Posted on 08/14/2007 9:22:48 AM PDT by mustang buff
The US government is on a ‘burning platform’ of unsustainable policies and practices with fiscal deficits, chronic healthcare underfunding, immigration and overseas military commitments threatening a crisis if action is not taken soon, the country’s top government inspector has warned. David Walker, comptroller general of the US, issued the unusually downbeat assessment of his country’s future in a report that lays out what he called “chilling long-term simulations”. These include “dramatic” tax rises, slashed government services and the large-scale dumping by foreign governments of holdings of US debt.
(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...
I heard the author give a short presentation on the book (linked below)
on BookTV (C-Span2; weekends).
I didn’t hear it all, but my impression is Yes and No are the answers
to the question.
Are We Rome?: The Fall of an Empire and the Fate of America
by Cullen Murphy
http://www.amazon.com/Are-We-Rome-Empire-America/dp/0618742220/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/105-1113586-3471607?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187130333&sr=1-1
What about things like running around nearly naked, ritualized/religious sexual practices, and tribal tattoos?
You mean hollywood?
Note: many of those in third world countries also see Hollywood as an enemy.
Rephrase, please?
Rephrase, please?
What is seen as immoral in one culture is business as usual in another. We are not a single global culture.
>Our children are being preached Marxism day in and day out. Eventually they will grown up to be voters.<
A lot of them already have, thus the leftward tilt to much of the GOP. The Democrats are no longer Democrats - except the “conservative” Democrats, they are Communists. The GOP is no longer the GOP - except for the “conservative” Republicans, I guess they are now really Democrats.
So, a few of those baby boomers escaped through the grace of God their indoctrination. Probably due to caring parents.
I have found there is little difference between a conservative Democrat and a conservative Republican. They both seem able to see beyond party to the best interests of their beloved country. That is why Duncan Hunter’s appeal is universal. He focuses on what is best for the country.
The two statements are indisputable.
But I would distinguish between saying (1)a. There are differences of opinion about what is moral, and (1)b. those differences are influenced by cultural differences; and (2) "morals are dependent on culture."
SOME OPINIONS about morals may be dependent on culture, but a difference of opinion about the best way to get to New York doesn't mean there isn't a best way to get there.
Moral absolutists wouldn’t agree with either of us.
There are difference of opinion on what "best" is.
Fastest, least traffic, good restaurant on the way ...
Yep, it’s a complicated question. Where I’m “coming from” we think one needs revelation even to approach the answer, even though careful thought can get a lot of the basics.
Woah! That’s interesting because I think I’m probably a moral absolutist.
So, you believe there’s one “right” moral code that should be adopted by every single human being?
Forcing it on 'em is a different matter. I think it's immoral to forcibly impose every part of my moral code on others. Some parts, yeah, like, say, the parts having to do with murder, injury, theft, rape.
‘If the USA falls, and that is a BIG IF, it will be because we turned our backs on God.’
My point being, does it really matter whether anyone turns their back on God or not, as God already knows what someone is going to do and what is going to happen, and whether the US falls or not. Whatever you or I or the US does, must be part of God’s plan.
I agree. It’s been that way throughout history.
I don’t think that traveling from one point to another, is a very good analogy for moral differences.
So for you, there are moral absolutes, but since others think differently and your moral absolutes shouldn’t be forced on another, where is the real absoluteness? Shouldn’t a real moral absolute be something inherent in every soul throughout history?
My alleged point was that the existence of disagreements does not prove that there is no "right" answer.
But to further defend my analogy, lots of smart people think of moral action as intended toward an "end" - a τελος. So I was trying to think of a train of actions which were intentional and how folks might disagree about the best way to accomplish a shared intention.
For what its worth, he left out that the leaders had become Christians and lost a willingness to exterminate their enemy.
Especially when the subject has no way of being proven, tested, analysed, etc.
I understand, it’s just one of those subjects that will always be questioned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.