Luminous
non-existential luminary
I'll take your word for it... original form, perfect phrasing.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does God forgive soldiers?
- Thread starter Axel
- Start date
Where Is God
Creator
Ummmm last time I checked.... Your average soldier would quickly do what he is told before facing imprisonment if not death for treason.
Tathagata
Freethinker
Learn some political philosophy before you assert things like that.
"Should it be illegal, we may next inquire, to 'incite to riot'? Suppose that Green exhorts a crowd: 'Go! Burn! Loot! Kill!' and the mob proceeds to do just that, with Green having nothing further to do with these criminal activities. Since every man is free to adopt or not adopt any course of action he wishes, we cannot say that in some way Green determined the members of the mob to their criminal activities; we cannot make him, because of his exhortation, at all responsible for their crimes. 'Inciting to riot,' therefore, is a pure exercise of a man's right to speak without being thereby implicated in crime."
-- Murray Rothbard
To put it more simply, if I told you to jump off a bridge, would you? And if you do, am I to blame for your death? Surely you wouldn't dismiss yourself of such fundamental responsibility and try to blame it on me!
It is simply childish talk to say things like that. You know when little kids say "Well, he made me do it!" No, the Nazis had a choice to make no matter what nonsense Hitler was spewing. What if Hitler said "take your pants off, go streaking around town then get me a sandwhich, I'm hungry." And then someone actually does it, who's to blame?
.
Last edited:
Luminous
non-existential luminary
unless ofcourse, its the crime of inciting a riot.
how busy philosophy is looking itself in the mirror.
Tathagata
Freethinker
unless ofcourse, its the crime of inciting a riot.
I suppose the quote was a bit misleading. I am not talking about "crime" as defined by the state, I'm talking about a moral crime from a philo-ethical standpoint.
I will make this enlarged for all to see:
Mere words can never equate to an immoral ACT no matter what words are uttered.
.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
Interesting, these philo-ethical standpoints, weak and far from truth if they don't accept agnosticism. Now, Mere words CAN EQUATE to an immoral act, and infact EQUAL it, if their utterance is immoral. it is immoral to lie and deny agnosticism(anti-agnostic tales are the greatest lies as supported by Satan, King of Religions and wrong philosophies)
Last edited:
Tathagata
Freethinker
I am working with the philosophical understanding that evil is suffering and the socio-political standpoint that initiating force is unethical. From this standpoint, no word can be held directly accountable for inflicting physical harm unto another being.
If we were to consider all hurtful words to be immoral, then phrases such as "God does not exist" may be an immoral phrase for it may offend or hurt the feelings of a deeply religious believer who has never questioned their faith.
For example, the words from this boy are not immoral, even though they made someone cry [0:13 - 1:42]:
[youtube]1CIhn3wPFnE[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CIhn3wPFnE
.
Last edited:
Luminous
non-existential luminary
Not to worry, i was working with that philosophical understanding and socio-political standpoint also. However, a definition of "directly accountable" will have to be agreed on. If the order/command is not directly accountable then neither is the follower, for his word was his thought. the truth hurts, and the truth is not immoral. yet lies hurt, and lies are immoral. falsehoods hurt and falsehoods are immoral. however, "god does not exist" is an ignorant falsehood commited by anti-agnostics, whom are immoral in their essense. morality is not contingent upon effervesant emotion but upon solid truth. physical and mental harm are immoral. emotional harm is relative and in my opinion non-existant. He was doing mental harm because of her cognitive dissonance and his disregard for the best way to help her mental problem. ugh, disgusting woman...projecting her hatred on his. although i must say his mom is a freak all on her own too.
Last edited:
waitasec
Veteran Member
i just think she wasn't used to hearing someone speak so frankly about her belief...
i remember when i was an evangelical christian and heard that type of talk for the 1st time, i was shocked and did everything i could to reassure my faith by simply doing what she did, ignore...only because my faith wasn't really firm, that's why the insecurity...
just for clarification, do you really believe what i highlighted?
Luminous
non-existential luminary
no. just a weak opinion. anti-agnostics are immoral in that they are mentally hurtfall, since they don't and wouldn't confess their agnosticism they were born into.
waitasec
Veteran Member
thats a mind twist...
so let me get this straight, anti-agnostics are people who are against agnostics (the fence sitters)...so anti-agnostics can either be a theist or an atheist...
right?
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
Seems to me that either your reading comprehension skills are lacking or you just really like beating up your strawman.
This is nothing more than you continuing to beat up on your strawman.
Congratulations!
You really whooped the **** out of him!
Now would you like to address what was actually stated and agreed to or would you rather keep beating your strawman?
I am, yes. It's all being done for money. Yes there are extremists and we all agree on that. However, where is Bin Laden now? All this fuss around him and they can't even find him? All the tech that they have? I saw a documentary on it, if I'm not mistaken it was Michael Moore's.
RitalinO.D.
Well-Known Member
Your analogy fails in one basic point. Telling someone to jump off a bridge is only hurting the person jumping. Commanding soldiers to execute Millions of Jews is in a completely different ballpark. If you cannot see that, then I honestly don't know what to say to you.
Let me put it another way....Say there's this guy, we'll call him Bob. Bob pays another guy, Steve, $10,000 to kill your entire family. Brothers, sisters, everyone. You seek revenge. Who do you seek revenge on? Just Steve? Or do you go after the person that initiated the deed? Is Bob not as responsible, if not more so for having been the initiator?
Ozzie
Well-Known Member
Soldiers are cannon fodder, and sometimes we forgive them. A thankless job.
salaam friends,
This thread reminds me of a story. There was this old wanderer, darvish that eeked out a living on the edge of town. Most people left him alone but some respected his devotion and ways. One of those people, a man, happened to have 3 sons. His sons were of an age to begin thinking of an occupation. For good luck as much as anything else, the man took his 3 sons to the darvish. The darvish inspected each one at length, looking at them intently. Finally, he pointed to the eldest and said, He should be sent to join the military. Of the middle child he said, This one should be apprenticed to a merchant. Gazing on the last one the darvish stated, This one is fit for the clergy.
The father decided to take the darvish's advice and made the arrangements. A couple of years later the darvish left. The sons went on and each prospered. The first became a great and renouned general. The second, a fantastically wealthy merchant. And the third was known the country over for his sermons. People would come by the hundreds and thousands to listen to him talk.
Basking in the success of his choices, the father one day did see the darvish again. The old man had become quite old by this time. The father rushed to the darvish and thanked him for his wisdom. I'm glad you could see that goodness in my sons, the father gushed. Oh no, said the darvish, I did not see good in any of them. In the first I saw a murderer, the second is prone to theft and the third was a liar. I simply suggested careers which would tend to modify or make use of these tendencies.
--------------------------------
It is useful to remember that a good shepherd recognizes that kindness to a wolf is a tyrany to the sheep. Sometimes harsh punishments or killing is advisable. Just ask Khdir.
wasalaam,
sirat
This thread reminds me of a story. There was this old wanderer, darvish that eeked out a living on the edge of town. Most people left him alone but some respected his devotion and ways. One of those people, a man, happened to have 3 sons. His sons were of an age to begin thinking of an occupation. For good luck as much as anything else, the man took his 3 sons to the darvish. The darvish inspected each one at length, looking at them intently. Finally, he pointed to the eldest and said, He should be sent to join the military. Of the middle child he said, This one should be apprenticed to a merchant. Gazing on the last one the darvish stated, This one is fit for the clergy.
The father decided to take the darvish's advice and made the arrangements. A couple of years later the darvish left. The sons went on and each prospered. The first became a great and renouned general. The second, a fantastically wealthy merchant. And the third was known the country over for his sermons. People would come by the hundreds and thousands to listen to him talk.
Basking in the success of his choices, the father one day did see the darvish again. The old man had become quite old by this time. The father rushed to the darvish and thanked him for his wisdom. I'm glad you could see that goodness in my sons, the father gushed. Oh no, said the darvish, I did not see good in any of them. In the first I saw a murderer, the second is prone to theft and the third was a liar. I simply suggested careers which would tend to modify or make use of these tendencies.
--------------------------------
It is useful to remember that a good shepherd recognizes that kindness to a wolf is a tyrany to the sheep. Sometimes harsh punishments or killing is advisable. Just ask Khdir.
wasalaam,
sirat
RitalinO.D.
Well-Known Member
Interesting.....
Luminous
non-existential luminary
ha, funny. there is no fense; there is just the higher ground agnostics stand on and the dark abyss the anti-agnostics throw themselves into. An agnostic can be a theist or an atheist or a deist, etc. we are all agnostic, but there are some agnostics who deny their agnosticism, their point of view is termed anti-agnostic, since they stand against all truth, morality, and goodness. anti-agnostics can either be theist, atheist, deist, pantheist, etc.
Last edited:
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
For what do they need forgiveness?
