Seriously, explain Democrats to me?

[Redworm]

But I venture to say, when someone uses the word "pedophile" or the word is used to describe someone in the media..."the long time pedophile.....etc",

Maybe it's an example of selective hearing on both our parts but I don't recall any specific news reports of "long time pedophiles". Then again the media gets things wrong quite often; how many times have you heard them mislabel FMJ rounds as "cop killer" bullets?

We are straying a bit, but it still deals with the perception of "right & wrong".

Right and wrong are human constructs. We created the concept of morality; it's not a universal constant and thus one's definition of it cannot be used to measure everyone's actions. I'm not condoning child molestation or murder but you have to realize that neither your ideas of right and wrong nor my ideas of right and wrong have any authority over others.

That being said, would either of you let someone babysit your child(ren) REGARDLESS of the fact that YOU KNEW (they admitted it to you in bar one night) they had pedophilic tendencies?

Of course not. But I wouldn't have him thrown in jail because he admited he's a pedophile. Upon hearing this revelation I would certainly suggest to him that he seek professional help immediately to lessen the risk of him commiting a crime.

 

[DasBoot]

I'm with you on most points....howevwer....

Right and wrong are human constructs. We created the concept of morality; it's not a universal constant and thus one's definition of it cannot be used to measure everyone's actions.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but aren't there things are wrong regardless of who, or where, you are?
Is rape an accepted norm ANYWHERE?
Child molestation?
Stealing?
The South thought slavery was ok.
Why did the North butt in?
This brings us back to "moral relevancy".
When I was a kid, if a neighbor saw me doing something "wrong", my folks heard about it!
And I then heard about it!!
By subscribing to your above quote, that neighbor would've just minded his own business.
I would have gotten away with it and most likely kept progressing up the ladder until I did something that FINALLY, everyone thought was wrong.
If you have children, did/do you teach them that everyone has a different idea of what "wrong" is?
So that, while it's "wrong" for them to take someone elses bicycle, it's ok for the other kid to take it because HE doesn't see any wrong in it.
Don't you see where this all leads to?
If there's a culture that accepts rape, you can bet the law wasn't passed by the women of that culture!
I believe there is a general decline in the quality of our culture exactly because so many, especially those on the Left, are afraid to say ANYTHING is wrong.
To do so is conidered "forcing " your values on other people.
You cannot convince me that there are not certain behaviours that are just NOT ACCEPTABLE universally.
And when they ARE accepted, it's because those doing it want to CONTINUE doing it.
It's so much easier NOT to do the right thing.
And again, this philosophy seems to be most prevalent on the Left.

 

[Redworm]

Perhaps I'm wrong, but aren't there things are wrong regardless of who, or where, you are?

That all depends on the people in question. A hundred years ago persecuting someone on the basis of their skin color was considered perfectly moral. Preventing an interracial marriage was the christian thing to do. A hundred years from now littering on the sidewalk may be a capital offense.

Is rape an accepted norm ANYWHERE?

In many societies, yes. It also happens in the animal kingdom, in various species, yet when they do it we don't call it rape. It's only wrong - and I agree that it's wrong - because we say it's wrong.

Child molestation?

Many Mormons to this day practice polygamy in secret and many of those "wives" are what we consider children. To some people a 14 year old girl is fair game. I tend to disagree but if you look at it from a biological standpoint a 14 year old girl is typically able to safety bear a child.

It's child molestation if the girl is one day from her 18th birthday. Why is it perfectly acceptable one day later? Because we as a society decided that for some arbitrary reason that 18 is the general age of consent in this country.

The South thought slavery was ok.
Why did the North butt in?

Well, not exactly. The north wasn't all high and mighty about slavery for moral reasons, they simply had less of a financial interest in it.

I would have gotten away with it and most likely kept progressing up the ladder until I did something that FINALLY, everyone thought was wrong.

Are you saying that getting caught was the only thing keeping you from progressing into a life of crime?

If you have children, did/do you teach them that everyone has a different idea of what "wrong" is?

I was raised to accept the fact that not everyone thinks the same way. I was raised to treat others as I would like to be treated. Anything beyond that is for experience to teach me.

I believe there is a general decline in the quality of our culture exactly because so many, especially those on the Left, are afraid to say ANYTHING is wrong.

I don't necessarily see it as a general decline but whatever the cause I feel the right is equally as responsible.

You cannot convince me that there are not certain behaviours that are just NOT ACCEPTABLE universally.

For morality to be universal it must exist without human interaction. Morality only exists because humanity concieved it.

And when they ARE accepted, it's because those doing it want to CONTINUE doing it.
It's so much easier NOT to do the right thing.

And until a while ago women voting and owning land was thought to be immoral and disgusting. But because they wanted to continue doing it they overcame mysoginist ideals and it's now perfectly acceptable.

And again, this philosophy seems to be most prevalent on the Left.

Indeed, and it's as beneficial as it is detrimental. Just like the right's philosophy of telling children that everything is "wrong" and expecting them to grow up as little prudes because they're sheltered from the reality of life.

 

[DasBoot]

Good points all!
Please tell me ...where is rape acceptable?
And I hope you're not going to tell me there are different forms of rape!
I mean the viscious, brutal taking of a woman in order to perform a sex act on her.
And I'm not interested in some quasi-prehistoric tribe buried deep in the Amazon or in the mountains of Afghanistan where misogeny rules.
And just to clarify, I'm speaking of our present day world.
It's true that 100+ yrs ago, young girls were taken as brides.
But we've progressed a bit since then in how we treat women and how they are perceived.
Not so in the Middle East.
Look at how woman were treated in Saddam's Iraq.

Many Mormons to this day practice polygamy in secret and many of those "wives" are what we consider children.

In secret precisely because we have chosen to protect our children.
If he loves the child, he can wait a few yrs till she's legal.

Are you saying that getting caught was the only thing keeping you from progressing into a life of crime?

Of course not.
But it's BECAUSE I was taught that THERE ARE things that you should not do.
No matter how you dice it, a kid, or anybody, should'nt..say...steal a car.
Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and it has been since humans started walking the earth.
Am I wrong in thinking that stealing is universally unacceptable?
And again, I'm refering to modern day, "civilised " societies.

I was raised to accept the fact that not everyone thinks the same way. I was raised to treat others as I would like to be treated. Anything beyond that is for experience to teach me.

Come-on Red!!
Are you saying your parents never told you it is wrong to steal, cheat in school, tell a lie, etc, etc?
Of course they did....I hope.
These are "values" that are instilled in us either from our parents, or learned along the way.
But they are still part of our general "code of behaviour".
My whole point has been that, if you weigh one party(philosophy) against another, it would appear that when it comes to giving a pass, or excusing behaviour that, IN OUR SOCIETY, is considered wrong, the Left is more apt to let bad behaviour slide.
Of course things are considered "morally wrong' because WE deemed them so, but that's what civilised societies do.
Without going into all manner of hypotheticals, do you consider these "wrong" behaviour:
Congresswoman McKinney hitting a police officer?
Marrion Barry in a hotel w/a hooker, smoking crack?
A standing president having extra-marital sex in the White House(not the sleeping areas).
Cheating on your spouse for no other reason than that your bored and want something new?
A kid in class coming in and putting his feet up on the teachers desk, refusing repeated requests by the teacher to take them down?
I could go on and on, but on their face value, do think any of these are acceptable behaviour.
Not punishable by death or imprisonment mind you, just a plain right or wrong.
And I don't care HOW right or wrong they are.
And if you are OK with any of them and consider them as perfectly acceptable behaviour, please tell my why.

 

[Bender711]

Marrion Barry in a hotel w/a hooker, smoking crack?

thats the only one that I find morraly acceptable.

Why, he's not hurting one (but himself of course, but I dont care about that).

 

[DasBoot]

You're a Great American Bender!!

 

[Big Ruger]

Slash I absolutely believe Delay is innocent. He has not been proven guilty of anything, nothing. As for Mckinney there is a huge, gigantic difference there. She will never even see a courtroom so a jury can decide if shes guilty. Can you not see the difference in the two? Indictment is not the same as conviction. Since, in your world an accusation is the same as a guilty verdict, I see no reason to further pursue my last question to you. Its the same old leftist saw. "its not the nature of the evidence, its the seriousness of the charges" That matters right? right. ERIC

 

[GoSlash27]

Big Ruger,

Slash I absolutely believe Delay is innocent. He has not been proven guilty of anything, nothing. As for Mckinney there is a huge, gigantic difference there. She will never even see a courtroom so a jury can decide if shes guilty. Can you not see the difference in the two?

No; there's no difference. DeLay may or may not be guilty. McKinney is innocent. By your own definition.
I would be inclined to treat them both as innocent, but certain people around here like to apply a partisan double-standard.

DasBoot,

But you're STILL making a moral judgement on the person based on what he does privately.
He hasn't actually DONE anything!

No, I'm not. 'Moral judgements' seem to be within your purview, not mine. AFAIC, so long as the behavior is not harming anybody who doesn't consent to the harm, it's none of my business. There is a potential for harm here.

Do you NOT think you have SOME level of obligation to your neighbors, their kids and, on a grander scale, the preseverence of a decent society, by NOT making it easier for this person to live in your area.

No, I do not. I have an obligation to my neighbors to assist the state in protecting them from demonstrable physical and financial harm inflicted by others. The state does this through a defined legal process, not an undefined corps of narrowminded zealots who can't seem to keep their own noses out of others' affairs.
You see some duty in appointing yourself as a deputy in the "moral purity" police. I do not.


"The preservance of a decent society"....heh.
Who's to decide what constitutes a 'decent society'? You? Jerry Falwell?
What constitutes "decent", anyway? You have already demonstrated that the mere thought of being sexually aroused by pre-pubescent children is indecent. Why stop there? Is not regularly attending church indecent? Is consorting with coloreds indecent? Is voting Democrat indecent?
Should each individual decide on their own, or will somebody be good enough to hand out a pocket reference guide?
And what's a suitable punishment for this "indecency"? Apparently financial ruin is a-ok with you. Why stop there? We could bury them in a cage for a week, put them in stocks, lynch them, burn them at the stake....
Shoot, why not deport them? After all, your obligation to your neighbors' children on a larger scale wouldn't seem to stop at just driving such people merely out of your neighborhood.
Again, who's to judge? Maybe they could put the suitable punishment in the same pocket guide.

No, I'll not go down that road with you. We've already been there and seen what it's like.

 

[Redworm]

Good points all!
Please tell me ...where is rape acceptable?
And I hope you're not going to tell me there are different forms of rape!
I mean the viscious, brutal taking of a woman in order to perform a sex act on her.
And I'm not interested in some quasi-prehistoric tribe buried deep in the Amazon or in the mountains of Afghanistan where misogeny rules.
And just to clarify, I'm speaking of our present day world.
It's true that 100+ yrs ago, young girls were taken as brides.
But we've progressed a bit since then in how we treat women and how they are perceived.
Not so in the Middle East.
Look at how woman were treated in Saddam's Iraq.

Rape is still accepted in many societies where women are second class citizens. It was acceptable in this country until women were no longer seen as possessions and in some back asswards towns down south it's still acceptable if the rapist happens to be the son of some prominent businessman or political figure.

The point is that morality has never been constant and never will be.

In secret precisely because we have chosen to protect our children.
If he loves the child, he can wait a few yrs till she's legal.

Hah, loves.

We have chosen to protect our children, it's a biological instinct. The question is what defines a child. 17 years and 364 days is a child but 18 years is an adult?

Of course not.
But it's BECAUSE I was taught that THERE ARE things that you should not do.
No matter how you dice it, a kid, or anybody, should'nt..say...steal a car.
Taking something that doesn't belong to you is wrong and it has been since humans started walking the earth.
Am I wrong in thinking that stealing is universally unacceptable?
And again, I'm refering to modern day, "civilised " societies.

The bit about stealing being wrong since humans walked the earth is where we disagree. Stealing is only "wrong" because society has deemed it as such. When humans first walked the earth we had no culture, barely any language, and still lived in hierarchical tribes where the alpha could take whatever he wanted from the weaker members of the pack.

You're refering to modern day societies yet at the same time claiming that what applies to these modern day societies is universally acceptable. Again, for something to be universal it must exist without the influence of us. Theft is a human concept.

Come-on Red!!
Are you saying your parents never told you it is wrong to steal, cheat in school, tell a lie, etc, etc?
Of course they did....I hope.

As I said, they taught me to treat others as I would like to be treated. I was smart enough to figure out from experience that stealing isn't cool when you're on the receiving end so it's pretty rude to do it to someone else.

These are "values" that are instilled in us either from our parents, or learned along the way.
But they are still part of our general "code of behaviour".
My whole point has been that, if you weigh one party(philosophy) against another, it would appear that when it comes to giving a pass, or excusing behaviour that, IN OUR SOCIETY, is considered wrong, the Left is more apt to let bad behaviour slide.

Prove it?

Of course things are considered "morally wrong' because WE deemed them so, but that's what civilised societies do.
Without going into all manner of hypotheticals, do you consider these "wrong" behaviour:
Congresswoman McKinney hitting a police officer?
Marrion Barry in a hotel w/a hooker, smoking crack?

Because you can't find Republicans that have commited equally stupid crimes? I'm sure you could.

A standing president having extra-marital sex in the White House(not the sleeping areas).

That I truly don't care about. He lied, which was really ****ing wrong, but had he been truthful I wouldn't have cared one bit. His sex life is none of my business nor yours.

Cheating on your spouse for no other reason than that your bored and want something new?
A kid in class coming in and putting his feet up on the teachers desk, refusing repeated requests by the teacher to take them down?
I could go on and on, but on their face value, do think any of these are acceptable behaviour.
Not punishable by death or imprisonment mind you, just a plain right or wrong.
And I don't care HOW right or wrong they are.
And if you are OK with any of them and consider them as perfectly acceptable behaviour, please tell my why.

You seem to believe that because I don't agree with some of your judgements that I'm some hippy liberal that says anything is ok and people should be able to rape each other at a whim. You're not comprehending my point.

Morality is not universal. It exists only because we became sentient and it is always evolving.

 

[TheBluesMan]

Though the discussion has remained surprisingly civil, this thread has strayed far from the original topic and has entered the realm of philosophy.

Closed.