dairygirl4u2c Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 a reoccurring theme happening in this thread as in others is this notion that no one can ever declare that a person is forcing their beliefs on someone else without getting jumped on. irrationally usually, id argue. it's just like the gay sex threads where we say you are forcing your beliefs on others. the basic idea... dont force your beliefs on others unless the issue you are dealing with affects others negatively. then we have those who say that in some indirect way it affects otehrs, be it the gay sex attitudes that affect others, or the people who know the guy who committed suicide. then we have those who just point out that in some sense, all laws are forcing beliefs on others. the problem with both points, one is that it's so indirect, usually, as per the firstpoint about how others are indirectly affected. and the other, is that gay sex or suicide or whatever, doesn't affect others negatively enough to justify forcing a belief on them, as would say speeding too fast in a car, or murder, or whatever is obviously negatively affecting others enough to justify forcing a belief on them. plus, it starts to get way too choppy to say that we have to allow for suicide and if we dont then we're forcing that belief on others... given the primary person being affected is the person who we say whether they can or can't commit suicide... *not* the people who are merely witnessing the situation unfold. i mean, how selfish is that, to act as if your hindrance with not being allowed to ban suicide affects you just the same, or at least signiicantly enough so, that we ban suicide just to make the person banning it feel better. to act as if there's people directly affected enough, or that we should just throw caution to the wind and say all laws are forcing a belief so let's enact them... is ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 (edited) if you want to ban suicide, or gay sex, or whatever. just be bold and say you are forcing your belief on others, moreso than most laws such as speeding or murder or etc. don't try to rationalize it as my last post addressess. Edited January 11, 2012 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Every law is the forcing of belief(s). What the people that spew out the "don't force your beliefs on me" don't realize is the by not allowing me to put in action my beliefs is actually the forcing of their beliefs on me. Hence, the "don't force your beliefs on me" right back at them. A non-belief is a belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326301652' post='2366965'] Every law is the forcing of belief(s). What the people that spew out the "don't force your beliefs on me" don't realize is the by not allowing me to put in action my beliefs is actually the forcing of their beliefs on me. Hence, the "don't force your beliefs on me" right back at them. A non-belief is a belief. [/quote] But removing a law, would you consider that as forcing a belief? Removing the law against Euthanasia, this then gives people the opportunity to decide their own fate rather than force then down the stay alive and remain in agony avenue. Removing the law against Gay marriage, this then gives the people the opportunity to decide on marriage or not, rather than force them down the not avenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 (edited) [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326306779' post='2367024'] But removing a law, would you consider that as forcing a belief? Removing the law against Euthanasia, this then gives people the opportunity to decide their own fate rather than force then down the stay alive and remain in agony avenue. Removing the law against Gay marriage, this then gives the people the opportunity to decide on marriage or not, rather than force them down the not avenue. [/quote] I am not the one that invoked the "don't force your beliefs on me" snippet. I am saying don't say that to me, and then turn right around and force your belief on me. Beliefs are forced on people. There is no way around it. Thou shalt not murder is a belief. So is murder being against the law a belief that is being forced on us? Yes it is. Edited January 11, 2012 by Papist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326307928' post='2367041'] I am not the one that invoked the "don't force your beliefs on me" snippet. I am saying don't say that to me, and then turn right around and force your belief on me. Beliefs are forced on people. There is no way around it. Thou shalt not murder is a belief. So is murder being against the law a belief that is being forced on us? Yes it is. [/quote] I'm not sure who turned something around and then forced a belief on you. I am suggesting the removal of a couple of unnecessary laws, thus allowing people to legally make choices. No force required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326308417' post='2367055'] I'm not sure who turned something around and then forced a belief on you. I am suggesting the removal of a couple of unnecessary laws, thus allowing people to legally make choices. No force required. [/quote] Ok. Let's start with traffic laws and then that stupid laws against wife beating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326308643' post='2367059'] Ok. Let's start with traffic laws and then that stupid laws against wife beating. [/quote] Or we could focus on the laws that I am actually worried about rather than being silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326310667' post='2367084'] Or we could focus on the laws that I am actually worried about rather than being silly. [/quote] I love how it is always you who gets to decide what's right and not right and the people that don't think like you are silly, not to be taken seriously morons. Where is the, [img]http://www.northernsun.com/images/imagelarge/Tolerance-Bumper-Sticker-(7103).jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1326314012' post='2367120'] I love how it is always you who gets to decide what's right and not right and the people that don't think like you are silly, not to be taken seriously morons. [/quote] What are you on about? I don't believe in objective wrong or right. I am an amoralist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Nothing more pointless or fruitless than trying to argue moral principles with an amoralist. If Stevil believes in no objective right or wrong, there is absolutely no reason for us who do to heed his personal opinions about what we ought and ought not do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 [quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1326330823' post='2367259'] Nothing more pointless or fruitless than trying to argue moral principles with an amoralist. If Stevil believes in no objective right or wrong, there is absolutely no reason for us who do to heed his personal opinions about what we ought and ought not do. [/quote] Certainly not from a moral perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326334185' post='2367306'] Certainly not from a moral perspective. [/quote] From what perspective then? Forcing a belief apparently conflicts with your moral values. Free choice is seemingly something that you value. Euthanasia as a legal issue has considerable ethical content. How do you make the leap from moral nihilism to logical discourse about moral values? Explain your philosophy in more detail please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1326334545' post='2367309'] From what perspective then? Forcing a belief apparently conflicts with your moral values. Free choice is seemingly something that you value. Euthanasia as a legal issue has considerable ethical content. How do you make the leap from moral nihilism to logical discourse about moral values? Explain your philosophy in more detail please. [/quote] Trying to explain my philosophical standpoint could be a lengthy exercise and it must take some liberties with the English language unfortunately. I feel the English language has been influenced by theistic philosophy for thousands of years and hence some words that do need redefinition with regards to me explaining myself. e.g. "rights" which many people take to have a moral aspect to it. But if you are willing to exercise your mind and allow me some liberties I am certain that I could explain it to you. I do think you are an intelligent thinker Laudate_Dominum and could likely understand my personal philosophy. Not that it takes intelligence but since it is natural for me and likely non intuitive for you, I feel it can take a willingness and patience and ability to look beyond what you know in order to understand another's perspective, even though you may not agree with it. Are you keen for this? If so I will start a new thread so as not to derail this thread any further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1326338485' post='2367368'] Trying to explain my philosophical standpoint could be a lengthy exercise and it must take some liberties with the English language unfortunately. I feel the English language has been influenced by theistic philosophy for thousands of years and hence some words that do need redefinition with regards to me explaining myself. e.g. "rights" which many people take to have a moral aspect to it. But if you are willing to exercise your mind and allow me some liberties I am certain that I could explain it to you. I do think you are an intelligent thinker Laudate_Dominum and could likely understand my personal philosophy. Not that it takes intelligence but since it is natural for me and likely non intuitive for you, I feel it can take a willingness and patience and ability to look beyond what you know in order to understand another's perspective, even though you may not agree with it. Are you keen for this? If so I will start a new thread so as not to derail this thread any further. [/quote] I would appreciate that. Sounds interesting. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now