CDZ I feel like the President should be held to a higher moral standard

[Circe]

It's true. No woman who would vote for him has dignity as a woman or respect for herself or other women.

Well, except for me, of course. And all the other women on this site who support Trump. I think you're in a minority, Esmeralda, and you think you can speak for people you don't represent at all.

I am not speaking for anyone but myself, and my opinion is that a woman who would vote for a man who is a predator of women and a mysoginist has no self respect as a woman. Opinion. Not speaking for anyone but myself.

So you are "just" name-calling against me and all the women who don't march lockstep with you? Not nice. And it's spelled misogynist, like gynecologist, same root. That's a word you definitely need to know how to spell if you are going to do feminism.

He is also a man who hangs out with and has sex with prostitutes and porn actresses and cheats on his wives. He is absolutely morally bankrupt. Total sleaze.

You don't know that. You weren't there. Fake news, dem attempt at a soft coup. The things people just BELIEVE on faith these days!!! Don't say "is," it sounds like you know objective truth when you don't: He is this, he is that. Ha. Don't be gullible.

Not a man any woman with self respect would admire, much less vote for.

When you're wrong, you're wrong big, that's for sure. I have plenty of self-respect and I both voted for Trump and admire him tremendously. For instance, his counter-attacks on people who are gratuitously nasty to him, as you just were to me and all the women who share my beliefs. I just did that back. Be respectful, many would.

 

[Disir]

[we shouldn't really even give them the title "President," they should simply be Mr. Smith.......same for congress....no titles......

You are totally allowed to call him Mr. Trump in any circumstances. That has been a matter of protocol and choice since George Washington. I learned that in grade school.

I didn't say that. Try again.

No. Don't give me orders.

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

 

[harmonica]

It's true. No woman who would vote for him has dignity as a woman or respect for herself or other women.

Well, except for me, of course. And all the other women on this site who support Trump. I think you're in a minority, Esmeralda, and you think you can speak for people you don't represent at all.

I am not speaking for anyone but myself, and my opinion is that a woman who would vote for a man who is a predator of women and a mysoginist has no self respect as a woman. Opinion. Not speaking for anyone but myself.

He is also a man who hangs out with and has sex with prostitutes and porn actresses and cheats on his wives. He is absolutely morally bankrupt. Total sleaze. Not a man any woman with self respect would admire, much less vote for,

how do you know Melania doesn't like it?
what's wrong with having some fun with whores? it's been going on for centuries
I admire him even more for getting it anyway he can

 

[Circe]

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

More information needed: what game is that?

 

[Disir]

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

More information needed: what game is that?

Don't play stupid. You intentionally misquoted me.

 

[Circe]

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

More information needed: what game is that?

Don't play stupid. You intentionally misquoted me.

I did misquote you, though not intentionally. You'll survive, and what is more, I bet it's not the last time you'll ever be misquoted in this sad world. I suggest you hope and pray it's always about something as harmless as whether it's allowable to call a president "Mister."

 

[Disir]

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

More information needed: what game is that?

Don't play stupid. You intentionally misquoted me.

I did misquote you, though not intentionally. You'll survive, and what is more, I bet it's not the last time you'll ever be misquoted in this sad world. I suggest you hope and pray it's always about something as harmless as whether it's allowable to call a president "Mister."

Circe, this ain't my first rodeo.

 

[Circe]

So the instructions given by the world's great religions on how to treat others, particularly strangers and the poor, are "leftist, PC garbage"?

That's it! Yes.

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it. Go the second mile, turn the other cheek, sheeeeeesh, talk about a slave morality. Buddhism is pretty much as bad, at least.

Islam is probably not the kind of religion leftists have in mind, as it's mostly about world domination by fire and sword.

I hate utilitarianism but it makes the most sense, and Kant's Categorical Imperative improves on the Golden Rule, as it was meant to, but still doesn't cover the ground, which is our hard-wiring to make sides and teams and compete for all the resources. I like the ethics of loyalty myself, natural law, sticking with one's team. Onward Christian Soldiers/Marching as to war --- it's what Christians actually DO, since the Golden Rule is impossible to follow and still survive or win.

 

[usmbguest5318]

So the instructions given by the world's great religions on how to treat others, particularly strangers and the poor, are "leftist, PC garbage"?

That's it! Yes.

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it. Go the second mile, turn the other cheek, sheeeeeesh, talk about a slave morality. Buddhism is pretty much as bad, at least.

Islam is probably not the kind of religion leftists have in mind, as it's mostly about world domination by fire and sword.

I hate utilitarianism but it makes the most sense, and Kant's Categorical Imperative improves on the Golden Rule, as it was meant to, but still doesn't cover the ground, which is our hard-wiring to make sides and teams and compete for all the resources. I like the ethics of loyalty myself, natural law, sticking with one's team. Onward Christian Soldiers/Marching as to war --- it's what Christians actually DO, since the Golden Rule is impossible to follow and still survive or win.

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it.

Say what? How is one not obliged to oneself, regardless of whether one adheres to the Golden Rule or doesn't?

 

[task0778]

I think every politician who is elected to national office ought to be held to a higher standard of conduct. Actually, any elected office, come to think of it. You see it every once in awhile when an individual's conduct is so egregious it can't be ignored, but far too often it isn't. It's no wonder why the polls consistently show the trust and approval ratings in our gov't is so low.

 

[Circe]

[ How is one not obliged to oneself, regardless of whether one adheres to the Golden Rule or doesn't?

What does "obliged to oneself" mean?

 

[usmbguest5318]

[ How is one not obliged to oneself, regardless of whether one adheres to the Golden Rule or doesn't?

What does "obliged to oneself" mean?

Slavery is the existential lot in life whereby one 24/7 serves directly and indirectly, during one's enslavement, the aspirations of someone else, one's master, and being (or being understood to) bound and inured legally, cognitively, and by society at large forced to subordinate even servicing one's own ambitions to those of one's master. If one eats, it's because one's master provides food, which s/he does because s/he would have one sturdy enough to perform various tasks. The only material thing one can do that is not in some way serving one's master's ends is severing one's relationship with one's master. Until one succeeds in doing that, everything one does one can do only because one's master allows it, and s/he allows it only because it serves his/her ends to do so. [1]

You wrote:

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it.

If one does not service one's own ambitions, then one must necessarily service either no one's or someone else's. Thus being obliged to oneself is to service one's own ends, to a slave to oneself. So, as I asked, how is one ever not servicing one's own ends? Even one's acts of charity must necessarily serve an end(s), be it tangible or intangible, one cares to effect.

Note:

1. Is that a sufficiently cynical exposition?
   
   The other day, you aired your epistemological stance.
   

   And as Lily Tomlin said, however cynical I become, it's never enough to keep up.

   Well, cynics acknowledge there is an existential underpinning to all one does, even if to others one's mark is recondite.

One day, observing a child drinking out of his hands, he cast away the cup from his wallet with the words, "A child has beaten me in plainness of living."
-- Diogenes Laertes, ed.; Delphi Complete Works of Diogenes Laertius​

 

[Circe]

​

You wrote:

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it.

If one does not service one's own ambitions, then one must necessarily service either no one's or someone else's. Thus being obliged to oneself is to service one's own ends, to a slave to oneself. So, as I asked, how is one ever not servicing one's own ends? Even one's acts of charity must necessarily serve an end(s), be it tangible or intangible, one cares to effect.

Okay, I see your point. I suppose I meant enslaving oneself voluntarily to whomever gets to slap the second cheek as well as the first, or demand one's company for the second mile. But now that you've pointed it out, I think "self-slavery" is a too-vague term.

The Golden Rule says to do for others whatever you would like somebody to do for you. This is of course entirely unworkable and no one does this. It's a prescription for voluntary slavery to whomever tells you to do whatever they want. Forgive them 70 times 7, which is pretty impractical, though it would certainly empty the prisons as one's nephew just keeps on stealing from the house week after week for drugs. A revision of this Rule is do NOT do to others what you would NOT want them to do to you, but that doesn't help, because thieves just go on mugging you and stealing your wallet anyway. I've been studying Ethics, as you can probably tell.

​

One day, observing a child drinking out of his hands, he cast away the cup from his wallet with the words, "A child has beaten me in plainness of living."
-- Diogenes Laertes, ed.; Delphi Complete Works of Diogenes Laertius​

Wonderful. The new simplicity books are everywhere; but not a new idea.

 

[usmbguest5318]

​

You wrote:

The Golden Rule is pretty hopeless, leading to abject self-slavery if you actually do it.

If one does not service one's own ambitions, then one must necessarily service either no one's or someone else's. Thus being obliged to oneself is to service one's own ends, to a slave to oneself. So, as I asked, how is one ever not servicing one's own ends? Even one's acts of charity must necessarily serve an end(s), be it tangible or intangible, one cares to effect.

Okay, I see your point. I suppose I meant enslaving oneself voluntarily to whomever gets to slap the second cheek as well as the first, or demand one's company for the second mile. But now that you've pointed it out, I think "self-slavery" is a too-vague term.

The Golden Rule says to do for others whatever you would like somebody to do for you. This is of course entirely unworkable and no one does this. It's a prescription for voluntary slavery to whomever tells you to do whatever they want. Forgive them 70 times 7, which is pretty impractical, though it would certainly empty the prisons as one's nephew just keeps on stealing from the house week after week for drugs. A revision of this Rule is do NOT do to others what you would NOT want them to do to you, but that doesn't help, because thieves just go on mugging you and stealing your wallet anyway. I've been studying Ethics, as you can probably tell.

​

One day, observing a child drinking out of his hands, he cast away the cup from his wallet with the words, "A child has beaten me in plainness of living."
-- Diogenes Laertes, ed.; Delphi Complete Works of Diogenes Laertius​

Wonderful. The new simplicity books are everywhere; but not a new idea.

The Golden Rule says to do for others whatever you would like somebody to do for you.

Except that it isn't that. It's do "unto" not do "for."

 

[Darkwind]

I won’t dusagree with him that most parts of Africa are in terrible conditions right now and that’s why people are heading for the states.

However, I also feel that openly denouncing people who we consider to be allies and who we have given aid to, in a move that has incurred international backlash from just about every country on the planet for the sake of “Calling it like it is”, is extremely short sighted.

We’ve all had points where we’ve had to bite our tongues and collect ourselves. Trump has not done that, and it has instigated nuclear war and infuriated all of our international friends and scared/angered half of the United States.

But at least he looks badass?

We've been biting our tongues for decades now, with little to no benefit. Nice to see someone finally kicking PC to the curb.

Deciding to vet people from the Middle East because some people might be in ISIS is kicking PC away, which is understandable.

Openly insulting people and degrading countries on an international stage, because you were frustrated and wanted to look like a badass is just dumb, imo. What did we gain from calling an entire continent and a few carribean islands a shithole?

He did not do it on an international stage.

A Democrat violated the rules of private meetings for the purpose of political power. It is the Democrat that should be publically flogged for bringing this out in the open.

I'm not a fan of Trump, but I wholeheartedly disagree with the entire notion that we should hold the President to a higher standard.

That really is nothing but code for, "We want to trash the opposite side and don't want to have to defend return attacks.

If you cannot hold them ALL to a high standard, hold none of them to it.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

It's true. No woman who would vote for him has dignity as a woman or respect for herself or other women.

Well, except for me, of course. And all the other women on this site who support Trump. I think you're in a minority, Esmeralda, and you think you can speak for people you don't represent at all.

I am not speaking for anyone but myself, and my opinion is that a woman who would vote for a man who is a predator of women and a mysoginist has no self respect as a woman. Opinion. Not speaking for anyone but myself.

He is also a man who hangs out with and has sex with prostitutes and porn actresses and cheats on his wives. He is absolutely morally bankrupt. Total sleaze. Not a man any woman with self respect would admire, much less vote for,

Did you vote for Hitlery? The enabler of a Rapist, and woman Abuser? Farging hypocrite = Liberal.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Are you absolutely sure you want to play this game?

More information needed: what game is that?

Don't play stupid. You intentionally misquoted me.

I did misquote you, though not intentionally. You'll survive, and what is more, I bet it's not the last time you'll ever be misquoted in this sad world. I suggest you hope and pray it's always about something as harmless as whether it's allowable to call a president "Mister."

Circe, I found out a long time ago, that the NASTIEST people on this planet is the Feminazi, who when not getting their way, turn into the worst bullies against men but especially again free thinking women. You look at those women who started the NAG(National Association of Gals) and since they are sooooo ugly, cant get a respectable man and be staying with that man in marriage for the rest of their lives, so must find a rapist or child abuser, like Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, or even Harvey Weinstein, just to make it in society today. Those women are such miserable wenches, that they attack people who just want to be happy, because they will never find that same happiness.

 

[sartre play]

Thought I was in the clean debate zone. what happened, where is the moderator?

 

[harmonica]

I don't care what Trump does--I LOVE IT!!!!

 

[usmbguest5318]

I don't care what Trump does--I LOVE IT!!!!

Well, "loving it" is one of the two things that're typical of indifference about anything.