Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleThis stuff about teenagers drinking is part of your response to the issue of pre- or non- marital sex.
Much like teenagers drinking isn't itself "the end of the world" and probably 99 times out of 100 nothing bad happens... but by allowing such to occur frequently, big mistakes are bound to happen, and the environment created is collectively wrong.
When I talk about morality, I am talking about guidelines that we have to help us navigate ourselves as well as we can through interactions with other people.
You are talking about 'not allowing things to occur'. I think maybe you are talking about laws passed to forbid things. Maybe you believe laws and morals are synonymous or should be.
If you had the power, would you pass a law making pre- or non- marital sex illegal?
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleI am not a very smart guy and I cannot decipher what everyone is saying all the time.
Alright, that's fine. I am not a very smart guy and I cannot decipher what everyone is saying all the time. Feel free to put some more words out on your position so I can have a better chance at understanding it.
Be charitable to me, for I am just a regular fellah.
+
"Because long-held prejudices and biases are extremely difficult to eradi ...[text shortened]... ation of the Bible that is fundamentally liberal, and is the true heir of Christianity's legacy?
That being the case, how do you determine what to believe and what not to believe? How can you trust the beliefs you do have?
Do you think the Bible itself is homophobic, sexist, etc, itself, and that the ideas within it are imperfect?
Because then... in a sense... you should agree with the conservatives who maintain the standard interpretation of the Bible, the one that has been in circulation for 2,000 years (and an interpretation that was prominent while homosexuality was very prominent in the Roman Empire).
How does that logically follow?
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleWhat do these things have to do with me or anything I have said?
Right, so germany can arrest an 80 year old woman because she denies the Holocaust, and Sweden can arrest a racist blogger, and through default positions of mass ostracism and legal fines and sanctions, as well as loss of employment, etc... society can pressure everyone to live in fear of saying something wrong about race... .
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @thinkofone(1) I do my best. I have no other choice. I try to spend a lot of time consuming relevant material. I have a 2 hour commute (both ways) and can usually dedicate 3 or more hours a day to listening to podcasts. I try to gather as many perspectives as possible. For a while, I was very interested in "skeptic" positions as well.
[b]I am not a very smart guy and I cannot decipher what everyone is saying all the time.
That being the case, how do you determine what to believe and what not to believe? How can you trust the beliefs you do have?
Do you think the Bible itself is homophobic, sexist, etc, itself, and that the ideas within it are imperfect?
Because then.. ...[text shortened]... le homosexuality was very prominent in the Roman Empire).
How does that logically follow?[/b]
The stronger arguments and the better ideas are all traditionalist, in my opinion, and so that is what I go with. I have no other choice. I am very open to being persuaded otherwise and will promise to read or follow anything that you think is relevant.
(2) If you believe that the Bible was homophobic, sexist, etc.,, why would you disagree with the interpreters of the Bible who advance homophobic or sexist narratives from their understandign of the Bible?
Of course, you can say that the Bible is not true, or not a good basis, but if the Bible is homophobic and sexist... How would you disagree with someone who says "The Bible advances a homophobic and sexist position"?
I am not a Marxist but I have read some of his work and I can correct someone's view on what Marxism believes if they are clearly wrong about it. It's just a matter of knowing what is consistent with the text and what was the intention.
I hope my point is clear.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @fmfThe arugment implied we do not actually get 'unlimited freedom' or democracy, etc., from the values which you espouse, and that it is not drastically different than other forms of government. So why should I be invested in this form of government, especially if it is hostile to the society that I envision, etc..
What do these things have to do with me or anything I have said?
I do not even get what is advertised from it, and hell, I do not even particularly want what is advertised.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleWho are you talking to? You sound like you are copy pasting from some kind of manifesto. I will ask the same question again with a few extra words: What do these things you have specifically mentioned have to do with me or anything I have said about what I believe?
The arugment implied we do not actually get 'unlimited freedom' or democracy, etc., from the values which you espouse, and that it is not drastically different than other forms of government. So why should I be invested in this form of government, especially if it is hostile to the society that I envision, etc.
Originally posted by @fmfJacob-Verville, you skipped this post of mine and answered a later one. What makes you feel the need to try to suggest I might be anti-Semitic?
I've probably posted 45,000 times on this forum. You won't find even a hint of anti-Semitic sentiment in any single one of those posts. Are you trying to poison the well?
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @fmfOh no, I wasn't sure why you were so obsessed with shooting down my Anne Frank analogy. It almost felt like you had some kind of antipathy towards Anne Frank and like her experience was somehow below you or not worthy discussing.
Jacob-Verville, you skipped this post of mine and answered a later one. What makes you feel the need to try to suggest I might be anti-Semitic?
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @fmfIt is an explanation of why I do not believe that much in the current western systems. are very good. You had written before that, in spite of their shortcomings, countries like Germany are still free and democratic. I pointed out how they actually aren't really achieving that.
Who are you talking to? You sound like you are copy pasting from some kind of manifesto. I will ask the same question again with a few extra words: What do these things you have specifically mentioned have to do with me or anything I have said about what I believe?
I think the discussion about freedom, and whether or not we are actually getting freedom, or if we are just getting manipulated by the media at the behest of financiers and elites is a great question. It goes back beyond Chomsky's concept of 'manufacturing consent' and into the works of Renee Guenon, I believe, and you could say that it was implied with the Juvenal quotation about Bread & Circuses.
... As long as you can just appease the masses by superficial means, they are blind and ignore the real depth of the matter.
I am sorry if you think I am unfairly characterizing your position. do feel free to write a very long post on this matter. I'd love to discuss the topic more.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleI think your Anne Frank analogy was weakminded. I was clear about that. So, that aside, what makes you feel the need to suggest I am anti-Semitic?
Oh no, I wasn't sure why you were so obsessed with shooting down my Anne Frank analogy. It almost felt like you had some kind of antipathy towards Anne Frank and like her experience was somehow below you or not worthy discussing.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleYou mentioned some very specific beefs you have with the reality of the public domain in Germany - Holocaust denial etc. What do these specific things have to do with me?
It is an explanation of why I do not believe that much in the current western systems. are very good. You had written before that, in spite of their shortcomings, countries like Germany are still free and democratic. I pointed out how they actually aren't really achieving that.
I think the discussion about freedom, and whether or not we are actu ...[text shortened]... tion. do feel free to write a very long post on this matter. I'd love to discuss the topic more.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleWhat does this have to do with what we are talking about?
As long as you can just appease the masses by superficial means, they are blind and ignore the real depth of the matter.
30 Jan 18
You said that you consider Germany a free country in spite of those limitations. And I do recollect that you also said you do not personally believe in those limitations but, still, it was a free country to you, right?
By the way, if you don't think something is relevant, I recommend that you simply state why you don't think it is relevant.
You end up asking me the same question several times in a row and it doesn't really serve to advance the dialogue.
We could get a lot more done a lot faster without just these little posts of open ended questions and everyone holding their cards close to their chest.
30 Jan 18
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleGo back and look at what I said about Germany.
You said that you consider Germany a free country in spite of those limitations. And I do recollect that you also said you do not personally believe in those limitations but, still, it was a free country to you, right?
Originally posted by @jacob-vervilleHow is Holocaust denial being illegal relevant to me?
By the way, if you don't think something is relevant, I recommend that you simply state why you don't think it is relevant.