Skip to comments.
A Note to Conservatives Who Are Secular
Townhall.com ^
| April 5, 2016
| Dennis Prager
Posted on 04/05/2016 7:51:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-116 last
To: Pelham
Aseity is part of the definition of God in Christian theology. Had to look up that word. Thanks! See post 99 for my wordier explanation to our (thus far) self-contained FRiend.
101
posted on
04/05/2016 12:00:38 PM PDT
by
Albion Wilde
(In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. --George Orwell)
To: Albion Wilde
If he had some philosophical sophistication we could finish him off with Gödel’s Theorems. Basically a proof that there cannot be any self-contained, self-defining systems. All must borrow from outside. But we are dealing with someone whose education appears to consist of reading Ayn Rand.
102
posted on
04/05/2016 12:23:58 PM PDT
by
Pelham
(A refusal to deport is defacto amnesty)
To: Pelham
There are always opportunities to witness in love and with compassion.
103
posted on
04/05/2016 2:40:48 PM PDT
by
Albion Wilde
(In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. --George Orwell)
To: Kaslin
The vast majority of leading conservative writers, just like their liberal colleagues, have a secular outlook on life. With few exceptions, the conservative political and intellectual worlds are oblivious to the consequences of secularism. They are unaware of the disaster that godlessness in the West has led to.
Is that really true, though? Some prominent conservative talking heads are converts to Catholicism (or Eastern Orthodoxy). Some of them are mainstream Protestants or Jews. And Evangelicals get published in conservative periodicals.
Even Krauthammer, who doesn't believe in God, isn't "oblivious" about the problems of secularism. He's quoted as saying that he didn't believe in God, but he feared him. There is a "secular right" group out there, but I don't think it's accurate to say there's no concern about increasing secularism in conservative publications.
104
posted on
04/05/2016 2:50:05 PM PDT
by
x
To: Albion Wilde
Paul adapted to his audience. Objectivism has a streak of Nietzsche in it.
105
posted on
04/05/2016 2:54:52 PM PDT
by
Pelham
(A refusal to deport is defacto amnesty)
To: CapitalistCrusader
“I can morally act in my self interest as long as I don’t infringe on the basic rights of life, liberty and property of others.”
What if you see your self interest as a higher moral calling such as over population of the planet or improvement of humanity’s gene pool?
106
posted on
04/05/2016 3:04:55 PM PDT
by
dangerdoc
((this space for rent))
To: Kaslin
Atheists are the children of Marx and the enemies of America. Our whole system of government is predicated on the idea that natural rights are granted by God, and presumes a culture of broadly Judeo-Christian ethics. Any attempt to substitute something else will cause our system of government to fail.
107
posted on
04/05/2016 6:24:18 PM PDT
by
GenXteacher
(You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
To: Kaslin
once again, one cannot be conservative if one is not socially conservative.
It is by definition, with no asterisk.
To: CapitalistCrusader
“Why does morality presuppose a law-giver?”
Because objective “rightness” and “wrongness” implies how some things (humans in this case) ought to act, not merely how they are acting. In other words, it implies an aesthetic design and purpose.
Traditionally, people understood morality in a teleological sense. Trying to divorce teleology from morals is a characteristic of modern moral philosophy....btw it’s the main reason that modern moral philosophy is an incoherent mess.
109
posted on
04/05/2016 8:17:41 PM PDT
by
Bishop_Malachi
(Liberal Socialism - A philosophy which advocates spreading a low standard of living equally.)
To: CapitalistCrusader
No. They are not both true revealed religions.
To: CapitalistCrusader
I can morally act in my self interest as long as I don't infringe on the basic rights of life, liberty and property of others.
But that only works as long as your code doesn't shift. You can easily justify any action you want by looking at their actions and saying they had already intruded upon your rights and you are just responding in kind.
In addition, were do those basic rights come from? You can say they exist, but why? The other person has no need or reason to agree with your identification of basic rights and create his own idea of what is a basic right. There can be no real agreement in your system between various individuals if there is not an outside referee or standard.
111
posted on
04/05/2016 11:29:15 PM PDT
by
wbarmy
(I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
To: wbarmy
There can be no real agreement in your system between various individuals if there is not an outside referee or standard. Reality is the outside arbiter. Reality cannot be faked or ignored for very long.
Belief in a deity does nothing to change anything to which you objected. People still need to agree on a code of ethics and abide by it regardless of its source.
To: CapitalistCrusader
Reality is the outside arbiter. Reality cannot be faked or ignored for very long.
Whose reality; yours or mine, or the transgender guy who really, really believes he is a girl deep inside and that he has to be treated like a girl no matter what, and has the law to back him up.
113
posted on
04/06/2016 4:52:26 AM PDT
by
wbarmy
(I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
To: Pelham
” Basically people before the invasion of the neocon bodysnatchers. “
LOL.....National Review 2016
114
posted on
04/06/2016 8:02:17 AM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(My Batting Average( 1,000) since Nov 2014 (GOPe is that easy to read))
To: CapitalistCrusader; Pelham; Fightin Whitey
“ In Islam Jews and Christians are referred to people of the book precisely because these religions are based on the same god.
This is the type of objectivist pretzel logic we have seen..hell.. forever!Aristotle was the antithesis of Ayn Rand/Objectivism. Islam is incompatible with Western civilization, and any place they have “invaded” PROVE it!
British Common Law is based on the 10 Commandments, as were most of our original laws in the colonies.
115
posted on
04/06/2016 8:17:20 AM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(My Batting Average( 1,000) since Nov 2014 (GOPe is that easy to read))
To: stephenjohnbanker
“Aristotle was the antithesis of Ayn Rand/Objectivism.”
Aristotle’s theism is certainly at odds with Ayn Rand’s creation.
116
posted on
04/06/2016 8:39:43 AM PDT
by
Pelham
(A refusal to deport is defacto amnesty)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-116 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson