Posted on 02/01/2002 7:13:38 AM PST by Sir Gawain
That's probably where I draw the line. |
It would be a vertical line. On one side, the left side, philosophy, on the other side, politics.
As an example, I have some background in both physics and engineering. Physics would be a subset of philosophy, engineering would be practical, worldly application. Physics would be on the left side of the line, engineering on the right side.
And similarly with a philosophy of morality [and ethics.] Ethics on the left of the line; politics, political engineering, on the right.
Clinton X-42, being a journeyman political engineer would exist on the right. Oh, well, it's just a diagram.
This is why we put them in jail.
We must limit their power to do wrong by restricting the purview of governmental authority; there is no other way.
So you want less things to be considered "Wrong".
They will unrelentingly pursue their own interests despite your or my 'moral suasion'.
Let them do so from the privacy of their own cell.
Indeed - a proud species.
Shalom.
I like the way you think. But I must say, an engineer who knows too little of physics is a poor engineer, and will build a defective bridge. Indeed, it seems the engineer would be constantly returning to his laws of physics to understand how to get where he wants. If there is a single flaw in the analogy, I think it is this, however: physics tells you that if you use this material this high, it will feel this much force from gravitation and be able to flex this much and so on...but philosophy would be concerned with why you were building the bridge in the first place.
I was speaking not of the common law 'wrongs' of assault, theft, etc., but of the politically-engineered crimes executed by shaping the varius bodies of administrative and other laws to further 'private interest'.
The so-called 'War on Drugs', for instance, is only explicable by acknowledging the power of criminal syndicates and other profiteers of human misery to warp the law for private benefit.
LOL!!!
I would have thought even someone as monomaniacal as yourself would have perceived that I was speaking of political crimes against the American people and their Constitution.
Name one political criminal,(Clinton is one, there are innumerable others), who now languish in the crowbar hotel.
One.(1)
And you need not call me sir (though I appreciate it!). I'm willing to bet I'm several years your junior, sir.
They will, though. Once you realize what you are looking at, whether it is to the left or right of the line, or even straddling the line, you can begin to link it all together. Then it becomes one. At the same time it becomes neither philosophy nor politics.
It might seem odd for a Republican, which I am, to have an interest in the doings of Mao. And I don't like what he did. But, he did take a philosophy, Marxism, and join it to practical politics in a way nobody else has done. He was wrong to use coercion, but it was effective, unfortunately. He failed completely, of course, as coercion seems to utterly fail in the end.
We are each independent creatures and must each come to our own realization as we become aware of the paradox of life. Probably most people don't get that far and just follow the recipe given them by their leader. Like engineering. Follow the herd, do this and you get that. Sounds like OBL. Sounds like some others I won't mention since I don't particularly want to start a riot.
To an extent we are also dependent creatures who live with and need one another (and not just for division of labor).
Probably most people don't get that far and just follow the recipe given them by their leader. Like engineering. Follow the herd, do this and you get that
Sadly, yes. The easy road is the one well-travelled.
I don't particularly want to start a riot
LOL--wisdom is nine parts prudence and one part good sense, as they say.
When people post in a thoughtful way, I feel bound to observe proprieties. ;^)
I believe the 'social mores' are much more 'enforcable' than you might think on first glance. My impression of my contemporaries, however, is that they are uncomfortable taking a 'judgmental' stand, unless it is fully backed up by the force of law and public unanimity.
This is the fruit of decadence; an intimidated citizenry makes a mockery of popular sovereignty.
To preserve the Constitution and the principles upon which it stands will take a considerable quantity of moral courage; we shall see if we possess it or not in the years to come.
You call the crap you've put on this thread sparring? You're a true leftist. I know, I know, you're proud of that title. Actually, from reading your posts....you're irrelevant.
"OWK" said...Where (post #31).
I thought, from yesterday's thread, you were someone worthy of my time. Sorry, you too are irrelevant.
lexcorp, you've said so many insane things you're beyond help. You indeed, are going to have A LOT TO ANSWER for when you meet your Maker.
nexuslexus, poof, you're gone. You too, will be in big doodoo when you fall on your face before God.
Incredible, the mindset of the left. Actually, it really isn't....for those of us who know Jesus as our Lord and Savior are not at all surprised by this.
You folks are really, really sick, indeed.
LOL!! I sincerely hope young Brad has more sense than his 'gramma', a woman who is apparently incapable of complex thought.
He could hardly have less, I suppose.
BTW, if you're going to slag me, please flag me. It's the 'ethical' thing to do; surely even a 'whited sepulchre' can remember the small courtesies.
My mistake, I thought I had.
This is true. Don't expect many here to believe it though. They have been told this so many times by "moral" people that wish to divide (and the Please Send More Money To Me For Jesus To Protect Us From This Travesty! hucksters) -- they are absolutely convinced it is so.
From schools that have tried to ban Christian Fellowship clubs on school property(while encouraging gay teen clubs) to banning valedictorian speeches with christian content, the incidents are common.
You may fancy yourself a liberal and you don't want to ban prayer -- that doesn't mean that those with whom you are allied share your tolerance and moderation.
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.