Using the same lack of rational, I could say that these Conservative Christians are too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
I don't find your apathy persuasive if that was your intent.
Apathy? It's fact. There are always things like this. And believe, everything affects the world in different ways. But why don't we just disband LucasArts. It hasn't seemed to do anything that are the likes of what you said, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Whatever adjective makes you happy. Please feel free to address your letter to Merriam-Webster.

Out of curiosity, what does "sighted" faith look like? Also, how is it related to religion? Looking forward to your response.
Oh please. You're turning this into something its not. Blind faith is faith in something that you cannot see or know is true, but have faith in it because of your belief. Faith other than that is faith in something that has evidence to which it can be true. I don't understand how you seem to find what I said hard to understand, its what it means. Maybe you might want to brush up on some vocab there, buddy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Please show me where the Constitution makes any reference to god? Also, many of the Framers were deists.
I concede your point, but all people who are theists/deists belive in God, and Creation. Show me a religion like that that doesn't. That was my point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Says the man that accuses me of watching too much news.

Bush admits that Iraq Had Nothing To Do With 9/11
No, just believing in it too much.

Besides, what I say isn't just based on armchair theorizing and watching CNN or anything, trust me. And as for Bush, well, I don't support Bush. I think he was a big dissapointment. So what he says I don't necessarily believe in. True, that may not have been his intent when he went into Iraq, but I do believe that it was all interconnected, and that we should have gone in (perhaps differently). Oh, and just was his intent? Hmm? Would it possibly have some kind of connection back to terrorism anyways?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
You mean the Iraqi civil war?
What?

Ermmm.... I'm guessing that you don't think Saddam was a problem before we went to war?
RobQel-Droma is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 12:35 AM   #52
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,046
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Ahem. Wasn't the Constitution written by men who were Christians? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but....
But what? I’m a Christian too. I was answering Achilles request for my frame of reference for my comment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
I have the same problem with these people that I have with other groups that try to force their belief structure on to others through legislation and the courts.
In Edwards vs. Aguilera the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision affirmed the lower courts decision that a Louisiana law requiring if evolution was taught in public school then creationism also must be taught. Therefore, they were saying that the law was unconstitutional. I see “intelligent design” as an attempt by antievolutionist to get creationism taught in schools.

I have no problem if someone teaches their children creationism; I do have a problem when they want to force ALL children to learn creationism.

You are correct most if not all the men were Christians, but they were also learned men and they did not want to force a national religion down the masses throats. I still believe keeping religion out of the governments’ hands guarantees everyone’s religious freedoms.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 01:23 AM   #53
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
True. But in answer to your question, I was trying to figure out why you cared.
Because I have a big heart.

Also, something about an adage about those that don't stand up when one group's rights are infringed find themselves standing all alone when their rights are at stake. Self-preservation through empathy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Using the same lack of rational, I could say that these Conservative Christians are too.
Indeed, I would say that they are. Get it now?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Apathy? It's fact. There are always things like this. And believe, everything affects the world in different ways. But why don't we just disband LucasArts. It hasn't seemed to do anything that are the likes of what you said, right?
We all find our spheres of influence where they are, I guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Oh please. You're turning this into something its not. Blind faith is faith in something that you cannot see or know is true, but have faith in it because of your belief.
Sure. The dictionary just refers to that as "faith" by the way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Faith other than that is faith in something that has evidence to which it can be true.
Hmmm...that sounds like "belief":

conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
I don't understand how you seem to find what I said hard to understand, its what it means. Maybe you might want to brush up on some vocab there, buddy.
Says the man that want's to redefine "belief" as "faith". Thanks for the pointers, though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
I concede your point, but all people who are theists/deists belive in God, and Creation. Show me a religion like that that doesn't. That was my point.
Deist belief is very different from christian belief. That was mine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
No, just believing in it too much.
Twice in one day I've been lucky enough to participate in a pot calling the kettle black exchange. Hooray for me!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
Besides, what I say isn't just based on armchair theorizing and watching CNN or anything, trust me.
Ok, I will. Hey...you aren't actually George Bush are you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
And as for Bush, well, I don't support Bush. I think he was a big dissapointment.
You just happen to swallow his rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Gotcha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
So what he says I don't necessarily believe in.
I, literally, never would have guessed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
True, that may not have been his intent when he went into Iraq, but I do believe that it was all interconnected, and that we should have gone in (perhaps differently). Oh, and just was his intent? Hmm? Would it possibly have some kind of connection back to terrorism anyways?
It's possible but he's had 5 years to prove his case and so far, nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
What?

Ermmm.... I'm guessing that you don't think Saddam was a problem before we went to war?
Ethnic tensions in Iraq go back much further than Saddam, my friend.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 05:26 AM   #54
Rogue Warrior
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Geelong Australia
Posts: 207
People are right to fear those who take an extreme view. Remember the police who had to tazer a protester? The same ire directed at that incident is also prevalent in those who seek censorship of views other than their own.
Rogue Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 06:22 AM   #55
John Galt
Junior Member
 
John Galt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Galt's Gulch
Posts: 474
I really don't have time to write a long post right now, but I'll sum up what I was going to say and elaborate later.

1. Yes, my viewpoint is extremely selfish. After all, the American people are the ones who foot the bill interventions like the Iraqi conflict, I just think that the people of America and her allies are the only ones that the US military is beholden to.

2. To sum up my position, I think intervention itself is immoral, unless there is very, very strong evidence that an attack on the US or her interests is about to take place, and even that's something of a stretch. Defensive wars, or if we get declared war on by another nation, the US government and military are morally obligated to carry out.





Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. Und wenn du lange in einen Abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein. -Friedrich Nietzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse
John Galt is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-28-2007, 09:50 AM   #56
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
The staff has received a reported post on the tone used in some of the recent posts. Keep it civil, please.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 09-30-2007, 11:20 PM   #57
Point Man
Seeker of Truth
 
Point Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The People's Palace
Posts: 612
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
In a ideal world, we could all sit down to talk and reason this out, but ideology tends to make such interactions difficult. Dogmatic ideologies make them impossible. Is there some way I can cause them to abandon their dogmatic ideologies?
Oh, I get it. They have no right to disagree with you. They must be forced to abandon their beliefs because those beliefs disturb your sensibilities.

Quote:
Just so long as no one gets any funny ideas about screwing with turkey-day.
Hey, I seem to recall an official name for that holiday...Now, what was it? Oh yeah, I believe it is called Thanksgiving Day. Who are we giving thanks to, anyway?


Show me a man who is twenty and not a liberal, and I will show you a man with no heart.
Show me a man who is forty and not a conservative, and I will show you a man with no brain.

Point Man is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 12:07 AM   #58
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo fett 66
Oh, I get it. They have no right to disagree with you. They must be forced to abandon their beliefs because those beliefs disturb your sensibilities.
That's an interesting conclusion to jump to. I think Jae tried to accuse me of seeking to censor them in an earlier post. Is this a familial thing?

No, Jimbo, they are welcome to whatever beliefs they would have. However, if they were to take action, they would be guilty of doing exactly what you and Jae (and others) have attempted to lambaste me for here. Which makes me wonder if your convictions would still be as strong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo fett 66
Hey, I seem to recall an official name for that holiday...Now, what was it? Oh yeah, I believe it is called Thanksgiving Day. Who are we giving thanks to, anyway?
IIRC, (American) Thanksgiving is holiday held to celebrate the end of the harvest season. According to wikipedia, the "who" is a native american named Squanto. Perhaps you had someone else in mind?
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 01:54 AM   #59
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
We're giving thanks to Squanto?

I don't buy revisionist history.
Yes, we should be grateful for the help he (and Samoset) provided the Pilgrims, but that's not why we have the holiday.

Try a primary historical source instead of wiki, like the 2 (and only 2 for the first Thanksgiving) primary sources from the first Thanksgiving.
Here's another discussion based on the primary documents. The first Thanksgiving they had a feast but they also gave thanks to God.

Also, try this site

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Washington's First Thanksgiving Proclamation
This historic proclamation was issued by George Washington during his first year as President. It sets aside Thursday, November 26 as "A Day of Publick Thanksgiving anf Prayer."

Signed by Washington on October 3, 1789 and entitled "General Thanksgiving," the decree appointed the day "to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God."
Here's an article from the George Washington Papers held at the University of Virginia. Here's a transcription of his proclamation and a copy of the original handwritten document. Washington acknowledges that it's a day where one should give thanks to God.

Lincoln also made a proclamation setting Thanksgiving day as a holiday, and also specifically mentioned it was to give thanks to God.

Not once is there mention of the day being set aside to give thanks to Squanto. They were giving thanks to God for the harvest.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 02:06 AM   #60
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
~snip~

It seems that you missed the point nonetheless (as I assumed that either you or Jimbo would). Thanksgiving is a traditional observance, not a religious holiday. If it makes you feel better to give thanks to god, then knock yourself out. In the mean time, I'll be reflecting on family, friends, and the real things in life that matter.

Last edited by tk102; 10-01-2007 at 10:35 PM. Reason: flamebait removed
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 09:53 AM   #61
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,912
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
~snip~

History was one of my undergrad majors, and I knew exactly what I was looking for with that--I knew which sources existed, I just needed to find them on the web for the citation. The more technical/medical studies take longer to search for and evaluate just because there's so much material out there.

You're the one who said this in answer to whom we give thanks (emphasis mine):
Quote:
IIRC, (American) Thanksgiving is holiday held to celebrate the end of the harvest season. According to wikipedia, the "who" is a native american named Squanto.
I was correcting your historical inaccuracy about Thanksgiving being a holiday to give thanks to Squanto, and that was all. I was not making a value statement on what we should give thanks for, nor was I arguing whether or not it's a religious vs. secular holiday. Now, you can try to deflect that with these comments you've made above or go off on a tangent to the purpose of Thanksgiving, but it doesn't change the historical facts.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.


Last edited by tk102; 10-01-2007 at 10:36 PM.
Jae Onasi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 10:07 AM   #62
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
~snip~
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
You're the one who said this in answer to whom we give thanks (emphasis mine):
Indeed I did say that. Your husband was playing cutesy with me and I was playing in kind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
I was correcting your historical inaccuracy about Thanksgiving being a holiday to give thanks to Squanto, and that was all.
So the pilgrims were not thankful to Squanto for his assistance? Gotcha.
~snip~

Thanks for your post.

Last edited by tk102; 10-01-2007 at 10:40 PM.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 10:24 PM   #63
Point Man
Seeker of Truth
 
Point Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The People's Palace
Posts: 612
The purpose of my mentioning Thanksgiving Day was to point out that there is something inherently contradictory in celebrating a day set aside for giving thanks to God while denying His existence.

The Pilgrims were thankful to Squanto, Samoset, and the others, but Thanksgiving Day was meant, and still is meant, for giving thanks to God for providing for our needs.


Show me a man who is twenty and not a liberal, and I will show you a man with no heart.
Show me a man who is forty and not a conservative, and I will show you a man with no brain.

Point Man is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-01-2007, 10:50 PM   #64
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo fett 66
The purpose of my mentioning Thanksgiving Day was to point out that there is something inherently contradictory in celebrating a day set aside for giving thanks to God while denying His existence.
Unless, of course, you're not giving thanks to god. Then there isn't anything contradictory at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo fett 66
The Pilgrims were thankful to Squanto, Samoset, and the others, but Thanksgiving Day was meant, and still is meant, for giving thanks to God for providing for our needs.
Perhaps in your household.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-02-2007, 05:09 AM   #65
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,250
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
Thanksgiving is but one harvest festival among many.


Also, the first recorded thanksgiving in North America was celebrated on May 23rd in 1541 by Vásquez de Coronado and the tribe of the Tejas somewhere around where now Texas is. Another one was on September 8th 1565 in St. Augustine, Florida, Pedro Menéndez de Avilés and his henchmen where celebrating their landing. Don Juan de Onate celebrated one on April 30th 1598 around El Paso, together with the Manso Indians.

The first anglophone thanksgiving happened 1578 on Newfoundland, celebrated by Martin Frobisher who thought he found the north west passage between Europe and Asia.

In 1620 a group of pilgrims lost orientation and stranded at Plymouth Rock, Massachusetts. They wouldn't have survived the winter without the help of the Wampanoag Indians whom they where thanking the following autumn with a three day thanksgiving festival.

However, besides those, there is another *story*, which tells that in 1623 a drought hit some pilgrims and the harvest was about to be destroyed, so they decided to have a day to "seek the lord through humble and heartfelt prayer and He decided to give them answer", to thank god they set a holiday for thanksgiving, which US-Americans and Canadians obviously base their Thanksgiving Day on.



Ray Jones is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-03-2007, 12:10 AM   #66
RobQel-Droma
Blah
 
RobQel-Droma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Up yours. X0
Posts: 2,216
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
You just happen to swallow his rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Gotcha.
Another nice snide remark. You're pretty good at that.

But, hmmmm, didn't I just say the exact opposite thing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Ethnic tensions in Iraq go back much further than Saddam, my friend.
Nice sidestep.

But my question was: did you think that Saddam (or, Ok, that region, to make you happy) was as problem before we went in?
RobQel-Droma is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-03-2007, 01:11 AM   #67
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
But, hmmmm, didn't I just say the exact opposite thing?
You sure did. My comment was meant to convey that I don't believe that to be true based on the things that you say. I would say that actions speak louder than words, however in this case, I think it would be more accurate to say that these paragraphs speak louder than this contradictory sentence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobQel-Droma
But my question was: did you think that Saddam (or, Ok, that region, to make you happy) was as problem before we went in?
I'm assuming that you meant "as big a problem". Not trying to call out the typo, just want to make sure that I'm addressing the correct question.

No, the evidence would seem to indicate that things are much worse now. That doesn't mean that I don't think we should have taken him out (or put him power in the first place). If it was our job to take him out for what he did to the kurds and shia, then Bush Sr. could have done so back in the early 90's before he left office. Being a "brutal dictator" just happened to be a convenient back up excuse after we didn't find WMDs and could no longer lie to ourselves that Hussein had anything to do with al qaeda.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-03-2007, 05:11 AM   #68
Rogue Warrior
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Geelong Australia
Posts: 207
Do you think maybe, to quote RobQel-Droma, snide remarks and the like undermine your attempts to portray religion, America, ect as the great evil you see it as?
Rogue Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > Christian right looks to rebound

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:02 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.