Private Morality

[Justin Davis]

"Sixteen women have publicly stated that Cosby, now 77, sexually assaulted them, with 12 saying he drugged them first and another saying he tried to drug her. The Washington Post has interviewed five of those women, including a former Playboy Playmate who has never spoken publicly about her allegations."
And what has been the result among those trained in Liberal non-judgmentalism?

"Sold-out Cosby show goes ahead amid sex assault claims
Cosby, 77, took the stage to a standing ovation and gave the audience a thumbs up at the King Center in Melbourne. The 90-minute show concluded without incident."

Now, here's a wonderful example of why I don't take the text of your screeds seriously.

Trying to blame Bill Cosby on "Liberalism".

When in fact, he's been a pinup boy for the right, happily blaming blacks and single mothers for hteir own hard times rather than the racism that is endemic in our society. He was a good House Negro who said, "Hey, I can make it, why can't you?"

But the minute that charges of sexual misconduct those wingnuts could no longer ignore came to light, you guys are more than happy to blame "liberalism' for his actions.

Yes, guess what, there are people out there who still think Bill Cosby is funny and still want to hear his comedy.

Those people aren't called "liberals" or "conservatives", they are called "Fans".

Let me sniff this out. Yep. That smells like a red herring, besides, Cosby is a lifelong Democrat and liberal. Back to the topic of the OP please.

 

[Justin Davis]

You "guys"???

"Probably not"????

You're still avoiding the point.

Okay, one more time. Conservatives were PERFECTLY HAPPY with Cosby when he was talking smack about single mothers and shit. You just stopped liking him when he got caught being rapist.

But there is no such thing as rape or irresponsibility or hypocrisy (though your allegation regarding that in this case is totally phony), remember? Just actions and consequences. You did agree with D4E on that, right? So what's your point? Doesn't look like you have one. Oh, wait. I wonder why you think rape and hypocrisy (though your allegation regarding that in this case is totally phony) is wrong or evil. You moral relativist are some really screwed up thinkers. I wonder why you guys make no sense. Oh, I know, because you're obviously wrong. Good and evil exist, and there are universal moral truths. Yep. That looks right, and that makes you guys wrong again.

 

[JakeStarkey]

When neither believers and non- can prove an absolute existence or not of God, then the talk of moral absolutes becomes interesting.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Second, this wage figure ignores the rise over the past few decades in the portion of worker pay taken as (nontaxable) fringe benefits. This is no small matter—health benefits, pensions, paid leave and the rest now amount to an average of almost 31% of total compensation for all civilian workers according to the BLS.

That's misleading. Yes, it is true that because we are the ONLY country that doesn't have universal health care, the cost of employing someone has increased. But the worker is not seeing an increase in his take home pay. Health insurance costs ten times as much and protects you from less. That's not a bargain.

I remember back in the 1980's, we called HMO's "HOrrible Medical Options". Because they were pretty awful. today, most of us wish was had an HMO. I remember our HR Lady bragging about how she was glad she was on her husband's HMO instead of our crappy program.

Third and most important, the average hourly wage is held down by the great increase of women and immigrants into the workforce over the past three decades. Precisely because the U.S. economy was flexible and strong, it created millions of jobs for the influx of many often lesser-skilled workers who sought employment during these years."

Again, horseshit. Most people aren't seeing any increase in their wages when adjusted for inflation. Women still make .71 compared to what a man makes and that was the case back in the 1970's.

"... we are the ONLY country that doesn't have universal health care,..."

This nation has had universal healthcare since 1986, you dope.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, it has not, PC. Twisting facts to fit your world view does not reflect actual reality.

 

[Muslim75]

Hello to all. I am Muslim.

People act morally because they are intelligent. The more the intelligence of a man, the more his morality.

Morality and intelligence enable one to believe in an Almighty God. Then after that one discards all untrue and corrupt religions, like Christianity, which is obviously, in 2014, an untrue, unauthentic, corrupted, falsified religion. Then after that one accepts the only remaining true divine message, the message of Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), Islam, authentic Islam.

Indeed, anyone who knows a little about Islam knows about the Night Journey and the holiness and the heavenliness of Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), the last of the 124 000 prophets and the best of them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sigh.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Years ago, at our university we had quite a number of Iranians attending grad school. Neat guys most of the time. However, when Mohammed was compared to Joseph Smith, all sorts of angst emerged. When the profs discovered some of the Shah's agents were spying on the Ayatollah's supporters, and vice versa, grades were docked. I still don't know if that was right, but having spies in classes was beyond the boundary.

The point of this is that some folks, Christians or Muslims or whatever, want to impose their private morality in the secular world. And the answer is "no".

 

[Justin Davis]

When neither believers and non- can prove an absolute existence or not of God, then the talk of moral absolutes becomes interesting.

But you forgot Rawlings wrapped that up real nice on the syllogism thread, so it looks like you're wrong again.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Years ago, at our university we had quite a number of Iranians attending grad school. Neat guys most of the time. However, when Mohammed was compared to Joseph Smith, all sorts of angst emerged. When the profs discovered some of the Shah's agents were spying on the Ayatollah's supporters, and vice versa, grades were docked. I still don't know if that was right, but having spies in classes was beyond the boundary.

The point of this is that some folks, Christians or Muslims or whatever, want to impose their private morality in the secular world. And the answer is "no".

As has been the case with so many other terms, you seem not able to to actually grasp the meaning of "impose."

I have no problem with your misuse of the English language, since 'imposing' a restriction, limiting you to terms you actually can define, would result in you being mute....and removing a prime amusement from the board.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hello to all. I am Muslim.

People act morally because they are intelligent. The more the intelligence of a man, the more his morality.

Morality and intelligence enable one to believe in an Almighty God. Then after that one discards all untrue and corrupt religions, like Christianity, which is obviously, in 2014, an untrue, unauthentic, corrupted, falsified religion. Then after that one accepts the only remaining true divine message, the message of Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), Islam, authentic Islam.

Indeed, anyone who knows a little about Islam knows about the Night Journey and the holiness and the heavenliness of Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), the last of the 124 000 prophets and the best of them.

Let's cut right to the chase, friend.

Does your understanding of the term "morality" include killing those who don't agree with your version of religion?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, it has not, PC. Twisting facts to fit your world view does not reflect actual reality.

Except, you moron, I haven't done so....as shown by the 'fact' that you were unable to give an example of same.


I know that I've asked for this clarification before, and you haven't responded...but, ever the optimist....let me ask again.....

Are you more a liar or more an imbecile?

 

[JakeStarkey]

When neither believers and non- can prove an absolute existence or not of God, then the talk of moral absolutes becomes interesting.

But you forgot Rawlings wrapped that up real nice on the syllogism thread, so it looks like you're wrong again.

Rawlings, as does keys, loves to babble and thinks a syllogism can prove a moral absolute of God. It can't. Any more than an atheist can prove God does not exist.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Years ago, at our university we had quite a number of Iranians attending grad school. Neat guys most of the time. However, when Mohammed was compared to Joseph Smith, all sorts of angst emerged. When the profs discovered some of the Shah's agents were spying on the Ayatollah's supporters, and vice versa, grades were docked. I still don't know if that was right, but having spies in classes was beyond the boundary.

The point of this is that some folks, Christians or Muslims or whatever, want to impose their private morality in the secular world. And the answer is "no".

As has been the case with so many other terms, you seem not able to to actually grasp the meaning of "impose."

I have no problem with your misuse of the English language, since 'imposing' a restriction, limiting you to terms you actually can define, would result in you being mute....and removing a prime amusement from the board.

We have no trouble with you babbling the presence of the adults.

You always entertain.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, it has not, PC. Twisting facts to fit your world view does not reflect actual reality.

Except, you moron, I haven't done so....as shown by the 'fact' that you were unable to give an example of same.


I know that I've asked for this clarification before, and you haven't responded...but, ever the optimist....let me ask again.....

Are you more a liar or more an imbecile?

I am neither, while you often are both.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No, it has not, PC. Twisting facts to fit your world view does not reflect actual reality.

Except, you moron, I haven't done so....as shown by the 'fact' that you were unable to give an example of same.


I know that I've asked for this clarification before, and you haven't responded...but, ever the optimist....let me ask again.....

Are you more a liar or more an imbecile?

I am neither, while you often are both.

I see....so you're a liar.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That you are as a babbling child adults is an accurate assessment of you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That you are as a babbling child adults is an accurate assessment of you.

WWTDD....
What Would Tyler Durden Do?

 

[JoeB131]

Answer the questions, coward.

"Sixteen women have publicly stated that Cosby, now 77, sexually assaulted them, with 12 saying he drugged them first and another saying he tried to drug her."

1. Would you give him a standing ovation?


2. In your estimation, is rape simply ignored as part of his 'private life'?

Answer the two questions.
Do it now!

I did.

Did you have anything else to add to the conversation.

 

[JoeB131]

Another atheist denying the only absolute ground for a universal morality as he spouts moral absolutes. I wonder why no one really escapes the necessity of moral absolutes. Could it be that some are just deluding themselves? Looks that way. Some people just aren't good people, but evil. Looks that way.

Uh, buddy, I put a simple question to you guys. If you guys offer Sodom as a morality tale, then gay sex is bad, but incest and offering your daughter up for gang rape are good.