OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I read this yesterday, and I've thought a lot about it since then. I pondered whether to post it to the list or not, and in the end I decided that this article was so insightful that I felt I had no choice. It relates to the Amish school shooting recently, and it's not political. It is, in fact, related in some way or another to all of us.


“Who needs a brain when you have these?”
— message on an Abercrombie & Fitch T-shirt for young women

In the recent shootings at an Amish schoolhouse in rural Pennsylvania and a large public high school in Colorado, the killers went out of their way to separate the girls from the boys, and then deliberately attacked only the girls.

Ten girls were shot and five killed at the Amish school. One girl was killed and a number of others were molested in the Colorado attack.

In the widespread coverage that followed these crimes, very little was made of the fact that only girls were targeted. Imagine if a gunman had gone into a school, separated the kids up on the basis of race or religion, and then shot only the black kids. Or only the white kids. Or only the Jews.

There would have been thunderous outrage. The country would have first recoiled in horror, and then mobilized in an effort to eradicate that kind of murderous bigotry. There would have been calls for action and reflection. And the attack would have been seen for what it really was: a hate crime.

None of that occurred because these were just girls, and we have become so accustomed to living in a society saturated with misogyny that violence against females is more or less to be expected. Stories about the rape, murder and mutilation of women and girls are staples of the news, as familiar to us as weather forecasts. The startling aspect of the Pennsylvania attack was that this terrible thing happened at a school in Amish country, not that it happened to girls.

The disrespectful, degrading, contemptuous treatment of women is so pervasive and so mainstream that it has just about lost its ability to shock. Guys at sporting events and other public venues have shown no qualms about raising an insistent chant to nearby women to show their breasts. An ad for a major long-distance telephone carrier shows three apparently naked women holding a billing statement from a competitor. The text asks, “When was the last time you got screwed?”

An ad for Clinique moisturizing lotion shows a woman’s face with the lotion spattered across it to simulate the climactic shot of a porn video.

We have a problem. Staggering amounts of violence are unleashed on women every day, and there is no escaping the fact that in the most sensational stories, large segments of the population are titillated by that violence. We’ve been watching the sexualized image of the murdered 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey for 10 years. JonBenet is dead. Her mother is dead. And we’re still watching the video of this poor child prancing in lipstick and high heels.

What have we learned since then? That there’s big money to be made from thongs, spandex tops and sexy makeovers for little girls. In a misogynistic culture, it’s never too early to drill into the minds of girls that what really matters is their appearance and their ability to please men sexually.

A girl or woman is sexually assaulted every couple of minutes or so in the U.S. The number of seriously battered wives and girlfriends is far beyond the ability of any agency to count. We’re all implicated in this carnage because the relentless violence against women and girls is linked at its core to the wider society’s casual willingness to dehumanize women and girls, to see them first and foremost as sexual vessels — objects — and never, ever as the equals of men.

“Once you dehumanize somebody, everything is possible,” said Taina Bien-Aimé, executive director of the women’s advocacy group Equality Now.

That was never clearer than in some of the extreme forms of pornography that have spread like nuclear waste across mainstream America. Forget the embarrassed, inhibited raincoat crowd of the old days. Now Mr. Solid Citizen can come home, log on to this $7 billion mega-industry and get his kicks watching real women being beaten and sexually assaulted on Web sites with names like “Ravished Bride” and “Rough Sex — Where Whores Get Owned.”

Then, of course, there’s gangsta rap, and the video games where the players themselves get to maul and molest women, the rise of pimp culture (the Academy Award-winning song this year was “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp”), and on and on.

You’re deluded if you think this is all about fun and games. It’s all part of a devastating continuum of misogyny that at its farthest extreme touches down in places like the one-room Amish schoolhouse in normally quiet Nickel Mines, Pa.

New York Times editorial by Bob Herbert, Oct 16th, 2006

EDIT: here's the original URL:
http://select.nytimes.com/2006/10/16...bert.html?_r=1

Re: [OT] Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I somewhat agree with that. Only somewhat because not all men view women as objects, lesser people. In point of fact, it is a very small minority that does. The problem is, all the people who think women are equals of men don't do anything to stop the attitudes that objectify women. If it were socially not acceptable, stupidity like that would dramatically decrease. Unfortunately, society as a whole hasn't made it unnacceptable.

Re: [OT] Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I've stated many times to other people I know that society is degenerating not progressing. Just sit back some day and really listen to the news. It’s saddening when you consider that we as a human race should be using all this wonderful technology to further ourselves and it ‘s all being used for petty issues and endeavors.

Medicine hasn’t progressed that much in the last couple of years. They come up with tons of new medicines, BUT they haven’t cured any major illnesses like HIV, diabetes and so on down the list. There’s more of a monetary reason NOT to find a cure, but to continue to treat the symptoms!

The biggest problem with society is “GREED” and it has many different spellings. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Re: [OT] Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

This is one of the most important issues of our lives. These stories happen so frequently today (the rape and murder of young women) that it becomes just a "ho hum" story on the news.

I want to SCREAM at the news reporters when they blandly state about an 8 YEAR OLD GIRL in the news yesterday: "He murdered her parents, stole her and her brother, murdered her brother, raped her for 2 weeks, blah, blah, blah. Now on to entertainment news! Tell us what us whats up with Jennifer Anniston!" This one guy they reported yesterday, "did the right thing" by reaching a plea bargain that spared the 8 year old from having to testify. In return, he gets life in prison, instead of the death penalty.

The words "did the right thing" and that guys name should NEVER be in the same sentence. In fact, I don't think that sparing her from testifying was necessarily in her best interests. In 10 years, she may still be traumatized by the fact that this guy is alive somewhere, getting up in the morning, having scrambled eggs and hash browns with a cup of coffee at the expense of tax payers. It may give her more closure to know that the rest of society viewed what he did as so satanicly vile that society demanded his life.

Until our society gets it priorities straight and someone stands up with the courage to put these guys to DEATH, we get what we deserve. Or, as your sig says:

"You deserve what you tolerate"

Re: [OT] Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I propose the reinstation of the guillotine in efforts to expediate the execution queue.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain UNALIENABLE rights, that among these are LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Killing is just never an answer.

To force a victim to re-live the most traumatic moments of his/hers life and to spill your innermost feelings to the public is just like to do it all over again.

I do think the world at large has a huge problem with women rights. We are all created equal and so we should treat each other.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Too bad the guy who killed her parents with a hammer, then killed her brother a week later and repeatedly raped the 8 year old girl for a week didn't believe the same as you.

Tis a shame.

The "state" is not the same as a individual, who, as you point out, has certain "inalienable" rights. An individual does not have the right to kill another individual, but then an individual cannot tax another individual, nor can an individual setup their own road laws and enforce them in front of their house on a public street either.

It is a noble thing, to want to wipe off killing in general with a wide brush, and that little girl may be traumatized and best if she is spared. That is, maybe. But to put "do the right thing" and that guys name in the same sentence is still sick and twisted. And it should be her right, when she is old enough to decide, that if it would feel right to her that a trial go on, and he be put to death for his crimes, that too should be her inalienable right, not through herself as an individual, but through the institution of goverment, which has the right to enforce its higher will on individuals and always has.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Xrati: that's far too cynical. You think the world is getting worse because that's the only thing the news likes to report, and we're getting news from all over the world. And technology..if you really look at history, most innovation has been driven by war or mass death. Disturbing, but its not a sign of a "world in decline".

For example, the worst American school killing wasn't in this decade. Or the 90s. Or the 80s. It was in 1927, when a school board member blew up a newly built elemttary school because he felt it had cost too much to build. While it was in session..

As for medicine, look up causes of death sometime. A 100 years ago, it was infectious disease mostly. Now? Diseases that are mostly causes by obesity Think about that one for a moment. It used to be being fat was a status symbol because it meant you were richenough to afford all that food!

RonGianti: it isn't just women you know. Murders don't make the news unless they're similar to another one or there's something odd about them.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Thats true, but the last 3 big news stories that are jumping out at me are the 8 year old raped for a week, the killing of Amish girls and the guy who took some girls hostage in a school, molested them, then shot one in the back of the head when the police arrived.

I just don't see any... outrage. Or even questioning. But I know more about Paris Hilton and Jennifer Anniston then I could ever care about in a lifetime. Neither one is news on any level, but they get reported on more than rape and murder. Something somewhere is... wrong.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I love women.

I think men that hurt women are the lowest forms of gutter trash known to exsist. Men who call the women in their lives "*****es" and "ho's" are without honor and are in fact cowerdly little closet thumb suckers.

While some women are truly evil most, like men, are just getting along. Then you have the few who enjoy perpetuating the negative sterotypes of women like that bumbling self absored spoiled rotten little trollup Paris Hilton. Hell that girl is NO role model yet millions of teenage girls around the world want to be just like her. WTF?

TV not only perpetuates the negative image of women, they are now telling women that in order to be cool you must be blond, dumb, and have a boy friend from another race who calls you ***** all the time as if he owns you.

Then when the news reports the kind of things they enjoy reporting because it gets ratings, people all of a sudden go "oh my God" and then quickly forget all about it. Just in time to turn on Paris Hilton on MTV and watch more "These are my *****es" rap music videos.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I would have jumped all over Mephisto's misuse (IMHO) of the Declaration of Independence to justify his blanket rejection of the death penalty, but RonGianti beat me to it. (Not that M.'s not entitled to his opinion.)

But to go back to the (OT) topic: The NYTimes editorial is "spot on," as the Brits say, in describing the problem at the symptomatic level, but he errs in identifying the root issue. The core problem is not lack of equality for women, nor is it hatred of women. It is not even the sexualization and objectification of women and girls (and boys). The core problem is that everyone is being taught that there is no absolute right or wrong, that there is no moral standard by which behavior should be judged, and that there is no God who will hold them accountable for every deed done in secret. Without these things, morality becomes strictly a matter of opinion, with nobody's opinion being any better than anyone else's, including the opinions of rapists, child molesters, serial killers, and porn merchants.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Side note: I always find it amusing how some people will lump porn and gay people in with mass murders.

dmm: Some of the largest mass murders in recent years have been conducted by religious people, so I really don't see how that flies.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

In todays America, mom and dad and the morals that they are responsible for enbedding into their children have been replaced by TV, music, video games, and the internet.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Phoenix-D:

Where do you see homosexuals mentioned?

Soviet Russia was Athiest. Now, how about we stop that track before it gets out of hand?

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

narf: people in general, not in this thread. And to complete the opposite effect Hitler was..nominally Christian.

When people start insinuating that I have no morals, and/or do not deserve to be an American citizen (hi, President Bush Sr!) I get just a liiitle annoyed.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I can understand that.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

It is horrible and a shame, no doubt about that. But I fail to see how killing him will make anybody else alive or give them justice. As much as I despise what such people do, they are still people and killing without dire need (read: self defense or defense of others from imminent peril) is wrong. The public is just as save when you put them into jail for the time being. An argument that this will cost money is, well, very problematic. Can it be right to kill someone to save cash?
The world did not come crashing down on my country when the death penalty was abolish 60 years ago. My humble opinion. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

I think we must agree to disagree over the matter. IMHO there is no unalienable right to kill someone for revenge. And if no individual has this right, it cannot be transferred to the state. All power of the state derives from the people.

In the end, we do agree on the subject of women rights. It is sick how many women are treated.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Lowest common denominator.

If you dislike how the news makes its money, then write a letter, stop watching... or both.

The really ugly stuff that the article describes has always been around in one form or another. Just with today's technology, and our massive use of it, the ugly truth is revealed. Society isn't in decline, it is right where it has always been. It's just in High Def color now.


Protect yourself. Live your life how you see fit. Fight crime when you are able.

I haven't seen the Clinque ad, nor the Telephone company ad.

However I like playing the Grand Theft Auto series of games, just how I like playing the Halo series games.

Freedom is a painful thing, because in order for you to have it... you have to allow others to have it as well. Video games, news stories, TV ads.... these don't make people do anything. People need to be responsible for their own damn actions. Stop blaming others for their misdeeds.

Someone isn't a porn junky because the internet easily provides it. They're that way because they lack self control.

Someone isn't a murderer because they played violent video games. The very notion should be ridiculous to a logically thinking person, however the more that notion is pushed... the more people will use it to come to terms with their own behavior.

I didn't murder people, the video games made me do it.

What crap.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

dmm said:
Without these things, morality becomes strictly a matter of opinion...

Christian morality is just as much a matter of opinion as that of any other religion, or humanist moral systems. How can you rightfully assert that the moral system of one arbitrary religion is somehow the absolute truth? You can make such assertions about any religious moral system; it doesn't mean one is somehow more true or better than others.

Morality does not derive from religion; religious doctrine generally mimics morality.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Run a pole and see if people favor the death penalty.

I don't believe that we should use the DP lightly. I firmly believe that is should only be used in extreme measure and reserved for the most hanious of crimes. I also firmly believe that the appeals process for a DP conviction should be limited to no more than 60 months with the execution taking place no later than 61 months from sentencing.

Before a procesecuter can seek the DP, they must first obtain a conviction for the crime, and then meet solid irrefutable concreat cryteria for the death penalty. No more sending the wrong guy too the gallow's!

I also believe that once a suspect has been arrested that a national media gage order be issued preventing any news organization from discussing the case other than to say so and so has been arrested and will be tried. This will remove any chance for jury tampering and or byass. A person should ALWAYS be considered inocent until convicted. Far too many times has the media convicted a person in the court of public affairs just to discover that the person was inocent. Once a conviction / aquittal is obtained, then the media can cover the story all they want.

I think that the prospect of being convicted of a crime and sentenced to life in a solitary 8x10 cell with only 1 hour per week of yard time would go a lot futher than the fear of being put too death. All criminals do solitary confinment for the duration of their sentence. Sure the cost would go up, but lets face it, they are not there too be coddeled, they are there to be punished and punished they should be. Not beaten or humilated, but isolated and cut off from the rest of the prison population. A prison full of 8,000 prisoners who never see or talk to each other or any one else except a family visit once a month. That would do more for rehabilitation than any life sentence ever could.

No books, no TV, no radio, just the convict, a cot, and an 8x10 cell 365 days a year, year after year.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

That's a good point Wenin.
"Freedom is a painful thing, because in order for you to have it... you have to allow others to have it as well."

Kind of an "Eye for an Eye" equation or variant of it. I guess we need to draw a line and define where we stand to that line with how much or how far we will let things go. When the line gets crossed do we sit and reason, when that person is not listening? Do we end a life when one is taken? Do we lock someone up for punishment and them give him all his rights? Makes no sense!

Many paths were taken by these pathetic people and maybe we should go back to the beginning to see where all the wrong paths were taken and see if we can prevent this from happening again and again. One ounce of prevention is worth more then a pound of cure.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Hamurabi said it best. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

Morality or not, sexually assaulting and killing little girls and then not even having the cajones to try and take out a police officer or two or face jail should be an insta-slag on the cop's part.

There's sick and then there's sick.

(Also, read Starship Troopers for a good definition of 'morals.')

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

"Hamurabi said it best. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. "

Great with that kind of philosphy the world will be filled with blind toothless *******s.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Pretty much, yep. Sooner or later people will smarten up and realize that every action has a reaction.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Personally, I'm all for the death penalty and think it should be used a lot more than it is (in the US, we unfortunately don't have it here in Canada...).

Any crime that results in the death of another should be punishable by death. If you're convicted of the crime, it's automatic. I bet violent crime rates would go way way down if that was the case. Something like sexual assault? Well, there's a simple answer to that one; sterilization. Cut off the bastards testicles. Bet you'd see sexual assault rates drop like a rock too.

If society and the justice system showed that there would be no tolerance for crap like that, and the punishment actually befitted the crime, crime wouldn't appear to be such an attractive thing.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Nominally means "in name only." So I totally agree.

I assume that I am one of those people who has you annoyed, probably because you are an atheist. Let me just say that I know some atheists who are more moral than some others I know who claim to be Christians. However, although of course I commend the former and am disgusted by the latter, I would contend that both are thinking and behaving illogically, given their postulates. My point was not that all atheists are immoral, but rather that the logical consequence of atheism is amoralism -- the lack of any morality, good or bad.

That is a good point; being religious in the wrong way can cause people to do despicable things. (Examples: Jim Jones and the Guyana mass suicide; the 9/11/01 murderers; the Oklahoma City murderers (Timothy McVeigh); pogroms by Christians against Jews.) But how do we judge these actions to be despicable? Another way to put the question is: are these actions TRULY despicable, or is that simply our opinion?

To go back to the original thread topic: Is violence against women WRONG (no excuses allowed)? Is objectification of women WRONG (even if the woman encourages it)? Is sexualization of children WRONG (even if the sexualizer is "made that way")? Is sexual harassment WRONG (even if all the guys at the stadium are participating, and the woman seems flattered as well as flustered)? For the record, there ARE correct answers, and they are yes, yes, yes, and yes. But when people are told, "There is no absolute morality," we should not be surprised when their answers come back wrong.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Who gets to decide what's WRONG?

You'd say "God." Problem- so did everyone you cited as being religious in the wrong way. So do the people that stone women to death for being raped. Etc.

Since God isn't in the habit of popping in and saying "hey, you're [censored] up", what you have one way or the other is the word of men. No more, no less.

You can get morality from that, in a roundabout and extremely complicated fashion.

I'm not actually an atheist, but I'm an agnostic, so most of the people that annoy me in that manner just lump me in. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

You are not being logical. If ALL moral systems are simply opinion, then ALL are a load of crap. In that case, anyone who doesn't do whatever he can get away with is a fool. So Ted Bundy was smart to rape and kill little girls. Why not?

This argument does not prove that Christianity is true or that humanism is false, and this thread (forum?) is not the place to argue about that. Logically, you could claim, "Everyone is wrong." But you cannot logically say, "Everyone is equally right."

I cannot, of course, PROVE that one belief system is THE TRUTH. I can, however, examine the logical and historical consequences of various belief systems. Just because some "nominal atheists" have good morals does not mean that atheism does not have logically and historically demonstrable consequences for society in the long term that I consider to be loathsome.

Every major religion I can think of has a lot of moral code in common. It is like descent with mutations from a common ancestor. If you believe that the common moral ancestor was God-given, then there is good reason to cling to it. If you believe that the common moral ancestor was an accident of evolution, then there is no logical reason to keep it around, other than situational convenience. It is not true, only utile. Therefore if I find it restrictive, I can just drop it, like junk DNA. It is vestigial, and those organisms no longer encumbered by it will prosper best (provided they don't advertise this to others).

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

If A > B then B < A : this is logic
ALL moral systems are simply opinion then ALL moral systems are load of crap : this is not logic

Reading Spinoza may help you formulate logical non-mathematic propositions.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

At the risk of sermonizing even more than I have already, I would contend that God has in fact done just that, for the very reason that you give, and that the Bible contains a reliable record of it.

Well, I was trying to give you credit for making up your mind. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Phoenix-D and Imperator Fyron,
Even though we are very far apart in our beliefs about God, the very fact of our having a nonvitriolic discussion about it shows that we share many of the same moral values. I conclude that you are not Xiati or EEE. As such, you are worthy of treatment other than eradication or slave labor in my mineral mines. Therefore, since I have to go, I will let you have the last word and not respond any more in public. If you want to keep talking after your final rebuttal, send me a private message.
dmm

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Okay, guys. Let's drop the religious debates.

Afterall, we all know that every other deity pales in comparison to Cthulhu, our dark god.

Amen.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Unfortunately every statistic says that this is not the case. And we can easily see this in some Islamic countries as well where the Sharia rules. If you rape a women you will get killed, if you are a thief you will lose a hand. But crime is still rampant in many of these countries.
A deterrent only works if you think rational about a matter, weighting loss and gain. But many crimes are committed in a state where rational thinking is no longer present. And you have to get caught in the first place to have a deterrent work.
Actually, if the risk of getting caught is high even "low" deterrents work very well. Statistics show that blue collar crimes dropped significantly when more pressure was put into detecting such crimes and bring them to court and public. The shame to stand in court and lose your career did have quite an effect.
So, our aim should be to detect and bring to court crimes with a high probability. And this is something that would help many violated women as well. How many women are beaten because the man can do it without fear that it might see the light of public. But how many will beat a women if it is a) brought to public and b) considered a crime by the public and neighbors (if the public doesn't care, then your are completely on your own http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif).

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Indeed, since they all base their moral codes on common human morality. It's just the same as most religious mythologies (in the sense of the stories and such that comprise the teachings of the religion's culture, not some tacked on "explicitly false" connotation) using a lot of the same basic symbols in similar ways; the way colors, numbers, etc. are used in one religion are very similarly to how they are used in many other religions. We all evolved from the same source, so much of the basic thought patterns and instincts that make up the core of a human's psyche end up being the same. People everywhere have more or less the same genetic predispositions.

Basic tenets of morality have to do with humans being social animals; it harms the group to kill each other, to rape each other, to steal from each other. It helps the group if humans cooperate towards larger goals, help out others in need, provide their skills to benefit the group. Thus, as humans evolved, they evolved basic predispositions to not do these things. As intelligence grew ever more refined, naturally these basic social needs would become codified into "law," when the concept of "law" began to be developed. As basic spiritual beliefs started developing into organized religions, such inherent social needs became codified into belief systems. Since all humans have the same base genetic dispositions, religions the world over tended to develop along similar lines.

It's a matter of psychology; particular religious belief doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it. Of course, you could always argue that God set us up to develop that way. That is not a falsifiable argument though, so it can't be "proven" either way.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Actually Fyron, it can be proven, somebody just needs to go find god, and have him explain it all? Anybody able to do that? No, okay then, lets disconnect morals from god for this argument and stick to what we know.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I am convinced God exists, by my own personal experience

The simple idea that some portion of the populace has yet to be so convinced does not negate my experience. Nor does the fact that I can't scientifically prove my anecdotal experience.

However, saying that I can't prove it to myself is to make a blanket judgement of every single experience of my life - The vast majority of which you know nothing about and do not have the right to do, anyway.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Mephisto, I get the impression you might be a defense lawyer http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Dmm, I would argue that some of what is in the Bible would be considered to be highly amoral today. The taking of slaves? The castrating of captured men/boys? That kind of argues against human morality being passed down from God, who would most likely have a higher sense of morality than what the Bible contains.

(Note, I'm using the Bible as an example only, since Christianity is the only religion I have any knowledge of, and shouldn't be construed as an attack.)

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Morality is a purely human concept.

God is sovereign so morality is not relevant.

I know it sounds lame but God doesn't have to explain anything to us humans. There are stories in the Bible where God instructs a leader to kill *all* traces of another people or village. If the leaders did not follow his command, He punished those leaders as well for not following His will.

That would not be moral by any human standard. But that's the point; God is not human but He is sovereign. Putting morality and God together just doesn't work in any explination that would satisfy any logical human. So don't bother trying; it's a stupid arguement. God doesn't have to explain *anything* to us yet we will have to explain *everything* to Him.

We *will* have to explain to Him our reasonings and our belief (or lack of) that we post here on this forum whether you choose to believe that now or not. I know what I want to be able to say....

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Actually ... no. I'm *supposed* doing IT contractual law but in effect do everything the firm is throwing at me. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
But the the university courses about criminal laws and the source and nature of crime weren't wasted. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

The only one I remember is the Isrealite invasion of the promised land - And that was explained as due to wickedness.

I don't know about you, but I can easily envision a society so corrupt the only alternative is destruction.

Anyway, this thread was originally about violence against women. Let's shift back, shall we?

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Thank you, AMF, for posting this. I might suggest the subject title should be, "Inciteful" instead...as any decent man should rail againt [censored] like this!

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

wow, they really were godless commies? i never knew! this gives me a new-found respect for the Soviets.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

well sure thats true. but while its true, heres the "why not":

our shared set of laws and mutually-agreed sense of "morality" is generally beneficial to those that participate in it. it provides some sense of assurance that the horrible things that you spare other from, will in turn be spared delivery upon you.

The other part of "why not" is that you might fear reprisal, either legal or extralegal. Ted Bundy might not have been smart to comit his crimes, when you consider what came to him. If the consequences of his actions dont outweigh the pleasure he got from them, then sure he was smart to do it. or at least a rational economic actor.

on the other hand, I certainly would have gouged his eyes out if I had the chance. Not because it would be my Moral obligation to do so, but because it helps uphold our (society's) mutually consentual system of laws and morals. "morals" not "Morals". It benefits me to uphold them, so i do.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

I'll just say that I disagree with you on all counts, and leave it there. I don't want to start religious flaming, and know there can be no reasoning with people who think like you obviously do.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

On-topic, please. We've barely touched the original topic.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Let's go back to the original discussion, for the origine ofthe universe most important topic.... CHEESE ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Can we say that the original topic of the “de-humanization” and violence against women exists because of our inability to focus on the subject and we continue to deviate from the Topic? Maybe our attention span is so short these days that we actually lose track of where we are going! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif
We live in such a fast paced society that just maybe we need to pay more attention to the topics rather then move on to other subjects like religion. Violence against women is a serious subject and maybe if we just focused our attention on it we could actually do something about it.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Traditional male domination over women has to do with fundamental genetic imperatives deriving from the makeup of male and female humans and the roles that almost always came about as a result of it... Noone said all of these genetic imperatives were necessarily good things. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Some must be striven to overcome.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

The most pathetic scene in an action movie for me is the one where the villian taunts the hero with the heroes' violent impulses.

'Oh, he's just like you? Which one of you kills for fun, again?'

Some people think that because they have an urge, they must satisfy that urge. This leads to shoplifting, addiction, murder, violence and oppression.

We have self-control for a reason.

Re: OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)
 

Actually Narf, you can't prove it to yourself. We can't prove anything beyond our own moment to moment, each morning you wake up and take a leap of faith that all that has come before, truly did come before, and isn't just some delusion or fabrication. Faith is probably the most powerful thing in this world, everybody has it, few people understand it, and a good portion of the population don't want ot admit to it, but its their. There is nothing in this life that can be proven, each moment in time is like a photograph, at the moment it is taken, you know it is true, but forever after you can only make your claims, and hope somebody will back you up.