scythekain: PK: since you didn’t properly answer my question:
K: I did answer your question, but see that is relativism,
You think this, I think that and who is to say who is right?
Scy: “Is capitalism = communism”, I am not going to respond to the rest of your post (it’s futile anyways, you are stuck in your ways.)
K: It is wise of you not to answer something you can’t answer.
K: I take a different perspective then you do.
Can you name the HIGHEST CULTURE? Was it
Greek, roman, English? Who?
Capitalism and communism are not cultures,
they are economic systems not cultural.
Thus showing how confused you are, thinking capitalism
is a cultural system."
SCY: Capitalism and communism ARE cultural systems. Capitalism evolved from millenia of trading and valuing property. Communism exists culturally in the inuit tribe.
K: culture does exist separately from a economic system.
Jeez, did you even go to school?
S:Communism existed culturally, when the governments changed their systems. (through great revolts.)
So your answer to my question, changes the definition of capitalism and communism, so you can judge them and continue along your relativistic way.
K: The first sentence makes no sense, and I will thank you.
S: Who had the greatest culture from the past to the present?
The culture I live in. If it were any different, I would make the culture reflect the better values. The same way you try to get the culture to reflect communistic values.
K: Based on what? See that is the problem, which criteria did you
used to base your judgement on? How can you say the greatest
culture of all time is the one you live in? I can think of several
by several different standards that are greater.
In fact, one could make the argument that present day
culture is a wasteland of monumental proportions.
And you could make another argument and thus
we are back to… perspective which is relativism.
satori: But you get the minor issues such as pre-marital sex, homosexuality, hell even eating of pork in the realms of morals."
Scy: That’s where proper discussion of the consequences and advantages of behavior comes in. Right now, we have two sides discussing the dialogue of their dogmas. The dogma of the relativist is that anything goes, and we can’t judge other societies, no matter WHAT atrocities they commit.
K: And who is to say what an atrocity is? From what
perspective can you say, “this is an atrocity”
Scy: The dogma of the theist is that we must follow the rule of god.
Every behavior has consequences and advantages, from stem cell research to sodomy. Without a proper debate, we’ll just get more dogmatic reason to do, or not to do certain behaviors.
K: Yes, every behavior does have consequences,
but that is not religious in context nor dogmatic,
just simply life. If I cheat on my wife, I will pay the price.
It has nothing to do with being relativistic or not.
ScY: Relativism is a religion. Secularists use it as their dogmatic engine for “moral” living. As an example, the relativist will commonly say that “we can’t take the moral high ground in war”, and that “war is unjustified”, etc.
K: completely missing the point. Relativism is not religion.
That stretches the boundaries of both into oblivion.
“dogmatic engine for moral living” I am not even sure
what that means. What is the “high moral ground for war”
has changed over the centuries, what was high moral ground
in the 16th changed in the 17th century and changed again
in the 18th and again in the 19th and 20th century and will
changed again in the 21st. So who is to say which one is the
right one?
Scy: It’s pure dogma, they ignore reality, the consequences and advantages of any given behavior.
K: To say relativist ignore reality is simply wrong.
In fact I would make the argument that relativist understand
reality better then theist or believers in god.
Scy: And yes, Islam is a part of the war of relativism… It should make you wonder when the enemy is using the same talking points as the democratic party…
K: I don’t know how you got to islam from relativism.
And of the so called talking points, didn’t happen.
Only people like yourself believe in that claptrap.
But they have alot in common:
- They both hate capitalism and america.
K I wrote about this in a 9/11 post.
My family has been in america since 1640 and I have an
ancestor who has run for president of the united states,
and was secretary of state. (william jennings bryant)
My family history is the history of america
To say democrats hate america is a lie of such proportions that
you should be ashamed of yourself. Calling yourself christian
and lying that way. God won’t be very happy with you. But hay
if you can live with lying…
- They hate freedom of expression; thusly criticism of behavior that derives from it.
K: such broad and misguided strokes. You can’t even prove how
democrats “hate freedom of expression” without more of
those lies you are so fond of.
- Their culture and ideas cannot stand up to criticism, thusly they try to suppress criticism. The neo-liberals do it through “PC”, it’s not politically correct to address the problems of any culture/people/system. The muslims do it through threat of life.
K: ah, 2 and 3 are really the same criticism.
Upon further thought, here it is. You defend a religion
you clearly don’t understand and you attack people based
on a misunderstanding of that religion.
You consider yourself a christian and yet you don’t even
understand it or know what it means to be christian.
every thing you do is based on a misunderstanding
of the gospel. Maybe instead of attacking me perhaps
you should begin again and understand exactly what
you are about. As an old man, I can understand being
misinformed about stuff, been there, done that.
Tend to your own garden until you get a understanding
about the world and people.
Kropotkin
