Reply With Quote
I try to do it all the time.
That is why I watch all the news networks and listen to conservative radio and read conservative rags so I can hear both sides.
How many of you people actually step outside of the situation and look what is going on instead of being stereotypical "fascist conservatives" or "bleeding heart liberals?"
It seems that people with level heads are a lost cause in this political forum. All I see is blind bashing and name calling.
I try to do it all the time.
That is why I watch all the news networks and listen to conservative radio and read conservative rags so I can hear both sides.
Get off your soapbox! Here's a couple of your recent posts!
QUOTE]Quote: Originally Posted by Supreme Allah
Thats profiling, you infidel!!!!
May Allah strike you down for your defiance!!!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]
And you're calling for others to be level headed? Whatever!!!Originally Posted by Supreme Allah: For one, this is not mouse
Second..SARCASM MOTHER ER! DO YOU UNDERSTAND IT!?
I guess we all can agree on somethings!
You forgot the threats. Anyway, all this is different from the Spurs forum, how? Geez, loosen up.It seems that people with level heads are a lost cause in this political forum. All I see is blind bashing and name calling.
Common ground, it was just a matter of time.
I guess we all can agree on somethings!
I hope your do realize that Supreme Allah is joking in about 99% of his posts. Funny think is, he is right about you people being too "partisan." How can anyone be completely liberal or completely conservative? It is just not possible!
I hope your do realize that Supreme Allah is joking in about 99% of his posts. Funny think is, he is right about you people being too "partisan." How can anyone be completely liberal or completely conservative? It is just not possible!
This Political Forum would have little action if our values and beliefs weren't piqued or challenged.
Perhaps Kori can create a "forum jump" led "Apathy and Indifference". for those that prefer topics that don't inflame the passions of the partisan crowd.
Why discuss things that everyone agrees on?
people just like the word conservative
Or maybe just one where people could carry out rational conversation... too boring for you?This Political Forum would have little action if our values and beliefs weren't piqued or challenged.
Perhaps Kori can create a "forum jump" led "Apathy and Indifference". for those that prefer topics that don't inflame the passions of the partisan crowd.
Why discuss things that everyone agrees on?
Rational, meaning like this post from you?
^^^Quote: Originally posted by scott who gives a ? This is a message board - not a Presidential campaign.
The irony of it all.
Rational is relative Scott. Many people have differing views that cannot be bridged by reason.
Partisan and reasonably civil suit me fine but I can deal with extreme views, how about you? Like your above quote (not sure where the rational part is) they're all just opinions.
Last edited by jochhejaam; 07-31-2005 at 10:55 PM.
Exhibit 1: Yawny-Bore/TROHow can anyone be completely liberal or completely conservative? It is just not possible!
You're only getting one side if you listen to the cons and the news networks. The news networks are pro-administration because of the companies they are owned by. You want the other side try DailyKos, the Nation or the Daily Howler. It's a start to getting both sides.
Really? Ever heard my position on the "Drug War?"
I challenge you to provide a serious statement (meaning, obvious jokes aside) I have made that I haven't tried to be objective and rational. Care to provide the context of the quote you found for me? Is anything I said there not true?Rational, meaning like this post from you?
^^^
The irony of it all.
Rational is relative Scott. Many people have differing views that cannot be bridged by reason.
Partisan and reasonably civil suit me fine but I can deal with extreme views, how about you? Like your above quote (not sure where the rational part is) they're all just opinions.
Since the last time I tried to engage you in a discussion, you cowered away with "it's late, I'll have to get to this later" and then never did - I won't be holding my breath.
The abandonment of reason is the number 1 threat facing this country - not terrorism or social security or CIA leaks or budget deficits or social security. The flight from logic will be what crumbles our society, and it isn't bound to Republicans or Democrats.Many people have differing views that cannot be bridged by reason.
The abandonment of morals is the #1 threat facing our nation. Without moral absolutes and moral guidelines as a personal foundation or springboard for our thoughts there is no logical thinking.It's no surprise that in your posts that are totally lacking in rational thinking you would brush it aside as an "obvious joke"
Cowered?Since the last time I tried to engage you in a discussion, you cowered away with "it's late, I'll have to get to this later" and then never did - I won't be holding my breath.
The abandonment of reason is the number 1 threat facing this country - not terrorism or social security or CIA leaks or budget deficits or social security. The flight from logic will be what crumbles our society, and it isn't bound to Republicans or Democrats.
The reverence of God is the beginning of Wisdom. Prov. 1;7
You are a relative newcomer to this forum, jochhe, so maybe you aren't familiar with it's history. A lot of the people who used to post here to engage in rational discussion no longer do, and some of the rest of them have turned to the dark-side of partisan politics. As a result, this forum has been inundated with fruitless squabbling rather than meaningful conversation.It's no surprise that in your posts that are totally lacking in rational thinking you would brush it aside as an "obvious joke"
As a result of that, I spend much less time trying to engage anyone in meaningful conversation, fully aware of the futility of such an endevor. I have neither the time or patience to add in the occassional joke. If you don't have the history in this forum to recognize that, it really isn't my problem.
It's understandable that it is late. That's a perfectly good excuse to bow out of a thread until later. However, you raised a number of points, which you felt were valid - and may very well be - and I countered them. Rather than addressing my rebuttal, as you said you would, you scampered off to threads where no one would point out the logical and empirical flaws in your arguments. Don't worry, I don't wait with "baited breath" for anything. I have been around this forum long enough to know that people like you who aren't willing to engage in debate are a dime a dozen. I continue to come here because there some very knowledgable and reasonable posters who provide great insights, even if they don't share my opinion. Travis and FromWayDowntown most notably.Cowered? It was 12:45 a.m. here and I get up at 6 a.m. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by "not getting back to you" , I had no idea you were waiting with "baited breath" for a reply.
Morals should stem from logic, not the other way around. Any morals not founded in logic are rather pointless. It is the sheepish following of ideals not based on rational thinking that have threatened all societies. Inherent in logical thinking is ethical behavior. I believe it is wrong to murder in cold blood not because of some theistic set of morals, but because it is simply there is no rational justification to do so. If people would use their facilities of logic, they wouldn't need a book to tell them what is right or wrong.The abandonment of morals is the #1 threat facing our nation. Without moral absolutes and moral guidelines as a personal foundation or springboard for our thoughts there is no logical thinking.
It was my rebuttal of your contention of the important of theistic based morals that you failed to address last time- and yet here you are again, touting them. If you want to engage in a rational, fair discussion on the subject - I'd love to, let's start a thread. There won't be any namecalling, just a friendly debate. I'm skeptical as to your desire to do so, however, based on your short history in this forum.
If, on the other hand, you just want to put text in bold to make it seem like you are saying something important and use a bunch of emoticons, be my guest.
You haven't cornered the market on rationalism scott. And just because someone views their arguements as rational doesn't make it so. When a diverse majortiy of others see your thinking as rational then it may possibly be. It's not a sign of weakness to admit that at times we shed the rationale to engage in some fun.Quote: Originally posted by scott
Morals should stem from logic, not the other way around. Any morals not founded in logic are rather pointless. It is the sheepish following of ideals not based on rational thinking that have threatened all societies. Inherent in logical thinking is ethical behavior. I believe it is wrong to murder in cold blood not because of some theistic set of morals, but because it is simply there is no rational justification to do so. If people would use their facilities of logic, they wouldn't need a book to tell them what is right or wrong.
It was my rebuttal of your contention of the important of theistic based morals that you failed to address last time- and yet here you are again, touting them. If you want to engage in a rational, fair discussion on the subject - I'd love to, let's start a thread. There won't be any namecalling, just a friendly debate. I'm skeptical as to your desire to do so, however, based on your short history in this forum.
If, on the other hand, you just want to put text in bold to make it seem like you are saying something important and use a bunch of emoticons, be my guest.
And tout them I shall (theistic based morals). But...it's 7:00 p.m. here and I have an 8:00 dental then off to work.
Bold text and emoticons are meant to aid, emphasize and convey what are normally easily conveyed in face to face conversation. Try it sometime, it greatly adds to what the poster is trying to explain. (I hate monotone text
You just don't get it.You haven't cornered the market on rationalism scott. And just because someone views their arguements as rational doesn't make it so. When a diverse majortiy of others see your thinking as rational then it may possibly be. It's not a sign of weakness to admit that at times we shed the rationale to engage in some fun.
And tout them I shall (theistic based morals). But...it's 7:00 p.m. here and I have an 8:00 dental then off to work.
Bold text and emoticons are meant to aid, emphasize and convey what are normally easily conveyed in face to face conversation. Try it sometime, it greatly adds to what the poster is trying to explain. (I hate monotone text
While at one time this forum had some great threads with intelligent conversation, it is nowhere near that anymore. And why? Due to posters like you.
Well, I've been acused of being of being a bleeding liberal due to my unconventional choice of clothing, temporary belief that I was an alien and a penchant for men when it just wasn't fashionable. I've also been accused of being a facist due to my vast collection of Hitler memorribilia, my greeding of the public with a "heil Hitler motion" and mine moving to Germany. So I guess I can say I've seen the world from both sides of the spectrum.
While this forum once did have more substantive posts, it certainly doesn't suffer from a lack of a number of different opinions anymore. Look at it this way - This forum had little future if 5 people dominated the context of most major threads. Now they don't, and some people have chosen to take it out on everyone else. I suppose it's perfectly natural for some people to want to dominate a conversation, but much better for the longevity of the forum IMO if we have a diversity of opinions.While at one time this forum had some great threads with intelligent conversation, it is nowhere near that anymore. And why? Due to posters like you.
Allow me to paraphrase what you just said;
"While at one time this forum had some great threads with people that agreed with my opinions it is nowhere near that anymore. And why? Due to posters whose arguements I can't counter with intelligent arguements of my own".
Hang in there MIG, it's not that big of a deal. Besides, NBA basketball isn't that far away so I'll be spending less time here and more time there. A little something for you to look forward too.
Last edited by jochhejaam; 08-02-2005 at 07:00 PM.
Actually, for the most part I am at odds with the majority of the people in here. You can keep diverting attention from your apparent lack of the intelligent viewpoints you claim I fail to present.Allow me to paraphrase what you just said;
"While at one time this forum had some great threads with people that agreed with my opinions it is nowhere near that anymore. And why? Due to posters whose arguements I can't counter with intelligent arguements of my own".
Hang in there MIG, it's not that big of a deal. Besides, NBA basketball isn't that far away so I'll be spending less time here and more time there. A little something for you to look forward too.
A lot of words here, and you've had time for other responses... but yet haven't addressed the topic of our disagreement on the importance of theistic based morals.You haven't cornered the market on rationalism scott. And just because someone views their arguements as rational doesn't make it so. When a diverse majortiy of others see your thinking as rational then it may possibly be. It's not a sign of weakness to admit that at times we shed the rationale to engage in some fun.
And tout them I shall (theistic based morals). But...it's 7:00 p.m. here and I have an 8:00 dental then off to work.
Bold text and emoticons are meant to aid, emphasize and convey what are normally easily conveyed in face to face conversation. Try it sometime, it greatly adds to what the poster is trying to explain. (I hate monotone text
Way to show me.
If you rule out creationism as our reason for existing perhaps you could make a case for morals stemming from logic but for those of us that are creationists that would be untrue. (I don't know if you're atheist or agnotic or...) Being a firm believer in the creation of man by a supreme being as recorded in the book of Genesis, I adhere to the set of morals He has laid out in the scripture. His moral precepts are laid out quite clearly on what is acceptable and what is not. The only logic I need in regards to His moral absolutes is to attempt to apply them to life situations on a daily basis.Originally posted by scott:
Morals should stem from logic, not the other way around. Any morals not founded in logic are rather pointless.
Being a creation of God's what thoughts could I possibly come up with that would improve on what is already pristine in content? I believe it would be an affront to God (dumb) for me to attempt to apply logic to the truths he has already given to mankind. That's not to say that we don't explore the meaning of His Word in an attempt to better understand and more fully follow their intent. In essence God is the Potter, I am the clay, He made me and I wish to follow His rules. There's nothing in them that would make me want to do otherwise.
On the other hand the alternative is to believe that there is no God and that we have to implement logic and find our own morals (or not) and that man exists solely by chance. That's where evolution, a theory which has been around only about 150 years, comes in. This theory based on the mutation of small organisms into higher, healthier, and smarter life form has been proven false. Science tells us that higher life forms cannot evolve from the mutation of cells , that the mutation of cells can only weaken life forms. Mutations that occur naturally, which is rare in and of itself, have shown to be harmful to whatever it is that is mutating, or at best, neutral.
The theory of evolution would have us believe that the butterfly and rhinocerus are sisters of the same evolutionary process. Sound rediculous, it is! Scientist have used an illustration regarding the complexities of the human body and it's functions;
The chances of the human body being created by chance in light of it's complexities is the same as a tornado sweeping through a scrap yard and assembling a 747 jetliner. The odds are not astronomical, they are totally out of the realm of possibility.
There may be irreconcilable divisions between creationists and evolutions regarding the logicalness of rationalizing our own set of morals...?
The Book and it's precepts were here long before you and you were fully aware of it's code of conduct so where's the logic behind you ascertaining that you don't need the Book? It's already an absolute and so it's of no consequence that you follow it but say you didn't need to be told to do so. In essence you were told and you do follow. That's makes you a disciple at least by proxy. His Word is the "Power of Attorney" and you "sign" it by agreeing that's it's logical to do so (moral).Originally posted by scott: Inherent in logical thinking is ethical behavior. I believe it is wrong to murder in cold blood not because of some theistic set of morals, but because it is simply there is no rational justification to do so. If people would use their facilities of logic, they wouldn't need a book to tell them what is right or wrong
Also, who determines what is ethical and who is right? That's were chaos comes in to play. If you ask enough people, most who would claim to be logical, and tallied up a list of things that this mass of logical people said are okay to do and then adhered to the list of things that are "okay to do" I'm betting just about anything and everything would be okay! That's why God's ultimate standard of morals should be adhered to. It's been there since the beginning of time, and it's absolutely thorough in content. At the very least there should be a consensus that His morals are unequivocally righteous and follow them if you please.
adam and eve must have been superhuman genuises
thats all i have to say
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
