Don't get me started on "Y"Gawdzilla wrote:So some of you are okay with "X is always wrong"? That's troubling.

Don't get me started on "Y"Gawdzilla wrote:So some of you are okay with "X is always wrong"? That's troubling.
No, but does the rightness of an action depend on what is "owed" by one person to another, or a group? Whether something is owed depends on the legal system in a given jurisdiction, or the moral/ethical opinion of a given individual.pawiz wrote:Does this girl "owe" anything to the human race. I think not.Coito ergo sum wrote:The child is 13, and is the last remaining woman on Earth. Without her being impregnated, the entire human species will go extinct. Yet, she is selfish and won't consent. Is it wrong to save the human race by forcing sex?sandinista wrote:see post above
"the idea that someone is better or worse because of an accident of birth"
as stupid as being a christian or muslim or whatever because of where you happen to be born. Why are you in search of an absolute before you die? I could probably chuck one out for you, how bout, "child rape is wrong". Maybe there is another side to the coin? If so throw it back at me. If not, there you go, your welcome.
First you might have to show me a country that has been ethical in ALL it's policies ! or do you think that the Merkin backed invasion of east timor by Indonesia (and how many US "advisors") was some thing you can be proud of ? do you want to take responsibility and try to justify for ALL the evils your country has committed ? i'm british/english and I know we did horrific things .. how can i be Proud of things I DID NOT DO (or ashamed).Gawdzilla wrote:If you think it's always bad, you need to show that. I'd be interested in seeing just one absolute before I die.Feck wrote:Gawdzilla wrote:Sweeping generalizations again. "X is always bad". Prove it.
Well I don't need to prove it do I! the idea that someone is better or worse because of an accident of birth is stupid ,a persons actions may or may not gain them respect but the country or the ancestry of their birth neither credits them or damns them .
I can neither be proud because I'm british nor should I be ashamed of that fact ....I do not take credit for Shackleton's heroics nor am I responsible for the golden temple massacre !
sometimes Y.pawiz wrote:Don't get me started on "Y"Gawdzilla wrote:So some of you are okay with "X is always wrong"? That's troubling.
And the human race should be saved because.... so we can fuck it up and the tigers again.Coito ergo sum wrote:No, but does the rightness of an action depend on what is "owed" by one person to another, or a group? Whether something is owed depends on the legal system in a given jurisdiction, or the moral/ethical opinion of a given individual.pawiz wrote:Does this girl "owe" anything to the human race. I think not.Coito ergo sum wrote:The child is 13, and is the last remaining woman on Earth. Without her being impregnated, the entire human species will go extinct. Yet, she is selfish and won't consent. Is it wrong to save the human race by forcing sex?sandinista wrote:see post above
"the idea that someone is better or worse because of an accident of birth"
as stupid as being a christian or muslim or whatever because of where you happen to be born. Why are you in search of an absolute before you die? I could probably chuck one out for you, how bout, "child rape is wrong". Maybe there is another side to the coin? If so throw it back at me. If not, there you go, your welcome.
If a female tiger becomes the last surviving female of the species, would we only save the species if she consented willingly to mate with a remaining male? I doubt it. We'd probably suggest that the survival of an entire species of animal is worth forcibly impregnating the one remaining female.
Ergo, I would argue that humans are no less valuable than tigers, and saving the human species by forcibly impregnating the last remaining female may be the right thing to do at the time.
As far fetched as the example is, it may well show that even the claim "child rape is wrong" is not absolute.
Why? Can't a person love a country with faults? Can't a person love a country that has dark aspects to its history? And, even though all countries have faults and have done wrong, must we grade them all the same? Can we not be more proud of England in the 1970s than the Soviet Union in the 1930s?Feck wrote:First you might have to show me a country that has been ethical in ALL it's policies !Gawdzilla wrote:If you think it's always bad, you need to show that. I'd be interested in seeing just one absolute before I die.Feck wrote:Gawdzilla wrote:Sweeping generalizations again. "X is always bad". Prove it.
Well I don't need to prove it do I! the idea that someone is better or worse because of an accident of birth is stupid ,a persons actions may or may not gain them respect but the country or the ancestry of their birth neither credits them or damns them .
I can neither be proud because I'm british nor should I be ashamed of that fact ....I do not take credit for Shackleton's heroics nor am I responsible for the golden temple massacre !
Not I. I don't try to justify anything that is "evil." Although, I don't really think that evil exists as a thing in and of itself. Evil is a value judgment placed on a thing or an action.Feck wrote:
or do you think that the Merkin backed invasion of east timor by Indonesia (and how many US "advisors") was some thing you can be proud of ? do you want to take responsibility and try to justify for ALL the evils your country has committed ?
The issue at hand is not whether you are proud or ashamed of particular things. Patriotism is merely love, devotion or loyalty to one's country. One can love one's country, and not be proud of many of the things it did. One can be loyal and devoted, and seek to improve it.Feck wrote:
i'm british/english and I know we did horrific things .. how can i be Proud of things I DID NOT DO (or ashamed).
Perhaps, but patriotism does not require a descent into extremes. Patriotism often requires resistance to, not support of, tyranny, despotism, and nationalism.Feck wrote:
Patriotism is the thin end of the wedge ,the fat end of that wedge is Nationalism Racism .
Many countries. In the fight against the illegal Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, it was arguably the right thing to do. Arguably we should not have helped them, and allowed the Soviets to murder a few million more of their civilians, but that depends on how you look at it.Feck wrote:
Just one absolute ???? Who armed the Taliban (in a Previous incarnation )
Many countries armed Iraq, including France, China, Russia, and many others, depending on the year you're referring to.Feck wrote:
Iraq (when we wanted them to use WMD's against Iran )
Are these really supposed to be examples of moral absolutes?Feck wrote:
Noriega (when his anti communist sympathy's when less trouble than his drug dealing )
Well, you'll need to specify what rules you're referring to. But, the other side of the coin is that much of the world is anti-Israel and looks to "censure" it when it really did nothing wrong or illegal. Plenty of countries around the world have "broken their own rules" about military aid - France, Russia, China, Great Britain, Iran, Iraq, Germany, and others.Feck wrote:
Who has broken their own rules about military aid to fund Israel to the tune of 5 billion a year and used their security council veto EVERY time they have horrified the world and deserved censure.
That's not what patriotism is. Patriotism is love, devotion or loyalty to your country. It doesn't necessarily mean support for everything the current government does, or blind approval of everything your country ever did.Feck wrote:
If you are going to be a nationalist then you have to agree that Your country Has done ,are doing and WILL do terrible things and To stand behind Your flag and Say " MY country Wrong or Right " . Seems a little blinkered to me ?
Strawman.Feck wrote:First you might have to show me a country that has been ethical in ALL it's policies
Where's that? Do they have a beach?Gawdzilla wrote:Strawman.Feck wrote:First you might have to show me a country that has been ethical in ALL it's policies
Clinton Huxley wrote:Anyone who waves a flag at me will be shot.
I guess I would ask, "protecting" from what? Caring about people isn't what I would classify as "patriotic".pawiz wrote:@Feck
While I agree with the sentiment, you have to recognize that your family, your friends, your loved ones live in your country (mostly) and it is that which you are protecting.
I'm no patriot by any means as I could not give a shit about land and where I was born - but I do care about the people.
Can't argue with special definitions. Have a nice life.sandinista wrote:Caring about people isn't what I would classify as "patriotic".
Agreedsandinista wrote:I guess I would ask, "protecting" from what? Caring about people isn't what I would classify as "patriotic".pawiz wrote:@Feck
While I agree with the sentiment, you have to recognize that your family, your friends, your loved ones live in your country (mostly) and it is that which you are protecting.
I'm no patriot by any means as I could not give a shit about land and where I was born - but I do care about the people.
...also...the human race doesn't need to, or deserve to be saved, especially if it means raping a young girl.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests