• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

BeachSiO2

Beach Fanatic
Jun 16, 2006
3,294
737
This is slightly off topic--how can I get a public record of the 31 Senators who opposed the repeal of DADT? I am sending them each a thoughtful (yes, I can be) letter of my personal dissappointment in them and their decision on this.

Sure, these letters will probably be seen only by an assistant or intern, but I feel the need. Thanks in advance, --Acrab.

This is the roll call vote results.

U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote
 

BeachSiO2

Beach Fanatic
Jun 16, 2006
3,294
737
Also...

----------------------------------------
Breaking News Alert: Obama signs repeal of 'don't ask, don?t tell'
December 22, 2010 9:38:54 AM
----------------------------------------

President Obama signed legislation on Wednesday that repeals the 17-year-old law preventing homosexuals from serving openly in the U.S. military.

The bill requires military officials to complete implementation plans before lifting the old policy, a process that could take months.
 

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,845
3,471
58
Right here!
What you are alluding to is moral relativism. It's a dangerous idea. If the religion says its OK to stone adulterers, than who is anyone to argue? Who are we in this country to take issue with other countries who engage in this practice?

So how do you judge if your religion espouses a "positive moral code"? You can't use your religion, that would be circular. You would have to use your reason and intellect to think outside your religion to properly judge it. So here you are judging a belief system used to make judgment. :roll: Conclusion: Lose the religion. It's an unnecessary middleman.

Right, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Now, what principles do you apply in deciding what is moral and what is not after you've removed the middle man?

It's interesting you bring up relativism since, you don't need religion to get your moral compass out of alignment. The Nazi movement in Germany would be a perfect example. And I wonder, are occurrences like that more likely once the middle man is removed. This is the question I've been trying to discuss but maybe I'm not communicating it well since this seems to be turning into yet another SoWal religion bashing thread.
 
Last edited:

30ashopper

SoWal Insider
Apr 30, 2008
6,845
3,471
58
Right here!
OOH- So what you're saying is rapists needed more religion? Um, what about all the ordained child rapists?

Checkmate

Morality and religion aren't mutually exclusive

No they aren't, but in a society like ours, religion plays a major role in defining the subject matter of our conscience. You may not be raising your son in a religious environment, but you are teaching him the lessons you leaned from that kind of upbringing. What will he teach his kids?

Also, I'm curious, if you are now free to define your own moral code, where have you deviated from religious teachings with your son? If he, say for example, told you in his twenties he was thinking of sleeping with a woman who was married, how would you react? (I'm just plucking that one out of the air.) I guess I'm curious if you would consider your moral code more lax than your parents or grandparents? If it is, do you think this has anything to do with you abandoning religious beliefs?
 
Last edited:

LuciferSam

Banned
Apr 26, 2008
4,749
1,069
Sowal
Right, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Now, what principles do you apply in deciding what is moral and what is not after you've removed the middle man?

You use the same principles that you use to decide that certain tenets of your religion are evil. All religions including Christianity have such tenets. That's why as a civilized society we have used our ability to reason in order to reject such teachings. This is of course unless you are a fundamentalist. Sam Harris has a great book on this topic. You really should read it. It's called The Moral Landscape.

Amazon.com: The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values (9781439171219): Sam Harris: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41vkB-YbXHL.@@AMEPARAM@@41vkB-YbXHL


It's interesting you bring up relativism since, you don't need religion to get your moral compass out of alignment. The Nazi movement in Germany would be a perfect example. And I wonder, are occurrences like that more likely once the middle man is removed. This is the question I've been trying to discuss but maybe I'm not communicating it well since this seems to be turning into yet another SoWal religion bashing thread. [/QUOTE]

You are right that you don't need religion to be evil, but I think most would agree on the Nazi's harmonious relationship to Catholicism, the current pope being an example.
 

Geo

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2006
2,740
2,795
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
No they aren't, but in a society like ours, religion plays a major role in defining the subject matter of our conscience. You may not be raising your son in a religious environment, but you are teaching him the lessons you leaned from that kind of upbringing. What will he teach his kids?

Religion is pervasive. And within its dogma there are useful lessons for teaching right from wrong. But the point I believe you are missing is that religion is entirely unnecessary for teaching right from wrong. Cub Scouts taught my son outdoorsmanship. Does this mean that if my son wasn't a scout that he couldn't learn how to safely widdle wood or pitch a tent? Could he no longer do his best and do his duty to his country and help other people?

Rather than telling my son things like, "Allah is watching you and you will be rewarded in the afterlife with virgins if you follow certain rules (or you will be sent to a place with fire to live with a guy with horns, red tights and bad acne if you don't)"---- I teach him morals.

I teach him ethics. I teach him laws. I teach him the societal and interpersonal consequences that he shall face on plant Earth while he is here should he make bad choices. I teach him something that resembles the concept of Kharma but without the dogma. I teach him love and respect. I teach him to value life, family and friends. I teach him to work hard and have fun. I teach him that all men and women are created equal. I teach him how fortunate he is and that it is important to help those less fortunate. I teach him hygiene. I could go on and on.
Also, I'm curious, if you are now free to define your own moral code, where have you deviated from religious teachings with your son?
"Now free"? Shopper, humans have always been free to teach morals to their offspring and to avoid religion. The pervasiveness of organized religion in society has caused people to forget this. That is scary and weird to me.

Where have I deviated? There is no Book. But there are many books with valuable lessons. We tend to avoid fear and guilt (we substitute consequences for our choices and empathy) or the ludicrous ideas like we are all born as sinners. We avoid rituals like- no meat on Friday just because. Hypocrisy is a no no. We try not to judge. We engage in critical thinking and reward creativity along with sound logic and reason.

If he, say for example, told you in his twenties he was thinking of sleeping with a woman who was married, how would you react? (I'm just plucking that one out of the air.)

I would react the same way (I presume) a religious person would. I would tell him that it is clearly wrong and that he should consider the feelings of everyone involved and the consequences of his choices for himself and others.

I guess I'm curious if you would consider your moral code more lax than your parents or grandparents? If it is, do you think this has anything to do with you abandoning religious beliefs?

Why would I (or anyone) consider my moral code to be more or less lax than than that of a Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Muslim, Buddhist, Scientologist or a bowling enthusiast? That is utter nonsense.

Are you putting me on?
 

AndrewG

Beach Fanatic
Mar 10, 2010
680
127
"It was a beautiful sight to see the expression on her face as she genuinely pondered my response of, "Why?""

That was the look of disappointment that you don't share her beliefs. Every parent fears this will happen. You basically give your kids a green light to disregard anything that's important to you so long as they can justify it to themselves. Otherwise you're a hypocrit.
 

LuciferSam

Banned
Apr 26, 2008
4,749
1,069
Sowal
"It was a beautiful sight to see the expression on her face as she genuinely pondered my response of, "Why?""

That was the look of disappointment that you don't share her beliefs. Every parent fears this will happen. You basically give your kids a green light to disregard anything that's important to you so long as they can justify it to themselves. Otherwise you're a hypocrit.

That's only the case if you think there can't possibly be any reasoned objective standards for morality. In your way of thinking, right and wrong is nothing more than a collection of hand-me-downs. This fails because certainly everybody's parents are wrong about certain things. With all due respect to Geo, he's not perfect (nor am I or anyone) and at some point his children will find it necessary to reject some of the things they were taught. I believe that if you've never called your parents out on anything then you have a problem.
 

Geo

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2006
2,740
2,795
Santa Rosa Beach, FL
"It was a beautiful sight to see the expression on her face as she genuinely pondered my response of, "Why?""

That was the look of disappointment that you don't share her beliefs. Every parent fears this will happen. You basically give your kids a green light to disregard anything that's important to you so long as they can justify it to themselves. Otherwise you're a hypocrit.

The look on my mom's face when I asked her why my son had to be anything (with respect to organized religion) was enlightenment. It had never occurred to her before then that an infant didn't have to be baptized because everyone she knew had been and were also under the impression that they had to.

I know this because SHE TOLD ME what she was thinking at that moment afterwards. So your opinion on what she was thinking is incorrect and irrelevant since we actually know.

This is exactly what we see here in this discussion. Folks seem to have never even considered the prospect that we can be productive, really good, well adjusted, successful people without religion.
 

LuciferSam

Banned
Apr 26, 2008
4,749
1,069
Sowal
The look on my mom's face when I asked her why my son had to be anything (with respect to organized religion) was enlightenment. It had never occurred to her before then that an infant didn't have to be baptized because everyone she knew had been and were also under the impression that they had to.

I know this because SHE TOLD ME what she was thinking at that moment afterwards. So your opinion on what she was thinking is incorrect and irrelevant since we actually know.

This is exactly what we see here in this discussion. Folks seem to have never even considered the prospect that we can be productive, really good, well adjusted, successful people without religion.

It's difficult for some people to imagine families fighting but also loving and learning from each other. It's another world that some will never know or understand, which is why I wish they would quit making assumptions. The same goes for raising your kids without religion. It's another world to some. I wish they would get a clue before making assumptions and drawing implications that quite frankly I find quite bizarre. As if we're all repressed baby killers with only religious dogma holding us back.:roll:
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter