From The Ground Up. A 99%ers Revolution

[Anathema]

I already do this. I refuse to do business with Companies that do not exercise Morality. That means no Ben & Jerry's ice cream for one. Realize that Morality and religion are not the same thing.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Modern American liberals are not just busy bodies, but they are very insistent on their by god right to spend YOUR money as THEY see fit.

If some outlet like Walmart engages in business practices with which I happen to disagree, then I am not obligated to patronize their stores. Aint freedom grand?

If some mom and pop florist shop has religious scruples against gays (because their religious beliefs assigns gays the role of "Sodomites" or whatever) then not only should that florist shop NOT be compelled by the State to do the floral arrangements for a gay wedding, but I remain free to protest that store's policies by not patronizing them.

Beyond that, the answer to the OP question is a hearty "no."

 

[Silhouette]

Please define "basic morality"
And please be very specific.
No one can honestly answer your question until they know the exact parameters thereof.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It's said differently in different religions, but the base message is the same. "Others" also includes children... That variation would be "do unto children as you would have done unto you when you were a child".

You get the gist. That morality is not subjective. Saying morality is subjective in this instance would be like saying "elephants are subjective, they could be wombats instead".

If you would hoard wealth while others suffer when if you imagine if you were in their shoes suffering from lack of a job they could have offered you with a living wage, then you are a sociopath by definition. You are incapable of the same empathy you would expect be shown you. That isn't a gray area open for interpretation. It is a simple, cold fact.

Being able to turn a blind eye to conditions you know would cause you to suffer is a lack of morality. That's why the Catholic Church, and in fact most religions are about charity. Faith, hope, charity. Those are moral principles that are immutable. If what you're doing causes needless real pain and suffering while you flourish immensely by comparison, it's wrong.

That's why the saying "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is called "The Golden Rule". Gold cannot be tarnished. It is inert, immutable and simple. It is an easy rule to follow. If you wince at the prospect of following it, to the degree you wince is the precise degree that you have fallen from morality.

I don't know....I'm here again. It's like an addiction. Maybe I'll ask the staff to have a corner in the religious forum called "Sil's Sermons" or something. Sometimes I feel like a preacher. But the image a preacher conjures up in my head is a being who thinks they are superior. Maybe it could be a play on words. I'll have to meditate on it.

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

 

[Silhouette]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Yes, because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person you refuse to serve a "wedding" for. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.

When LGBT followers ask society to participate in their unravelling of a sacred institution of father/mother to children's formative environment, they're asking society to perform a great evil, one they would not or did not have to endure themselves: lacking a father or mother figure in their life. The greater evil is to institutionalize this great harm to children, while one was not/is not willing to endure that evil themselves, or who cannot imagine it. So why would we thrust kids into an experiment we already have an idea the depths of how it would cause them to suffer?

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Yes, because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.

Why is homersexuality more of a sin than adultery?

 

[Katzndogz]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Of course it is

They treat others as they would expect to be treated. Not treated as the people they are.

A florist who declines to arrange flowers for a same sex wedding is treating that couple exactly as the florist would expect to be treated if it was her same sex wedding.

 

[Publius1787]

...inspired by this conversation... Why should a hamburger flipper make the same as a highly skilled worker Page 20 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

A person making $20/hour still cannot pay all the mortgage, insurance, transporation, food, medical, schooling, sundries etc. that are basic necessities month by month. Once a year tax breaks for people aren't going to patch together the rest of the year. This tax bracket by the way doesn't qualify for any significant tax breaks. Uncle Sam would consider this hypothetical person as "too well off"...

It's slavery. We should just call it what it is. They tell you that you can get ahead with college. But the facts are that there aren't enough jobs out there for everyone to justify going into debt for the rest of their adult life until they die of a stress-related illness of being overworked and underpaid...struggling to afford escalating health costs as their pitiful bodies finally and predictably give out.

It's a sham, a mirage, a false-reality. The American dream died the same time we started importing stuff from China and exporting our jobs there. (where our good capitalists know that their socialized medicine makes it possible for their low wages) Give it up. Don't go to college. Just resign yourself to flipping burgers at McDonalds and dying early and in debt, leaving your kids nothing but a gutted American economy to fight over the scraps of. Hope there are enough police around in about 10-20 years.

I'm not being a nihilist here. This is actually an optimistic prognosis.

The other day I was in a position to watch some police chase down a suspect wanted on multiple felonies, mostly stealing. As I watched from a close vantage point, they finally caught the guy, with the help of a passer by. The cop who caught him was obviously tired, out of shape, struggling. He had an OK haircut, his equipment was a bit rough but clean at least and functional. He was doubled over starting to puke. The exercion made him sick to his stomach. Just another stressful day in a sea of them. I predict he won't live past his late 40s or early 50s. Maybe it was a bad tooth making him sick? Or a poor diet from buying bargain shit at the grocery just to make ends meet on his cop salary?

You'd better hope he's not the thin blue line in your neighborhood as this situation gets worse.
The tipping point in Pre-Revolutionary France was when the cops there woke up and realized where the actual problem was. Seems the thin blue line is the only thing standing between the 1% and the 99% when the oppression reaches a zenith.

The magic bullet for this situation is universal healthcare. It wouldn't even cost employers a dime. In fact, it would save them money: they wouldn't have to provide healthcare insurance. Their workers would be healthier, more productive, their savings in monthly outlay could stimulate the economy.

I've said this like a 100 times and it always falls on deaf ears. The loyalty to the BigHealth is admirable, if foolish.

Why do you hate rich people, is it envy? Jealousy? Or do you hate them simply because you were told to hate them and you obeyed mindlessly? I suspect you know very little about "rich" people, the amount they give to charity, the things the support. Its sad to see so many buying into the acidic rhetoric the left uses to get votes.

I don't recall saying I hate rich people.
My grandfather was one of the best off people in his town financially. Want to know what he did with all his money? He fed people knocking on his door during the Great Depression. He did charity work and gave at church. He lived frugally so his two kids could not have to struggle so hard. He was a rich guy, the best of them.

What if the 99% insisted that the products they buy come from a company where the CEO and other ranking members attended church regularly? Be it a synagogue, Catholic, Christian or Muslim sublime faith? The CEO would have to attend regularly, humbly. S/he could not be a member of that churches committes, fathers or other controlling influences. They would have to enter the doors as a sinner among sinners in the pews, with head bowed, listening and soaking in the weekly message.

It could be a new kind of revolt. It would be one where a message would be sent to the 1% that if they lack basic human morality, their business will fail. You'd watch jobs and profit sharing begin to rise. The economy would be back on its feet in no time at all.

Consumers can already do whatever they want. It's their money.

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Of course it is

They treat others as they would expect to be treated. Not treated as the people they are.

A florist who declines to arrange flowers for a same sex wedding is treating that couple exactly as the florist would expect to be treated if it was her same sex wedding.

Why is homersexuality more of a sin than gluttony?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

YOU misunderstand.

But that's par for the course.

If you have a serious RELIGIOUS basis for declining to serve gays, then I might question the validity of your religion and its beliefs, but I am not allowed to compel you to serve a gay couple. I am not obligated to be a customer at your florist shop or pizzeria or bakery.

But the notion of doing onto others as you WOULD have them do unto you simply means that you want to make sure that you don't treat people in a way that YOU would not approve of if the shoe were on the other foot. If you wouldn't like to be denied service on the basis of your sexual orientation and THEIR religious beliefs about that, then you shouldn't do that to others. But if you agree that they should be able to deny you service because of your orientation (and their religious beliefs about it) then your behavior is arguably consistent with your beliefs.

Don't like being the victim of racist behavior? Then don't behave like a fucking racist yourself. Don't like being treated disrespectfully on the basis of your religion? Then better make sure you don't behave in that offensive fashion to those of different religious beliefs than you have.

But still, if your understanding of your religion's requirements is that you should shun "sodomites" you are free and (sad though it may be) maybe you should be free to shun them. I don't think I should have the right to compel you to serve people whom your religion says you shouldn't serve.

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

YOU misunderstand.

But that's par for the course.

If you have a serious RELIGIOUS basis for declining to serve gays, then I might question the validity of your religion and its beliefs, but I am not allowed to compel you to serve a gay couple. I am not obligated to be a customer at your florist shop or pizzeria or bakery.

But the notion of doing onto others as you WOULD have them do unto you simply means that you want to make sure that you don't treat people in a way that YOU would not approve of if the shoe were on the other foot. If you wouldn't like to be denied service on the basis of your sexual orientation and THEIR religious beliefs about that, then you shouldn't do that to others. But if you agree that they should be able to deny you service because of your orientation (and their religious beliefs about it) then your behavior is arguably consistent with your beliefs.

Don't like being the victim of racist behavior? Then don't behave like a fucking racist yourself. Don't like being treated disrespectfully on the basis of your religion? Then better make sure you don't behave in that offensive fashion to those of different religious beliefs than you have.

But still, if your understanding of your religion's requirements is that you should shun "sodomites" you are free and (sad though it may be) maybe you should be free to shun them. I don't think I should have the right to compel you to serve people whom your religion says you shouldn't serve.

If they show no outward sign of being ghey, how would you know if they were ghey to not serve them??

 

[Katzndogz]

Modern American liberals are not just busy bodies, but they are very insistent on their by god right to spend YOUR money as THEY see fit.

If some outlet like Walmart engages in business practices with which I happen to disagree, then I am not obligated to patronize their stores. Aint freedom grand?

If some mom and pop florist shop has religious scruples against gays (because their religious beliefs assigns gays the role of "Sodomites" or whatever) then not only should that florist shop NOT be compelled by the State to do the floral arrangements for a gay wedding, but I remain free to protest that store's policies by not patronizing them.

Beyond that, the answer to the OP question is a hearty "no."

While you are free to not patronize a store because of its practices everyone who specifically wants to patronize that store because of the principles it has is also free to do so. Ain't freedom grand?

 

[boedicca]

...inspired by this conversation... Why should a hamburger flipper make the same as a highly skilled worker Page 20 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

A person making $20/hour still cannot pay all the mortgage, insurance, transporation, food, medical, schooling, sundries etc. that are basic necessities month by month. Once a year tax breaks for people aren't going to patch together the rest of the year. This tax bracket by the way doesn't qualify for any significant tax breaks. Uncle Sam would consider this hypothetical person as "too well off"...

It's slavery. We should just call it what it is. They tell you that you can get ahead with college. But the facts are that there aren't enough jobs out there for everyone to justify going into debt for the rest of their adult life until they die of a stress-related illness of being overworked and underpaid...struggling to afford escalating health costs as their pitiful bodies finally and predictably give out.

It's a sham, a mirage, a false-reality. The American dream died the same time we started importing stuff from China and exporting our jobs there. (where our good capitalists know that their socialized medicine makes it possible for their low wages) Give it up. Don't go to college. Just resign yourself to flipping burgers at McDonalds and dying early and in debt, leaving your kids nothing but a gutted American economy to fight over the scraps of. Hope there are enough police around in about 10-20 years.

I'm not being a nihilist here. This is actually an optimistic prognosis.

The other day I was in a position to watch some police chase down a suspect wanted on multiple felonies, mostly stealing. As I watched from a close vantage point, they finally caught the guy, with the help of a passer by. The cop who caught him was obviously tired, out of shape, struggling. He had an OK haircut, his equipment was a bit rough but clean at least and functional. He was doubled over starting to puke. The exercion made him sick to his stomach. Just another stressful day in a sea of them. I predict he won't live past his late 40s or early 50s. Maybe it was a bad tooth making him sick? Or a poor diet from buying bargain shit at the grocery just to make ends meet on his cop salary?

You'd better hope he's not the thin blue line in your neighborhood as this situation gets worse.
The tipping point in Pre-Revolutionary France was when the cops there woke up and realized where the actual problem was. Seems the thin blue line is the only thing standing between the 1% and the 99% when the oppression reaches a zenith.

The magic bullet for this situation is universal healthcare. It wouldn't even cost employers a dime. In fact, it would save them money: they wouldn't have to provide healthcare insurance. Their workers would be healthier, more productive, their savings in monthly outlay could stimulate the economy.

I've said this like a 100 times and it always falls on deaf ears. The loyalty to the BigHealth is admirable, if foolish.

Why do you hate rich people, is it envy? Jealousy? Or do you hate them simply because you were told to hate them and you obeyed mindlessly? I suspect you know very little about "rich" people, the amount they give to charity, the things the support. Its sad to see so many buying into the acidic rhetoric the left uses to get votes.

I don't recall saying I hate rich people.
My grandfather was one of the best off people in his town financially. Want to know what he did with all his money? He fed people knocking on his door during the Great Depression. He did charity work and gave at church. He lived frugally so his two kids could not have to struggle so hard. He was a rich guy, the best of them.

What if the 99% insisted that the products they buy come from a company where the CEO and other ranking members attended church regularly? Be it a synagogue, Catholic, Christian or Muslim sublime faith? The CEO would have to attend regularly, humbly. S/he could not be a member of that churches committes, fathers or other controlling influences. They would have to enter the doors as a sinner among sinners in the pews, with head bowed, listening and soaking in the weekly message.

It could be a new kind of revolt. It would be one where a message would be sent to the 1% that if they lack basic human morality, their business will fail. You'd watch jobs and profit sharing begin to rise. The economy would be back on its feet in no time at all.

Absolute Poppycock.

The End.

 

[Silhouette]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Yes, because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.

Why is homersexuality more of a sin than adultery?

I explained it as you were asking on the last page...

..because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person you refuse to serve a "wedding" for. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.

When LGBT followers ask society to participate in their unravelling of a sacred institution of father/mother to children's formative environment, they're asking society to perform a great evil, one they would not or did not have to endure themselves: lacking a father or mother figure in their life. The greater evil is to institutionalize this great harm to children, while one was not/is not willing to endure that evil themselves, or who cannot imagine it. So why would we thrust kids into an experiment we already have an idea the depths of how it would cause them to suffer?

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

Yes, because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.

Why is homersexuality more of a sin than adultery?

I explained it as you were asking on the last page...

..because promoting an evil culture stands to harm many more people than just the one gay person you refuse to serve a "wedding" for. The Golden Rule doesn't mean you wear blinders. You have to weigh greater vs lesser evils.
When LGBT followers ask society to participate in their unravelling of a sacred institution of father/mother to children's formative environment, they're asking society to perform a great evil, one they would not or did not have to endure themselves: lacking a father or mother figure in their life. The greater evil is to institutionalize this great harm to children, while one was not/is not willing to endure that evil themselves, or who cannot imagine it. So why would we thrust kids into an experiment we already have an idea the depths of how it would cause them to suffer?

the Bible shows sin as just sin, not in different levels of wickedness....

 

[Katzndogz]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

YOU misunderstand.

But that's par for the course.

If you have a serious RELIGIOUS basis for declining to serve gays, then I might question the validity of your religion and its beliefs, but I am not allowed to compel you to serve a gay couple. I am not obligated to be a customer at your florist shop or pizzeria or bakery.

But the notion of doing onto others as you WOULD have them do unto you simply means that you want to make sure that you don't treat people in a way that YOU would not approve of if the shoe were on the other foot. If you wouldn't like to be denied service on the basis of your sexual orientation and THEIR religious beliefs about that, then you shouldn't do that to others. But if you agree that they should be able to deny you service because of your orientation (and their religious beliefs about it) then your behavior is arguably consistent with your beliefs.

Don't like being the victim of racist behavior? Then don't behave like a fucking racist yourself. Don't like being treated disrespectfully on the basis of your religion? Then better make sure you don't behave in that offensive fashion to those of different religious beliefs than you have.

But still, if your understanding of your religion's requirements is that you should shun "sodomites" you are free and (sad though it may be) maybe you should be free to shun them. I don't think I should have the right to compel you to serve people whom your religion says you shouldn't serve.

If they show no outward sign of being ghey, how would you know if they were ghey to not serve them??

That must be why there have been no accusations that gays have been denied service.

 

[Silhouette]

A person making $20/hour still cannot pay all the mortgage, insurance, transporation, food, medical, schooling, sundries etc. that are basic necessities month by month. Once a year tax breaks for people aren't going to patch together the rest of the year. This tax bracket by the way doesn't qualify for any significant tax breaks. Uncle Sam would consider this hypothetical person as "too well off"...

It's slavery. We should just call it what it is....

Absolute Poppycock.

The End.

Then try it and get back to me.

 

[Moonglow]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you..

So it's okay to refuse to give service to someone because they are ghey.......Their religion tells them to....But that would not be treating others as you treat yourself...

YOU misunderstand.

But that's par for the course.

If you have a serious RELIGIOUS basis for declining to serve gays, then I might question the validity of your religion and its beliefs, but I am not allowed to compel you to serve a gay couple. I am not obligated to be a customer at your florist shop or pizzeria or bakery.

But the notion of doing onto others as you WOULD have them do unto you simply means that you want to make sure that you don't treat people in a way that YOU would not approve of if the shoe were on the other foot. If you wouldn't like to be denied service on the basis of your sexual orientation and THEIR religious beliefs about that, then you shouldn't do that to others. But if you agree that they should be able to deny you service because of your orientation (and their religious beliefs about it) then your behavior is arguably consistent with your beliefs.

Don't like being the victim of racist behavior? Then don't behave like a fucking racist yourself. Don't like being treated disrespectfully on the basis of your religion? Then better make sure you don't behave in that offensive fashion to those of different religious beliefs than you have.

But still, if your understanding of your religion's requirements is that you should shun "sodomites" you are free and (sad though it may be) maybe you should be free to shun them. I don't think I should have the right to compel you to serve people whom your religion says you shouldn't serve.

If they show no outward sign of being ghey, how would you know if they were ghey to not serve them??

That must be why there have been no accusations that gays have been denied service.

So the religious person committed a sin by serving them when they are incognito?

 

[Silhouette]

the Bible shows sin as just sin, not in different levels of wickedness....

There is venial, cardinal and mortal sin. You know that. Mortal sin carries with it the punishment of eternal damnation. Enabling the spread of a homosexual culture into a normal one is a mortal sin.

There is falling from grace with a small "f" and there is Falling from grace with a capital "F". Enabling "gay marriage" is a Falling from grace.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Morality isn't subjective.

That is a NON-answer answer.

Exactly what things are moral, and exactly what things are not?

Gee, why are you suddenly being so evasive??..... hmmmmmm.....