Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (73538)	8/27/2003 5:34:25 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Don't know where you got that. I compared what I imagine to be the meaning of an oath to tell the truth as God is my witness. If I don't believe God is my witness then what is the oath exept a promise that will be kept, as long as I see it as in my best interests to do so. I asked you earlier to explain the meaning of an "oath" as having significance. You declined to answer. Now you are ranting about morals and my attitude or something? Wazzup withat?

To: Lane3 who wrote (73538)	8/27/2003 5:51:13 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

I didn't hear him saying that. What I heard him saying was that if you truly believe in an afterlife and purgatory and the fires of Hell, then if you swear to tell the truth on the Bible so help you God, the price of lying is not merely abuse of your personal ethic, but the risk of literally burning in Hell for all eternity. When you measure that against the perceived risk of lying which a non-believer faces, which is limited to the abuse of a personal ethic, there is an argument to me made that the perceived cost of lying to a believer is greater, since they suffer both the abuse of personal ethic plus an eternal consequence. Doesn't say that a nonbeliever is necessarily less honest than a believer. Just that once one takes the oath, the stake for the believer jumps up a whole lot further than the stake for the nonbeliever.

To: Lane3 who wrote (73538)	8/27/2003 5:52:39 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

As you know, I think that ethics logically precedes theology. Moreover, I think that a well- brought up atheist will by and large behave better than a poorly brought up religious believer, although religious belief (laying aside the question of grace) is more conducive to the reform of character. One behaves well because of an instilled sense of wanting to be a certain sort of person, admiring and seeking to behave in accordance with certain values, having contempt for and seeking to avoid others......