Yeah England got America back and Canada did not end up being a satellite of the USA but still remains one of England
They have their own interpretations of God. Or gods if you wish. This is kinda the point. If morality were so objective, no one would disagree.They can disagree with ME all they want. It's the Gods definition that they will have to deal with eventually.
Fair enough. To each their own. Personally, I prefer horror.Nope. I don't watch comedies. they're a waste of time.
But you know that isn't so. You're not ignorant of history.Whereas I draw the opposite conclusion.... that nobody cares to try and fix them.
Had it been perfect, why would anyone shrink from it?We did start with ideological perfection and then, because it wasn't fun or pleasant enough for everyone, we ran away from it.
Actually yes you did, you started prattling on about the EU and our membership, when this has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with ECHR.
It might well be within our gift as you put it, as the Conservatives have suggested leaving the ECHR and replacing it with a British Bill of Rights.
Britain may need to withdraw from European Convention on Human Rights, says Cameron - Telegraph
Thank Christ that moron's out next year.
Says it all.Hear, hear. I suspect he probably will wait for the full term to expire before calling an election. At the moment it looks like Labour are 7-9% ahead in the polls. That might mean another close call, but with Labour creating the coalition. As long as it gets Osborne and Gove out of office, I'll be happy.
They have their own interpretations of God. Or gods if you wish. This is kinda the point. If morality were so objective, no one would disagree.
But you know that isn't so. You're not ignorant of history.
Had it been perfect, why would anyone shrink from it?
From what I understand, Canada will not extradite someone back to the US if they face the
Death penalty, because it violates their laws.
Allowing Italy to extradite Amanda Knox would violate our laws against Double Jeopardy.
Heh heh. In previous times people were only moral on the surface. Out of public view they were still flawed and immoral people.I'm not ignorant of history at all. The last century and a half has been all about moving further and further away from a decent, moral, and values-based society into social anarchy where there are no rules or expectations on people.
Heh heh. In previous times people were only moral on the surface. Out of public view they were still flawed and immoral people.
It almost sounds like you're saying that immorality is ok as long as we don't see it.Whereas nowadays even that external venier of decency and propriety is gone. Instead of working to improve their private lives we've allowed their private immorality to become their public fce as well. Not the right direction so far as I'm concerned.
It almost sounds like you're saying that immorality is ok as long as we don't see it.
Point is, an objective fact is indisputable, whereas morality is anything but that. There's no 'true' morality, it being interpretative. You may choose to believe that water doesn't boil at a hundred degrees centigrade, but that doesn't change the fact. Morality is neither universal nor replicable, being an intangible concept. You're trying to posit morality as being empirical, but it never will be. It's not a question of convenience.That's completely untrue. Most people want to ignore true Morality because it is neither convenient nor politically correct. It REQUIRES things of people, whether they like those things or not. It REQUIRES them to do and be things they may not want to be.... like housewives and homemakers or like productive members of society rather than lay-about losers.
Either that or moving towards a revised morality. People still have expectations and values. You're only arguing for your personal preference. Not being you, how could anyone else be expected to see the world precisely as you do, much less everyone? Lacking the authority to impose morality on behalf of your entire country, you've no choice but to settle for the status quo. You're not permitted to behave as you will and you'd be stopped if you tried.I'm not ignorant of history at all. The last century and a half has been all about moving further and further away from a decent, moral, and values-based society into social anarchy where there are no rules or expectations on people.
Revolt's the wrong word. Morality doesn't exist as a sentient entity, capable of compelling obedience. Even God grants us the free will to do as we please. There'll always be debate and resistance, but these aren't negatives. Only ongoing feedback ensures that ideology develops as a dynamic, adaptive and responsive process. Being a Conservative, you believe that stasis is a possibility. This is one of the ways in which Conservatism is fundamentally flawed. Traditions only pave the way for novelty and modernity.That's not true at all. There will always be people who don't like what true Morality expects of them and who will therefore revolt against it at every opportunity.
Point is, an objective fact is indisputable, whereas morality is anything but that. There's no 'true' morality, it being interpretative. You may choose to believe that water doesn't boil at a hundred degrees centigrade, but that doesn't change the fact. Morality is neither universal nor replicable, being an intangible concept. You're trying to posit morality as being empirical, but it never will be. It's not a question of convenience.
Either that or moving towards a revised morality. People still have expectations and values. You're only arguing for your personal preference. Not being you, how could anyone else be expected to see the world precisely as you do, much less everyone? Lacking the authority to impose morality on behalf of your entire country, you've no choice but to settle for the status quo. You're not permitted to behave as you will and you'd be stopped if you tried.
Revolt's the wrong word. Morality doesn't exist as a sentient entity, capable of compelling obedience. Even God grants us the free will to do as we please. There'll always be debate and resistance, but these aren't negatives. Only ongoing feedback ensures that ideology develops as a dynamic, adaptive and responsive process. Being a Conservative, you believe that stasis is a possibility. This is one of the ways in which Conservatism is fundamentally flawed. Traditions only pave the way for novelty and modernity.
Things change.
Things change.
With all due respect, that's cynical Conservative nonsense. Society has never been more advanced.Lighten up.
Moral standards and morality overall have certainly deteriorated over the last 50 years. Credit that mostly to the "It's all about me" mentality which started taking roots through the '60s and '70s...
You'll continue to believe that while you cleave to ahistorical and outmoded ideals.Not in a positive direction, if the past five or six centuries worth of history are any indication.
Lighten up.
Moral standards and morality overall have certainly deteriorated over the last 50 years. Credit that mostly to the "It's all about me" mentality which started taking roots through the '60s and '70s...
She shouldn't be extradited, but if she ever steps off of American soil, I support Italy going after her for no reason other than being an insanely dumb f'n bitch.
I think that "me, me, me" attitude started in the Eighties under Reagan and Thatcher, Gordon Gecko and "greed is good". We then had endless movements of anti-poor agitation; a systematic denial of the existence of community and society; the cynical, fallacious scam that was 'trickle-down' economics and the ever-widening, ever-more-extreme inequality of opportunity and income. Moral and ethical standards are certainly in a poor state, but it has nothing to do with the Sixties, hippies or free love.
That sounds like advocacy for the USA to take out the entire Italian justice system since its insanely dumb and "F'd" up!
I'm an isolationist. It's dumb, but it's theirs.
I also turn a blind eye on other religious and tribal practices that America thinks is "cruel" or "inhumane". Female circumcision, for instance.
I support America minding its own business.
the entire concept of welfare is ME ME ME.
You mean like giving tax breaks to the wealthiest 1% or earners? Those don't just buy votes, they buy Super-PACs.using forced charity to buy yourself the votes of the recipients of such handouts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?