Why so many NJ teachers are retiring......

[mangofirst]

Although Mark is wrong about this being a Christian nation. The whole point of the clause in the constitution refutes that.

Of course I am referring to the nation culturally. Who cares what's in the old Constitution? It's irrelevant mostly after 200 years. I don't mean irrelevant in people's dreams and fantasies, I mean effectively irrelevant as a national institutional framework. All that matters now is the ludicrous, but appropriately named, "Supreme Court."

Really!? Is everyone going to let this go? It is amazing to me the disdain people have of the very document (along with the Bill of Rights) that provided them the freedom and life that they enjoy today.

I certainly agree that it is treated as irrelevant by those sworn to uphold it.

I didn't realize until we did a Constitution Day ceremony at my school this year that every branch of the U.S. military swears an oath not to protect our country or the people in it, but to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic," and "bear true faith and allegiance to the same". The only catch there is that they also swear to obey orders of the POTUS and officers appointed over them...seems like the last few presidents we've had haven't really upheld their own oaths to "preserve, protect and defend" the same.

Can we just take a moment to notice the words 'and domestic' up there? Anyone wanna take a swing at defining a domestic enemy for me?

The Boston Bomber dude.

Chelsea Bradley.

Oh yeah, and all the people being spied upon by the NSA.

Pffft I have completely different views of Manning and Snowden. Edited May 2, 2015 by mangofirst

[mangofirst]

Well, put it out there!

You mean the why?

The types of documents released were completely different. Snowden is a whistleblower and Manning is a traitor. Snowden released information that has to do with the American people and -- qualifier here -- from what I've read, the only person he put in harm's way was himself. Manning released information that, while some of it is quite questionable, put many lives in danger. I guess it hits home with me because my husband's name could be in those files which would put not only his life but mine and our daughter's in danger as well. Not cool.

[BigStewMan]

 

 

Can we just take a moment to notice the words 'and domestic' up there? Anyone wanna take a swing at defining a domestic enemy for me?

do you want their forum names?     Friday is the best day to joke around since … Thursday.

Let's not get the NSA involved...oh wait, if you type NSA are they automatically involved? :-D

 

Mangofirst … they probably have a file on you now.  

[BigStewMan]

Live your life on your own moral terms. That's the very best thing I believe we can do.

A discussion for another day as you have one going on right now that i don’t want to derail). But, I can’t agree with your statement here (if i understand it correctly). Played out for real, wouldn’t that result in utter chaos?  Everyone having their own standard--why that would eliminate all right and all wrong.  I see no way whatsoever that could result in a peaceful existence for anyone -- and, being half Portuguese and half Hippie,  I’m all about peace.  

[mangofirst]

It's that whole utopian society farce. You see, boys and girls, there is e-ville in the world as well as good. This is why communism will never work.

[mangofirst]

And Stew, I'm half redneck half hippie. I should be a flippin' Gemini!

[BigStewMan]

When I say "moral terms" I mean that people's inherent moral understanding is fine. They don't need to be told that slavery is wrong, that compassion is good, that stealing is bad and giving is good.

yet, societies all over the world allowed slavery to be the norm; some countries today homosexuality carries a death penalty; and in some parts of the world, people will still eat you and be fine with it.  Where is their inherent morality? Again, to avoid chaos, wouldn’t then everyone’s inherent moral understanding have to be the same? The cannibals will have no qualm about eating you.  I’ve never met one so i can’t say with certainty whether they have any feeling at all whether what they’re doing is right or wrong.

Edited May 2, 2015 by BigStewMan

[muel]

It's pretty tough to talk about universals... not much is.  The only universal taboo in the world is incest and there is not even close to an agreement on what constitutes incest from one culture to another.  Not really a fun topic but you need to understand that people are really different the world over.  

[BigStewMan]

 

 

When I say "moral terms" I mean that people's inherent moral understanding is fine. They don't need to be told that slavery is wrong, that compassion is good, that stealing is bad and giving is good.

yet, societies all over the world allowed slavery to be the norm; some countries today homosexuality carries a death penalty; and in some parts of the world, people will still eat you and be fine with it. Where is their inherent morality? Again, to avoid chaos, wouldn’t then everyone’s inherent moral understanding have to be the same? The cannibals will have no qualm about eating you. I’ve never met one so i can’t say with certainty whether they have any feeling at all whether what they’re doing is right or wrong.

You're right, all those people are out there in spite of having millions of laws, customs and constitutions. Correct? You're describing the world as it is. The one I live in, and you live in. Obviously our laws and constitutions haven't changed that. Ergo, law is an effect of human behavior, not a cause. Those who behave like X, wrote that behavior down into their law or customs, and those who act like Y write a different law.

I'm just recognizing those facts, and acknowledging that I certainly don't need external authority for moral guidance. For me, it is absurd to look for moral guidance from an institution filled with dishonesty and corruption, like the USA government. I don't care about guys who died 200 years ago. I don't think they hold any moral superiority to me. And as for the current flock? Not even effort listening to.

Good comments. A very serious subject! I'm impressed with the conversation.

 

I’m not anti-government; but, I'm no fan of the way world governments operate today. A moral law can’t come from an immoral person or group of people. A friend of mine says that you can’t make chicken salad out of chicken s**t no matter how much mayonnaise you put in it.  I certainly don’t need government for moral guidance; but, left alone (a world of full of me) i can’t say it would be utopia either.  You made a statement in an earlier post, something that I’ve been arguing with a friend about for years.  I say people are naturally evil. He says they’re naturally good (except for the time an unscrupulous house seller tried to rip him off).  I certainly didn’t teach my kids to lie -- they figured that out probably by age two.  They knew they could say “no” when asked if they did something, hoping to avoid whatever they thought would happen. We all have done that because “that” too is in our nature.  Hopefully, as we mature, we learn to control our selfish instincts and develop a respect for others -- one which will include honoring the other by being truthful.  

ok, got slightly off track for a minute … 

 

I agree law is the effect of human behavior and not the cause; however, i want to say i sensed a different sentiment in that thread about the Baltimore riots where some laws were called oppressive (or something to that effect) and (not sure about this part nor who wrote it) but, the laws seemed to be the blame for the behavior. (If i misread or haven’t remembered those posts correctly-- I apologize. Maybe the context was about the police forces not the laws).

 

It is hard to dispute some of your claim because we’ve never been without some form of law. But if laws aren’t the cause of our behavior then our character flaws will still exist in a world without law -- right?   I watched a show about a tiny island tribe of natives.  Even they had a hierarchy of authority and they had their own laws (no idea what they based their “code of conduct” on).  They didn’t wear clothes. Lived in huts. No technology. They didn’t have an FBI, NSA, written constitution, jails, nor Big Business corrupting their lives; but, they still had cases of murder, rape, and theivery.

Because I believe people are naturally evil (and i consider selfishness a form of evil) and most of us learn to control that to varying degrees -- I can’t believe that those on the Mars Manifest (want to include as many threads as possible in this post  ) will not duplicate the same atrocities that we’ve experienced here -- that’s just who we are.

Thanks for the dialogue.

Steve

Edited May 2, 2015 by BigStewMan

[BigStewMan]

t's a fork in the road for every person

well Yogi Berra said, ”when you come to a fork in the road -- take it." 

 

In my opinion, more important than examining someone else’s behavior is a healthy dose of self-examination.  I’ve come to a few forks in the road during my life and i’ve chosen which path to take.  But, i’m cheating myself if i don’t challenge my own beliefs, if i don’t ask myself why i chose this road or that road.  There have been times, i’ve had to admit that I chose particular paths for reasons such as seeking the easiest road to travel, the company of the other travelers, misread the road signs, got misleading directions, or at times … plain stubbornness. I’ve traveled far down some paths, continuing on even when I knew it wasn’t the right one.  That’s the self-serving, self-gratifying part of me -- thinking i always know best and if I don’t then I’m darn sure my friends know.

 

I come from years of drug addiction. There was a time when I (seriously) thought everyone in my generation did drugs (except this one guy).  It was everywhere and everyone was using.  It sounds stupid now; but, it wasn’t until years later that I realized that everyone wasn’t doing it -- I just had surrounded myself with people just like me.  I don’t hang around with only people like me anymore. What a boring existence that would be and what a sure fire way to stunt the learning process.  I have a very dear friend of many years and we rarely agree on anything, in fact the only thing i think we agree on is that prison should be for violent offenders only.  Too many people in prison, wasting taxpayer money, for things that don’t pose a safety hazard to the public. We can be more creative with our punishments for the Bernie Madoffs, etc...

 

I guess the flip side is that education/information doesn’t solve a thing.  It’s useless if we’re unwilling to use it. I’ve had to do an about-face, more than once, and go back to that fork and take the other path. We owe that to ourselves.

 

Appreciate the glimpse into your thought process -- i think we did it civilly.  Enjoy your Saturday.

Edited May 2, 2015 by BigStewMan

[Jeff Matthews]

It's the argument of the ages. Man is Evil is the impetus for religion. Man is Good is the impetus of humanism. How about ants - good or evil? Tigers?

I can't find a way to make biological intelligence evil by definition. So, I begin with 'life is good.' If I believed life was evil, I'd just kill myself. These are fundamental decisions we all arrive at one way or another. It's a fork in the road for every person. You build your life upon the premise you choose. I chose Humanism a long time ago.

 

Aha!  Now, you have exposed the sentiment of a lot of people.  Not too many people want to admit they are evil.  What good would that do?  So, let's look at the fact, as stated, that many people have "learned" to control their evil nature.  Why is this learned?  For an evil purpose, or for a good purpose?  Once we inject the good somewhere into the equation, we can't claim it's all evil anymore.  Which, then, predominates?  This is where the real argument lies.  You have two views:

 

1.  It's basically evil, except...

2.  It's basically good, except...

 

I don't think it matters one way or the other.  "Into this world we're thrown like a dog without a bone..."

[mangofirst]

Did I mention that I love it here? :-D

mdeneen: I did not think your comments were directed toward my family. Just using a little pathos to support my side.

Now, can someone go back and do a quick and dirty recap of the development of this thread? How'd we get from the tooth fairy to here? Fun times.

[Fjd]

Now, can someone go back and do a quick and dirty recap of the development of this thread? How'd we get from the tooth fairy to here? Fun times.

 

 

Funny! Maybe this is just another example of the application of the "six degrees of separation" theory.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Fjd

[ssh]

I think I'm ready, now, to write my new novel, Lord of the Fleas. The tone copies A Confederacy of Dunces, and its stream of consciousness mimics The Sound and the Fury.

SSH

[ssh]

Not even Macbeth?

SSH

[mangofirst]

Now, can someone go back and do a quick and dirty recap of the development of this thread? How'd we get from the tooth fairy to here? Fun times.

 

 

Funny! Maybe this is just another example of the application of the "six degrees of separation" theory.

O_o I was thinking of Kevin Bacon as I was typing that!

[mangofirst]

Also, can anyone tell me how to get smilies to work when posting from an iPad? If I try to use the iEmojis it gives me an error message, and I don't have the option even though I'm using the "full version" instead of mobile. :-(

[mangofirst]

I think I'm ready, now, to write my new novel, Lord of the Fleas. The tone copies A Confederacy of Dunces, and its stream of consciousness mimics The Sound and the Fury.

SSH

I've really got to read some more Faulkner. As I Lay Dying was just not the best place to start.

[BigStewMan]

Also, can anyone tell me how to get smilies to work when posting from an iPad? If I try to use the iEmojis it gives me an error message

That happens because you’re trying to smile at something that’s not funny.  

Sorry … forgot to mention that I’m half-Portuguese, half-hippie, and half-punk.

I’d answer your question if I knew … i’m lucky i’m able to log on successfully.

Steve 

Edited May 2, 2015 by BigStewMan

[BigStewMan]

I think I can see through the "man is evil" school. It really means, "you are evil, I am good."

Well I only speak for myself, not for anyone else you’ve encountered in life; but, what I mean is “I am evil - You are evil, and we’re equally so."

Now that doesn’t mean that we go about life doing only evil things; but, our natural inclination is to serve ourselves. As I said earlier, i consider selfishness of form of evil.  We evil people are capable of doing good things; but, even then we’re often using selfish motives (praise from others, popularity, guilty consciences, etc.)  Our deeds would be “good” for the beneficiary; however, I say our selfish motive tarnished them.  How can I then pat myself on the back?

Edited May 2, 2015 by BigStewMan