In article <Qt2Cf.6819$vU2.94@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Istlota
says...
>I did not suggest that the men you mentioned are good guys. My point is
>that, yes, they are bad guys but that doesn't automatically make the rest
of
>us good guys.
Well, that's not TOO hard of an ethical dilemma:
Have you enslaved anyone?
Have you ever eaten anyone, in the sense of a Philly cheesesteak, rather
than
the Ellen/Anne sense?
Have you ever performed involuntary human vivisection?
If the answers to these are "no", then you're at least somewhat better as
a
person than Nathan Bedford Forrest, Jeffrey Dahmer and Josef Mengele.
>Your argument assures eternal war (which of course is what W. has been
>campaigning for since he came out of hiding after 911). Your argument
>insists that there must always be not only bad guys, but also good guys.
Not really. There CAN be situations with no good guys, say two pedophiles
fighting over a copy of the NAMBLA newsletter. But once again, if you use
simple tests, like the one above, it's not that hard to tell if there are
good
guys, or at least "better" guys.
>My argument is two millennia old ... "Let him without sin cast the first
>stone."
My argument is MUCH older... "Cast a stone at me and I'll whip your ass."
Although to be honest, a big enough stone will probably get you shot.
>Again, you change my argument into something else, and then argue against
>it. I did not argue to do nothing.
Maybe your argument is so ambiguous that like the salt vampire in the
"Star
Trek" episode "The Man Trap", everybody who sees your argument sees
something
different...
>Wickedness in this world _must_ be fought by the enlightened of us. We
just
>need to pick weapons that work. If physical war worked, considering how
many
>millennia it has been tried, we would not be having this discussion. War
is
>ancient. How many millenina must we keep making the same mistake?
So similarly, if water put out fires, considering how many millenia it has
been
tried, we would not need fire departments?
>All the entities I just listed caused the deaths of innocent civilians.
>Hence, they (we?) are all evil ones. The degree by which they (we?) are
>evil is just a trick to avoid dealing with the horror of war.
So then, because they both broke the law, Byron de la Beckwith and Lil'
Kim are
both equally evil, right?
>> I don't believe in "god". I have no "holy men". I believe that I have
no
>duty
>> to be a slave. I would cheerfully kill anyone who tried to make me
slave.
>I
>> would organize other people to that end.
>
>You do believe in god and I think this can be proven ... to least to a
>reasonable observer.
Strange, I ALWAYS say I DON'T. And just WHO is this alleged "god"?
Horus?
Zeus? Ahura Mazda? Yaweh? Jesus? Allah? Cthulhu? Daehok?
And why JUST one?
You kind of sound like one of those christian fundamentalists who tell
homo***uals, "You're REALLY straight, you just don't know it..."
>> Isn't this the ultimate evil of religion? SOMEBODY is always using it
to
>> explain why you shouldn't resist being a slave... or a bar of soap,
>because to
>> do so would make you "as bad as" the guy trying to enslave or murder
you.
>
>I argue the existence of God, you argue the futility of religion. These
are
Of course those two things aren't mutually exclusive. In Robert E.
Howard's
Conan novels, Crom Cruagh, the god of the Cimmerians, exists, he just
doesn't do
anything for you.
>two completely different arguments. Yes, religion is stupid, ignorant,
>self-defeatist, and a hundred other adjectives which you could mention
and I
>would probably agree with. But, all these things are not God. All these
That presupposes "god" AT ALL... and "his" (or her) identity... nevermind
the
EQUAL possibility of MULTIPLE gods... and goddesses. Prove to me that
Lena
Horne and Dorothy Dandridge aren't goddesses.
>God is Truth, Justice, Love, and Wisdom. If you believe in these things,
and
>I have reason to think you do, that you do believe in God.
"God" is a way to get people to do things that you want them to do that
you
couldn't otherwise convince them to do by means of logical argument... for
instance being a slave... or flying an airliner into a building.
--
--
Gun control, the theory that 110lb. women should have to fistfight with
210lb.
rapists.
|
