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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (18691)	11/21/2004 12:30:25 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28931

"The goal to "establish Justice" in the opening line of the Constitution has it's basis in the Theistic underpinnings of the Declaration." That is nonsense. The DOI has no Constitutional authority. If they had wished to base justice upon primitive tribal ideas of "justice" they would have said so in the bylaws. "Your "opinion" is just that, your opinion" Well...it is not "just that"...but it is surely my opinion. "There are six billion other opinions, so what? It does not stand up to rational scrutiny" There are many opinions that are substantially equivalent to mine in this particular issue. Neither agreement nor disagreement informs the rationality of the opinion. Rationality is not a popularity vote. Indeed, it is axiomatic that the greatest, clearest, and most rational thinkers (and this is not a self reference) will represent only a small portion of the population. The rest are part of the herd. "Besides being entirely arbitrary, this argument clearly commits the Naturalistic Fallacy attempting to move from what is to what should be" NONSENSE! You cannot point out a single human being who does not value life for the "happiness they can eke out of it" and who wishes to "avoid suffering" within the context of their values. "I don't think the objection to the Stamp Act was on the basis of legality; rather it was a moral objection" Which is what I said. But it was not a moral objection pulled from thin air but from a rational concern for property rights, and freedom from religious/political control and oppression. "then the revolutionaries are simply common criminals." That is nonsense. The Revolutionaries epitomised objective morality. Objective is not synonymous with "legal". Moral is not synonymous with legal. Surely you can follow these simple points? We have a world full of "legal" murderers fighting and murdering "legal" murderers. If all scores of them were MORAL...it would nullify the very idea of rationality. "that indeed is my premise" Then it is silly. It is not ethical to condemn anyone as criminal simply because they have done an illegal act. I don't want to leave you openings for the games you enjoy playing so I will repeat what is clear from our entire discussion that we are discussing the definition of criminality which relates to conceptions of morality: as Websters says... 2 : a grave offense especially against morality Millions are criminals in any war They are not immoral just because a Government or a group murdered them by beheading, or by some other act of mindless social insects. "if no objective good exists then the Law is all you have left" Are you not following? Objective good DOES exist. Have you followed nothing of the last several posts where I explained that legal does not equate to moral and objective--no more than does superstition?? Certainly, "legal" in a civilized culture may respect the value, dignity, freedom, and rights of individuals, but it will be an "objectivity" of a mean or average level. The rational and objective are few when we consider the entire human perspective and the benefactors of science and reason. That is the way it is. The few must watch the many as they screech, scream, shoot. Future generations of rational people will be able to inhabit other planets and to leave the most brutal and violent creatures behind--all the insane who are HOLIER than others and who have racial claim--(or is it a Godly claim--far worse)--to the HOLY LAND! One of you sects is a MORON! Which one!?? Which one of you will win? You realize that self righteous Certainty and Hate will still be your guiding principle, do you not?