vision2020
RE: Compassion
John,
If a woman is cited or arrested for wearing clothes that reveal too much
cleavage under the ordinance, will you describe her with the same word you
used for the carwashers?
Sunil
>From: John Harrell <johnbharrell@yahoo.com>
>To: Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com>, ddouglas@pacsim.com
>CC: vision2020@moscow.com
>Subject: RE: Compassion
>Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 23:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Wait a minute Mr. Ted Moffett,
>
>I did not express a rude and insulting attitude towards "women", as in
>all the females.
>
>I was reflecting on the character regarding the behaviour of some women
>that feel it is necessary to expose themselves in front of all the
>children in a downtown area.
>
>Please try to keep it straight. Or another misunderstanding could occur
>as similar to what we have all been witnessing between you and David
>Douglas.
>
>Cheers!
>John Harrell
>
>
>
>
>--- Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > David:
> >
> > I am glad you do not agree with the rude and insulting attitude
>expressed by
> > John Harrell towards women.
> >
> > The ethical issues you raise are important and complicated. We could
> > discuss them for years and not completely resolve the factual and
>logical
> > difficulties involved which are of the highest order. If you are really
> > interested in studying a non-religiously based ethical system, read
> > Principia Ethica by G. E Moore.
> >
> > I suspect you will try to argue that only your theistic ethical system
>can
> > be correct, while my agnostic or atheist system has no compass by which
>to
> > judge ethical direction. Why don't we just agree to disagree? But
>allow me
> > the dignity as a human being of having my opinion on ethical matters. I
>do
> > not completely deny you the validity of many of your ethical beliefs, I
>am
> > sure. So why must you insist, as it seems you are, that I have no basis
>for
> > making any ethical judgments? Here I sense the arrogance of the
> > fundamentalist who must be right and all other views that challenge must
>be
> > wrong! Excuse me if I misjudge you.
> >
> > As far as my statement about accepting the validity of and sacredness of
>the
> > many valuable cultural and religious traditions of the human race, this
>is
> > just what I mean, though not in the extreme way that you might be
> > interpreting this statement. To answer two questions at once, for
>example,
> > I accept that Doug Wilson can be right about many ethical issues based
>on
> > his faith. I admire many of the ethical teachings of Christ, so I
>accept
> > the validity of and sacredness of this tradition, but I do not swallow
>it
> > whole without a critical and skeptical analysis of what faults there may
>be
> > in Christianity. I could go on and on listing numerous spiritual
>traditions
> > and what validity they have, but why labor the point?
> >
> > Perhaps I can suggest, if I may, a way out of the apparent intractable
> > quandary of the insane religious wars that plague the human race.
> > When defining what is meant by "sacred" we will wade into very deep
>waters
> > very quickly that often do not lend themselves to precise logical
> > clarification. Some spiritual traditions, Buddhism among them, make it
>very
> > clear that the true experience of the sacred is beyond definitions and
> > words. If you are talking about the sacred this event is NOT SACRED.
>As
> > far as my appreciation of the sacredness of the spiritual traditions of
> > Christianity, I am certain that I understand, again perhaps at a level
>of
> > experience that transcends logical or verbal definition, the exalted
> > spiritual states of Hildegard Von Bingen that she expressed in her
>music. I
> > know that because of my connection to music that I can assure you plumbs
>the
> > deepest wells of the human soul. Please excuse my vanity and pretension
> > here, but I feel strongly that I know of one way to unify spiritual
> > experiences across culture and religion.
> >
> > I think we are structured as human beings to feel religious experience,
>the
> > experience of the "sacred," perhaps we are even hard wired in our brain
> > networks for a religious faculty of mind. Thus music in all cultures is
> > used to evoke the sacred based on this commonality of structure of the
>human
> > mind. There are other ways, I am certain, in which religious experience
>is
> > linked across religions. Why not embrace the commonality of the
>experience
> > of the sacred across cultures? Is this not a wise and humane project?
> > Would not this endeavor do much to stop hatred and war based on
>religion?
> > Humanity is not so at odds with itself as is commonly thought!
> >
> > Well, I suspect my ideas will not resonate with joy in your mind.
> > Sorry....
> >
> > Of course I do not believe in many of the religious beliefs that
>Hildegard
> > held dear, nor do I buy into much of the mystical trappings of Buddhism,
>but
> > should that preclude an appreciation of the mystical sacred dimensions
>of
> > the music of both Christianity and Buddhism? And based on this
>commonality
> > can I not truly state, as I did, that I accept the validity of the
>spiritual
> > traditions of religions across the human race, to shorten my statement?
>Of
> > course, of course, I should have qualified my statement to indicate I do
>not
> > mean ALL religious traditions to the letter, especially any religious
> > traditions that inflict pain and harm, such as forcing women under
>threat of
> > force to keep their lovely breasts all tied up and hidden from public
>view,
> > which are actions that any humane ethical system would seek to avoid.
>But
> > this is obvious!
> >
> > Read Principia Ethica! You will not agree with it, but just maybe you
>can
> > open your mind to another viewpoint!
> >
> > Ted
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "David Douglas" <ddouglas@pacsim.com>
> > >To: "'Ted Moffett'" <ted_moffett@hotmail.com>, <vision2020@moscow.com>
> > >Subject: RE: Compassion
> > >Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 22:17:17 -0700
> > >
> > >
> > >Ted Moffet says:
> > >
> > >"You do a disservice to your ideology and/or theology by coming to the
> > >defense of misogynist mud slinging."
> > >Ted,
> > >
> > >I *just* about gave a little preamble in my letter distancing myself
>from
> > >Mr. Harrell. However, I really didn't think it was necessary because
>that
> > >wasn't the point of my post. For the record, I neither justify nor
>defend
> > >what Mr. Harrell wrote.
> > >
> > >I see no active defense for Mr. Harrell in my post. My "defense" of
>him,
> > >such as it was, came from my disagreement about *your* reasoning.
>Based on
> > >your reasoning, I saw no basis for *you* to make any kind of value
>judgment
> > >at all. That you can indicates (to me) that your reasoning was
> > >inconsistent; whether you agree with my reasoning or not, it does not
> > >constitute a defense of Mr. Harrell. Lucy made a pretty good case, I
> > >thought.
> > >
> > >Perhaps I was in error in picking that particular example, especially
> > >since,
> > >based on your response, I didn't communicate my point well. Mind if I
>try
> > >again, sans Mr. Harrell? By way of a less volatile(?) example, you
>seem to
> > >be disagreeing with Doug Wilson in a different thread: let me rephrase
>and
> > >ask again a couple of my questions.
> > >
> > >
> > >Mr. Moffet writes:
> > >" ...mindset, that accepts the validity of and sacredness of the many
> > >valuable cultural and religious traditions of the human race. "
> > >
> > >And I ask:
> > > What, (and/or how) specifically, does one believe that is consistent
>with,
> > >and accepts as valid, the many religious traditions of the human race?
> > >and
> > > "Some say there is no God, while others say God is everything (or
>rather
> > >everything is God). If everyone can be correct, why not Doug Wilson? "
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >David Douglas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> > http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
>http://sbc.yahoo.com
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Back to TOC