Posted on 09/30/2005 6:45:41 PM PDT by JohnRoss
I don't believe capitalism teaches anything, it being just the use of one's capital for the purpose of investing. Capitalism is just something one practices, including Christians. I have never heard that it should be a substitute for religion, though there are doubtless plenty of people who do that. But not because it is a requirement of capitalism.
Who says? Care to identify where he said that?
Isn't he talking about altruism? The direction of conscience? The leading of a higher power (not secular or temporal)...but spiritual?
'Bold' socialism.. - And who is to dictate what is "good"? - The state no doubt, - helped along by his religious ideas of the common good.
This appears to be mere projection on your part. And economic confusion as well. And unsupported at that. You do know that the authors have all been hardline anti-communists, don't you?
Care to elaborate on just which views are such, and how so?
These lines of his are a good example:
"Freedom," of course, is meaningless, and soon becomes bizarre (as in our own commercialist culture) if it is not directed towards the true "good" that fulfills human nature.
He's claiming that freedom must be "directed" by the State. -- Anti-constitutional BS.
Who says? Care to identify where he said that?
He "says it" in his line just above. Read much?
Isn't he talking about altruism? The direction of conscience? The leading of a higher power (not secular or temporal)...but spiritual?
No, -- he's claiming that freedom must be "directed" by the State. --
______________________________________
The author:
If freedom does not achieve a true satisfaction of human nature, why is freedom "good"? If, however, freedom is "good" because it genuinely fulfills human nature, economic "freedom" or the ability to sell goods made and to purchase goods made by others, must be subordinated to overarching considerations of the "good."
'Bold' socialism.. - And who is to dictate what is "good"? - The state no doubt, - helped along by his religious ideas of the common good.
This appears to be mere projection on your part. And economic confusion as well. And unsupported at that.
Of course you can 'project' whatever you like from his ill written words. But I'd still say they speak for themselves.
______________________________________
The author:
Since we are speaking about a public "good," we must speak about the "common good," in which every private good is included. The common good entails the fulfillment of human nature at large. If all of the above reasoning is valid, economic freedom to buy and sell must be ordered to the achievement of a truly fulfilled human nature, both individually and commonly.
The man is virtually spouting the old communist line.
Care to elaborate on just why you find his views interesting?
You do know that the authors have all been hardline anti-communists, don't you?
So? Anyone can claim to be anti-communist, -- but then spout the socialists line.
Care to elaborate on just why you are defending socialistic views ?
Yesterday when I looked in the bathroom mirror.
In the premiere moral battle of today's society, the struggle to protect marriage, the free market is on the other side. Didn't the entire entertainment industry get on the sodomite bandwagon because mass marketers want urban empty nesters ? Haven't we seen the massive poitierization of homosexuals in movies and television for decades now ? A sodomite channel just appeared on my cable service. I didn't ask for it. I certainly don't want it. Media elites decided they would inflict it on me.
Precisely how? Because he is not for anything-goes as a matter of morality?
Precisely how? Because he is not for anything-goes as a matter of morality?
His words speak for themselves. There is no precision in them to be "precise" about.
Simply stop worshipping the constitution. Libertarianism = economic narcissism.
And as to your admission on respect for the document, thanks for your candor. At least I know where you stand.
Simply stop worshipping the constitution. Libertarianism = economic narcissism.
Your comment doesn't make any sense as a reply to mine. Do you have a point? Care to try again?
The constitution says nothing about enshrining laizzez faire capitalism.
Who said it did?
Of course, any of us as individuals can - and should - offer opinions on anything that concerns us.
Again, my apologies for some poor and hurried writing.
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.