What is evil?

Like, I said, what is basically obvious to me as good and evil is not so for others. I am not saying I like this, I am just saying it is and it basically comes down to personal preference, as frivilous as that is. I want the world to be in agreement that killing is wrong but then others, who are also of the Judeo-Islam-Christian faiths will have a differences. Catholics don't always agree with Eastern Othordox Catholics, Protestants don't always agree with Evangelicals, Reconstructionist Jews don't always agree with Reform Jews. If we all agreed on one way of doing things, we'd all be the same religion. My faith, which is strong and, in which I was born in a place where terrorism exists often and for real and not as a boogeyman (Tel Aviv), my faith from having a very small family that was once large and spanned 3 European nations and now just a handful of us due to the Holocaust and the anti-Semitism that still exist in this world, this is my faith, and it goes back a hell of a lot longer than a 1000 years and is bigger than Western civilization.

ps-I think that killing is ALWAYS wrong as where you may (I don't know) be for the death penalty or the war in Iraq or Mexican border vigilantism-that is a big difference in our opinion of good and evil right there.

 

You start off with the assumption that Bush is evil and manipulative and then wrap your view of his actions around that premise. If you look at it objectively the threat of another 9/11 style attack is very real. The things that are being done that may infringe on civil rights, are done in order to prevent another such attack. It would be imprudent to not take any actions to prevent another attack. It is important to balance civil rights with national security but if you are unwilling to make any concessions then you can make very little progress.

I find it unfair to judge anyone's pre 9/11 actions by what we know today but the truth is that the Clinton administration has much more blame for not stopping Bin Laden than Bush's does. Bush had only been in office for a short time when it happened and he was late getting is cabinet and staff in order because he had to fight off Al Gore's attempt to steal the election in Florida. Clinton was offered Bin Laden by the Sudan and refused to take him. Clinton has even admitted this in a speech. Like I said though it was pre 9/11 and if Clinton had known then what he knows now he would have taken Bin Laden.

 

How can you have a strong faith in a religion and not believe that the value system it teaches you about what is right and what is wrong is the correct one? If I did not feel strongly that christianity was right then I would not be a part of it.

 

the girl in daphne's avatar has huge sweater hams.

carry on.

 

Can we get this moved to TGB? Thanks.

 

my first post in R&S and you want the thread moved. I suck.

 

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."-Ben Franklin, Founding Father. I am NOT willing to give up one single freedom for ANYTHING. Then the terrorist win and then we are no longer the land of the free and there's nothing worth fighting for. Again, this is the pitch Hitler used in the 1930's to strip away the liberty of the people and this is why you have proven my point as to why Bush-supporters and 1930's Germans have a lot in common. I don't know about you but NO TERRORIST is making ME give up what my country stands-NEVER.

 

Did you actually read my post?

 

It's a half-inch picture, you must not be paying attention to the topic. My avatar is me but there's other places to talk about that kind of stuff.

 

So Good and evil are purely a matter of personal choice and there are no universal absolutes? That's awfully convenient. And, I believe, wrong. If there were no absolute truths with respect to good and evil, then doing the right thing would be simple....by your definition, just do what you like.

Actually fascism is a system, not unlike a dictatorship where power is centralized under one control. Merge communism and dictatorship, and you have it. But that's neither here nor there....I assume you are saying that Bush is giving power to the corporations to run the country?? A free market economy is hardly what you describe, and IS what the Bush admin supports. Let's not forget Enron, Tyco and inflated corporate accounting scams occured on Clinton's watch.
America, a sovereign nation, is accountable only to it's people, and since there are no world courts with jurisdiction, it's improper to refer to the actions of any sovreignty on the world stage, as "illegal". So I assume you mean that Bush is doing illegal things while in office. The latitude granted a commander in chief during wartime is wide and historic precedence in the office exists for every action Bush has taken so far (can you say Clinton wiretaps on political enemies?), so just because you don't agree with something, doesn't make it illegal. You wanna call something immoral, fine, but illegal is an entirely different stone to throw.

I am always amazed at how you liberals call the threats of today "fabricated dangers" yet piss and moan that Bush should have listened to his security briefing on some day and known that the Trade Center bombings were coming.You can't have it both ways, either the threats used to be real and something changed (Iraq War) to make them fabricated now...or the threats have never been real and are not real now, therefore Bush would be excused for not being omniscient .....or the threats have always been real and still are. Make up your mind...personally, I believe the threats are, were, and always will be real...but nobody can be blamed for not knowing all there is to know about them...even your boy Clinton. Intelligence is vague like that. I haven't given up one single right since 9/11...things may be a bit more complicated to accomplish now, but I am as free as I was before. In fact, the last time I felt my freedoms beingsqueezed was when the assault rifle ban went into effect...but I'm sure you got a REALLY good explanation of why that's OK.[/QUOTE]

The media's desire to publish the government's playbook in the terror war is treasonous. During WWII, the "Loose lips sink ships" theory was pretty much followed by the media for that very reason. And I'm not sure if you're trying to say domestic spying is impeachable, or your characterization of your perception of Bush's discussion with NYT and WP is impeachable. But either way, you're grasping at straws. The right to monitor international communications by the government has been long ago established. So that dog don't hunt either way.

You, a Jewish person, believe terrorist threat is a fabricated danger...and I have a false narrative about my world?? Oy, genug shoyn!!

If I wasn't too old to serve I would have already been there.