Comments | khyrand: guest journaler

khyrand

guest journaler

Sep 10, 2008 06:37

As I mentioned yesterday, I am going to focus this blog more on relating moral theory to action. The first action that I would recommend is to oppose acts that lead to the possibility of a Palin presidency. A person with good desires and true and complete beliefs would be adamantly opposed to any action that would put Palin a heartbeat away from ( Read more... )

Comments 4

ebum1101 September 11 2008, 04:51:51 UTC

well THAT's simple-minded now, isn't it?

I'm immoral and a bad person and damned proud of it.

re: Fannie Mae.... who does he THINK the taxpayers are that are having to pay out for this mess? just because it doesn't come from tax money, per se, doesn't mean taxpayers aren't affected. HELlo.

Knowing who put "under gog" in the pledge of allegiance will have no bearing on my assesment of a future VP's intelligence. Really, we're counting points for trivia now?

I don't think this is a great argument against Palin. I'm not saying there aren't any good arguments against her, I'm just saying this piece doesn't address any REAL concerns, just trite ones.

Call me an idiot, I guess.

khyrand September 11 2008, 17:22:45 UTC

Re: Fannie Mae. Palin's original quotation was "John McCain has been calling for years to reform things and cut bureaucracy, even at the lending agencies that our government supports. The fact is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, they’ve gotten too big and too expensive to the taxpayers." To me it's clear she thought (9/6/08, before the bailout) that FM and FM were government entities bleeding taxpayer money. "Our nation is in a free-fall economically, and the person vying for the number two spot in the land doesn't know how these major financial players operate?" (Apt comment, but not my words ( ... )

ebum1101 September 11 2008, 04:54:41 UTC

how does this guy determine what's right and wrong (for his blog posts) without gods anyway? I've always been curious about that when it comes to atheists. Is each person to use his own moral compass to guide the way? Seems risky - and it means that anyone's actions can be justified, if EACH PERSON's view of right and wrong is valid. Something to think about. Not related to Palin, exactly. Just my sudden and intense dislike of this yahoo.

khyrand September 11 2008, 18:36:54 UTC

if EACH PERSON's view of right and wrong is validReligious people have to address the exact same issue, wrt interpretation of scripture, theology, accepting or rejecting dogma, &c. &c. Where does _your_ moral compass come from? If it is different from another theist's, whose view prevails where they conflict? Is there a still, small voice telling each of you different things? How do you know whose is truthful ( ... )