Don Homuth wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 21:14:26 GMT, Roy Jose Lorr
> <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >Would I break the law and steal bread to feed my
> >starving kids?... maybe. Do I think I'd be morally
> >right in doing so?... no.
>
> Sure you would! The morality of feeding a starving child trumps the
> Absolute Morality of not stealing -- every time. And well it should.
Absolute Morality is 'trump' proof.
>
>
> >> Same problem. Would you look the guy in the eyes and tell him he was
> >> dying?
> >
> >My original answer stands, (below).
>
> And your original answer continues to lack Human Compassion.
Define "Human Compassion".
>
>
> >The prohibition is not against lying in general but against
> >giving false testimony against one's neighbor.
>
> So it's OK to lie, because you construe the Commandment differently
> than most?
No. Lying is a given of cognizance. Humans lie to others and
to themselves, as a matter of course. For instance: telling
yourself that 'compassion trumps morality' is an internal lie that
you accept as truth. Reason is not what it would have us
believe... "Reason lies, with good reason.'
>
>
> >What is a "PK"?
>
> Preachers' kid -- plural form intended.
>
> >I hardly think lying to an obviously dying man is
> >compassionate or comforting to the dying man.
> >Rather, I see such lies as giving compassion and
> >comfort to the liar.
>
> Son -- I guess you just Had to be there.
Pop -- I've been there, on more than one occasion.
>
>
> Morality is invented by Humans to serve Human ends. Occasionally even
> Humane ends.
>
> But it's Always comparative in its application.
>
> The rest of that futzing around is mere Philosophy and navel-gazing.
The problem with human morals fiddling is that we invariably
either intentionally or unintentionally get it wrong. Without
Absolute Morality, choosing between right and wrong is a
crap shoot in moral relativism at best.
--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004, Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
> Bill Shatzer wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
> > > I've told y'all how to read God's Commandments so
> > > that y'all can understand them.
> > I'd love to, but I don't know in which book I should look.
> > The Torah? The Bible? The Koran? The Bhaghavad Gita? The
> > Diamond Sutra? The Talmaud? The list might be expanded almost
> > without limitation.
> > > That you choose
> > > not to is your problem.
> > But where should we look? It's not so much a matter of choosing
> > not to read as an insufficient amount to time to explore all the possible
> > sources of "God's Commandments".
> > Kinda narrow it down for us if you could.
> Repeat: God's Commandments exist in whole only in
> the Five Books of Moses (Genesis - Deuteronomy).
Hot damn! I can quit shaving! :-)
OTOH, I gotta give up lobster and shrimp. :-( [1]
And, if my brother dies, I gotta sleep with his widow? I
suppose I could bring myself to do it but my current wife
wouldn't be too happy 'bout that.
And the list of folks who are supposed to be put to death ...
Well, iffen those are god's commandments, let god put 'em
to death 'cause I'm completely uninterested in participating
in the execution. Certainly iffen god wants 'em dead, he
doesn't need MY help?
[1] What to do about coneys and rabbits which the Pentateuch
sez chew their cud and are thus "clean" and edible but which
three millenia of scientific observation has failed to detect
a single cud-chewing rabbit remains problematic. But, for me,
not a problem. I don't eat coneys or rabbits anyway.
Peace and justice,
In pdx.general Roy Jose Lorr <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote:
[...]
> Repeat: The evidence is in the existence of
> Absolute Morals in an amoral world.
> --
Repeating meaningless nonsense doesn't
make it true.
And you're still an ignorant, superstitious
fuckwit.
Andrew
In pdx.general Roy Jose Lorr <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote:
[...]
> Repeat: God's Commandments exist in whole only in
> the Five Books of Moses (Genesis - Deuteronomy).
> --
To you, they're "God's Commandments".
To me, they're bad Jewish literature.
Just because you say it's the Word O' God
don't make it so.
Keep trying, fuckwit.
Andrew
Dave Thompson wrote:
> "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:3FF37BEB.DE3397FF@no-spam
> >
> >
> > Dave Thompson wrote:
> >
> > > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:3FF0C0FD.67EE1627@no-spam
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > clw@no-spam wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312281652020.29159-100000@no-spam>,
> > > > > Bill Shatzer <bshatzer@no-spam> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Which God? Yours?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are just innumerable gods out there and every
> self-proclaimed
> > > > > > prophet claims his/hers is The One.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yep, just like the Hebrew god told Moses, "Thou shall have no other
> gods
> > > > > before me". Sorta implied that there were more gods, but this one
> > > > > wanted a personal franchise with the Hebrews.
> > > >
> > > > There are many man made "gods" but only ONE God... comprehension
> helps.
> > >
> > > Why should we take your word on this, over my nephew, my paperboy, or
> the
> > > village idiot?
> > >
> > > You've already answered that I shouldn't.
> > >
> > > Your assertion that there is one god doesn't hold much weight, now does
> it?
> >
> > Proof of my God is in the existence of His
> > Absolute Morals in an amoral world.
>
> Which you can't prove.
I've proven them both to my satisfaction. Your beliefs
are your problem.
>
>
> > Deluding yourself into belief that they don't
> > exist is your problem.
>
> Then show me the truth.
I have. You choose not to accept it.
>
>
> Can't do it, can you?
I've done it. The rest is your problem.
--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
Baxter wrote:
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:3FF37B14.1F711789@no-spam
> >
> >
> > Baxter wrote:
> > >
> > > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:3FF0BF3C.48D4756A@no-spam
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Baxter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > > > news:3FF02308.1147E3E9@no-spam
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bill Shatzer wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are just innumerable gods out there and every
> self-proclaimed
> > > > > > > prophet claims his/hers is The One.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is only ONE.
> > > > >
> > > > > What evidence do you have that it's yours?
> > > >
> > > > Envy is good.
> > >
> > > Who said anything about envy?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I've given y'all my evidence. Reread the thread.
> > >
> > > IOW, you have no evidence whatsoever.
> >
> > Repeat: The evidence is in the existence of
> > Absolute Morals in an amoral world.
>
> You have no evidence of Absolute Morals.
Repeat: 'The evidence is in the Five Books of Moses (Genesis - Deuteronomy}'.
--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
Baxter wrote:
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:3FF37D9B.61870538@no-spam
> >
> >
> > Baxter wrote:
> > > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:3FF0C0FD.67EE1627@no-spam
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > clw@no-spam wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312281652020.29159-100000@no-spam>,
> > > > > Bill Shatzer <bshatzer@no-spam> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, 28 Dec 2003, Roy Jose Lorr wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Which God? Yours?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are just innumerable gods out there and every
> self-proclaimed
> > > > > > prophet claims his/hers is The One.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yep, just like the Hebrew god told Moses, "Thou shall have no other
> gods
> > > > > before me". Sorta implied that there were more gods, but this one
> > > > > wanted a personal franchise with the Hebrews.
> > > >
> > > > There are many man made "gods" but only ONE God... comprehension
> helps.
> > >
> > > Again, what evidence do you have for that claim?
> >
> > Repeat: The existence of Absolute Morals in an
> > amoral world is all the proof necessary.
>
> Again, you have no evidence of the existence of Absolute Morals.
Babbling again?
--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3FF4ED78.3CA6EAB5@no-spam
>
>
> Baxter wrote:
>
> >
> > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:3FF474A5.479E4B13@no-spam
> > >
> > >
> > > Baxter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > > news:3FF37B14.1F711789@no-spam
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Baxter wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IOW, you have no evidence whatsoever.
> > > > >
> > > > > Repeat: The evidence is in the existence of
> > > > > Absolute Morals in an amoral world.
> > > >
> > > > You have no evidence of Absolute Morals.
> > >
> > > Repeat: 'The evidence is in the Five Books of Moses (Genesis -
> > Deuteronomy}'.
> > >
> > You're chasing your tail. You're claiming that Absolute Morals is the
> > evidence of God and the evidence of Absolute Morals is the "Word of
God".
> > What you've got is a Circular Argument - and it's entirely invalid.
>
> Until you've tested the evidence for validity you're just mouth fartin.
> I've told you how to test it. That you choose to avoid making the
> test is your way of keeping your head stuck in some existential
> nihilist rectum.
Actually, there's no way to actually test your claim. Just because
something is written in the OT doesn't make it Absolute Morality -
particularly an OT translation from the 9th Century (A.D.).
