Senator McCain did not put country first when he selected his running mate
- Thread starter Thunderdog
- Start date
If someone was about to unwittingly step into dog shit, wouldn't you feel compelled to warn them?
Maybe you are just joking here, but, just in case you don't, I couldn't disagree more. My parents taught me to tolerate and love everyone, as much as I can. That's how I brought up my children too. But, you've got to be humble and know your own faults. You don't like something in the world? First change what's inside you, make sure you got it right, and then try to help fix the problem out there. Come to think of it, that's how you're supposed to handle an oxygen mask in an airplane too, right?
Lucrum and Yannis,
about the dogshit example, I agree with Lucrum...
About the oxygen mask I would help as many as possible.
Why did I answer like this?
Well, it is not about morals - which are derived from religion, poses authoritative control over your actions and demands obedience.
It is well known that the world and reality is not bivalent - simply "black and white", "true or false" like in simplistic propositional logic which is employed by e.g Abrahamic religion - polarizing everything into "good or evil".
There is a natural way that we humans act and react - akin to "two-level utilitarianism". We have some general guidelines based on our interests and knowledge - while we are still able to adapt to any situation that occurs. Through personal integrity and ethics in our actions, we provide the structural strength (while supporting the trust needed) for our environment and ourselves.
It is not "principles" that guides us in our decisions or "everything";
rather it is adaptation to each and every situation, while considering our prior knowledge generalized as "guidelines".
Morality and negative conservative forces are external influences for invasive control and reduction/limiting of your personal freedom. Usually morality is not induced by reason, but by emotions - primarily fear and guilt.
Moralists, please consider:
if you do something evil sometimes, you are not really a good person even if you cop out with receiving forgiveness, are you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-level_utilitarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_range_theory_(sociology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame_society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_bivalence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_logic
about the dogshit example, I agree with Lucrum...
About the oxygen mask I would help as many as possible.
Why did I answer like this?
Well, it is not about morals - which are derived from religion, poses authoritative control over your actions and demands obedience.
It is well known that the world and reality is not bivalent - simply "black and white", "true or false" like in simplistic propositional logic which is employed by e.g Abrahamic religion - polarizing everything into "good or evil".
There is a natural way that we humans act and react - akin to "two-level utilitarianism". We have some general guidelines based on our interests and knowledge - while we are still able to adapt to any situation that occurs. Through personal integrity and ethics in our actions, we provide the structural strength (while supporting the trust needed) for our environment and ourselves.
It is not "principles" that guides us in our decisions or "everything";
rather it is adaptation to each and every situation, while considering our prior knowledge generalized as "guidelines".
Morality and negative conservative forces are external influences for invasive control and reduction/limiting of your personal freedom. Usually morality is not induced by reason, but by emotions - primarily fear and guilt.
Moralists, please consider:
if you do something evil sometimes, you are not really a good person even if you cop out with receiving forgiveness, are you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-level_utilitarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_range_theory_(sociology)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame_society
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_bivalence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_logic
I agree. Which is perhaps why Bush should have addressed pressing domestic issues before he deciding to "fix" Iraq, wouldn't you say? It's not as though the whole world was appealing to him for an Iraq intervention. We know the WMD argument was bogus, and so Bush morphed it into a humanitarian thing, saying he would have gone in there even if he knew then what he knows now, in order to establish democracy and so on. However, if I am not mistaken, there were and are far worse and vicious dictatorial regimes perpetrating unspeakable crimes against humanity in some African countries. So even his new excuse falls fairly flat. Mr. Bush has shown himself to be both incompetent and dishonest. And while I don't think that Senator McCain is dishonest, we all know that he has agreed with Bush about 90% of the time, since he had already said so himself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uThoBMfcFRc
When has a politician ever put the country & its people first instead of last?
LOL!
LOL!
McCain picked a greenhorn who could conceivably find herself at the helm during his administration if McCain wins. That is downright irresponsible and shows a disregard for what is better for the country. He just wanted the votes, come what may. On the other hand, Obama could probably have slam dunked it with Clinton as his running mate but, what some reason, probably thought the dynamic wasn't right. He went with Biden, who is far more seasoned and a responsible choice. Therefore, unlike McCain, Obama evidently did not sell out for votes.
LOL what?
Wow you are STUPID!