Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, I lost interest already. I don't enjoy debating with sensible people usually. Makes me feel all self conscious, also makes me consider their points more. I don't like to doubt myself.Trying to set a consistent morality is a tool of society. The fact is that all people have their own morals and they try to make the governments as close to theirs as possible. You are right that they work with responsibility. But what one is responsible to, how far it stretches, etc are all moral issues. Health Care is without a doubt one. You might have an odd definition of morals. But that laws are based on moral judgments is hard to deny.
Trying to make the government's descision making process resemble your own morals is right. I get that.
Take the guy that was arrested for admitting he was attracted to children. They let him go, because he hadn't done anything wrong. There's nothing legally wrong with being attracted to children. There's something morally wrong, at least as far as I'm concerned, but nothing legally wrong.
This is why, despite all the b*tching and moaning about gay marriage, it will happen. There is no stopping it. It's the job of the government and the law that "rules" it, to be totally objective. Morals often lead to acting in haste when you aren't fully informed.
I won't argue that humans operate based on their morals, and that governments(or politicians) use this to fuel elections, political debate and key issues. That's why so much of what is discussed in politics are non-issues, non-government issues.
If you go back to the beginning of this thread, I discussed a consensus on what is basic human conditions in this country. It is the responsability of a government of,by and for, to fulfill these obligations. Not to distract the issue by bringing morals or money into it.
(And that's what it's really all about, money.)
Originally posted by lord xyz
not to sound stupid or naive, but the main points in his film are infallible IMO. Our healthcare is undeniably better.
I agree to a degree, but Moore, like in the rest of his films tries hard to sway the viewer to his own personal views and bias. I don't like that, I prefer to see both sides and judge for myself.
Originally posted by Robtard
I agree to a degree, but Moore, like in the rest of his films tries hard to sway the viewer to his own personal views and bias. I don't like that, I prefer to see both sides and judge for myself.
Or you could you could just pull a South Park and say everyone on either extreme is stupid.
It's easier to give you this link: http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/checkup/
Here's the trailer if you want to see it: http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/trailer/
Originally posted by Devil King
Trying to make the government's descision making process resemble your own morals is right. I get that.Take the guy that was arrested for admitting he was attracted to children. They let him go, because he hadn't done anything wrong. There's nothing legally wrong with being attracted to children. There's something morally wrong, at least as far as I'm concerned, but nothing legally wrong.
Yeah, as far as you are concerned. Not me. It is a moral decision. We find it morally wrong to punish people for something they did not do but just think. That's the government's moral decision
Originally posted by Devil King
This is why, despite all the b*tching and moaning about gay marriage, it will happen. There is no stopping it. It's the job of the government and the law that "rules" it, to be totally objective. Morals often lead to acting in haste when you aren't fully informed.
Err, both sides are moral standards. Some want gay marriage and think it is morally right to allow it some don't
Originally posted by Devil King
I won't argue that humans operate based on their morals, and that governments(or politicians) use this to fuel elections, political debate and key issues. That's why so much of what is discussed in politics are non-issues, non-government issues.
I don't understand what you see as morals and what not.
Originally posted by Devil King
If you go back to the beginning of this thread, I discussed a consensus on what is basic human conditions in this country. It is teh responsability of a government of,by and for, to fulfill these obligations. Not to distract the issue by bringing morals or money into it.
Responsibility is inevitably linked with morality. Morality defines every aspect of a responsibility. You give it a different name. But it is morals, you think the government is morally responsible to provide that for it's people others don't...it's just about where you draw the line of responsibility.
Originally posted by Devil King
(And that's what it's really all about, money.)
Yeah, it is one of the major factors. Though again deeply linked to morality.
Originally posted by RobtardHey, it's the same situation with South Park and Penn and Teller. They're biased as ****, but so what when they're right?
I agree to a degree, but Moore, like in the rest of his films tries hard to sway the viewer to his own personal views and bias. I don't like that, I prefer to see both sides and judge for myself.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, as far as you are concerned. Not me. It is a moral decision. We find it morally wrong to punish people for something they did not do but just think. That's the government's moral decision
As far as I'm concerned, what? Morals are an issue of emotional reaction. This is why a judge will recuse himself during a trial, because he knows he isn't approaching the case from an objective place. That is the government...at least in theory.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Err, both sides are moral standards. Some want gay marriage and think it is morally right to allow it some don't
no no, I'm not saying it isn't a moral perspective that allows us to have an opinion on it. I'm saying that the removal of morality from the debate is going to be the enevitable outcome. This is why one side of the debate is going to end up wrong.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't understand what you see as morals and what not.
I don't understand your question(or statement), so we're both confused I guess.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Responsibility is inevitably linked with morality. Morality defines every aspect of a responsibility. You give it a different name. But it is morals, you think the government is morally responsible to provide that for it's people others don't...it's just about where you draw the line of responsibility.
Oh no, I don't think the government is morally responsable for anything. I don't think a government is capable of being moral or immoral. We aren't talking about social responsability. We're talking about the responsability of a government, based solely on it's own existence.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, it is one of the major factors. Though again deeply linked to morality.
You aren't talking about morality, you're talking about a total lack of it.
legal or not legal does not = moral