Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

People are truly good at heart? Sadly, no
Jeffjacoby ^

Posted on 01/03/2013 9:39:58 AM PST by chessplayer

ELEVEN YEARS AGO, al-Qaeda terrorist Richard Reid tried to blow up American Airlines Flight 63 with a bomb hidden in his shoes. As a result, air travelers to this day must remove their shoes to pass through security at US airports.

In 2006, terrorists plotted to destroy as many as 10 planes flying from London to North America using peroxide-based liquid explosives smuggled in their carry-on luggage. So passengers now must limit any liquids they carry through security checkpoints to minuscule containers sealed in clear plastic bags.

It is fundamental to the Judeo-Christian outlook that human beings are not naturally good. "The intention of man's heart," God says in Genesis, "is evil from his youth."

"It's a wonder I haven't abandoned all my ideals, they seem so absurd and impractical," 15-year-old Anne Frank confided to her diary on July 15, 1944. "Yet I cling to them because I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart. I simply can't build my hopes on a foundation of confusion, misery, and death."

Three weeks after those heartbreaking words were written, the Gestapo discovered the secret annex where Anne and seven others had been hiding. She died in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp the following March.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 01/03/2013 9:40:00 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

It took thousands of years to slowly civilize humans, it takes no time to undo that it seems.

Humans are monsters without moral restraints underpinned through thousands of years of social traditions.


2 posted on 01/03/2013 9:43:32 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
William Goldings' novel "Lord of the Flies" was a quaint little book that a lot of high school students were forced to read. Many people sagely nodded their heads and opined, "None of us are all that far away from barbaric behavior, you know."

Wait and see. The lessons of the book will be emphatically re-stated in a neighborhood near you real soon. And people will express shock and dismay to see such barbaric behavior "come out of nowhere".

3 posted on 01/03/2013 9:51:18 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Don’t look for a unique human quality of “good” or “bad”, or “good” or “evil”, instead look for degrees, a scale, of “strength” and “weakness” in people.

A strong person is generally balanced in their life; prefers order and organization in their family, but from within, not foisted on them by others; they generally treat people with respect, and trust character more than wealth, power or ambition, yet have little tolerance for bad behavior, criminality or perversity.

They also tend to be self-reliant; serious about their work, whatever it is; and they are comfortable with their lot in life.

A weak person, on the other hand, is a mess. They tend towards neuroses and addiction; they are filled with feelings of anger and hate, envy, greed, lust and spite; they are abusive to others and themselves; they see other people not as individuals but as groups, easy to label; they are grasping for illusory ends, such as wealth and power, control over others; and petty vindictiveness for slights, real or imagined. They are sure of themselves without justification, and they have deep feelings of inadequacy which manifests itself with efforts to feign superiority.

A weak person is generally miserable, no matter where they are or what they do. They feel unloved, and in truth are often unloveable; they feel cheated and that success comes not from hard work, but from luck. Finally they feel that by tearing others down, they lot will improve, or at least they will feel better.


4 posted on 01/03/2013 10:03:05 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Most people who argue that people are inherently good don't have children. It doesn't take much time of trying to civilize a child to recognize that our natural impulses are not "good" impulses.

The reality is, most people define "good" according to a Christian definition which they believe is universal. History doesn't support them. The U.S. won't support them much longer as we keep re-defining "good" to suit our own desires.

5 posted on 01/03/2013 10:05:43 AM PST by ArGee (Reality - what a concept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Donald Kaul of The Des Moines Register just wrote a column calling for the NRA to be declared a terrorist organization and made illegal, and fantasizing about all gun owners being killed. Richard Reid believes in killing non-Muslims, Kaul in killing gun owners. The main difference is that Reid tried to take action and was arrested, whereas Kaul merely wrote a column and sat back waiting for the accolades to pour in.
6 posted on 01/03/2013 10:06:58 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
A strong person is generally balanced in their life; prefers order and organization in their family, but from within, not foisted on them by others; they generally treat people with respect, and trust character more than wealth, power or ambition, yet have little tolerance for bad behavior, criminality or perversity.

A strong person is only that way if his parents taught him to be when they were stronger and could force him to learn their rules.

There is no evidence in nature or history that a person would grow up in his/her own with those characteristics.

7 posted on 01/03/2013 10:07:53 AM PST by ArGee (Reality - what a concept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

It took thousands of years to slowly civilize humans, it takes no time to undo that it seems.

Humans are monsters without moral restraints underpinned through thousands of years of social traditions.


It can be all undone in minutes. I think the left and right agree on the point that the human species is an abomination,,,an abortion.


8 posted on 01/03/2013 10:26:23 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

bump


9 posted on 01/03/2013 10:27:37 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
Most people who argue that people are inherently good don't have children.

I beg to disagree. Moral restraint is the primary feature which distinguishes humans and animals. Yes, we raised our children to be useful members of society but it wasn't inherit nature which led them to make the few wrong choices which they did, it was peer influence which was driven mainly by the sewer pipe from popular culture.

I look at my little grandson and see a little fellow full of sweetness and love. Even when he is relentless and destructive about pulling things off shelves, it isn't because he's evil, it's because he is curious and hasn't yet learned the restraints necessary to govern that curiosity.

10 posted on 01/03/2013 10:31:37 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

My wife was a preschool teacher and she said they were all a bunch of Hell-bound little sinners. Their default nature was self-serving sin.


11 posted on 01/03/2013 10:35:40 AM PST by AppyPappy (You never see a masscre at a gun show.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Some certainly are...and some certainly aren’t


12 posted on 01/03/2013 10:36:27 AM PST by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to, otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
A few days after the tragic Sandy Hook school murders, a young Marine in fatigues stationed himself at the front entrance of the Nashville elementary school his two children attend. Another parent heard him admit to a reporter that he was unarmed. The other parent commented that, even though the young Marine standing guard was not armed, it made him “feel better” to know he was there.

It’s often been observed that “perception is more important than reality”. The observation is often correct. It is never MORE CORRECT than for those we’ve come to call “liberals”. I prefer “statist” but “liberal” has morphed from its classic meaning to the other end of the spectrum so I’ll stay with it.

Since these folks operate almost entirely on EMOTION and FEELING, REALITY seldom allows FACTS to intrude upon the delusional worldview they have constructed and the comfort that provides them. It is that illogical, irrational and delusional mindset that prompts many of them to continue to quest after a Utopian society. The thought that such a society can and will never be achieved in a fallen world populated with failed sinners never penetrates whatever remains of their cognitive consciousness. It’s a DANGEROUS WORLD and, as the liberals continue to “define deviancy down”, it becomes more dangerous daily.

There is another, far more sinister, level of the “liberal” call for gun control.

It was Mencken who offered that “The urge to save humanity is most often a false front for the URGE TO RULE.” He clearly had been a student of the liberal politicians of his day. Were he alive today and able to observe the likes of Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein, Obama and the rest, he’d almost certainly have used far stronger language to frame his sage observation.

To conclude, dozens of studies reveal the FACTS concerning gun control. Those FACTS are that where firearms are widely and READILY available to law-abiding citizens, CRIME GOES DOWN! The liberals who willfully ignore the FACTUAL EVIDENCE and continue to call for gun control (i.e. the DISARMING of DECENT CITIZENS, thereby denying them the ability to exercise their God-given right to self-defense) are those about whom Mencken wrote: Their goal is NOT about preserving life. It is about the hell-bent pursuit of the impossible to achieve Utopian world where all are equal but some (that’d be THEM) are MORE equal than others (that’d be US).

There are many PRO-RTKABA videos on You Tube that your often busy lives don’t allow you to find on your own. Search there for “Gun Control”, watch them – and, more importantly – SHARE THEM with the folks in your orbit.

We’re in a fight. And losing will ultimately cost us much more than our right to our guns.

13 posted on 01/03/2013 10:55:47 AM PST by Dick Bachert (An ARMED society is a POLITE society!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
William Goldings' novel "Lord of the Flies" was a quaint little book that a lot of high school students were forced to read. Many people sagely nodded their heads and opined, "None of us are all that far away from barbaric behavior, you know." Wait and see. The lessons of the book will be emphatically re-stated in a neighborhood near you real soon. And people will express shock and dismay to see such barbaric behavior "come out of nowhere".

Milgram's experiment pretty much proved that point.

14 posted on 01/03/2013 10:57:21 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
Most people who argue that people are inherently good don't have children. It doesn't take much time of trying to civilize a child to recognize that our natural impulses are not "good" impulses.

My standard argument against the basic goodness of mankind boils down to this: You don't have to teach a toddler how to misbehave.

15 posted on 01/03/2013 10:58:01 AM PST by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (Some cultures are destined to remain stupid and we need to quit trying to uplift them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

Interesting take on it.

I think a careful examination will also find some mix of good and bad (strong and weak) in everyone.


16 posted on 01/03/2013 11:06:46 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Moral restraint is the primary feature which distinguishes humans and animals.

The ability to make moral decisions distinguishes humans and animals, not the preference to make them for "good".

Simple question, did you have to teach your grandson to claim the toys he wants as his own, or to share them?

In my experience, the negative behaviors of my children where exhibited before they were influenced by their peers. And the peer influence argument pre-supposes the first badly behaved peer, but doesn't explain where that peer came from.

17 posted on 01/03/2013 11:07:54 AM PST by ArGee (Reality - what a concept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
It is an interesting argument sort of like which came first, the chicken or the egg.

However, I think one of the better tests lies in studying the endgames of various types of civilizations and what happens when they all more or less come to a consensus on something or general rules on the way to live.

On the extreme evil end you might consider the example of Afghanistan before the U.S. invasion where the Taliban is killing other Muslims for not being sufficiently Islamic. On the extreme good end, you have the Biblical story of the City of Enoch.

Like the old cartoons of an angel and devil sitting on each shoulder, the one which we feed the most and listen to the most will eventually control our destiny. But it is still our choice.

There is much in Native American religion which resembles the ancient Zorastian view of New Testament times. The wise men who visited the baby Jesus were most likely Zorastian who were pleased that the balance would swing to good with the birth of the Son of God. So it is with many of my people who have accepted Jesus whereas those who have not continue to try the balancing act of good and evil or, worse yet, turn to evil altogether and call it good. So it is with many children, so it is with many people and so it is with most liberals.

Funny, isn't it, how so little has changed since the ancient Zorastians discovered the principle of our need to feed and nurture good lest you default into evil?

18 posted on 01/03/2013 11:10:31 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
Simple question, did you have to teach your grandson to claim the toys he wants as his own, or to share them?

Very interesting questions because neither he nor my own children when they were little were consistent.

There are times that they want to share even when you don't care to share. What parent or grandparent hasn't had a second hand ice cream cone or the like popped into their mouth? Or had their little guy or girl bring them a favorite toy?

With us, this type of spontaneous sharing was nearly as frequent as the ridiculous quarrels over refusals to share. The "you have a box full of toys! Why do you have to quarrel over that particular one?" type of thing. More often than not, we solved this dilemma as a parent by taking the offending toy away and hiding it, sometimes where it wasn't seen for weeks or even years later.

This may not have been the best solution, but my adult daughter told me that it taught her that fighting over somebody else's stuff seldom benefited her and often resulted in the loss of the stuff for everybody-- a lesson your average Libtard in America still has not learned!

19 posted on 01/03/2013 11:27:46 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
"monsters"

I don't think most people are monsters, but a certain percentage of the population is. It only takes a small percentage of misfits and psychopaths (Lenin, Hitler, Mao) to convince a slightly less insane percentage of the population to willingly follow them. And as most people in any society are sheep and willing to be led or unwilling to cause trouble, they're dragged along. The percentage of resisters to tyranny in any society is much smaller than the psychopaths, the easily led, and the sheep. If you could have shown Germans in 1932 the ruins of Berlin by April 1945, they'd most likely have publicly stoned Hitler. Too late by 1933.

20 posted on 01/03/2013 11:35:09 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

It is so instructive and productive to have headlines of despair one after the other.

People who quote the Bible on such things tend to neglect to quote the better news, the encouragement and the other side of the truth.


21 posted on 01/03/2013 11:50:57 AM PST by stanne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

That is a very important point, in that people tend to want absolutes, dichotomies, in their view of things. In some cases, like moral absolutes, they exist; but in others, they are more dynamic, with tendencies in one direction or another that can change over time.

This is why strength and weakness are good measures of men.

For example, Napoleon observed that “Fatigue makes cowards of us all”. And that is quite correct, except fatigue under the same stresses, is not evenly divided.

In the strong, fatigue can be addressed as something to be overcome, within limits. But in the weak, fatigue can be reinforced, made stronger, by “indulging” in it, using up one’s energy in fretting about how tired you are.

A strong person might “tough it out” through intense pain; but a weak person can be laid low by a paper cut.

Strength and weakness are also relative to age, gender, knowledge, and many other motivations. A person accumulates things that make them strong and weak over the course of their life, and they parcel out their strengths and weaknesses. A person surrounded by strong people may offer only weakness, but when the strength of the strong fails them, the person exhibiting weakness can step into the gap and ‘save the day’, since their strength is reserved.

Some people indulge so much that all that is left in them is weakness. But a real argument can be made, for example, to question “does drink make us weak, or do we drink because we are weak?” It is likelier that weak people can be more easily addicted, and find it harder to break their addictions.

Strength can also be problematic, as it can lead to arrogance, or cause dependency in others. While a strong person might be able to do a task ‘best’, they might step aside and let others try their might, to discover if they can succeed or fail.

We are complex creatures, and it may be best to “know strength and weakness when I see it”, not being too quick to judge them in others. Those who are truly strong or weak will make themselves known.


22 posted on 01/03/2013 12:36:03 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

I think there is truth in that as well, but of course people are very often strong in some areas and weak in others. An otherwise good family man may be an alcoholic. A leadership giant in business may be a coward among his family. We most commonly are a mixed bag: strong in some areas, fallen in others.


23 posted on 01/03/2013 12:45:05 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Very interesting questions because neither he nor my own children when they were little were consistent.

What is consistent in your stories is that the children were doing what they wanted to do without concern for what you (or the other child) wanted. They were selfish, which is not a "good" trait. So you had to teach them to consider others.

If you reflect on the sharing experiences, you'll probably find that the child wanted attention when you weren't providing an adequate amount.

I don't mean to pick on your grandchildren by any means. It is normal for children to think only of themselves, and it is normal for families to need to teach them how to behave in a civilized society.

Sometimes it is so natural we don't see it, but it is still required.

As Jeff pointed out, God Himself has accused us of having every thought being only evil, continually.

He's (God is) hard to argue with.

24 posted on 01/03/2013 1:03:47 PM PST by ArGee (Reality - what a concept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

It took thousands of years to slowly civilize humans, it takes no time to undo that it seems.


You just wrote a one-sentence book report on Lord Of The Flies


25 posted on 01/03/2013 1:07:56 PM PST by Peet (Alles hat ein Ende nur die Wurst hat zwei. (Monroe in "Grimm"))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Peet

I guess I did. lol


26 posted on 01/03/2013 3:02:43 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

I look at my little grandson and see a little fellow full of sweetness and love.


Ever see how cruel young kids can be to other classmates? I know you love your grandson and think he is an exception, but children are FAR from being full of sweetness and love.


27 posted on 01/03/2013 7:58:53 PM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson