This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Do you Christians here think children should read the bible?

#231kozlo100Posted 2/1/2013 11:53:21 AM
I believe this whole show started with the implication that logic is your personal standard, and not one that everyone need ascribe to.

Still, what you're saying is that the mere fact that you can see me is enough for you to exert your will over the relationship between me and my child in terms of what is important in protecting him.

You're dictating who has what right, and which ones are primary.
You're dictating what does and does not violate them.
You're dictating who's authority exceeds who's.
You're literally trying to be lord of all you survey.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick
#232Far421Posted 2/1/2013 11:53:38 AM
kozlo100 posted...
And all that is aside from the fact that you still haven't shown me that I'm doing it improperly. You've just decided amongst yourself that I am, and used that as justification that I haven't a the right to complain if you and your neighbors violate my rights, or at least the ones you deem I have. It would appear you wouldn't even bother considering those rights I think I have, but you do not believe in.


Firstly, we don't deem that you have the right to violate someone else's rights without you having the good reason.

Rights are based in logic. If we can't see the logic in something, we don't consider it an acceptable excuse for violating a right is already established. Maybe this forces you to explain yourself, but that's better than the other possibility.

Have you considered that the standards you're suggesting (not forcing logical justification before letting you violate your child's rights) allow a parent to brutally rape his child for the parent's personal pleasure as long as he's willing to lie and tell us that god told him he had to, refusing to show us the evidence?
---
Pokemon White FC: 4341 2165 1292
#233SuibomPosted 2/1/2013 11:56:05 AM
Far, do you even have kids?
---
"Indeed these are the mere edges of His ways, and how small a whisper we hear of Him!
But the thunder of His power who can understand." - Job 24:14
#234Far421Posted 2/1/2013 11:57:35 AM
kozlo100 posted...
I believe this whole show started with the implication that logic is your personal standard, and not one that everyone need ascribe to.

Still, what you're saying is that the mere fact that you can see me is enough for you to exert your will over the relationship between me and my child in terms of what is important in protecting him.

You're dictating who has what right, and which ones are primary.
You're dictating what does and does not violate them.
You're dictating who's authority exceeds who's.
You're literally trying to be lord of all you survey.


No, you agreed to accept logic at the outset. Remember how I said I wouldn't try to reason with the unreasonable? Without logic any argument you would put against me dies in the wind. it is not practical to not accept it.
---
Pokemon White FC: 4341 2165 1292
#235kozlo100Posted 2/1/2013 12:01:38 PM
Far421 posted...
we don't consider it an acceptable excuse for violating a right is already established.


This is the crux of it. The rights you have already deemed to be established, not the ones I have. The logic as applied to your body of evidence, not mine. At every turn you're insisting that your position is superior to mine when you have admitted that you cannot know what mine is.

My system fails under a deceitful parent exactly as much as your fails under a deceitful government. On the whole I wonder if parents or governments are less often deceitful.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick
#236kozlo100Posted 2/1/2013 12:02:43 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#237Far421Posted 2/1/2013 12:15:12 PM
kozlo100 posted...
Far421 posted...
we don't consider it an acceptable excuse for violating a right is already established.


This is the crux of it. The rights you have already deemed to be established, not the ones I have. The logic as applied to your body of evidence, not mine. At every turn you're insisting that your position is superior to mine when you have admitted that you cannot know what mine is.

My system fails under a deceitful parent exactly as much as your fails under a deceitful government. On the whole I wonder if parents or governments are less often deceitful.


Either a right has been established or it hasn't. This is not subjective, it just may not be known. That's why you should tell people if you can establish one. I'm insisting that my body of evidence has been established and we'll tell you how. You are not, so we have no evidence that you have evidence.

As for the whole deceit bit, governments may hide some information and in bad cases even spread hateful propoganda, but what you're calling a government is society as a whole. Yes, if we are illogical as a society, we can fall for the deceit of those who are cloest to the reins, and bad things can happen. However, we have each other to keep ourselves in check, to show each other the flaws in the deceit. That is why slavery was repealed in the U.S. On a global level, that, together with good will for others, is why Hitler failed.

However, it is easy for just one or two peple to be corrupt. If we let a child's fate be decided by just one or two people, we will have the chronic problem of having some children regularly abused.
---
Pokemon White FC: 4341 2165 1292
#238kozlo100Posted 2/1/2013 12:21:43 PM
Far421 posted...
Either a right has been established or it hasn't.


Who gets to decide whether it has or hasn't?

This is not subjective, it just may not be known. That's why you should tell people if you can establish one. I'm insisting that my body of evidence has been established and we'll tell you how. You are not, so we have no evidence that you have evidence.


So, because you know you have evidence, and you cannot know whether or not I have evidence, we have to use your body of evidence. It's that transition from 'you' to 'we' that I have a problem with. I know my evidence, so leave me to act logically upon it.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick
#239Far421Posted 2/1/2013 12:26:18 PM
kozlo100 posted...
Far421 posted...
Either a right has been established or it hasn't.


Who gets to decide whether it has or hasn't?

This is not subjective, it just may not be known. That's why you should tell people if you can establish one. I'm insisting that my body of evidence has been established and we'll tell you how. You are not, so we have no evidence that you have evidence.


So, because you know you have evidence, and you cannot know whether or not I have evidence, we have to use your body of evidence. It's that transition from 'you' to 'we' that I have a problem with. I know my evidence, so leave me to act logically upon it.


Logic dictates whether the right is established.

You can act on your evidence insofar as you don't violate the rights of others. However, we will not allow you to violate your child's established rights.
---
Pokemon White FC: 4341 2165 1292
#240kozlo100Posted 2/1/2013 12:50:38 PM
Far421 posted...
However, we will not allow you to violate your child's established rights.


As you see them according to your body of evidence, not mine.

Lets do a quick hypothetical to show you the problem. Lets say I have all the evidence you could ever want that this medicine is going to damn my kid. I've got video interviews with this god taped in front of a live studio audience full of physicists and psychologists making sure everything is real where he physically showed us heaven and hell and let us bring back little vials of sulfur from the lake of fire gift shops, before explaining that this medicine is bad news, but don't worry the kid won't suffer long, I'll take him to heaven. The whole nine yards, I have it all, and you have none of it.

You come over, see me not giving my kid the medicine, so you tell me to do it. I tell you I've got some really, really good reasons not to, but I'm an obstinate son of a ***** so I don't show you that mountain of evidence. I just tell you I have enough and you should bugger of and leave me to it.

You take my kid, give him the pill, and next week on 'Talking with medicine god' there's my kid in the lake of fire because you acted to intervene when logic dictated that there was relevant information that you could not know. You couldn't know whether or not I had evidence, you assumed I didn't, and now my kid burns.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick