It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Morals? Morals?!? Morals?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 06:27 PM
link   
of course monica. bush is illiterate. who here is actually acting moronic?




posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 06:52 PM
link   
I promise to write a letter to George Bush thanking him for betraying the United States of America and the Republican Party.

For being for big business and aiding the growing scurge of the Federal Government and it's need for fuel where ever it may lie.

I will close by saying that I feel bad for his children for having to maintain themselves in the spotlight while he helps run us into the ground while giving up the token promises, the heres and theres.

All this new legislation and no solutions or improvement.



posted on Nov, 4 2004 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Oh, don't worry about his daughters. My roommate says he's planning to date both of them at once!



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by MoveToCanada

From a previous post, I think we Canadians are more scared of than laughing at the U.S.. The U.S. and Canada could not be further apart. Ultra liberal to Ultra Conservative. Canadians are legalizing Marijuana and Americans are burning Libraries.

I'm sorry, but I must have missed the libraries being burnt...
where did that happen?



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
Canadians are legalizing Marijuana and Americans are burning Libraries.


If you are appealing to disgruntled Americans to move to Canada to escape the Bush administration, then I wholeheatedly support your effort. But, let me give you some compositional advice. Never put a sentence such as the above quote in your opening paragraph. You immediately lose credibility with the lucid members of the audience.


[edit on 04/11/5 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:27 AM
link   
Although being an American liberal myself, I can understand why 'marrage' would be forbidden with homosexuals, heck, even Kerry did!
What I don't understand, what is wrong with legalizing a *secular* civil union between two human beings, gay or not?

My stance is based on the reasoning that Marrage is indeed for pro-creation purposes, however, a simple contractual social agreement between two human beings that allows them certain inalienable liberties in matters of taxes, hospital visitation, insurance, wills, and other secular/legal circumstances should be granted between anyone regardless of sexual preference.

Where is the morality in permanently voiding such a non-intrusive, *secular* social contract between two people?



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
.........
While 100 000+ Iraqi civilians and 1000+ American Military men and women have been killed by Bush, Americans are worried that men are humping men and a few cells are being destroyed for science. Even then, what is moral about turning away Stem Cell research and letting millions suffer with diseases. Nothing makes any sense.

Its pretty scary seeing the whole country Red. Reminds me of Communist USSR or Nazi Germany. Maybe thats too much, but America has definetly taken a 75-year-step backwards. Bye Bye Womens rights, Bye Bye minority rights and Gays will be burned at the stake.
..............


First...where do you get that figure that "Bush killed 100,000 Iraqis"?.....

Second...I live in the US and I don't see no libraries being burned down........

Third.... The Republic of the US is as different from Communism and Nazi Germany as the differences between day an night...in that order....



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by thirddensity
............
If American started thinking for themselves and stopped trying to force their morals on the rest of the public, a lot of these problems would go away.
..........


Really?....and why do many countries in the world want the US to bow down to them? and follow their mandates?.... Even after these countries themselves have told the US to stay away from their own business?...

The rest of your post makes sense just to you... You see it as...the US is sheep to Bush.... We see it as "we don't want to be sheep of the UN and the socialist/communist agenda"....and Bush is not our shepherd...he is our Commander in Chief... there is a difference...



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
............
Socialism has the chance to be a good thing.

...........


Socialism is just a step before Communism...if you don't believe me just do your own research as to what many founders of socialism in the US have said...and do take a look at what the U.S.S.R was teaching not too long ago about the goal of Communism..



I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.
Roger Baldwin


Excerpted from.
www.brainyquote.com...




AN ADDRESS BY BERIA
American students at the Lenin University, I welcome your attendance at these classes on Psychopolitics.

Psychopolitics is an important if less known division of Geo-politics. It is less known because it must necessarily deal with highly educated personnel, the very top strata of "mental healing."

By psychopolitics our chief goals are effectively carried forward. To produce a maximum of chaos in the culture of the enemy is our first most important step. Our fruits are grown in chaos, distrust, economic depression and scientific turmoil. At least a weary populace can seek peace only in our offered Communist State, at last only Communism can resolve the problems of the masses.

A psychopolitician must work hard to produce the maximum chaos in the fields of "mental healing." He must recruit and use all the agencies and facilities of "mental healing." He must labor to increase the personnel and facilities of "mental healing" until at last the entire field of mental science is entirely dominated by Communist principles and desires.

To achieve these goals the psychopolitician must crush every "home-grown" variety of mental healing in America. Actual teachings of James, Eddy and Pentecostal Bible faith healers amongst your misguided people must be swept aside. They must be discredited, defamed, arrested, stamped upon even by their own government until there is no credit in them and only Communist-oriented "healing" remains. You must work until every teacher of psychology unknowingly or knowingly teaches only Communist doctrine under the guise of "psychology.". You must labor until every doctor and psychiatrist is either a psychopolitician or an unwitting assistant to our aims.


Excerpted from.
members.cox.net...


The full text and one of the first copies of the originals can be found at.
www.fhu.com...


Let's hear what some other people have to say about socialism.


The historical experience of socialist countries has sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and economic inefficiency.
Pope John Paul II


Excerpted from.
www.brainyquote.com...

Socialism is merely a step closer to communism, and as one of the founders of ACLU said.... "the goal is communism"

[edit on 5-11-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
.........
While 100 000+ Iraqi civilians and 1000+ American Military men and women have been killed by Bush, Americans are worried that men are humping men and a few cells are being destroyed for science. Even then, what is moral about turning away Stem Cell research and letting millions suffer with diseases. Nothing makes any sense.

Its pretty scary seeing the whole country Red. Reminds me of Communist USSR or Nazi Germany. Maybe thats too much, but America has definetly taken a 75-year-step backwards. Bye Bye Womens rights, Bye Bye minority rights and Gays will be burned at the stake.
..............


First...where do you get that figure that "Bush killed 100,000 Iraqis"?.....

Second...I live in the US and I don't see no libraries being burned down........

Third.... The Republic of the US is as different from Communism and Nazi Germany as the differences between day an night...in that order....


First.... There was a group in England that released a report estimating that 100 000 Iraqis men, women and children have been killed in the war. It was released about a week before the election. It was on CNN and I think it may have been posted on Michaelmoore.com.
Most were probably innocent and most probably don't even know where the United states is. Do you really think these buildings are empty when the americans blow them up? No one would be voting republican if they were in that situation.

Second... The Republicans want to keep the population stupid. That includes World History and American History. This is obvious whenever you see an American tourist anywhere in the world.

Third... Of course the US is not communist or run by Nazis. But wake up, you Americans are backing the wrong guy. Wait until Bush passes the Patriot Act part deux. I rather live in 'socialistic' canada and know the government isn't wire tapping my phone, than live in the States and have to watch my back.

[edit on 5-11-2004 by MoveToCanada]



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
Canadians are legalizing Marijuana and Americans are burning Libraries.


If you are appealing to disgruntled Americans to move to Canada to escape the Bush administration, then I wholeheatedly support your effort. But, let me give you some compositional advice. Never put a sentence such as the above quote in your opening paragraph. You immediately lose credibility with the lucid members of the audience.


[edit on 04/11/5 by GradyPhilpott]


Hell no, I'm not appealing to anyone to move to Canada. Toronto's mass transit system sucks as it is. And I could care less if I'm credible or not on a friggin Internet message board. You don't have to be credible to become the president of the united states anyways.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Since you know so much, tell me...what did Bush do to make the economy go bad?
Forget the faux tech boom in which investors world investing a crap load of money into the lookmomihaveawebsite.coms, forget 9/11, forget all corrections, tell me what Bush specifically did to cause the econ. to go bad.

Just to note: It started sliding before Bush became pres.

Just another note:
quote.bloomberg.com...
washingtontimes.com...
apnews.myway.com...
apnews.myway.com...
www.guardian.co.uk...
etc


Look, I'm at work on my break, so I don't have time to throw all these fancy links out. When it comes to Economics, no sometimes leaders inherit problems. And I'm sure 9/11 and the air line industry didn't help. But there is a huge deficit Bush has to figure out and alot of health and social security issues.

I know very little, but I get invovled in my country. We had an Ultra COnservative running for Prime MInister here in Canada. It was like having a little Bush running in the snow up here. But Canadians were smart enough not to put him power.

[edit on 5-11-2004 by MoveToCanada]



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
Hell no, I'm not appealing to anyone to move to Canada.


Hence the name MoveToCanada (wink, wink).....



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by MoveToCanada
Hell no, I'm not appealing to anyone to move to Canada.


Hence the name MoveToCanada (wink, wink).....


My screen name was a throw up between MoveToTexas or MoveToCanada




posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Warning... sorry for the rant ahead.

I have some questions relating to morals though...

It is my understanding that the predominant moral issues in this election would be stem cell research (as well as abortion) & gay marriage.

The two arguments I typically hear on the former from "Christians" (not labeling or stereotyping, just referring to whom I've spoken with) are that A) it's against one of the 10 commandments (the 6th) to kill/murder. B) by having an abortion you are going against G-d's will.

A1) Exodus 21:22,23 (Today's English Version):

“If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she is not injured in any other way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the woman's husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges.”

In this verse, the law says, that if two men fight, and a pregnant woman is injured so that she loses the baby, the one who caused the miscarriage must pay a fine to the woman’s husband. (which is effectively property law)

In verse 23 we see: “But if the woman herself is injured, the punishment shall be life for life…”

So if the woman dies, the man will pay with his life. Which in the end boils down to the unborn child is property of the father and only the father of it can determine it’s value. So by someone saying that Jane Doe’s unborn baby has the value of a life is incorrect, unless the father of that child deems it so. Personally, I’m all for pro-choice as we were given free will by G-d, but I am also against an abortion after the 1st trimester. Either way, that was G-d’s take on an unborn baby’s value, and if you can find something in the bible that specific that says otherwise, please do let me know.

A different take, with the 100,000+ casualties in Iraq (a signifact portion of which are innocent women and children, NOT insurgents), the 6th commandment argument is seems pretty irrelevant. For it to be okay for us to kill innocent people under the guise of “war on terror” then by the same logic it is okay to kill unborn babies that pose no threat to anyone either because they could possibly one day be “bad” people (as Iraq could possibly one day have attacked us). Also, why was it again that we’re at war there? It has been shown that the intelligence was flawed, while key portions completely ignored (the CIA reports said we needed to not go in alone... which we effectively did), as well as there were no active WMD programs there. It’s a frightening thought to think that “what if they had WMDs” because the munitions they did have, we weren't even able to secure. Plus since the war in Iraq is based on terrorism, why Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia? 15 of the 19 hijackers were from SA, as well as SA is know for supporting and funding terrorism. The argument that Saddam was evil and posed a threat to us is pretty weak too, I agree with it (him being an evil person), and you can talk about the atrocities he commited against his own people... but was there anything that significant since 1992 that I missed?

B) It is the same way that if you have cancer and seek treatment you are going against G-d's will. You were given cancer for a reason, and who are you to undo what G-d has done? What if G-d wanted you to die a slow painful death?

And in regards to Gay marriage, well... the church doesn’t need to recognize a marriage, and that should be sufficient for members of the church. But, to want to amend the US constitution... isn’t that a little over the top? A state constitution being amended is another topic altogether, and I’m far more okay with that than the national constitution. I’m not quite sure about why people think that homosexuals getting married is going to do anything to desecrate the institution of marriage anymore than the straight people do (current divorce rate or infidelity for example). And for the record, my father-in-law is a pastor and he has told me numerous times he is amazed by the number of “regular” marriages suffering from the issues I mentioned (especially considering the numbers aren’t any better w/in the Christian community than out of it). So for people to talk about tainting the institution, perhaps it’s the moral thing to do to try and make an impact on the “normal” people that are screwing it up first.

And on a side moral issue in regards to our political system. It would be the moral thing to do by getting rid of the parties altogether. Hearing people say “he’s a republican so I’ll vote for him” only shows how uneducated/uninformed our general public prefers to be. The parties (or gangs as I like to refer to them) do more damage than good by making issues an “us vs. them” thing. Life and politics are not black and white. And currently the number of people I’ve heard talk about all the local government positions and that they voted for “their party” is sickening. By abolishing the parties people would be required to learn about the candidates and what they stand for, as well as in the process, force people to learn more about the issues and individuals other than “he’s red” or “he’s blue”.

And another side moral issue in regards to our political system (ties into the last one)... the system we have where the incumbent is automatically chosen to run for that party again is completely ludicrous. Most republicans I know like McCain a lot more than they like Bush (in terms of being competent & capable of good), but, why didn’t the those republicans stand up and say “hey, we think McCain is more qualified and would do better than Bush, therefore we’d rather have him as president”? The answer is because Bush is still a republican and that’s good enough for them.

The idea that our country is doing a good job raising it’s youth is pretty far-fetched as well. We live in a country where we have commercials that teach parents how to do their job. “Talk to your kids”, “Ask your children very basic questions”, “educate you kids on what’s right and wrong in the world”, etc... It is sad to see us in a state like this where it is know that parents are watching TV instead of spending time with their kids, so they need reminders. (I know a number of excellent parents/families which spend a lot of time together so I’m not saying it’s everyone, but it has to be a significant number if the money is spent on those ads). If we live in a society where this is the case (as we obviously do) then the real moral issues go much deeper than what people are fighting for/about. We need to fix ourselves before we go telling others what they can and cannot do with themselves.

And my last moral issue (for the moment) is one that relates to everyone and runs much deeper as it currently affects both ourselves and future generations. The Bush administration repealed over 200 environmental laws and undid ~20 years of very hard work to ensure we do as little damage to the environment as possible. And it was done so that corporations can make more profit more easily. It’s amazing that it’s ok for corporations to be able to have the ability to destroy the environment w/o much regulation, but we think that women shouldn’t have the right to do things that primarily affect only their own bodies (and yes that of an unborn fetus...).

To address a couple statements Machine made...


Most rap music is mindless garbage wrapped in violence and foul lyrics. The rest of your, “fine” selections for personal entertainment help me to understand that I’m dealing with a true, “mental giant”.


I gather from your statement that one choosing to like rap or The Simpsons or various other forms of entertainment you don’t like makes them somehow mentally inferior to you. There is quite a bit of rap that has good social values and relevant messages which is not about violence and doesn’t use foul language. It’s not necessarily all mainstream, but it’s still out there. And I think you’d be surprised by how well The Simpsons & even South Park point out the absurdity in our society today... especially when it relates to people like yourself who think they’re somehow above “the clueless masses”. Plus... it's entertainment, it's not like anyone's claiming that it's for everyone. I know people that like Law & Order and it's not my cup of tea... but others like it and I don't think any less of them for it.

And for you to say that somehow spelling and grammar relate to mental function... well it’s a laughable notion. Wisdom comes in all forms. Do you have children by chance? I’m just curious because it’s amazing how smart they are for being “uneducated” or not having the same capacity that you’d expect from an adult. The dope you so nicely criticized, just fyi, was also grown (and most likely used) by the founding fathers of this country as well... and we know how incompetent they were.


“You liberals live in a state of fear and panic.”

What is with the demonizing of the word liberal? All of the freedoms we have in our country today are thanks to ideas that were at one time considered “liberal”. You really showed your true colors with that “us vs. them” comment... we’re all in this together and there’s typically more gray area than black & white. Try not to be so foolish like that because it really takes away from the value of any statements/arguments you make when it sounds so ignorantly biased... as the motto for ATS goes... Deny Ignorance....

On a final note, a nice way to sum up the whole argument about morals is
some people call them morals, others call it religion. Oh, and no time to re-read, so forgive and spelling or grammatical errors as I know that they’re obviously relevant to someone’s thoughts.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:21 PM
link   
PLEASE!

EVERYONE ....think independently..

just like me....


Independent thinking is best done in LARGE numbers...(at least more than 47 percent, anyway)..



silly huh?



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:31 PM
link   
I just wish americans would be humane and leave the bible out of lawmaking. If you want to use that book to guide your personal decisions, fine. But to truly be a free country, specific religions need to be left out of government. Morality should include things like not persecuting certain people because they are different.

Someone posted on this thread that their (I'm assuming they meant america's, and not theirs personally) women, minorities and gays are free to live as they choose. That is not the case in a country rules by people who base their decisions on the bible. The bible is a book of rules for a long gone tribe of people, rewritten numerous times to reflect then current points of view. A truly free people know that morality means responsibility and freedom at the same time. To pull that off takes thought and judgment. Yes abortion is killing what may very well be the next Einstein, but the pregnant woman in question should have the right to her own body first. When a fetus can survive and be born without a woman's body, then men can make decisions about abortion.

And if you've ever moved from a free-thinking city to small town america, you will learn real fast that minorities and gay folk are not safe, and not free. Black people are still called colored, gay couples receive death threats and their pets are killed. Happened in the church-going town I lived in. As for female freedom - having short hair and being single I was constantly hassled and asked what my *dad* thought of my hair. I'm 38!?!

These folk were only *moral* to people who were kin, went to their church, or maybe had kids in the same school. Thank goddess it's a free enough country that I was able to move back to a safe place before the elections. The ghetto I lived in in the city was full of more compassionate, "moral" people than a town full of christian church goers.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Civil Unions, not gay marrage:
Where is the morality in permanently voiding such a non-intrusive, *secular* social contract between two people?

??????????



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join