Re: Our Lapdog Congress


"Chris Morton" <cmorton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dr7u4p027bg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> That's because mankind is divided up into good guys and bad guys... unless
you
> think Nathan Bedford Forrest, Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer were all
"good
> guys".

I did not suggest that the men you mentioned are good guys. My point is
that, yes, they are bad guys but that doesn't automatically make the rest of
us good guys.

Your argument assures eternal war (which of course is what W. has been
campaigning for since he came out of hiding after 911). Your argument
insists that there must always be not only bad guys, but also good guys.

My argument is two millennia old ... "Let him without sin cast the first
stone."

> And if we're ALL evil, Anne Frank and Hans Frank, Nathan Bedford Forrest
and
> Forrest Whitaker, then there's no reason to DO anything.

Again, you change my argument into something else, and then argue against
it. I did not argue to do nothing.

Wickedness in this world _must_ be fought by the enlightened of us. We just
need to pick weapons that work. If physical war worked, considering how many
millennia it has been tried, we would not be having this discussion. War is
ancient. How many millenina must we keep making the same mistake?

Consider all the contributions to this thread over the past days. Everyone
kicked in their own opinion about who the evil ones are, and how to fight
them. We could go on for the next year debating who was more evil, Osama bin
Laden, the North Koreans, or the Iraqis, or Hitler, or America, or W., or
Dahlmer. But, we are all just talking about degrees of evil. We have not
made a case for there being good guys.

All the entities I just listed caused the deaths of innocent civilians.
Hence, they (we?) are all evil ones. The degree by which they (we?) are
evil is just a trick to avoid dealing with the horror of war.

> I don't believe in "god". I have no "holy men". I believe that I have no
duty
> to be a slave. I would cheerfully kill anyone who tried to make me slave.
I
> would organize other people to that end.

You do believe in god and I think this can be proven ... to least to a
reasonable observer.

> Isn't this the ultimate evil of religion? SOMEBODY is always using it to
> explain why you shouldn't resist being a slave... or a bar of soap,
because to
> do so would make you "as bad as" the guy trying to enslave or murder you.

I argue the existence of God, you argue the futility of religion. These are
two completely different arguments. Yes, religion is stupid, ignorant,
self-defeatist, and a hundred other adjectives which you could mention and I
would probably agree with. But, all these things are not God. All these
things are foolish men, pretending to be holy men, making up traditions of
men, and then claiming these traditions are the Word of God.

God is Truth, Justice, Love, and Wisdom. If you believe in these things, and
I have reason to think you do, that you do believe in God.

Istlota

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Our Lapdog Congress
    ... I did not argue to do nothing. ... >evil is just a trick to avoid dealing with the horror of war. ... I would cheerfully kill anyone who tried to make me slave. ... And just WHO is this alleged "god"? ...
    (soc.culture.african.american.moderated)
  • Re: Win At All Costs: The Next Generation
    ... questions about an omnipotent god? ... Is God willing to prevent evil, ... One can argue that the world is imperfect with its share of evil, ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Win At All Costs: The Next Generation
    ... Is God willing to prevent evil, ... Along the philospher angle, without evil, how can there exist free ... One can argue that the world is imperfect with its share of evil, ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: BBC: Why does God allow natural disasters?
    ... way of escaping the paradox is to argue that God isn't omnipotent. ... large crack, the problem of evil. ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)