Posted on 08/24/2007 5:38:27 PM PDT by firebrand
Guilt by association is somewhat troubling.
I was attacked for something the author I quoted in one instance (Heinlein) said in a totally unrelated publication and context.
I gave a counter example to show that guilt by association is a despicable practice. But you seem disagree with my example.
Please specify where you disagree. Are you saying that slavery is to be tolerated? I can't believe that! Or are you unsettled that there is something in the Bible (condoning slavery) that is not considered proper today?
Please let me know what it is that you find troubling.
(Incidentally, Heinlein abhorred slavery in all of its manifestations!)
“I cite one quote from Heinlein’s work and you attempt to tar me with something totally unrelated? What kind of silliness is that?”
My point was to show how irrelevant the quote you used was. I simply put it in perspective. Why should I consider the moral opinions of someone, fictional or not, who engages in incest as valid?
See post #21, above.
The answer appears to be because he opposed slavery. ;-)
And that slippery slope is called "morality".
how many people are willing to wander around Vermont in Autumn?? I assume it’s fairly chilly, no?
Read my lips: No. Bad. Naked.
Opps...I left out part of my comment.
how many people are willing to wander around Vermont in Autumn IN THE NUDE?? I assume it’s fairly chilly, no?
heh heh...I forgot the nude part! heh heh...I said nude three times in one post!!!
Past my bedtime. :P
fortunately, council has permanently kept the ban on smoking in your own home
If only that was still true...
I knew this was coming. In fact, it seems as though it has already come. I knew that when the argument was posed regarding the sex industry that “it’s not hurting anyone”, this was sure to come next. They claimed with that we didn’t have to look, even though morality was being destroyed, human beings were turned into sexual objects, and the culture was being debased while the market profits boomed and the government raked in loads of tax money. I knew nudity would come next. Afterall, they again claim that “it’s not hurting anyone” because we don’t have to look. Of course, in some cases we can’t help looking. We don’t know where they may be. How do we know these people aren’t going nude because it arouses them for men, women, or even children (sic) to see them that way. The Judeo-Christian morality is being wiped away more each day. The liberals want it that way. We can stand around, and we can allow them to do this, or we can stand up for the Judeo-Christian values this country was founded on.
I suspect that's why Plato referred to uncontrolled sexual urges as the “Tyranny of the Appetite”. But what did he know? Silly old Republican.
That’s probably why they let the ban expire next month.
Anyone walking around naked after that could rightfully be checked into the nearest mental institution.
It’s not troubling, it’s downright ludicrous.
There’s something pathetic about someone who treats science fiction like Scripture.
There’s something pathetic about someone who treats science fiction like Scripture.
One man's theology is another man's belly laugh.Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973
Typical libertarian libertine argument.
I objected to a T-shirt that promoted marijuana use, arguing that he was promoting his ideas to children as well as everyone else. He said, "If you don't like my shirt, don't ride the bus."
Last week the New York Sun suggested that a United States commissioner quit her job and open an organic-food store if she thought the Whole Foods/Wild Oats merger would raise prices.
The convolutions libertarians would have us engage in to avoid their absolutism become more and more preposterous. They are a bigger problem than the Democrats.
I agree with you about the libertarian mindset. I disagree with it as well as the liberal mindset. I don’t know if you have ever gone to the libertarian website and read their platform. Not all of the libertarians here are quite that bad, as some here are pro-life. However, the platform concerns me, and I find that ideology as threatening as liberalism. A libertarian society would be one big moral minefield where there is little concern for others, and people are victims of themselves (which would happen to a lot of people if all drugs were made legal).
Scripture is science fiction.
No. It’s historically accurate which already has something over science fiction.
It leads one to God, who can change lives, which is also demonstrable.
Science fiction is merely written to entertain or MAYBE make a point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.