.....why does it smell like Republicans in here ?......

......somebody open a window........

Thank God my sense of moral worth is low? Huh?

interesting. i look at life as choices. some good, some bad. try it for just a day.

your bad habit is worse than my bad habit. and you should burn in hell for yours... turn all churches into homeless shelters. that's what JC would do.

I seem to remember a sage piece of advice, something like "Pride goes before something" ahhh oh yeah "A FALL". and also, watch yourself when you think you stand... Where did that advice come from???

We all end up in a place where power, wealth and fame are useless.

Whether you believe in heaven and hell or that with that last breath it's over, that fact remains true.

Fearless contemplation of it will give the strongest a sense of humility.

i get the sense the author is confusing cause and effect:

People who inveigh against a vice in others are often themselves fixated on it, and more likely to succumb to its allure

Luckily for people of the democrap jackass party, the party of NO VALUES they don't have to worry about moral conflicts because they were trained by lib professors to believe in the moral equivalence in every act.

trained by lib professors to believe in the moral equivalence in every act.

I have a liberal arts degree with a major in Philosophy.

I don't remember ever encountering this particular theory of ethics.

Care to expound further?

How does it relate to Kant's categorical imperative, for example...

"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."

Interesting and thought-provoking piece from Mr. Bennett. Silver Ironist's comments are thoughtful as well. We all are flawed, and adhering to some reasonable moral code is a daily, often quite private, challenge. Humility and respect for others are virtues that get little of the attention they deserve in a society that rewards arrogance and self-righteousness.

Luckily for people of the democrap jackass party, the party of NO VALUES they don't have to worry about moral conflicts because they were trained by lib professors to believe in the moral equivalence in every act.

#8 | Posted by fwthom at 2009-07-09 09:45 AM |

I must say, I agree with Thommy.

Kisses,

Larry Craig.

.....I have a liberal arts degree with a major in Philosophy.

#9 | Posted by silver_ironist

.....yet I cannot manage to figure out why I don't have a job.

why I don't have a job.

I have heard that joke before.

I had a successful run in the Silly Valley computer biz until the dotcom bust, so I know the answer to the question.

The bigger question is, what can I do about it?

But enough about me.

Weren't we discussing ethics?

That's all we CAN do is discuss - you cannot scientifically test it -

otherwise you end up with whacky cause and effect theories .....

I crusade against alcohol because i have a deep seated DESIRE for it -

etc and so forth.

Bah.

you cannot scientifically test it

You may be correct about that, but don't try to tell it to a psychologist.

Human behavior and the rationalization thereof is a slippery subject.

That does not mean a statement like "trained by lib professors to believe in the moral equivalence in every act" is anything other than blather if one is not willing to then rationally discuss ethics.

If you take away their talking points, all you have remaining is an empty potato sack. No wonder the hero of the right, Ronald Reagan, "proved" all his arguments with 100% anectodatal "evidence". Seems you righties like a good bedtime story.

I am aware of the limitations of my keyboard.

That does not mean a statement like "trained by lib professors to believe in the moral equivalence in every act" is anything other than blather if one is not willing to then rationally discuss ethics.

#16 | Posted by silver_ironist

I think FWTHOM made a great point ,(maybe not specifically applicable to you) .... and perhaps he will not have further discussion with you b/c he simply does not like you or this thread.

But I am only guessing, and I should not speak for FWTHOM.

FWTHOM is a drive-by agitator.

I have been guilty of such behavior myself.

Why post here if you can't have fun?

#19 - FWThom's only "point" ever, at any time, is that liberals are rampant and always wrong and democraps and jackasses. I can't take someone like that seriously.

"If you have a holier-than-thou attitude about temptation, you probably are ushering it in," says Loran Nordgren, a social psychologist and assistant professor at Northwestern's Kellogg School of Business who has studied how people underestimate the power of their impulses.

The article covers projection pretty well, but doesn't mention (at least not by name) another closely related defense mechanism, reaction formation.

The evanjihadis who crusade against homosexuality, only to be later revealed as closet cases themselves, are great examples.

Republicans always think they are right..the affairs including Palin, Sanford, Gingrich and a couple dozen more and 100s of others going on. You preach moral justice hiding behind causes like Life yet take peoples lives away by destroying marriages.................

My ears were burning. Did someone mention my name, I was in the bathroom taking a Letterman.

"My ears were burning. Did someone mention my name, I was in the bathroom taking a Letterman."

Wait till you take a FWTHOM, a different part of you will be burning.

I think I'll become a LIBERAL! 'I have sinned'!

You damn Democrats don't give a shit about anything BUT power and what accrues therefrom so get off this Republican BULL SHIT!

We're all human beings and a few of us can think for ourselves! So take the Medication as labeled JOELABEY and take a nap! You'll soon feel better!!

the affairs including Palin, Sanford, Gingrich and a couple dozen more and 100s of others going on

Forbidden fruit is always the sweetest.

Forbidden fruit is always the sweetest.
#27 | Posted by silver_ironist

MMMMM.... forbidden fruit.

My guide is the Bible. Soloman had 700 wives and 300 concubines so as long as I don't exceed those numbers I'm OK.

Hey SilverIrony what does your Manifesto say about those ethics?

OK, I take back, ever so slightly, what I said about you, FWThom. Your last two posts were kind of funny.

The reichwing hides a swastika behind a cross. Nothing new.

MMMMM.... forbidden fruit.

#28 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

with chocolate.

What's a "demoncrap"? And would it be wrong to take a demoncrap on a wingtard's head?

Hey SilverIrony what does your Manifesto say about those ethics?

Hey, I am a child of the Sixties.

Sex, drugs and rock and roll.

"If it feels good, do it!"

That philosophy bullshit was just a mindfuck, dude.

FWTHOM posted:

My guide is the Bible. Soloman [sic] had 700 wives and 300 concubines so as long as I don't exceed those numbers I'm OK.

Apparently you didn't read the Bible very well. Solomon eventually violated all of his wise advice and was punished by God who split his kingdom in two. His extensive collection of wives and concubines was one of his primary violations

OTOH, Leviticus 20:10 states: "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death."

In the Hebrew:

ואיש אשר ינאף את אשת איש אשר ינאף את אשת רעהו מות מת הנאף והנאפת׃

Maybe instead of finding excuses for Ensign, Vitter, Gingrich, Sanford, and Spitzer, et alia, we should be piling up plenty of stones.

Note that adultery is described very narrowly as a man (married or not) having relations with a married woman. A single woman having relations with a married man is not mentioned in the laws in Leviticus.

The same punishment is also prescribed for men who commit homosexual intercourse (though nothing is said about women, or about male homosexuals as long as they abstain from anal sex - apparently God didn't mind the occasional BJ).

Death is also the required punishment for the son who speaks disrespectfully to his parents. Prostitutes are to be burned alive.

In addition, Leviticus dictates a wide range of laws including when and how to perform sin offerings, burnt offerings, and other sacrifices; the laws of Kashreit (aka Kosher - Chapter 11 goes into great detail), ritual cleanliness, keeping the Sabbath holy (working on the Sabbath is punishable by death). It also specifies that you can't plant two different crops in the same field or graze two different types of animals in the same field. It even forbids the wearing of clothes made of two different materials, like cotton and wool (the so-called "lindsey-woolsey" law.

Those who profess to believe so blindly in the writings of small desert tribes living way back in the bronze age (my people, BTW), when convenient, should not pick and choose which laws are inviolate and which can be conveniently ignored. That is not only the height of hypocracy, but it tells more about the person than the book he quotes from.

It is also important to note the conveniently overlooked fact that each section starts out with something like And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying: Speak unto the children of Israel, saying:

There is nothing in Leviticus to indicate that ANY of its laws were meant for anybody except the small number of tribes of Hebrews who their God designated as his servants.

Somehow I suspect that your claim that your guide is the Bible is so much rationalization for your own prejudices, projections, and reaction formations.

FWTHOM posted about:

the democrap jackass party

It is interesting how the right continues to play these infantile word insult games as a form of ad hominem abusive attack in place of actual reasoning and logic.

Most of us grew out of this sort of argument when we graduated from playing in the sandbox during third-grade recess. Apparently, on the Right, arrested mental and emotional development fixed at elementary school ages is quite common. No wonder John Stuart Mill once remarked:

"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."

A wise man, John Stuard Mill.