Do or Die
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-10-2016, 12:37 AM
RE: Do or Die
(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  I do think I know better than a lot of people Tongue And I will definitely fight for what I believe is right.
I don't hold onto the idea that I know what is right. I hence can't fight for it.
Makes me a pacifist I guess.
I really don't like the idea of my neighbors peering over my fence and telling me what I ought to do. Worse yet, I don't like the idea of them coming over and forcing me to comply with their version of morality. I find that to be very aggressive and intrusive, let alone, none of their business.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  Even though I know that that belief is rooted in subjectivity.
Even in a subjective personal mindset, I don't paint the world as right or wrong. It's too simple a way to look at things.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  If you want laws for survival of yourself that's fine,
It's the only ones that I can justify in all honesty.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  but personally... I find that too limited. We aren't bound by our biology any more. We can go further. I don't want to control anyone either though.
How do you go further without controlling others?
If you didn't like people having abortions (I know this isn't your position), I guess instead of forcing people by law, you could take a more influencial approach rather than a coercive approach, you could campaign, put up flyers, make some educational video. I wouldn't have any problems with that approach with something I might be passionate about. But I would use that rather than law.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  I'm not sure that I can. Your definition of not forcing your personal preferences onto others seems to be rather different to mine. For example, I believe that rich people exploiting poor people are both forcing their personal preferences onto others *and* using the law as a tool to do so, which is not coincidental since rich people always have a hand in what becomes law in the first place.
So, how does this apply to you and me, our preferences and our desire or lack of desire to push our preferences onto others?

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  
Quote:I want the law because of me, and my need to exist in a stable and safe society.
I don't want people to kill me, I don't want people warring around me because that makes things dangerous for me. I don't want my parents, wife, children or friends to be killed, I don't want my employers to be killed, I need safety and stability. It is a need rather than a preference. There is nothing wrong with killing me, but I want a law against it none the less.
OK so we're just using different terminology. That's more or less exactly how I would justify a law against killing.
I won't resort to labelling something as morally wrong. I need to tie it to something that is real, and something that makes it my business. But if these conditions are met then I will support a law.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  Morality enters because you seem to argue for an extreme position where businesses are not regulated or are trusted to regulate themselves.
This isn't my position at all.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  You for example say that environmental pollution should be reckoned an acceptable trade off in exchange for a business staying in the country and not taking all those lovely jobs off to China
I haven't said this at all.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  I'm not arguing for perfect equality or that everyone will be happy, but I am arguing that the purpose of life is not to build the economy.
I'm not in discussion about the purpose of life, that would be a different topic.
I'm just wondering how left wing policies create jobs? I am assuming left wing supporters want there to be jobs for the poor, so that they can become not poor.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  A strong economy is important but more important is a government's committment to the people, that they will rule for the benefit of the people. I think that that benefit is most fully realised with socialist policies like welfare, free education etc.
I think a thriving economy where people have opportunity and job options is for the benefit of people. I think people being on long term welfare isn't beneficial to anyone.

(11-10-2016 03:28 PM)morondog Wrote:  Raising the minimum wage is a call for economists to make, I can see the effect that you claim, but the same damn claim could be made for child slavery. How much do *you* care about jobs? Would you be prepared to work in a sweatshop? Or to condemn others to work in one, 'cos hey, if you don't want to we can always send the jobs offshore?
I wouldn't support slavery, and I wouldn't support forcing people to work.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: