Political Roundtable Part XXXIV

[payitforward]

...The test of morality is action. What you do for others. Especially when you put yourself at risk to do it.

Interesting So how would you reconcile doing a morally correct thing for others (let's say as a govt or corporate whistleblower for instance) if it causes your job loss, bankruptcy, divorce, and leaves your children destitute. Should one choose to do the moral good in order to benefit the public at large, or favor your personal and family's best interests and therefore culminate in an act of immorality?

How does what I wrote even begin to raise this question?

Every issue of morality or ethics comes up in a world, a context, that one way or the other is subject to conflicts of the kind you mention.

You see an accident ahead of you on the highway. Two cars, damaged, spin out on the side of the road. Who knows, but it looks like it might be serious. You pull over to see what help you can provide. That's a moral action.

You see an accident ahead of you on the highway. Two cars, damaged, spin out on the side of the road. Who knows, but it looks like it might be serious. You drive on. Doesn't make you Adolph Hitler, but it's not a moral action either.

[dobrojim]

The previous several posts (above) I originally learned about from another news source disparaged
on this site by a poster too intellectually lazy & dishonest to check for himself. This poster claimed
or feared he would be misled if he used the source I originally cited which they claimed was biased and
couldn't be trusted. Maybe finding all these other source is part of a conspiracy.

If someone doesn't want to learn, they are free to remain ignorant or naive (take your pick). They are even
free to make announcements or promote, here or elsewhere, about their beliefs. But they shouldn't expect to
be taken seriously. Or to have their erroneous beliefs codified into law ie to impose them on other people.

FWIW, this didn't take long. It was easy. Like shooting fish in a barrel. Maybe I should do a little of this every day.

[AFM]

PIF, please post more in this thread. I am tired but I enjoy reading.

[dckingsfan]

Yea only the right does it, the left is flawless. Good grief the amount of whine on this forum, there's not enough cheese in the world to go with it. You guys can never admit fault. Just like the liberal SCOTUS can never dissent, they always walks the same narrow-minded line like a cult

So, no nuance. Just the "the left is flawless". No comparison on any issue?

Let's take on debt first. Can we go through how both sides are less than flawless but one has buried our balance sheet?

Or do we want to go the ignorance or willful ignorance direction?

[dckingsfan]

PIF, please post more in this thread. I am tired but I enjoy reading.

I mean, it is the off season, right!?!

[payitforward]

daoneandonly -- why don't you try discussing, actually putting thoughts into words, any aspect of what I've posted here?

Or, why don't you give a hint of where your point of view comes from; try that why not? Are you a committed "Christian" -- i.e. meaning some strand of it that takes a hard line on abortion?

Here's another question: do you actually know something about these moral issues -- in the sense of having had experience related to them, I mean? Did someone abort a foetus you were hoping to be a Father to if it had thrived to birth?

Or is this, from your perspective, simply a straightforward reading of the 10 Commandments? Which, somehow, prohibits interruption of any x-y chromosome combo (although they interrupt each other, or are interrupted, naturally all the time)? For that matter, where does contraception fit in your point of view? Not ok? Or ok. How about the "day after pill"?

[Fairview4Life]

Lol

https://www.psypost.org/trump-supporters-report-higher-levels-of-psychopathy-manipulativeness-callousness-and-narcissism/

[dobrojim]

Dave Z in the Nation

https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/night-patrol-washington-dc-occupation/

[dobrojim]

https://bsky.app/profile/nypapajoe.bsky.social/post/3lxnbkpni322t

[daoneandonly]

The previous several posts (above) I originally learned about from another news source disparaged
on this site by a poster too intellectually lazy & dishonest to check for himself. This poster claimed
or feared he would be misled if he used the source I originally cited which they claimed was biased and
couldn't be trusted. Maybe finding all these other source is part of a conspiracy.

If someone doesn't want to learn, they are free to remain ignorant or naive (take your pick). They are even
free to make announcements or promote, here or elsewhere, about their beliefs. But they shouldn't expect to
be taken seriously. Or to have their erroneous beliefs codified into law ie to impose them on other people.

FWIW, this didn't take long. It was easy. Like shooting fish in a barrel. Maybe I should do a little of this every day.

Hilarious, anyone on the left calling someone lazy when they have their hands out expecting medicaid benefits, student loan forgiveness, etc. That's laziness personified.

No, I'm not reading anything on MSNC. Nothing about that far-left garbage will be in my cache or cookies.

Erroneous beliefs codified into law? Funny coming from someone who is so pro trans. Laws and rules being adjusted to accommodate erroneous beliefs, but hey, that's ok somehow. As long as it doesn't involve accountability, that's where the line seems to be for the left.

[daoneandonly]

daoneandonly -- why don't you try discussing, actually putting thoughts into words, any aspect of what I've posted here?

Or, why don't you give a hint of where your point of view comes from; try that why not? Are you a committed "Christian" -- i.e. meaning some strand of it that takes a hard line on abortion?

Here's another question: do you actually know something about these moral issues -- in the sense of having had experience related to them, I mean? Did someone abort a foetus you were hoping to be a Father to if it had thrived to birth?

Or is this, from your perspective, simply a straightforward reading of the 10 Commandments? Which, somehow, prohibits interruption of any x-y chromosome combo (although they interrupt each other, or are interrupted, naturally all the time)? For that matter, where does contraception fit in your point of view? Not ok? Or ok. How about the "day after pill"?

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness.

How does one look at a little baby and not smile, not want to see them laugh and appreciate their innocence. That's where Im coming from. They deserve a chance at life, its not their fault they werent planned for. So I'll give them a voice.

Day after pill is an abortifacient. I don't have an issue with contraception, but don't think it should be given "free" via tax-payer dollars.

[queridiculo]

daoneandonly -- why don't you try discussing, actually putting thoughts into words, any aspect of what I've posted here?

Or, why don't you give a hint of where your point of view comes from; try that why not? Are you a committed "Christian" -- i.e. meaning some strand of it that takes a hard line on abortion?

Here's another question: do you actually know something about these moral issues -- in the sense of having had experience related to them, I mean? Did someone abort a foetus you were hoping to be a Father to if it had thrived to birth?

Or is this, from your perspective, simply a straightforward reading of the 10 Commandments? Which, somehow, prohibits interruption of any x-y chromosome combo (although they interrupt each other, or are interrupted, naturally all the time)? For that matter, where does contraception fit in your point of view? Not ok? Or ok. How about the "day after pill"?

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness.

How does one look at a little baby and not smile, not want to see them laugh and appreciate their innocence. That's where Im coming from. They deserve a chance at life, its not their fault they werent planned for. So I'll give them a voice.

Day after pill is an abortifacient. I don't have an issue with contraception, but don't think it should be given "free" via tax-payer dollars.

You are insane.

[payitforward]

daoneandonly -- why don't you try discussing, actually putting thoughts into words, any aspect of what I've posted here? ...give a hint of where your point of view comes from;

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness....

So your objections on not strictly speaking "religious" -- more a personal moral response, including...

How does one look at a little baby and not smile, not want to see them laugh and appreciate their innocence. That's where Im coming from....

For me, this has nothing -- literally nothing whatever -- to do with the issue.

But, given this, why are you not vocal on the hundreds of thousands of children (or whatever number, really -- it's a big one for sure) who are dead because USAID had its doors closed. Didn't they...

...deserve a chance at life...

?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I knew he wasn't dead.

[Zonkerbl]

It is interesting to me that Russia's hybrid warfare targeted the US electorate with the "both sides" argument. It was highly effective.

You start with the obvious. Everyone is flawed. Therefore every party is flawed.

And the the fallacious conclusion: both parties are equally flawed.

It hasn't been the case since Bush took us into the forever wars. And yet, we have many that voted for Bush twice and Putin Trump three times under the guise that they are the same as the Democratic candidates.

It hasn't been close in terms of freedoms, foreign policy, grift and the economy.

Those that voted for Bush/Trump are fully responsible for this mess but keep repeating the both sides mantra.

Fascinating.

Yeah. Da1 said the same thing. “yes, Trump rapes kids, but what about Bill Clinton? He’s no saint either!”

Not a serious country.

Dont speak for me and mention hurting kids when you're pro kill a baby because they werent planned.

I said if Trump is guilty, impeach him; I call him out. You guys never mention Clinton because, well, all you do is complain about the right because they dont support handouts and wiping out debt that people owe.

People here say I dont have the right to tell someone who or what is moral, but thats all you all do here. The hypocrisy is comical.

Dems defended Clinton in the 90s. If he's in the Epstein files they would absolutely throw him to the wolves now. Look what happened to Al Franken. You're kidding yourself if you think the blind eye the Republicans are turning to the crimes being committed in their name is remotely close to what the Dems have done (at least since the civil rights movement). Both sides! What a laugh. Republicans are the party of unadulterated evil right now. Dems are just cowards. I can forgive cowardice, even though I hate it. What the Republicans are doing right now is unforgiveable. It's not cowardice. This is what they want.

Hypocrisy. JFC. Every time a Republican says "both sides" instead of "I'm sorry for the evil acts being committed in my name" an angel bursts into flames.

[Zonkerbl]

Every Republican atrocity is justified by "but they punched me back! both sides! both sides!"

I want a divorce. If Dems had any guts they would be taking active steps towards secession. Maybe after the Republicans rig the midterms.

[Zonkerbl]

daoneandonly -- why don't you try discussing, actually putting thoughts into words, any aspect of what I've posted here? ...give a hint of where your point of view comes from;

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness....

So your objections on not strictly speaking "religious" -- more a personal moral response, including...

How does one look at a little baby and not smile, not want to see them laugh and appreciate their innocence. That's where Im coming from....

For me, this has nothing -- literally nothing whatever -- to do with the issue.

But, given this, why are you not vocal on the hundreds of thousands of children (or whatever number, really -- it's a big one for sure) who are dead because USAID had its doors closed. Didn't they...

...deserve a chance at life...

?

The commitment Republicans have to imaginary babies trumps all else, including actual babies and actual women.

[Zonkerbl]

I knew he wasn't dead.

Maybe he's really sick and about to die?

[AFM]

Life, liberty, persuit of happiness....

So your objections on not strictly speaking "religious" -- more a personal moral response, including...

How does one look at a little baby and not smile, not want to see them laugh and appreciate their innocence. That's where Im coming from....

For me, this has nothing -- literally nothing whatever -- to do with the issue.

But, given this, why are you not vocal on the hundreds of thousands of children (or whatever number, really -- it's a big one for sure) who are dead because USAID had its doors closed. Didn't they...

...deserve a chance at life...

?

The commitment Republicans have to imaginary babies trumps all else, including actual babies and actual women.

Watch on YouTube

[Zonkerbl]

test. Probably have to be logged in to bloosky to see it