Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Please stop saying that. It's starting to sound really silly. What you call "category mistakes" are you criticising the irrelevant parts of my hypothetical questions?
It's like me asking you if you want artificial feeding tubes should you be in a coma, and you asking what color the tubes will be.
SD
Not all wagers are on games of pure chance, such as slot machines or rulette tables.
So what? What does that have to do with anything. I am not redefining "games of chance" by saying "wagers or bets." I am instead listing different types of things we know as "gambling."
Would we agree that gambling involves some type of risk for a greater reward, based in part or whole upon events that are out of our control?
SD
It is not a bad example, it is a perfect example. Do you deny that their is a gamble inherent in life insurance?
SD
BigMack
I am now convinced that I made a "Category error" is assuming you can read for comprehension.
I said "My contention is that not all attempt to gather in more money, whether for yourself or for your family, are sinful." Which a sentient being would read as me saying that I, personally, do not belive that providing for an inheiritance is sinful.
Then I said:
Doug has said that all "gambling" for money is sinful, unless it is not for yourself, only your heirs.
So I did not state that Doug believes that providing for his heirs is sinful.
So you are oh-for-two in understanding. Why don't you just leave it for those who can follow along?
My argument is that Doug's definition of "coveting" for oneself versus "not coveting" if it is for others does nto bear scrutiny. By showing the absurditiy, I am not trying to get him to believe wanting money for your heirs is wrong. Rather, I want him to realize that wanting money for yourself is not always wrong.
SD
Irrelevant. I agree with both you, Doug, and Scripture that it is wise to provide for those who you have the responsibilty for. That you think you need to prove this to me shows how little you understand of the arguments I am making.
SD
Please demonstrate how purchasing life insurance qualifies as a "risk".
Sigh. No, I'm sorry I did this already. Read my posts.
SD
Looks like a "category mistake" to me.
Buying an asset for future use is not a "gamble". Even if there is no drought, you still have the asset and you could consume it or sell it.
A more accurate comparison would be purchasing an option on wheat futures.
Hey I'm not that cheap (10 cents). I paid a whole 14.95 plus tax for it. I usually buy my books for a quarter at the library. It's kind of like what Steven posted. You hate to leave in the middle. I would have changed some things if I had wrote it ( like names) and come on, nobody is that perfect. I would have made the characters a little more earthly:'). I enjoy reading them though.
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.