| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"topcat" |
| Date: |
01 Apr 2004 09:17:30 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
<You won't quit until the US resembles some backward third world country
<that's devoid of any morals or values.
Which third world country is devoid of any morals or values?
Name one.
Are you just a idiot? We see how cheap life is to the animals in Iraq
everyday. We see the lack of human rights throughout the world. What about
leaders like Mugabe? Open your eyes.
TC
.
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 11:33:46 AM |
|
|
"topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
<You won't quit until the US resembles some backward third world country
<that's devoid of any morals or values.
Which third world country is devoid of any morals or values?
Name one.
Are you just a idiot? We see how cheap life is to the animals in Iraq
everyday.
That means that they have different values than we have.
But perhaps not that different. Have you seen how cheap Iraq life is
to George W Bush? We just think our reasons for taking their lives is
better than their reasons for taking ours.
We see the lack of human rights throughout the world.
We see a lack of human rights in the Bible. Does that mean that the
Bible is devoid of any morals or values.
What about leaders like Mugabe?
I'm more interested in leaders like George W Bush, who is more
self-righteous, but not necessarily more righteous.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "topcat" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 12:03:42 PM |
|
|
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:ncko60hjaqb61tob8mbu10rnkgga47n6m3@4ax.com...
Are you just a idiot? We see how cheap life is to the animals in Iraq
everyday.
That means that they have different values than we have.
LOL! "Different" values, he says! They have NO respect for human life.
But perhaps not that different. Have you seen how cheap Iraq life is
to George W Bush? We just think our reasons for taking their lives is
better than their reasons for taking ours.
Blame America first. Bush could have totally FLATTENED Iraq. Carpet-bombed
them back to the stone age. Did he? NO! Why? Because of America's MORALS and
VALUES.
We see a lack of human rights in the Bible. Does that mean that the
Bible is devoid of any morals or values.
Another comical analogy. Let me know when you want to talk about TODAY.
TODAY, when the Arabs still hate the Jews, when Castro is still in power,
when China still has no basic human rights, when North Koreans are starving.
Take just a little time out of hating Bush, and take a look around the
world. Then go outside and kiss the ground.
I'm more interested in leaders like George W Bush, who is more
self-righteous, but not necessarily more righteous.
Of course you are. Mugabe is persecuting white people. That's always okay
with you liberals. Read it and weep:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/806171/posts
TC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 01:22:28 PM |
|
|
"topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" < > wrote in message
news:ncko60hjaqb61tob8mbu10rnkgga47n6m3@4ax.com...
Are you just a idiot? We see how cheap life is to the animals in Iraq
everyday.
That means that they have different values than we have.
LOL! "Different" values, he says! They have NO respect for human life.
Evidence? Cary has noted that the murder rate in most of the Middle
East is lower than ours.
But perhaps not that different. Have you seen how cheap Iraq life is
to George W Bush? We just think our reasons for taking their lives is
better than their reasons for taking ours.
Blame America first.
No.
Bush could have totally FLATTENED Iraq.
So what. Failure to commit genocide isn't a major virtue. Only a
couple of nations in history haven't had that.
Carpet-bombed
them back to the stone age. Did he? NO! Why? Because of America's MORALS and
VALUES.
Because we are signatories to the Geneva Convention too. If we had
done, so, we would have been pariahs of the world for decades to come.
Sure we have the power. So what?
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 11:08:35 AM |
|
|
In article <c4haqm$el3$1@news.monmouth.com> "topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> writes:
<
<"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
<>
<> <You won't quit until the US resembles some backward third world country
<> <that's devoid of any morals or values.
<>
<> Which third world country is devoid of any morals or values?
<>
<> Name one.
<>
<
<Are you just a idiot? We see how cheap life is to the animals in Iraq
<everyday. We see the lack of human rights throughout the world. What about
<leaders like Mugabe? Open your eyes.
That's your proof that the entire culture and everyone in the country
is "deviod of any morals or values"? Okey doke. When our country
was busily engaged in killing a half million of its own, a century
and a half back, does this constitute proof that America was utterly
"devoid of any morals or values"? How about when we killed or
dispossessed several tens of millions of Indians; was each and every American
living at that time thereby a moral derelict?
If fact, we just now finished killing (by most estimates) several tens of
thousands of Iraqis, not one of which would ever have set foot on
American soil. So I suppose that America is to this day, just
as in Colonial times and during the Civil War, a backward country devoid
of any morals or values.
Or perhaps the situation is slightly more complex? Perhaps a country
and a culture can contain both a complete moral and ethical perspective,
along with a number of people who are willing to act in defiance of
that recognized ethical system.
Whadday think?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "topcat" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 11:53:15 AM |
|
|
"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
That's your proof that the entire culture and everyone in the country
is "deviod of any morals or values"? Okey doke. When our country
was busily engaged in killing a half million of its own, a century
and a half back, does this constitute proof that America was utterly
"devoid of any morals or values"? How about when we killed or
dispossessed several tens of millions of Indians; was each and every
American
living at that time thereby a moral derelict?
I've been waiting for the "Blame America First" liberal side of you to come
out.
Thank you for proving my point. Some of these third world civilizations have
been around for THOUSANDS of years and they are still barbaric. We've only
been around a little over 200 years and we've already addressed our issues.
If fact, we just now finished killing (by most estimates) several tens of
thousands of Iraqis, not one of which would ever have set foot on
American soil. So I suppose that America is to this day, just
as in Colonial times and during the Civil War, a backward country devoid
of any morals or values.
Puh-leeze. You're mixing apples and oranges. Whether we invaded Iraq or not
isn't the issue. The issue is that places like the middle east NEVER seem to
make any strides towards becoming civilized. For instance, how long have the
Arabs hated the Jews?
As long as life remains as cheap as it is in the middle east (and other
places), these places will remain cesspools where morals and values aren't
found. Just like I said.
We could have totally FLATTENED Iraq and probably not lost as many brave
soldiers as we have, but because of OUR MORALS, we don't. We fight with one
hand behind our back and save civilian lives. Meanwhile the animals drag
dead bodies through the streets.
We also don't strap bombs to our back and detonate on buses. Don't try to
compare the US to these third-world swamps.
Or perhaps the situation is slightly more complex? Perhaps a country
and a culture can contain both a complete moral and ethical perspective,
along with a number of people who are willing to act in defiance of
that recognized ethical system.
Whadday think?
I think as soon as a liberal uses the word "complex", I get nervous. You
liberals love to make everything "complex". I prefer to deal in FACTS. The
fact is many parts of the world are still barbaric and devoid of moral and
ethics.
TC
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 01:16:38 PM |
|
|
"topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> wrote:
"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
That's your proof that the entire culture and everyone in the country
is "deviod of any morals or values"? Okey doke. When our country
was busily engaged in killing a half million of its own, a century
and a half back, does this constitute proof that America was utterly
"devoid of any morals or values"? How about when we killed or
dispossessed several tens of millions of Indians; was each and every
American
living at that time thereby a moral derelict?
I've been waiting for the "Blame America First" liberal side of you to come
out.
Thank you for proving my point. Some of these third world civilizations have
been around for THOUSANDS of years and they are still barbaric.
"Still"? What makes you think that this is something that is likely
to change? "Barbaric" is in the eye of the beholder, and you won't
think them other than "barbaric" until they are good little
church-going, English-speaking clones of yourself.
We've only been around a little over 200 years and we've already addressed our issues.
Not hardly.
If fact, we just now finished killing (by most estimates) several tens of
thousands of Iraqis, not one of which would ever have set foot on
American soil. So I suppose that America is to this day, just
as in Colonial times and during the Civil War, a backward country devoid
of any morals or values.
Puh-leeze. You're mixing apples and oranges. Whether we invaded Iraq or not
isn't the issue. The issue is that places like the middle east NEVER seem to
make any strides towards becoming civilized.
Define "civilized". There was a long period when the middle east was
more peaceful than Europe.
For instance, how long have the Arabs hated the Jews?
Not much more than a hundred years, at most. Probably less than a
hundred, if you want to talk about any generalized hatred.
As long as life remains as cheap as it is in the middle east (and other
places), these places will remain cesspools where morals and values aren't
found.
They are found. You just don't approve of their values (and they
don't approve of yours).
We could have totally FLATTENED Iraq and probably not lost as many brave
soldiers as we have, but because of OUR MORALS, we don't.
We also could have left Iraq alone, and not killed any of them, but
because of Bush's morals, we did.
We fight with one hand behind our back and save civilian lives.
They call this attempt to preserve civilian lives "The Geneva
Conventions". Most countries of the world have subscribed to them,
including many (most?) of the third world countries.
Meanwhile the animals drag dead bodies through the streets.
They don't like us. Do you blame them?
We also don't strap bombs to our back and detonate on buses.
Nor do most of them.
I think as soon as a liberal uses the word "complex", I get nervous. You
liberals love to make everything "complex". I prefer to deal in FACTS. The
fact is many parts of the world are still barbaric and devoid of moral and
ethics.
By your standards, they always will be, because they are unlikely to
adopt YOUR morals and ethics. This does not mean that they don't have
any.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 02:54:19 PM |
|
|
In article <u1qo60tmo4vfb6h21uhdfvv6p4300po3q3@4ax.com> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> writes:
<"topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> wrote:
{...}
<>Puh-leeze. You're mixing apples and oranges. Whether we invaded Iraq or not
<>isn't the issue. The issue is that places like the middle east NEVER seem to
<>make any strides towards becoming civilized.
<
<Define "civilized". There was a long period when the middle east was
<more peaceful than Europe.
When the Crusaders finally took Jerusalem, many of them famously
chose to stay there rather than to return to the then less
civilized countries they had come from.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-satan the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 05:02:45 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 14:54:19 -0600, Cary Kittrell wrote
(in message <c4hvhr$mfo$1@oasis.ccit.arizona.edu>):
In article <u1qo60tmo4vfb6h21uhdfvv6p4300po3q3@4ax.com> Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> writes:
<"topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> wrote:
{...}
<>Puh-leeze. You're mixing apples and oranges. Whether we invaded Iraq or not
<>isn't the issue. The issue is that places like the middle east NEVER seem
to
<>make any strides towards becoming civilized.
<
<Define "civilized". There was a long period when the middle east was
<more peaceful than Europe.
When the Crusaders finally took Jerusalem, many of them famously
chose to stay there rather than to return to the then less
civilized countries they had come from.
-- cary
It's more complicated than that.
Very few historians are aware that the allowance for the Crusaders'
"household baggage" was just for the deployment and that all that furniture
and household appliances (including the ones that could only be powered by
camelpower that the Crusaders bought "down south") had to be paid by by the
individuals who were below the rank of First Centurion.
So it wasn't exactly because they liked the area, it's because they couldn't
afford to go back.
A troubadour, Bob Sonofdylan, who had been traveling
with King and the Crusaders put it this way:
Now the preacher looked so baffled
When I asked him why he dressed
With twenty pounds of headlines
Stapled to his chest.
But he cursed me when I proved it to him,
Then I whispered, "Not even you can hide.
You see, you're just like me,
I hope you're satisfied."
Now the bricks lay on Grand Street
Where the neon madmen climb.
They all fall there so perfectly,
It all seems so well timed.
An' here I sit so patiently
Waiting to find out what price
You have to pay to get out of
Going through all these things twice.
Gray Shockley
--------------------------------------------------------
[from "Stuck Inside Jerusalem with the Irish Blues Again"]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 12:37:50 PM |
|
|
In article <c4hjun$j2r$1@news.monmouth.com> "topcat" <topcat@aboy.com> writes:
<
<"Cary Kittrell" wrote:
<>
<> That's your proof that the entire culture and everyone in the country
<> is "deviod of any morals or values"? Okey doke. When our country
<> was busily engaged in killing a half million of its own, a century
<> and a half back, does this constitute proof that America was utterly
<> "devoid of any morals or values"? How about when we killed or
<> dispossessed several tens of millions of Indians; was each and every
<American
<> living at that time thereby a moral derelict?
<>
<
<I've been waiting for the "Blame America First" liberal side of you to come
<out.
Not at all. Instead I'm attempting to show that if the same behaviors can
be found in this country that you point to in other countries as
proof that they're "devoid of all morals and values", then maybe
you should re-think your "proof".
Which is why I asked you at the end of each example if you therefore
thought that American was "devoid of all morals and values".
In 1999, our murder rate was 6/100000, compared with Kuwait's
1/100000. Employing topcat logic, should a Kuwati therefore
conclude that we're all animals with no respect for human
life?
Rates of murder and theft -- and god knows, other "crimes" such
as adultery and fornication -- tend to be much lower in harshly
Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia. Shall we thereby
conclude that they are the civilized and we the animals? I'd
rather not, thank you.
Our rates of incarceration currently either, depending on your figures, lead
the world or are second only to Russia. Should someone in Kenya
therefore assume that we're running wild in the streets over here,
or is there possibly something wrong with your method of demonstration?
{...}
<>
<
<Puh-leeze. You're mixing apples and oranges. Whether we invaded Iraq or not
<isn't the issue. The issue is that places like the middle east NEVER seem to
<make any strides towards becoming civilized. For instance, how long have the
<Arabs hated the Jews?
In the main, since 1947. On the other hand, I can point you to
a long history of pogroms, mass expulsions and slaughter in
our own European heritage. Including a rather unfortunate
event which occurred within my lifetime. Unless, of course,
you already think that Germany was just another of your third-world
hellholes which will always resist civilization.
{...}
<
<As long as life remains as cheap as it is in the middle east (and other
<places), these places will remain cesspools where morals and values aren't
<found. Just like I said.
<
<We could have totally FLATTENED Iraq and probably not lost as many brave
<soldiers as we have, but because of OUR MORALS, we don't. We fight with one
<hand behind our back and save civilian lives. Meanwhile the animals drag
<dead bodies through the streets.
You know, I strongly suspect that if Iraq had somhow managed to invade
this country, overthrow the government, dismantle all administrative
apparatus, kill ten thousand or a few tens of thousands -- and the
average American were powerless to do anything about it -- then
I would bet the farm that you would see the same behavior from
Americans on the few occasions that we managed to get our hands
on an occupier.
And all of this, of course, presumes that the phrase "Jasper, Texas"
means nothing to you.
<
<We also don't strap bombs to our back and detonate on buses. Don't try to
<compare the US to these third-world swamps.
No, because we don't have to. We can send in hundreds of thousands of
troops with firepower unparalleled in the history of the world. Killing,
as I say, tens of thousands.
In the meantime, the Palestinians are powerless, and can do nothing
more than take out a handful of their perceived enemy at a time,
with the only handmande weapons that are effective.
Do I approve of that? Of course not. I want to *****-slap both
parties involved in the endless cycle of retribution and retribution
over there. I despair that it will ever be resolved.
But my point is that you seem to feel that the mechanized killing
of masses of civilians by the use of overwhelmingly superior
firepower is somehow "civlized" (because, after all, we could have killed
them all), whereas the highly personal killing of a small number
at a time involving the sacrifice of one's own life is somehow
"animalistic".
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brendan Taylor" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't de-Word the Pledge |
01 Apr 2004 01:37:43 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 12:53:15 -0500, topcat wrote:
We could have totally FLATTENED Iraq and probably not lost as many brave
soldiers as we have, but because of OUR MORALS, we don't.
How virtuous of you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
