I am an atheist.

[Czernobog]

Do you believe that forgiveness is more conducive to correcting preventing and understanding causes of problems or conflicts, rather than taking a retributive approach with negative focus or energy?

Not necessarily. I have a great deal of respect for retributive actions.

You are both wrong.

First of all there is a practicality problem of not forgiving people. People make mistakes. We can't kill everyone who makes a mistake. They can't be punished forever. Eventually everyone must move on.

But most importantly forgiveness is something we do for ourselves because it is unhealthy if we don't. The human mind cannot live in conflict. And because you can't go back in time to fix it, the only way to reconcile the conflict is forgiveness.

Confession is even more important.

Yeah...a mistake made more than once isn't a mistake; it's a choice. I didn't suggest that no one ever deserves forgiveness; at least that wasn't my intention. However, just as it is true that some deserve forgiveness, and a new start, some...don't. And before you ask who gets to make that determination...I do. Just as I pointed out in my OP. I, and I alone, get to choose the direction, and extent of my morality, and I, and I alone, accept the consequences of that morality. And don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that I get to make that determination for everyone. I'm saying I et to make that determination for me. I get to decide who has wronged me, who I will forgive, and who I will not.

Now, keep in mind, we're talking about morality here, not legality. If you wrong me, and I decided you made a choice, and do not deserve forgiveness, but, in fact, deserve retribution, I feel perfectly justified, morally - depending on the severity of the wrong - shooting you in the face. However, that does absolutely nothing to change the legality (or probable illegality, in this case) of the action, and I will have to deal with that.

 

[Czernobog]

You sanctimonious shits...

LOL from the guy who believes that HE is the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good.

There is a creator, aka "God". He alone determines what is moral, righteous and good, not you. Find and follow him.

...for him! That's the part you are leaving out. I am the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good FOR ME. I do not presume to speak for anyone else. That's the difference between me, and you sanctimonious theist fucks. I only presume to speak for myself. You presume that your morality based on your imaginary sky god is so perfect, that it should be imposed on everyone.

 

[emilynghiem]

You sanctimonious shits...

LOL from the guy who believes that HE is the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good.

There is a creator, aka "God". He alone determines what is moral, righteous and good, not you. Find and follow him.

...for him! That's the part you are leaving out. I am the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good FOR ME. I do not presume to speak for anyone else. That's the difference between me, and you sanctimonious theist fucks. I only presume to speak for myself. You presume that your morality based on your imaginary sky god is so perfect, that it should be imposed on everyone.

Dear Czernobog
if you are the only person who decides for you
what stops you from shooting another person to get their car or shoes
because that suits you.

surely the law of reciprocity and equal justice applies to you as other people.
Decisions that affect other people should be made ideally by consensus
to make sure BOTH people agree that it works for THEM.

So that involves the consent of other persons besides just yourself,
do you agree?

 

[Czernobog]

You sanctimonious shits...

LOL from the guy who believes that HE is the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good.

There is a creator, aka "God". He alone determines what is moral, righteous and good, not you. Find and follow him.

...for him! That's the part you are leaving out. I am the ultimate determiner of what is moral, righteous and good FOR ME. I do not presume to speak for anyone else. That's the difference between me, and you sanctimonious theist fucks. I only presume to speak for myself. You presume that your morality based on your imaginary sky god is so perfect, that it should be imposed on everyone.

Dear Czernobog
if you are the only person who decides for you
what stops you from shooting another person to get their car or shoes
because that suits you.

You confuse self-determination with self-gratification. Nothing "stops" me from shooting someone for their shoes, or cars. However, I stop me from doing that, because I determine for myself that such a violent act for such an absurd reason is neither healthy, nor rational.

surely the law of reciprocity and equal justice applies to you as other people.
Decisions that affect other people should be made ideally by consensus
to make sure BOTH people agree that it works for THEM.

So that involves the consent of other persons besides just yourself,
do you agree?

What you're talking about is the social contract of law. While the two are not necessarily mutually exclusive, neither are they interchangeable. I choose to agree to live in accordance with certain restrictions, and obligations, in exchange for protections, and privileges as part of a society. This does not alter that I also have possession of my own personal moral code which I determine for myself, and to which no one but myself can hold me accountable.

 

[Czernobog]

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

You started this thread with a post boasting about how virtuous you are. This shows that you care more about having people think that you are virtuous, than about actually being virtuous. That's pretty much the definition of “sanctimonious”.

There was nothing boastful in my post. There were simple declarative sentences. The only reason you find them "boastful" is because I dare to say that I am able to behave in this manner without the need of some imaginary sky god. Well, I'm sorry that my lack of a need for an imaginary deity offends you so. Actually, no I'm not. My fervent hope is that someone who isn't so sure of their religious teachings will read this, and learn that there is an alternative.

 

[ding]

Do you believe that forgiveness is more conducive to correcting preventing and understanding causes of problems or conflicts, rather than taking a retributive approach with negative focus or energy?

Not necessarily. I have a great deal of respect for retributive actions.

You are both wrong.

First of all there is a practicality problem of not forgiving people. People make mistakes. We can't kill everyone who makes a mistake. They can't be punished forever. Eventually everyone must move on.

But most importantly forgiveness is something we do for ourselves because it is unhealthy if we don't. The human mind cannot live in conflict. And because you can't go back in time to fix it, the only way to reconcile the conflict is forgiveness.

Confession is even more important.

Yeah...a mistake made more than once isn't a mistake; it's a choice. I didn't suggest that no one ever deserves forgiveness; at least that wasn't my intention. However, just as it is true that some deserve forgiveness, and a new start, some...don't. And before you ask who gets to make that determination...I do. Just as I pointed out in my OP. I, and I alone, get to choose the direction, and extent of my morality, and I, and I alone, accept the consequences of that morality. And don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that I get to make that determination for everyone. I'm saying I et to make that determination for me. I get to decide who has wronged me, who I will forgive, and who I will not.

Now, keep in mind, we're talking about morality here, not legality. If you wrong me, and I decided you made a choice, and do not deserve forgiveness, but, in fact, deserve retribution, I feel perfectly justified, morally - depending on the severity of the wrong - shooting you in the face. However, that does absolutely nothing to change the legality (or probable illegality, in this case) of the action, and I will have to deal with that.

That is largely true for all of us today.

No one can deserve forgiveness. Unless of course, you are going off of past performance which you as a forgiver would only have a partial filtered picture. But even then, past performance is no guarantee of future performance. So I am right back at no one can earn forgiveness. You certainly don't earn forgiveness from the act that needs forgiving, amirite?

Maybe you were thinking that you can forgive people who look like you or who think like you or who act like you. Nothing like good old fashioned subjectivity.

No where in your response did I find how not forgiving them was good for you. Is it your opinion that it is healthy to hold grudges? That it makes you a better human being; smarter, faster, more handsome.

No where in your response did I find how taking your retribution on them was good for you. Is it your opinion that it is healthy to find happiness in harming others.

 

[ding]

You are not an atheist. There is no such thing as an atheist. There are those who acknowledge the truth and those who don't.

Fuck off. Yeah. I know that's rude, but that's all I have for an arrogant dickwad who presumes to tell me what I do, and do not believe.

So, yeah. Fuck off. If you ever decide that you'd like to have a civilised discussion, by all means, let me know.

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

Dr. Ron Paul responds:

"Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government."

 

[ding]

You are not an atheist. There is no such thing as an atheist. There are those who acknowledge the truth and those who don't.

Fuck off. Yeah. I know that's rude, but that's all I have for an arrogant dickwad who presumes to tell me what I do, and do not believe.

So, yeah. Fuck off. If you ever decide that you'd like to have a civilised discussion, by all means, let me know.

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

The early thinkers of our country were convinced that the state must be held accountable to the authority of a higher ethical and spiritual standard – the “Natural Law” or the “Law of Nature’s God.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” George Washington, Farewell Address, Sept 17, 1796

“Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.” John Adams Letter of June 21, 1776

“Religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness.” Samuel Adams Letter to John Trumbull, October 16, 1778

“The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor…and this alone, that renders us invincible.” Patrick Henry Letter to Archibald Blair, January 8, 1799

“The only foundation for...a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.” Benjamin Rush Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical, 1798

 

[Czernobog]

Do you believe that forgiveness is more conducive to correcting preventing and understanding causes of problems or conflicts, rather than taking a retributive approach with negative focus or energy?

Not necessarily. I have a great deal of respect for retributive actions.

You are both wrong.

First of all there is a practicality problem of not forgiving people. People make mistakes. We can't kill everyone who makes a mistake. They can't be punished forever. Eventually everyone must move on.

But most importantly forgiveness is something we do for ourselves because it is unhealthy if we don't. The human mind cannot live in conflict. And because you can't go back in time to fix it, the only way to reconcile the conflict is forgiveness.

Confession is even more important.

Yeah...a mistake made more than once isn't a mistake; it's a choice. I didn't suggest that no one ever deserves forgiveness; at least that wasn't my intention. However, just as it is true that some deserve forgiveness, and a new start, some...don't. And before you ask who gets to make that determination...I do. Just as I pointed out in my OP. I, and I alone, get to choose the direction, and extent of my morality, and I, and I alone, accept the consequences of that morality. And don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that I get to make that determination for everyone. I'm saying I et to make that determination for me. I get to decide who has wronged me, who I will forgive, and who I will not.

Now, keep in mind, we're talking about morality here, not legality. If you wrong me, and I decided you made a choice, and do not deserve forgiveness, but, in fact, deserve retribution, I feel perfectly justified, morally - depending on the severity of the wrong - shooting you in the face. However, that does absolutely nothing to change the legality (or probable illegality, in this case) of the action, and I will have to deal with that.

That is largely true for all of us today.

No one can deserve forgiveness. Unless of course, you are going off of past performance which you as a forgiver would only have a partial filtered picture. But even then, past performance is no guarantee of future performance. So I am right back at no one can earn forgiveness. You certainly don't earn forgiveness from the act that needs forgiving, amirite?

Maybe you were thinking that you can forgive people who look like you or who think like you or who act like you. Nothing like good old fashioned subjectivity.

or, maybe I wasn't thinking anything like that, at all...

No where in your response did I find how not forgiving them was good for you. Is it your opinion that it is healthy to hold grudges? That it makes you a better human being; smarter, faster, more handsome.

I never suggested it does. Do you only do things that are completely healthy? You never eat fast food? You've never gotten drunk? Further, you seem to equate not choosing to forgive someone with "holding a grudge". I would submit that they are two separate things. When I tell you to fuck off, you no longer exist in my reality, and then proceed to simply cut you out of my life. I am not "holding a grudge", I am simply deciding that you are not worthy of being a part of my life. I, then, go on with my life without ever giving you so much as a single thought. That's not "holding a grudge"; that's cutting out a cancer.

No where in your response did I find how taking your retribution on them was good for you. Is it your opinion that it is healthy to find happiness in harming others.

Sometimes, yeah. It is cathartic. If you have never enjoyed the catharsis of punching a dick in the face, then it is something that you simply will not understand.

 

[Czernobog]

Fuck off. Yeah. I know that's rude, but that's all I have for an arrogant dickwad who presumes to tell me what I do, and do not believe.

So, yeah. Fuck off. If you ever decide that you'd like to have a civilised discussion, by all means, let me know.

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

Dr. Ron Paul responds:

"Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government."

Woohoo. Ron Paul is entitled his opinion. It does not change that I need no church, no religion for me to decide to do what I do. Your point?

 

[Czernobog]

Fuck off. Yeah. I know that's rude, but that's all I have for an arrogant dickwad who presumes to tell me what I do, and do not believe.

So, yeah. Fuck off. If you ever decide that you'd like to have a civilised discussion, by all means, let me know.

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

The early thinkers of our country were convinced that the state must be held accountable to the authority of a higher ethical and spiritual standard – the “Natural Law” or the “Law of Nature’s God.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” George Washington, Farewell Address, Sept 17, 1796

“Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.” John Adams Letter of June 21, 1776

“Religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness.” Samuel Adams Letter to John Trumbull, October 16, 1778

“The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor…and this alone, that renders us invincible.” Patrick Henry Letter to Archibald Blair, January 8, 1799

“The only foundation for...a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.” Benjamin Rush Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical, 1798

Again, woohoo. In what way does what any of these people had to say alter that I live my live devoid of any religious indoctrination, and the moral code I follow, as posted in the OP, is no less positive than theists?

 

[toobfreak]

...I am an atheist.

You would be better to think of yourself as an Impersonalist. You believe in good and bad, just not any personal (personified) cause behind it all.

 

[ding]

or, maybe I wasn't thinking anything like that, at all...

I know you weren't thinking like that. That's why I pointed out why you were wrong.

I never suggested it does. Do you only do things that are completely healthy? You never eat fast food? You've never gotten drunk? Further, you seem to equate not choosing to forgive someone with "holding a grudge". I would submit that they are two separate things. When I tell you to fuck off, you no longer exist in my reality, and then proceed to simply cut you out of my life. I am not "holding a grudge", I am simply deciding that you are not worthy of being a part of my life. I, then, go on with my life without ever giving you so much as a single thought. That's not "holding a grudge"; that's cutting out a cancer.

That's a false equivalency. All things work for our good, if you understand how they are connected. But that doesn't mean there is not a better way. That is what we are discussing. The better way.

You are rationalizing why withholding forgiveness is a good thing. It's not and never will be. Just because we mete out punishment as a form of justice doesn't make it right. A much better way of looking at it is that it is wrong but we still choose to do it. Why is this better? Because it doesn't lower the standard. Which is something I believe you have done in an incrementalized fashion the way it has always been done in its time honored tradition of normalization of deviance. It really shouldn't have been a surprise that the Nazi's went from we don't like Jews, to Jews are evil to Jews are not human to kill the Jews.

Your incremenatalization of moving the standards is no different. You end up far away from what is good and just.

Sometimes, yeah. It is cathartic. If you have never enjoyed the catharsis of punching a dick in the face, then it is something that you simply will not understand.

No. It isn't. And if it is, you are devoid of virtue.

 

[ding]

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

Dr. Ron Paul responds:

"Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government."

Woohoo. Ron Paul is entitled his opinion. It does not change that I need no church, no religion for me to decide to do what I do. Your point?

My point here was that religion serves a purpose and is a force for good.

"Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government."

See?

 

[ding]

It usually does when I'm dealing with sanctimonious trolls.

Bully for you! Do you want a cigar or a blowtorch to light it with? Those that seek to do service for others don't feel the need to advertise it. Nothing takes away from doing good for others than by standing up and wanting recognition and appaluse for having done it...........capiche'?

And another pompous ass missing the point. I didn't post the OP for milk, and cookies. I posted it to point out that one does not need religious indoctrination to do good.

The early thinkers of our country were convinced that the state must be held accountable to the authority of a higher ethical and spiritual standard – the “Natural Law” or the “Law of Nature’s God.

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” George Washington, Farewell Address, Sept 17, 1796

“Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.” John Adams Letter of June 21, 1776

“Religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness.” Samuel Adams Letter to John Trumbull, October 16, 1778

“The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor…and this alone, that renders us invincible.” Patrick Henry Letter to Archibald Blair, January 8, 1799

“The only foundation for...a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.” Benjamin Rush Essays, Literary, Moral and Philosophical, 1798

Again, woohoo. In what way does what any of these people had to say alter that I live my live devoid of any religious indoctrination, and the moral code I follow, as posted in the OP, is no less positive than theists?

But according to the early thinkers of our country, you can't be good without religion. That's the point. They are calling bullshit on your ability to do so in a vacuum. Moreover, there belief was that no government could succeed if the populace is corrupt. There point was that we need religion, morality and virtue if we are ever going to maintain freedom and liberty. That freedom and liberty cannot exist without morality and virtue and that religion is necessary for morality and virtue.

 

[ding]

And Alexander Solzhenitsyn validates the logic of the early thinkers of our country.

“More than half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: ‘Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened. Since then I have spent well-nigh fifty years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval...But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some sixty million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." Alexander Solzhenitsyn

“Templeton Lecture, May 10, 1983,” in The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings, 1947-2005, eds. Edward E. Ericson, Jr. and Daniel J. Mahoney (Wilmington, DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2006), 577

 

[Czernobog]

...I am an atheist.

You would be better to think of yourself as an Impersonalist. You believe in good and bad, just not any personal (personified) cause behind it all.

I don't believe in any cause - personal, or otherwise. There is no God.

 

[ding]

And Karl Marx validates the logic of the early thinkers of our country.

Communism is naturalized humanism. Karl Marx

 

[ding]

And Vladimir Lenin validates the logic of the early thinkers of our country.

The propaganda of atheism is necessary for our programs. Vladimir Lenin

 

[ding]

And Abraham Lincoln validates the logic of the early thinkers of our country.

“We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God...

...We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us...and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own...

...Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us, then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness."

Abraham Lincoln, “Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day” in

Collected Works. The Abraham Lincoln Association, Springfield, Illinois, ed. Roy P. Basler (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1953), 6:155-157.