Waiting for Fitzgerald - Page 162

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky

If God wrote the code then why couldn't he hard wire it into all of us. He gave us a conscience. What is so inconsistent about that?

It does not need to be learned. I have never said it had to be learned, let alone said "having to learn it" is the cornerstone of my argument. People seem to be born with a consicence.

It is intelligent design.

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Its like you guys are addicted. You just keep going there.

The liberals on the board like to project their biased hatred and intolerance of the Republicans, W, Capitalism, free markets, freedom, national security and defense, fiscal conservatism, tax reform, federalism, democracy and/or the culture of life upon me. Much like W is the bogeyman for the left on a national level or America is the bogeyman for the Internationalists, I am the bogeyman of this board.

Meanwhile America continues to lead the world on a march in the Right(eous) direction and the left recedes into the dustbin of history, much like their failed Soviet experiment.

Spanky · 10-09-2005, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
I think part of the problem here is that you are reading the definition too broadly. The fallacy you are hung up on is that if one is a relativist, then one can never hold any opinion on anything. That is reductio ad absurdum.

That is not what I am saying. I am saying that a moral relativist believes that morality is a social construct that can change from society to society. In that case, a moral relativist can not critisize the moral decisions that are made in other cultures and societies.

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk I can believe that the decision whether or not it is right to take a life depends upon the facts and circumstances of the life being taken

That is not moral relativism. If the facts and the circumstances change then the moral judgement can change. You can have different moral judgement in different situations. For example. It is OK to kill someone when they are trying to kill you but not OK when they are just standing next to you. That is not moral relativism.

Where moral relativism comes in is where the facts and circumstances are the same and your moral judgement changes.

In other words, for example: is it OK to terminate a fetus to save the life of the mother? Specific facts and circumstances. A non-moral relativist would say that there is a right or wrong answer here and the answer is universal. A moral relativist would say that the answer to this question could be different in different locations. In other words terminating the fetus could be moral in California but immoral in Massachusettes. Or this is moral now but would have been immoral back in 1955.

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 02:22 PM

BREAKING:

DATELINE: NEW HAMPSHIRE, USA:

Serious floods following more than 24 hours of heavy rain forced evacuations in many Monadnock and Lakes Region communities today. The state has declared an official emergency.

State officials said one unidentified person in Unity had died while trapped in a car.

The state has called up 500 New Hampshire National Guard troops to help. One hundred have already been deployed in the Keene area, while 400 more remain on standby at the Guard's armories in Manchester, Plymouth, Littleton and Concord.

Wow, I am surprised that there any Natioanl Guard troops there, I would have thought Bush sent them all to their deaths in Iraq by now. I wonder how many more lives will be lost in NH due to Bush's actions, errors, and omissions. Impeachment?

Spanky · 10-09-2005, 02:37 PM

And while we are on the subject of the Jews, don't get all annoyed with me about the universal moral code, you can blame your ancestors. They were the ones that first discovered it (or made it up depending on your point of view).

The Jews said that this idea of different Gods and different morals for different people was B.S. There is just one God and there is one universal moral code. If it is immoral to have sex with your mother in Judea it is immoral to have sex with your mother in Rome.

And like most people who discover the truth, they have been paying for it ever since. Like Einstein said, great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. First the Romans, then the Inquisitors and then the Nazis did not like hearing that they were violating the universal moral code.

The Jews have also been arguing what is in the moral code for thousands of years. But just because Jewish scholars disagree on what the moral code says, or because they think it is very complicated (have you seen the size of the rule book and the commentary?) does not mean they think it is relative. They believe it is universal.

When the idea of a universal moral code was created, my ancestors were running around Northern European forests with bones through their noses and were throwing rocks at each other. So don't blame me.

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 02:38 PM

Formula:

1. Marry a powerful, successful spouse;

2. Stand by that spouse and stoically (in public) absorb the shame and embarassment of his sins, lies, and crimes, including his force feeding of his weenie to the 19 yo secretarial aide; and

3. Leverage his power and your victimhood into deluding the lemmings of NY to elect you to the Senate.

Result:

Induction Into the Women's Hall of Fame

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky

The Jews said that this idea of different Gods and different morals for different people was B.S. There is just one God and there is one universal moral code. If it is immoral to have sex with your mother in Judea it is immoral to have sex with your mother in Rome.

.

Is it immoral to have sex with Hank's mom in Detroit?

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 02:59 PM

I'm off to the babyjesuschristsuperstar's house for Sunday Mass.

Because I care, I will pray to the babyjesus to give W and the Senate guidance on the Harryette Miers nomination.

I will pray for total victory in the ME and the destruction of our enemies there and here.

And I will also pray my liberal pals here find common sense and stop repressing their natural instinct for the UMC.

Finally, I will pray for end to the bias and the hate and the resulting PoPD.

PTL.

Amen.

sgtclub · 10-09-2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Yes.

I disagree with subsidies to the private sector of any kind, including tax incentives that favour one industry over another, whether in the corporate, individual or death part of the tax code. I also disagree with pork politics whether practised by the Reps or demos. The only defence of it that I will make is that since we live in a world of government subsidies, market distorting tax incentives and pork, the oil industry should not be singled out as the one major economically crucial industry to be denied.

I have a close personal friend involved in making solar power more widely available and efficient for the masses to use for home energy needs. I pray to the babyjesuschristsuperstar that his company flourishes (I also wouldn't mind some family and friends shares in the IPO).

I agree with most of this, although I may be able to favor certain tax breaks that encourage new technologies, such as clean energy.

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I'm off to the babyjesuschristsuperstar's house for Sunday Mass.

Because I care, I will pray to the babyjesus to give W and the Senate guidance on the Harryette Miers nomination.

I will pray for total victory in the ME and the destruction of our enemies there and here.

And I will also pray my liberal pals here find common sense and stop repressing their natural instinct for the UMC.

Finally, I will pray for end to the bias and the hate and the resulting PoPD.

PTL.

Amen.

I have returned from Mass and again, I have felt the babyjesus' words coming to me in answer to my prayers,

'Go get a new peaceful Avatar and get a new olive branch style sig line, and get peace on the Board'.

And, by God, I'm gonna do it.

Penske_Account · 10-09-2005, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
I agree with most of this, although I may be able to favor certain tax breaks that encourage new technologies, such as clean energy.

Slippery slope my friend, slippery slope. Whoooosssh!

Hank Chinaski · 10-09-2005, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Is it immoral to have sex with Hank's mom in Detroit?

I warned her about checking into hotels with you, and not being the first to use the bathroom.

Gattigap · 10-09-2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Exactly, and that is the Creator's intelligent design.

Not for nothing, but if your argument is that rights are handed down to us from God, then a companion argument that those rights are of the kind of "irreducible complexity" that is the hallmark of ID doesn't reflect well on you.

sgtclub · 10-09-2005, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Slippery slope my friend, slippery slope. Whoooosssh!

I know, and that is why I say "may." The problem is that with experimental technologies, the costs and the risks of failure or inefficientcy is very high, though the magnitude of potential success is also very high. In areas of such import as energy, I think it may be beneficial to encourage more entres into the industry in order to increase the chances of success by mitigating, at least to a small degree, the costs involved.

The pharm/biotech industry has a great model in this regard. Many of the assets/technologies are developed by the universities and then licensed or sold to private companies in the development/exploitation stage. Not sure if this is done in the energy industry.

Hank Chinaski · 10-09-2005, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
I know, and that is why I say "may." The problem is that with experimental technologies, the costs and the risks of failure or inefficientcy is very high, though the magnitude of potential success is also very high. In areas of such import as energy, I think it may be beneficial to encourage more entres into the industry in order to increase the chances of success by mitigating, at least to a small degree, the costs involved.

The pharm/biotech industry has a great model in this regard. Many of the assets/technologies are developed by the universities and then licensed or sold to private companies in the development/exploitation stage. Not sure if this is done in the energy industry.

Technolgy in energy areas has developed. Now it just has to sell.

The hybrid cars are a big step forward, but because we have to have such big cars they have the approximate gas milage as the cars being sold in the late 70's early 80's. So the technology benefits us how?

You want to reduce energy problems the thing you need to do is make the consumer change. There are incentives being put out for hybrids like access to HV lanes even though you only have a driver.