Nimrod

[ironmonk]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Jan 19 2005, 12:05 PM'] you have every right and duty to expound Catholic teachings at a Catholic University and I think your professor should be aware of this.
If the question he asks is supposed to utilize moral relativism, however, there is no sin in answering the question academically. It's an exercise in thinking like the enemy.

But the question he used so [i]totally [/i]allows for you to express Catholic teachings. [/quote]
Exactly.

When it's time to review him I'll have a nice little tidbit to put in the comments section.

I'm still considering replying soon, but the guy is has a J.D. in law and a degree in psychology... seems to be far left, but I could be wrong. [u][b]If [/b][/u]he's far left, I doubt he has enough integrity to be able to seperate when he looses the debate and has to grade my term paper and essays.

If I thought others in the class would read my reply, I would post it.

God BLess,
ironmonk

[Socrates]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Jan 18 2005, 11:41 PM'] Ironmonk, may I recommand the CDC site on AIDS. Last year if there was NO (as in Zero) sexual interaction between infected persons there would still have been upwards of 10,000 new infections in the US alone. HIV/AIDS is an STD, yes, but improperly named. Prior and during 1985, a signifcant precentage of new infections came from blood transfusions. Moreover, in Africa, there is still issues with blood safety and stopping reuse of sharps. Many hopsitals cannont afford to purchase new sharps and the disuse occurs when they no longer preice the skin.

Another example could be Ebola, which is not known to be airborne, infects many people in Africa a year, killed upwards of 85% within 8 days. Clearly, this illness is able to spread quite well. And, being that it is not airborne, but blood and bodly fluids born, the must be ways for it to be able to flare up. Same is rather possible with HIV/AIDS.

I would recommand before you risk making a fool of yourself by citing an STD as proof of the ill results of sin check the transmission types. Up until a few years ago it was possible to contract a number of STD's from a toliet seat.

And mind you as well, HIV does appear rapidly among monoghamius populations as well. It is introduced into the blood of one person, giving it to his spouse, who would than pass it on to any child. Simple epidemiology. [/quote]
While it is true that sexual promiscuity is not the [i]sole[/i] factor in the spread of AIDS, I would say it is obvious that this is indeed a major factor.

If people didn't sleep around, stayed in faithful monagomous marriages, and avoided homosexual activity, there would be much fewer cases of this horrible disease.

The AIDS epidemic in Africa is caused in part by poor sanitary conditions, etc., and cannot be blamed entirely on loose sexual mores (though this is indeed a factor.)

In the U.S. and Europe, AIDS is overwhelmingly found among homosexuals, drug abusers, and the sexually promiscuous.
Politically incorrect as this notion is, returning to traditional morality would indeed be the best method to stop the spread of this disease!

Only a fool or one completely blinded to the truth by moral relativism would deny any relation between AIDS and othe STDs and sexual behavior!

Edited January 19, 2005 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='spathariossa' date='Jan 18 2005, 11:52 PM'] I disagree with Moral Relativism but rather than argue the I know the truth aspect of things I prefer to use the CS Lewis method. That is, I prefer to demonstrate that all cultures pretty much agree on a set moral code of conduct. This code of conduct resembles the 10 commandments (not exactly but a resemblance). Thou shalt not kill, steal, commit adultery, lie, etc. No culture on Earth believes that lying is generally good. They might say it is necessary or okay in some circumstances but nobody really believes that lying is good. Same goes for the rest that I listed. So yeah, that's how I go about it. Moral relativism doesn't exist because we all pretty much agree. [/quote]
Unfortunately, moral relativism does exist (not that it is a logical position, but it is the current fashionable "politically correct" idea.)

I would say that no culture really practiced moral relativism, until today's modern decadent culture.
People have called me an idiot and worse for denying the position that all morality and truth is relative, and varies from person to person.

Moral relativism is used to argue for abortion, homosexuality, and anything else. Nothing is objectively right or wrong, so people should be allowed to do whatever they want.

Scary stuff.

[ironmonk]

Just another thought...

I'll unload in my review of him, and after I graduate I'll write a few people at the school about poor professors on campus.

There is a time and place for everything... making professors mad while in school is not the time or place to do it.

There's an old saying... (there are exceptions - like a few teachers here I believe would be exceptions)

"People who know - work, and the people who don't know, teach."

I've met a lot of professors that think they know about the real world when in fact they don't know much at all. Prime example is this guy saying that sex has nothing to do with the spread of AIDS in Africa.

It would be foolish to start a battle that I cannot win in his class. Also professors talk to each other. Make one mad, others will be mad too.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[aloha918]

[quote name='Broccolifish' date='Jan 19 2005, 02:31 AM'] If you were serious about your position, you wouldn't worry about your grades. Either stick to your guns, or don't say you like to do so. Stand up and be a man. Be a martyr, or go play the "school" game, but don't claim to be a martyr when you're not one. You're biting your tongue because you value your grade more than you value the Truth. [/quote]
Maybe you should DISCUSS it with your professor in a pleasent manner........instead of standing up and arguing...which always gets us places with people..........

[1337 k4th0l1x0r]

I think you have the right approach here. It won't do you much good to try to argue this with someone who has some control over your academic future. There's a time and a place to pick your battles, and some battles are not worth fighting. Besides, most of the time people are stubborn and they never change their mind even after a good argument.

[DojoGrant]

I had a professor who misrepresented the Church, especially on what indulgences were. I e-mailed him after class, politely corrected his errors, and told him that I could not, if required, write a false definition for indulgences as the answer to the question on an exam. There were other discrepencies as well, that I can't recall now.

However, I did it in a polite, respectful, and scholarly manner, and he told me that he respected me for sticking up for what I believed, and that he would not require me to give answer against my beliefs.

I can understand you trying to argue mathematical equations and things going awry, but the type of things we're dealing with here are not 2+2=4, not hard, objective facts. We're looking at correlations, not causes and effects, so there is no "right answer" in the academic field.

Talk to him privately; correct him privately.

I had one sociology professor "quote" a Pope who said on his death bed, "This myth of Christ has served us well."

I looked i up. A pope said it right enough...in a satire play, a work of fiction. I corrected him outside of class, and he said he wouldn't use that example anymore in lecture.

[Guest JeffCR07]

Hey Max, I go to a secular college, so trust me, I know what its like. I feel for you, and you can be sure that you've got my prayers.


- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[Mary's Knight, La]

just a couple of questions but the answers to them might prove useful to you.


1. ) Who is the bishop there?
2. ) Is he likely to care about what is being taught at said Catholic university?

3. ) If the answer to 2 is yes, why not contact him about it? I'm more than certain you know which documents state Catholic schools are suppsed to be faithful to the teachings of the church. And as long as you approach the bishop and/or his secretary carefully... ( I know you're style doesn't easly lend itself to this but it can pay off here ) you may stand to achieve amazing results.

I'm convinced it cannot be a matter of no bishops in the US caring. I beleive they do not truely realize how bad some Catholic universities are. Our job as laeity is to help them see this and make sure they have our support when they move to correct the problem.

[Philippe]

at first i thought u were talking about Nimrod from genesis