Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Moral Compass / Political Leanings (FE)

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Moral Compass / Political Leanings (FE)
    Posted: 11 February 2013 at 2:29pm
Alright FE, I'm biting your bait here. If you're not trolling us and you're really open to discussion for this, I hope you'll take time to read what I've got to say and engage me in some actual, productive dialogue here becaue frankly I find this entire subject fascinating.
But I want to respond to this in particular-
 
Originally posted by FE FE wrote:

I find it amazing that other liberals have sided with this guy... He clearly has a different view of morality than most. But, isn't that the goal of liberalism? To make our old moral "standards" fit the "new and improved" anything goes viewpoints?...
 
But I've always been interested in the subject of relative morality. I think this is a central point of confusion with human beings, particularly with the religious.
 
Firstly, I think that you're working on a straw man definition of liberalism-liberalism has much less to do with morality and much to do with humanism. Liberalism (as we know it now, not by the technical definition) tends to view the pursuit of human rights en masse and the associative quality of life as the central point of their political ideologies, whereas conservatives tend to view quality of life as being something determined on an individual basis.
 
So for example, a liberal would look at education reform as funneling money into public school reformation so that a mass population can benefit from it whereas a conservative would likely say that quality of education is achieved through individual choice and therefore suggest something along the lines of homeschool vouchers so that a person can pursue his / her education at an individual level.
 
As such, liberalism tends to appeal to the poverty stricken who benefit the most from public goods whereas conservativism is going to attract those who are already able to provide for their on an individual basis and therefore will reap the most benefit from the system.
 
Now I'm going to blow your mind with this-they're actually both quite conservative. See, they're both choosing the option that benefits themselves the most. Both options will allow either party the individual pursuit of happiness to the maximum profit of the economy. In other words, they can both be right at the same time. It's not as black and white as both parties would seek to make it.
 
That's why your insistence on dividing up liberal and conservative bugs me, because it's a complicated web of logic that only works when you view it on a two dimensional plane. Any effort to dig further beyond the surface will simply confound one's own ideology and blur the lines between the two positions.
 
Now....
 
Religion.
 
You, as do most conservative Christians I know, subscribe to the idea tha that relative morality leads to a lack thereof. You view morality as a discipline factor-without the punitive aspects of God you feel that one has no motivation or leanings towards positivity but rather drifts on the line, diving into either good or bad as the situation sees fit.
 
I wholeheartedly disagree with this.
 
First of all, the word morality.
 
There are two ways to look at that word-one is in the strictest definition in which morality defines your sense of good and bad. The second, is that morality simply defines the GOOD decisions someone makes and that the inverse is obviously immoral. That's straight from wikipedia, BTW. Not my own definitions.
 
Anyway, viewing purely from the second definition, it's impossible for morality to truly be relative in society because the lack of morality is evil and evil is generally defined by the society you live in.
 
So be you Christian, Muslim, Atheist, etc, by American standards if you molest children, murder, rape, or steal, you're a bad person. In fact, these morals have existed long before Christianity.
 
Specifically, you claim that liberalism encourages moral relativity. But let me ask you this-do you think someone that's not your denomination of Christianity is going to hell? I come from a church where the people aren't allowed to watch TV or use the internet. For you to accept their Christian salvation, you have to exercise a certain amount of moral relativity.
 
In this light, we all believe that morals are relative. So your continual insistence that liberalism endorses a nihlistic society in which every thing is good and nothing is bad is entirely false because that society CANNOT exist. It's not possible.
 
Anyway, I'd love to hear your thoughts and the thoughts of anyone brave enough to make it through this.
 
Big smile
 
 
 
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 February 2013 at 2:42pm
Please explain the evolution of 'Law' without the initial mass belief system of 'religion' in the individual cultures as they developed their public Laws and moral codes. When we crawled out of the caves and formed tribal groups was was the usual initial belief system, one developed by the 'Gods' that in the perception of the time molded and controled the world they lived in. Man began to construct a system of codes that 'tribe' should live by in order for the tribe to survive. The code usually transformed into a mass belief system now called a religion in order to have a central belief system now between the tribes in order for the overall leaders of the developing culture to control the masses and their behavior.

Strat, what would you consider the moral code to live by, by your standards. As you relate those ideas and ask for acceptance are not you creating a 'mass' belief system for all to follow in order to live in your culture. And when you decide on the :aws of your culture do you not establish a 'moral' code to live by, and if you do not how would you define those that don't live by your belief system to the others that belief in order to keep your culture and belief system moving foward without questions from the believers.

It is a complex lesson in humanity, but there still needs to be a moral compass where the mass belief system benifits the whole, what would result if everyone got to decide their own moral compass knowing the mind of man.

Religion today is the core of many cultural belief systems, and those that still belief being critisized by those that don't are not recieving the justice the non believer is trying to install by his treatment of the believer. Just because there are those that do not accept your mass belief system, does not justify you acting outside of the cultural code and laws established based on that religion or mass belief system. The old "When in Rome" argument of diversity many seem to forget.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 February 2013 at 4:12pm
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Please explain the evolution of 'Law' without the initial mass belief system of 'religion' in the individual cultures as they developed their public Laws and moral codes.
 
I would go at this in a couple of ways.
 
Firstly, I'd tell you to read (or as you likely read it in school, reread) Platos' The Republic. In it we see the dialectic as the basis for deciding law-discussion between two parties that leads to a mutual result.
 
Philosophy, which in many ways forms the foundation of law, has always had a tendency to look at religion in its most sarcastic light. Plato, writing through Socrates, used religion to prove his points but the goal that he sought to achieve was the answer that you ended up with when both parties argued their sides to the simplest solution.
 
So to that extent, I'd say that morality is actually acting to the mutual benefit of those around you. And in fact the Bible would back me up on this-yet, many of Paul and Jesus' teachings were around long before Themselves. The reason as Christians see Jesus as a revolutionary figure is because he redefined OUR OWN religion, yet philosophers had sought out and proved His ideologies long before He appeared.
 
Now, this can turn into a circular chicken and the egg discussion. From a religion perspective, I'd say that God saw the evolution of man's intellect and chose that time for Christ because they were ready to receive and understand His teachings.
 
From a secular standpoint I'd say that some of writer's of the Gospel were influenced by Greek philosophy.
 
Again, it's all depending on your standpoint. That said, I think what this does prove is that the basic ideas of the Golden Rule and self sacrifice existed long before Christ taught them.
 
I'd call it a basic element of any species surviving. You can see it recurring throughout nature-lions kill other creatures but if they killed each other indiscriminantly they'd have ceased to exist before they even got going.
 
All organisms capable of thought on earth are alive in some way because instinct tells them not to be self destructive. In that same sense, when we see someone cry that invokes emotion, no? That's why babies cry. Babies aren't taught to cry by the Bible, it's an instinctive reaction from birth because it causes a reaction.
 
Humans respond negatively to seeing one another in distress or pain, just like animals, So naturally it goes against our own instincts to cause each other pain. Hence the Golden Rule.
 
It's very basic instinct, in my opinion. I think that, with or without God, man would still not randomly murder himself just for funsies.
 
Hell, he did with his belief in God. Half of the serial killers (obviously a sarcastic statistic) you hear say God told them to do it. A warped conscience can't be reasoned with in human means, regardless of religion psychopaths will be psychopaths.
 
Now, you are right about the fact that I can't separate religion from our collective belief system because it has so heavily influenced it that doing so would be impossible.
 
But religion is specific-instinct tells you not to rape, religion tells you not to commit adultery. The idea behind religion is to take you one step beyond instinct and make you a better person, and in that I see religion as a great thing. If you follow the teachings of early philosophers, they would have pushed you much harder and with much more discipline than Christ Himself. Christ was forgiving of the human natutre, Plato would have said that a man who couldn't control his own lusts and desires is no better than a pig in the field.
 
So it's there, regardless of religion or not.
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6544
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 February 2013 at 4:34pm
Sounds like you are in a class on the subject.

I just find it interesting how one group with a differing set of moral or mass system beliefs almost always tend to impose that belief system on those that do not believe as they do. They will justify their belief with writings that conform to their agenda, and will immediately cast off any writings and opinion that differs from their belief of the moment.

Strat you are really no different than the "Bible Thumper" just that your bible of belief is just different than theirs. And your need to impose and justify your belief as the norm is again no different than theirs.

Religion and Politics, same animals in different dress, each willing to impose their beliefs and resisting, sometimes violently, any attempt of another's belief being imposed on them.

Before the enlightenment of the Greek and Roman era's philosophers the 'Gods' usually were the 'supreme' writers, through men of that belief system, of the Laws of that culture.

Ancient man had no true science and for what they could not explain they conveniently used a deity or 'religion' to explain those occurrences of nature as well as man. Cultures across the globe with no contact developed similar beliefs from "Rah" the ancient Egyptian Sun God, to the Ancient Native American Plains Indians Thunderbird. Each explaining the movement of the sun, and how the sun rested with the moon still providing light. The similarities of Mayan construction and ancient Egyptian as well as the intent of the similar hieroglyphic writings in the stone of each still have modern anthropologists guessing on the origins of the similarity.

Edited by oldsoldier - 11 February 2013 at 4:35pm
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 February 2013 at 5:07pm
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Sounds like you are in a class on the subject. 
 
Actually, no. My beliefs come entirely from home study-I've mentioned on here before that I was in training to be a minister a kid. I can almost guarntee you that I can out Bible any Bible thumper you can throw at me. I know that Book inside and out, and in fact still retain my beliefs. So actually I have the real world experience in this, not the book learnin.
 
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:


Strat you are really no different than the "Bible Thumper" just that your bible of belief is just different than theirs. And your need to impose and justify your belief as the norm is again no different than theirs.
 
I'd love for you to point out in my post where I want to impose anything on anyone. I made two points in those posts-that morals exist outside of religion and that you can't define liberals and conservatives with blanket terminologies because those fail.
 
Those are amoral observations with no implication of moral decision making.
 
And I didn't answer this question on purpose-
 
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Strat, what would you consider the moral code to live by, by your standards
 
Because you would have just responded with
 
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

your need to impose and justify your belief as the norm

I respect everyone's beliefs. I don't respect fallacies, however. If I see something that is blatantly and observationally incorrect I will point it out.
 
Much of our system is built on fallacies. Over time people have developed these cute images of each other (like how Democrats think Republicans are assault weapon toting ignorant Bible thumpers and how Republicans think Democrats want your children to have sex and gays to marry llamas) that are absolutely ignorant and false.

I believe that living a life base entirely on ignorance of your enemies is depriving yourself of the pursuit of knowledge. Why end this life knowing so little about it? It's a waste of the intellect that God gave us.

You speak from your experience, OS (and I respect your experience and attitudes immensely) but I can't speak from your experience so I speak from own. Asking anything more of me is silly because that's not possible.
 
But you are right-it is a natural human desire to invoke one's ideas on another person. The key is to rise above your base level human desires. I think if you re-read my posts you'll find that we're not really in much disagreement aside from your personal observations of my own ideologies.
 
Either way, I love these discussions. It's my nerd fun


Edited by stratoaxe - 11 February 2013 at 5:08pm
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 February 2013 at 10:12pm
What is the purpose of life?...


That is what I think of when comparing peoples world views. 

Now if we ignore the "religious" aspect as that is "mans" interpretation of Gods viewpoints. We are left at the most basic raw level with that question. The purpose of life. 

If you look at it from a secular viewpoint (meaning what is taught in schools today). Our lives are just chance, cells developed on their own after millions of years and somehow our genetics allowed for a massive "positive" mutations that brought us into being (course almost every mutation we see in science is actually negative and breaks down the genome, but we are supposed to ignore that...). When we die, that is it. How we live on earth doesn't really matter, so "borrowing" music we didn't buy, isn't really "wrong" as it is just a little thing that doesn't really matter. Or taking a cookie, not a big deal, no one will notice and it doesn't hurt anyone. Our morality is based not on our actions but on the result of our actions... If no one is harmed, or notices, then it isn't "wrong".  And the basis for right and wrong is completely human focused, as if we are all that matters.

To me, that viewpoint is very two dimensional. As we only look at the here and now, and we pretend to know what happened in the past using our rose colored glasses to make it fit a certain preconceived notion of reality. 

It ignores a major part of humanity. The spirit. 

All throughout civilization we have always had the concept of the spirit world, even the American indians who never were "indoctrinated" by European civilization still had a great respect for the spirit world as we found when the white man came to America.

Yet today, we ignore that aspect of our lives. Most everyone believes in their "soul" but they put it aside, and ignore that whole discussion. It is easier to just think about the here and now, and ignore that aspect. As there is no way to "scientifically" prove or disprove it. And yet, if we accepted that we are not only a human body but a spirit body as well, and that spirit body would live on after our  human body dies... Then our actions would have an effect on not just the "here and now" but also the spirit world... THAT is three dimensional thinking!

And yet, statistically speaking the majority of Americans believe in God. And believe in an afterlife. But, most don't live with a moral compass that agrees with that belief. Which is why so many people are cynical of "christians". Shoot, I don't blame them, some of the worst people I have known in my life were self professing "christians". Yet they didn't live their lives as if they had a christian world view or moral compass. And certainly didn't live it according to the affect their sin (aka morals) was having on their spirits.


So that is one aspect to think about, the spiritual beings that we all are. Many ignore that part, but it has an impact in your life even if you ignore it, doesn't make it go away. 

Life is about choices, and for me as a Christian, I choose everyday how I will live my life. And the choices I make will affect my life, and my kids lives. As we all make choices everyday that affect others around us. We can pretend that our "sin aka morals" hurts no one, as they don't know, but I truly believe that the "wages of sin is death" meaning that EVERY sin that I commit, will result in separating myself from God. And the only way to "fix" my spiritual divide caused by my sin is to accept the grace and use the blood of Christ to cover that sin. 

Does that mean I don't sin... Of course not, but it bothers me when I do... As I feel that separation from God when I make a choice that is wrong. And yet to someone with a secular world view, they would say that is just silly, and if it doesn't hurt someone else then what is the big deal. And you know what, if I keep sinning in the same way, after a while, that sin won't bother me anymore... I have changed my morality to fit a new standard... And that is where we are as a society. We pushed away the morals of our past, and now hold "new, and improved" morals that aren't new or improved, as society is always ready to fall into depravity. All it takes is desensitizing ourselves to sin, and that over time degrades our morals and makes things that would never be acceptable, to become normal, and even accepted. 

All going back to the question at the beginning of this post. "What is the purpose of life?"


For me, the answer to that question is to use my life to glorify God. I don't live for myself but to sacrifice my secular human nature to instead of living for myself. I try and live for God. 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2013 at 8:36pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

When we die, that is it. How we live on earth doesn't really matter, so "borrowing" music we didn't buy, isn't really "wrong" as it is just a little thing that doesn't really matter
 
I find this to be a particularly poor interpretation of atheistic beliefs.
 
Here's the thing, as I said earlier, I do believe and God. I agree that a Christian who doesn't follow his / her own beliefs is a terrible ambassador of the religion, hence why I don't label myself a Christian. It's not that I want to distance myself from my religion, it's that I don't follow my religion and don't want to represent it poorly.
 
That said, I went through a pretty rough period of unbelief in my life. I got pretty sarcastic about God and religion and overtime this built a barrier that very nearly cost me my faith-and in turn, I began to look at life as just how you described it. I felt that I had wrongly believed in an afterlife and that this world was all I really had.
 
But that freeing sensation that you and others in the religious world never happened. Rather, it made me want to pursue life to its fullest. I realized what a precious gift life is to simply waste sitting around playing video games. It made me want to really work at getting a relationship going, experience kids and family life. It made me realize how selfishly I had pursued life before that.
 
So for me, the awakening wasn't that I could do what I want when I want, it was that the belief in the afterlife causes us to temper our expectations for this one. People in church tend to shrug off difficulty because they believe that this life is but a vapor-which, true that this may be, is a terrible way to waste the only earthly existence you'll ever have.
 
Further, I think that simply classifying any group of people as careless thieves and thinkless sinners is insulting to your own intelligence. You're a smart guy, I can tell by the way you present your points. One of the things you learn after high school and the idiot circus you see there is that life fails to live up to our stereotypes. I have atheist friends that would never pirate music, that never lie, etc etc.
 
These are individual choices. I have a devout Christian friend that would argue FOR pirating software-he'll tell you all day that it's not stealing it's sharing and that it just became a moral problem when the government told us it was stealing. Pirating is simply violating a term of agreement-it's not actual theft. Theft is taking something that doesn't belong to you, these people simply put their copy of a piece of software or music up for you to copy.
 
That's the thing though-right and wrong isn't so easy as "this person has morals, this one doesn't" and those types of nitpickings are what separate entire denominations of Christians from one another. So why wouldn't atheists and unbelievers see the same thing?

I agree with both you and OS-I think that religion has stood the test of time. I think we spend far too much time relying on scientific information that we've yet to see. Countless arguments on the Internet involve scientific data that we don't understand or have never seen for ourselves yet we blindly trust the word of science. That's how I view religion-I've seen lives changed, I've seen problems solved, and we could argue all day about the validity or plausibility of these things but I'll hold on to my thinkless evidence and let the rest hold on to theirs.
 
But that's my view-it's not everyone's and I refuse to believe that just because someone doesn't believe in a punitive Higher Power that they will then become counterproductive members of society. I think that morality and integrity go far beyond the bounds of religion.
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2013 at 8:55pm
I agree that others outside a "God" based moral world view can have similar morals to the ones God put in place. And oftentimes I generalize groups in ways that lump everyone into the same category and that isn't correct or true. There are always exceptions to rules when talking morality. 

But, there is something to the way our political class behaves which shows they are more concerned with manipulating the public than actually being truthful. 

For example, tonight is the state of the union (starts in a few minutes) and I can bet that there won't be a single mention of the fact that gas prices are now 3.79 a gallon, and unemployment has skyrocketed, and 11,000+ people are joining the ranks of food stamp recipients each day. All while my personal health insurance is going up another 23% if I keep the same plan...

THAT is the state of our union, a government who is spending way too much money, while NOT fixing anything but only making things worse. But, the focus will be on gun violence and taking away more of our rights...

And the media will follow along as they do when democrats are in charge. 

To me, that is immoral. You have soldiers killing themselves daily at massive numbers, and the fort hood victims have been denied help because instead of calling the attack a "terrorist" attack, they have classified it as "work place violence"...

The media COULD do something about this, but they don't... Why?

It has to do with the country moving the direction they want, more power to the government and if they play their cards right, they might move into the government too, like so many news people have done. It is corruption at the worst. Of course both parties are to blame for this mess, but it is just annoying to watch the emperor  dance while our country is being destroyed by our ruling class. 


But, back on topic, who decides right and wrong? 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4785
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2013 at 9:29pm
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:


That said, I went through a pretty rough period of unbelief in my life. I got pretty sarcastic about God and religion and overtime this built a barrier that very nearly cost me my faith-and in turn, I began to look at life as just how you described it. I felt that I had wrongly believed in an afterlife and that this world was all I really had.
 
But that freeing sensation that you and others in the religious world never happened. Rather, it made me want to pursue life to its fullest. I realized what a precious gift life is to simply waste sitting around playing video games. It made me want to really work at getting a relationship going, experience kids and family life. It made me realize how selfishly I had pursued life before that.



So you might find this shocking, but I did too. Even after being healed as a kid... I had some very hard years as a young man, I was abused, bullied, and tormented, some of it was because of my parents religion (they even had a house church...). 

I watched as our house was foreclosed and went to the auction where an on the phone bidder bought our house... (turns out it was my grandparents.). 

I was TICKED at God, and blamed Him for all of my troubles. Shoot at 14 I was working three jobs, and buying my own food, and clothing. As I was tired of wearing shoes with cardboard inside so my toes didn't touch the ground... Of course that drive made me who I am, and pushed me to get off my rear end and make something of myself. 

But, as I got older, and realized that it wasn't God's fault my dad quit his job and I went though those tough times. It was a result of choices of the people around me. Their "morals" and work ethic (or lack thereof) affected my life. And their focus on themselves instead of doing what was "right" deeply affected my youth. So I did my own thing for many years, and was able to accomplish some amazing things even with all of that turmoil in my home life. It made me a stronger person, and helped me realize that we all get to make our own choices in life. And those choices have consequences. Good and bad...

Too many times people don't DO things themselves and try to wait for it to be done for them... I learned that life lived waiting for others to accomplish things for you will leave you waiting forever. 

I also realized that God was there the whole time, and looking back it was so much easier to see His impact in the choices I made and the people that I was able to meet and learn from, because that is what life is all about. Learning, growing and doing. I too hate it when people act like this life doesn't matter. Because it DOES. God gives each of us gifts and what we do with those gifts matters. He made me able to ride a bike and gave me a huge desire to have fun. So I did, and that fun helped me deal with the darkness that could have destroyed me if I had let it. For people to act like the gifts they were given should be ignored, as this life doesn't matter is just like the parable where the master gives the different servants talents (money) and the ones with more skills get more, and the ones with less get less. Course in that parable, one guy just buried his talent in the ground and did nothing with it... What we DO with what we are given is the key. We have to do our best in everything we do. So if you are cutting the grass, are you cutting it to get the job done, or are you doing it as unto the Lord. That is where I see a difference in world views. Each job I do, no matter how small, I do my absolute best I can at that job. As it isn't being done for me, but as a testament to the gifts God has given me.  

Because to me, it is a way to show God that I am taking each thing He gives me and doing my best at it. I'm sure other people without a God based world view do things to the best of their ability, but the focus for each of us is different. I'm doing it FOR God, as a "Thank you" for his blessings, while they are doing it for themselves.

That difference in focus changes motivation, and results.  




Edited by FreeEnterprise - 12 February 2013 at 9:59pm
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2013 at 9:37pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

To me, that is immoral.
 
I see politics and money as amoral. The problem is, if you try to invoke God in politics the entire system of capitalism is driven and powered by greed. If people didn't pay 600 bucks for ever iPad release while their neighbors and their families lose jobs and go on to government assistance then A:) the system would crumble and B:) the neighbors and their families wouldn't NEED the government assistance to begin with.
 
The free market operates for one thing-money. What was it Jesus said? That it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven. Now, I realize that this is one of those misquoted partial references where the second verse qualifies that it is indeed possible, but Jesus wanted people to understand that you couldn't serve God and Mammon (the secular world).
 
I hear people all the time say "Oh, that person gives X percent of his income to charity, how wonderful!" but you and I both know that God asks for more. He wants everything.
 
Capitalism wouldn't operate if everyone gave everything. The economy isn't powered by needs, it's powered by wants. Trying to interact that with the Christian ideology is an exercise in futility.
 
Furthermore, Jesus said to render unto Ceasar's that which is Ceasar's. The very fact that there are "Christian" Republicans who will make it their life's effort to combat a fractional percentage of a tax raise because it may lower corporate profits by a fractional percentage makes me laugh-God doesn't care about the tax rate. God cares about the advancement of the Church. The Republican party has whored itself out to churches and the religious and I would almost be willing to bet that, if you believe in the same God I read about in the Bible, it makes him want to vomit.
 
You're right-extortion and political theft are wrong. But we don't live in that kind of country-our tax rates are quite low for the amount of help and assistance available from the government. People live the highest quality of life the world has ever known. It might be harder for a business to make a profit right now, but I highly doubt God Himself is weeping tears because the Dow drops and someone gets dropped into a lower tax bracket.
 
All the while Christians on these insane political rants have made the Church a laughing stock. Instead of protesting gun control and taxation they should be protesting the corruption among their ranks.
 
You know what annoys me? Televangelists with million dollar homes and private jets that used capitalism to rob the flock of its money and spirituality. Remember the workers who claimed they did things in Jesus' name and He sent them straight to hell? The Church isn't a money pit.
 
But I digress-I love capitalism because I separate my religion from my politics. I think it's an amazing system. But this modern movement of reconciling to Christianity is a product of state sponsored manipulation. There's a reason "in God we trust" was added to the money-if you own the Church you own the people. They wanted to manipulate the people into believing that their very religion was being threatened and that the government was an angelic protector.
 
It's the same reason they want people to believe that we gave Israel back to the Jews when in reality Britain did it because the US and Britain refused to accept the refugees and needed a place to put them. But if history is warped and the US is able to relate itself to your religion it becomes a sin to question the state. We love to pretend that we're always the good guys with a holy cause to fight.
 
Anyway, as to your question-
 
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

But, back on topic, who decides right and wrong? 
 
That's complex. Taboos are generally a social thing. Hence why killing a cow in one country is evil while in America it's, at most, just cruelty to an animal.
 
Social standards and rules develop naturally to support the life of a society. And over time those standards change, sometimes violently (as we saw in the civil rights movement) as people mold them to ensure equality.
 
The rights in the Constitution are legal matters, not moral matters. I highly doubt that God cares if you're able to own a gun and furthermore if you do as my more redneck FB members have promised and shoot the cop that tries to take it you've committed murder because no object is worth your life as per the Bible.
 
So, aside from suppressing religion, were the Constitution to be based purely on the Bible, it would be quite empty. Rather, those ideas of right and wrong are social progression brought on by a need for equality.
 
Society decides right and wrong. Religion takes those rights and wrongs further or denounces them. Traditionally, the Bible has actually acted COUNTER to society's ideas. The whole idea of the Bible is to separate from the world and identify yourself with God.
 
So lots of people decide right and wrong, regardless of religion and often to spite it.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2013 at 9:40pm
Originally posted by Free Enterprise Free Enterprise wrote:

Too many times people don't DO things themselves and try to wait for it to be done for them... I learned that life lived waiting for others to accomplish things for you will leave you waiting forever. 
 
I had a spiritual awakening myself, but I won't share it on here because I don't want to open it up to criticism. It's a personal thing I want to hold on to. Maybe a conversation we can have privately in the future.

Regardless, I agree. I think that God gives you most everything you need to figure life out and often we're just too stubborn to accept that the solutions are already there.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.328 seconds.