Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Community Discussion > The Lounge > Politics & Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-09-2008, 02:50 PM   #286
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

Good post, phil. As far as I'm concerned, that neatly adresses pretty much every argument in favor of abortion. Then again, I'm pro-life, so it's pretty easy to convince me....
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2008, 03:00 PM   #287
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,140
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default

Here is the problem though: For every moment I am not having sex, I am killing potential life. Therefore, I believe that there should be a law making it mandatory for each individual to have as much sex as he or she is physically capable of. Anyone who disobeys this law will be sent to a working camp to help build bridges and railroads.

Also, how can we prove that other people exist? For all we, an individual, know, we aren't killing life at all-- all that exists are our eyes, which see the sun and other people.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2008, 05:52 PM   #288
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

I know your post is tongue-in-cheek, but since I'm not sure to what extent, I'll just just ask a question. Wouldn't you say there is an enormous difference between not creating life, "killing potential life" as you call it, which is really a neutral act, and actually destroying existent life (if that is what you consider it to be), a negative act?

As to your second point, those are good questions for a man to think over for himself underneath the stars, but what laws, if any, could survive that kind of a philosophical grilling? Almost certainly none. You can't build any kind of society that way. That is why philosophy is always in direct conflict with the state.
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2008, 11:34 PM   #289
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,140
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard the Lionheart View Post
I know your post is tongue-in-cheek, but since I'm not sure to what extent, I'll just just ask a question. Wouldn't you say there is an enormous difference between not creating life, "killing potential life" as you call it, which is really a neutral act, and actually destroying existent life (if that is what you consider it to be), a negative act?

As to your second point, those are good questions for a man to think over for himself underneath the stars, but what laws, if any, could survive that kind of a philosophical grilling? Almost certainly none. You can't build any kind of society that way. That is why philosophy is always in direct conflict with the state.
I don't see it as a neutral act because either way you are denying life. The only difference is that there are no gory pictures for one and there are gory pictures for the other.

A society could survive like that and would be much better because people wouldn't need to be lead.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2008, 07:07 PM   #290
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrovant View Post
phil, I'm curious about specifics of your abortion views. Do you feel the same for any stage of pregnancy? How do you feel about things like the morning-after pill?

Also, how do you feel about execution, or something like 'pulling the plug' of someone on life support?
Mont...thanks for the window of opportunity, here, to address the
related issues, and some of the logical errors I think some people make.

Firstly, I'll state, point blank, my position on abortion (in the context of
what I regard reality to be...not my "opinion" as it were):

An unborn child is a human life, just as human as an adult. The unborn
child has his/her own DNA, and, if healthy, will progress through all
stages of development that all other humans do. The only difference
is that the unborn child is in his/her earliest stages of development,
and that the unborn child is physically internal to the mother, and
connected by the umbilical cord and placenta.

To kill this unborn child is just as much the killing of a live human being
as killing an 8-year old child, or a 55-year old adult. In fact, one may
argue that it is worse, since you have truncated the life of that human
being in that person's earliest stage.

Abortion is permissible in only in the case of what is referred to as the
"indirect abortion", meaning that some measure needs to be taken to
save the life of the mother, or to save the mother from some serious
illness or deformity, and the death of the unborn child is unavoidable.
Morally, every reasonable effort needs to be taken to save the life of
the unborn child, too, if possible.

Cases of rape and incest cause the additional moral problem of the woman
becoming pregnant against her will. It is problematic, because this does
not, in any way, reduce the humanity of the unborn child. This is what
makes rape such a terrible crime, because it can result in the
creation of a new life. In all other cases, even if a woman does not
intend to become pregnant, she is still, implicitly, consenting to the
creation of a child, by the act (men are not by any way absolved from
responsibility on this either).

Pregnancy due to rapes and incest are very rare. Personally, I believe
that a huge step toward alleviating this problem is to educate women
about receiving a cervical flush within 12 hours of the rape, in order to
prevent a potential pregnancy. Some doctors already do this, but mass
education on this ought to be necessary.

NOW...as far as some of those other issues you brought up:

Death Penalty...I have wavered on this over the years, but lean a bit
toward the pro-death penalty side. "What?? And you call yourself
pro-life ??" I have heard numerous times. Here's the BIG MAJOR
DIFFERENCE...the unborn child is 100 % innocent. The murderer is
guilty of a crime, moreover the crime of killing another human being.
It is not "murder" to execute a convicted murderer. It is an "execution".
(In much the same way that to force someone to pay money is called
"extortion", except that when it is a punishment for a crime, it is called
a "fine".) Recently, I have heard it argued that being pro-capital
punishment is actually the more "pro-life" position. By placing execution
as the punishment for first-degree-murder, society is showing that it
regards life as that important that the person who commits the
murder should forfeit one's own life (as opposed having a person's
life being worth "5 years" or "10 years" or "rehabilitation").

Pulling the Plug...Unless some person has a living will, there is not a
moral obligation to keep a person alive with "extraordinary means" (such
as a lung pumping machine). That is, if the person has reached the
point where their own body will expire on its own, without such high-tech,
that may be the natural course. However, when "reasonable means",
such as basic medical care and feeding, are what is needed to save the
person's life, it is a moral imperative to take those means. It is a whole
other issue where the line is between "reasonable means" and "ordinary
means".

Killing in war...This is another dicey issue (especially with the War in Iraq
going on). Killing in national defense is also permissible, provided that the
army at war is taking careful measures to avoid civilian population wherever
possible (which I believe the United States tries to do, and we severely
go after members of our military who clearly violate this principle). Saying
"no civilian death" is not a reasonable position to take, since then, our
country would never engage in a military action...in which case our
position as a nation would be to always stand by an do nothing
whenever injustice, killing, and human violation occurs anywhere in
the world, which would ultimately be a very "anti-life" position to take.

The morning after pill...RU-486 is a post-conception process, and is,
technically, killing a person in the earliest stages of life. Thus, based on
this fact, I am against it according to principle. This, like abortion itself,
will never go away, because it is already so deeply intrenched into our
society.

My ultimate opinion of abortion is that it exists because humanity has
gotten very morally lazy. We are resistent to taking responsibility for
our actions both in terms of refraining from reckless behaviors (i.e. sex
out of marriage/sex before one is ready to take care of children), and
bearing the responsibility of unborn children once they exist. Thus,
since our natural inclinations are to engage our desires, without having
to take on the corresponding responsibilities for them, we have collectively
chosen to turn our heads away from the humanity of the unborn child.
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 03:10 PM   #291
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

Here's the next question for you, CK (and Dennis Prager is touching
on the topic today, as I type this):

Why is it that people on the left (Democrat, Liberal, etc.) tend to
resent wealth ?
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 03:13 PM   #292
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,863
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philabramoff View Post
Here's the next question for you, CK (and Dennis Prager is touching
on the topic today, as I type this):

Why is it that people on the left (Democrat, Liberal, etc.) tend to
resent wealth ?
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 03:21 PM   #293
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Why is that funny?

If people on the left do not resent wealth, tell me why.
If they do, tell me why.

As far as I can tell, it seems like anybody who becomes wealthy,
the left tends to portray that person as somehow "greedy" or
"selfish" or motivated by the "profit motive". Moreover, if a
person becomes wealthy, it is because the person must have
done it dishonestly, by hoarding, or by exploiting other people.

And Buck, if you're laughing at me, remember it's you, not me,
that believes in an economic system that has been a repeated
failure throughout the world, and has produced widespread human
suffering and death.

As opposed to you, Buck, CK, at least, even if he severely disagrees with
me, will try to respond to me the best way he can.
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 03:42 PM   #294
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,863
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

And Buck, if you're laughing at me, remember it's you, not me,
that believes in an economic system that has been a repeated
failure throughout the world, and has produced widespread human
suffering and death.


My economic system has never been attempted on the state level (state indicating a governing body of a recognized sovereign nation). Every time you repeat this fallacy that socialism/communism under Marx's tenets has been attempted it makes you look like a fool. I'm sorry Phil and no offense but the idea that ANYONE who has read the basic tenets of Marx and then concludes that the Red Army (which numbered around 600,000 at the end of 1918 after defeating the White Army) spoke for the 185 million people who lived there is absurd. Hell, today we got nearly 500 million Chinese farming rice fields that have never heard of Marx that we label communists. It's the most intelluctally dishonest label I've ever come across in my life.

Specifically, I can only speak for myself when I say I don't resent rich people. Your post just smacked of this jealous/longing stereotype that people believe exist between poor and rich people...that's all.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 04:08 PM   #295
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
Specifically, I can only speak for myself when I say I don't resent rich people. Your post just smacked of this jealous/longing stereotype that people believe exist between poor and rich people...that's all.
Okay, I'm glad you don't.

Especially in America, nobody should resent anyone doing financially
better than them, because we do (or at least we still do), have a
fluid system whereby people are able to move from one economic class
to another. Back in the mid-90's, when I was working as a temp for
IBM, and living in a dumpy apartment on the north side of Milwaukee,
I never imagined that 15-years later I'd own a home in California, draw
in a (just over) six-figure income between my wife and I, and, if all
goes well, retire a millionaire (counting my house, and my retirement
account). My brother went from being unemployed and dirt-poor, to
being the owner of a million-dollar business through hard work and
taking major risks.

What I'm referring to is the common Democratic/liberal campaign
strategy that tells low-income people that they cannot survive without
the government carrying them, and that everything will be paid for
by "taxing the rich". Moreover, it is commonly portrayed that anyone
who is "rich", and doesn't support them, is only doing so because they
are "greedy" and because they only care about "big business".

Maybe you see things differently than I do, but I certainly believe that
the Democrat/liberal strategy depends on large numbers of people
buying into this characterization of the "rich".
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 04:27 PM   #296
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,863
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Especially in America, nobody should resent anyone doing financially
better than them, because we do (or at least we still do), have a
fluid system whereby people are able to move from one economic class
to another.


I would disagree that the system is as fluid as you PROBABLY think (cuz I don't know) but the fluidity of the system isn't my main problem with capitalism. The fact that one exists for no moral/logical reason bothers me.

What I'm referring to is the common Democratic/liberal campaign
strategy that tells low-income people that they cannot survive without
the government carrying them, and that everything will be paid for
by "taxing the rich". Moreover, it is commonly portrayed that anyone
who is "rich", and doesn't support them, is only doing so because they
are "greedy" and because they only care about "big business".


I have a problem with the whole mainstream process so this is of little concern to me. The mainstream Democratic Party is also in the pocket of mainstream media/Hollywood which promotes destructive immoral agendas...IMO of course. I don't understand the desire to be rich, get rich or make money.

I deal with rich people as best I can but don't understand their world. I don't value money or their values so there is frustration. Unfortunately, I must live and deal with them even to the point so I can do my job and exercise my morals. My only beef is the classism that exists in this nation and my view that the rich don't want to break down those walls.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 04:45 PM   #297
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
I would disagree that the system is as fluid as you PROBABLY think (cuz I don't know) but the fluidity of the system isn't my main problem with capitalism. The fact that one exists for no moral/logical reason bothers me.
I concede that the system is not so fluid that any person at any level can
just, at will, move up to a higher income class. However, I contend that
our system is a lot more fluid than people give it credit for. For one
thing, we have an extensive educational system that's there for everyone.
It was my personal frustration when I taught high school, that I was often
abused and disrespected by many of the same people that would be
complaining that our country is just not giving them opportunities.

BTW...what do you mean that you are bothered that "one exists for no
moral/logical reason"? That what "exists" ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
I deal with rich people as best I can but don't understand their world. I don't value money or their values so there is frustration. Unfortunately, I must live and deal with them even to the point so I can do my job and exercise my morals. My only beef is the classism that exists in this nation and my view that the rich don't want to break down those walls.
Here's another point of confusion that is too often made. There's a
difference between people who "have wealth" and people who are "snobby".
I hate snobby people, the one's who think that because they are wealthy
or rich, that they have more value than other people. I agree with you
on that. However, gaining wealth may simply mean that that person has
been duly compensated for what they have created. Michael Jordan is
filthy stinking rich because a whole lot of people were willing to
pay to see him play (including me). On a more meaningful plane, the
owner of Amgen is likely very wealthy because his company has produced
numerous life-saving meds.

It's a mistake to believe that money and wealth determine a person's
value, and a downright stupid belief at that. Still, wealth is what it is.
Provided it is not gained illegally or immorally, it is nothing more than
compensation for what that person has produced that others wanted.
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 05:07 PM   #298
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
The mainstream Democratic Party is also in the pocket of mainstream media/Hollywood which promotes destructive immoral agendas...IMO of course.
Just curious, what agenda does the Democratic party promote that is destructive and immoral, in your opinion of course.
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 05:44 PM   #299
philabramoff
Exiled Packerfan in SoCal
 
philabramoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 537
philabramoff is on a distinguished road
Default

I take it the last question was meant for Buck, not me.

All the better anyway...I just used up the last three hours sparring
with Buck (and then you, CK), while I was waiting around here at
the college for the interviews we're doing at 2:00.

Actually, even though I was kinda pissed when it all started, it was
an interesting convo with you, today, Buck.

CK...even in our vehement disagreements, good to jawjack with you,
as well.

Later days...gotta go.

Remember, we're all Americans.
philabramoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2008, 05:47 PM   #300
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,863
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

I concede that the system is not so fluid that any person at any level can
just, at will, move up to a higher income class. However, I contend that
our system is a lot more fluid than people give it credit for. For one
thing, we have an extensive educational system that's there for everyone.
It was my personal frustration when I taught high school, that I was often
abused and disrespected by many of the same people that would be
complaining that our country is just not giving them opportunities.


I don't find the system to be very fluid. The system often requires one to empower the existing ruling class to move up the ladder. The fact that a schism exists (our class system) is what I find to be arbitrary/immoral/illogical.

On a personal note, I can understand why you struggled teaching in the inner city Phil...as you've mentioned before. The problem is you can't apply the logic/values that you see/saw in education to people that live in an alternate world. If you aren't from that world...you can't really expect to express the values/teach deemed important by you or the system as a whole.

Having grown up in that environment, teaching in it, coaching in it...it doesn't bother me. The problem arises when one doesn't admit that there are two worlds...two sets of rules...in this nation: one for the rich, one for the poor.

Let me give you an example:

Since May I have been coaching a high school football team in the inner city (the high school I graduated from, taught at for years). Recently the transit authority cut/restricted busing from the city to the suburbs due to a lack of funds. There were only a few routes to the business districts but they were vital to these inner city folks. The city of Youngstown has about 85,000 people in 34 square miles of land. It has only ONE supermarket within the city limits (remember that capitalism dictates profit as being paramount over health, education, etc...values I think are important...not sure about others).

So basically you have a city of 85,000 people (deemed the poorest city in the U.S. by the the feds a few months back) with only one supermarket and limited transportation.

Understanding this as a major problem wasn't hard to do. Kids started missing practice to carpool to the burbs and get goods/services for their families. This created a problem immediately because poor folks...especially those of color...aren't permitted in those suburbs in personal vehicles (sorry if you're going to take offense to this Phil but we gotta press on with reality here so just suck it up and take my word for it ). Kids started getting tickets, detained and essentially "discouraged" (seems like yesterday rich folk were discouraging me from entering their domain ) from doing business there.

Now...the rest of the coaches and myself had to solve this problem.

1. We couldn't have kids skipping practice to do this. One, if not more, was liable to get shot or arrested for SWB/P (shopping while black/poor ).

2. Us coaches simply taking $ and shopping for the families wasn't an option (cuz my college degrees and nice car say I can go where I want to :thumbup. Food stamps are electronically run in this state and you have a pin #. Poor folks aren't exactly trusting of others to simply give the # out and in any event...that would be quite a pain in the ass

3. We didn't want to involve the churches. Like I said, I don't like empowering the oppressors so involving churches, especially the predominantly black inner city churches which have done little to nothing in my eyes, wasn't an option. You probably wouldn't have wanted to do so either Phil. Think Reverend Wright...:thumbdown:

So we had a huge problem, as you can see here Phil. How do we get these kids and their families mobilized without the aid of the government (cuz the bus funds were cut), the churches (because most of us felt they simply oppress the poor) and do it while being able to drive in these burbs without someone getting shot or arrested cuz they're black and/or poor? And how do we do so on a limited budget of our own? Trust me, I've spent hundreds of my own dollars driving kids around.

We came to a solution: first Saturday of the month (cuz the government checks go out on the first) we get a van/bus or two (sponsored and donated by a local car company) to drive 'em out to the burbs. We made a call to a friend of mine at the local paper to do a story on us. Flashed my college degrees and put on my "for the children" shtick for the story and there ya go. You know, one of those PR things that folks just love.

That way, everyone knew the undesirables were coming. :thumbsup2: Cops couldn't touch us due to possible bad PR for them. God forbid they create an incident and spoil the van dealer's tax write-off not to mention his good PR. Plus, nobody wants to be against the children...even poor and/or black ones.

We keep the kids and their families in check on the bus (though they already know to be cautious around rich folks) and there ya go...problem solved.

We've been doing this every Saturday since May so now you know how I spend my weekends. :thumbup: Not one incident and my buddy at the paper even did a follow-up on us and I was interviewed on TV (extended our PR and ability to do the project).

See what I mean Phil? You gotta own up to the alternate world, navigate it and then get the best result. I, along with a few of the other coaches, were able to use our clout to do this because we understand the two-worlds REALITY (cuz it ain't a theory). This isn't a set-in-stone intelligence issue. It's subjective. If you haven't lived it, then it won't click. You can't have the ladder be so wrought with b.s. such as this that a person has to go thru endless hours of work to get quality food on a limited budget.

I still feel awkard about using the media because I don't think they've done their best in exposing the b.s. of the situation or the world in general but like everyone else without all the answers...I made a compromise. And considering I was the one who put on the tie and stood in front of the camera...it didn't hurt too much. I'm used to being a whore. :thumbup:

BTW...We spread the kids and their folks out when we go out to the burbs. Never have too many of 'em in one place.

Don't wanna have some rich SOB see too many poor/black folks at once and give him a heart attack.

CK...I'll get back to ya as soon as possible on your Dem question. :thumbup:
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hell in St. Louis bama4256 The Lounge 0 12-19-2007 11:11 AM
Conversation with myself Panthers-Rule The Lounge 3 10-15-2004 12:47 AM
Who should start in St. Louis? Marc National Football League 15 02-25-2003 12:16 PM
St. Louis Scores 28 Points in Fourth Quarter bama4256 National Football League 9 01-03-2003 05:17 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:32 AM.