Someone was asking me a question, having a problem with some basic understanding of basic reasoning, so I'm just pointing to the transitive property to help them understand.
IF Dan opposes racism, and
IF Mr X supports/fans racism,
THEN Dan opposes Mr X
IF Dan opposes anti-Semitism, and
IF Ms Y supports anti-Semitism,
THEN Dan opposes Ms Y.
It doesn't matter how many substitutes one gives for the second condition, Dan will still oppose racism/sexism/anti-Semitism.
That is, it doesn't matter...
IF Dan opposes sexual assault, and
IF a GOP politician commits sexual assault,
THEN Dan opposes that GOP politician
OR
IF Dan opposes sexual assault, and
IF a DEMOCRAT politician commits sexual assault,
THEN Dan opposes that DEMOCRAT politician
OR
IF Dan opposes sexual assault, and
IF a Green politician commits sexual assault,
THEN Dan opposes that Green politician
It doesn't matter WHO you insert into the middle condition, Dan is opposed to the bad/harmful behavior, and thus, will always be opposed to that behavior.
It's really not difficult to understand.
So, having said all that, if someone says to me, "But what if it were a Libertarian politician who committed sexual assault... THEN would you oppose them?"
The question is a stupid one and has already been answered. WHY? Because I've already made it clear that I'm opposed to sexism, slavery, racism, sexual assault, etc... there's no need to ask what has already been answered, because I'm consistent on my opposition to harm.
Now, IF you are a pathetic partisan hack who SOMETIMES opposes sexual impropriety (i.e., when it is a person not in your group/party), but SOMETIMES gives a pass to sexual impropriety (i.e., when it is a person IN your group/party), THEN asking them to clarify is rational.
But I'm not inconsistent that way.
Ultra conservative fundamentalist type, Al Mohler, has pointed out that the GOP/conservatives who support Trump have lost their credibility and any sense of high moral ground as/when they've embraced Trump but opposed Clinton for much less sexual impropriety, he isn't wrong. He's pointing out the petty hypocrisy of such immoral and irrational conservatives, and rightly so.
But I'm not them.
So, go ahead, ask me if I'm opposed to slavery (or sexism, or sexual assault, etc) if it's THIS person, but don't be surprised if I just laugh at your inability to understand reason and reality and laugh off your hypocrisy and irrationality.
21 comments:
What this only works for you? Why not apply your standards to others equally.
If this is actually true, why are you going to such lengths to avoid actual specific condemnation of the real life anti-Semites in organizations you support?
Is it really that hard to specifically and directly call out those who engage in the things you claim not to support?
Tell me, Craig, are all instances of slavery always wrong? Or are there times that you think slavery is okay, or has been okay in the past?
Are all instances of killing children in battle or in Conquest wrong? Or do do you make exceptions to say that sometimes it's not wrong to do that?
If you'd like to talk on this topic, then I require that you answer those questions first please.
And lest you be confused about what I mean by slavery, I mean the owning of a human being where they are not free to leave because they are property of another human being.
Of course you do, because it’s your step toward deleting comments.
No, I don’t support chattal slavery. Never have, never will. I don’t support or make excuses for those who currently practice chattal slavery.
Are all instances of killing children in battle equal? Are all instances of killing children equal?
Does the nature of the circumstances bear on whether killing children is wrong?
Are there circumstances where killing children might be unavoidable in the pursuit of a greater good?
Is it wrong to kill a child because they are a particular gender?
Is it wrong to kill a child for a kiss?
Is it wrong to kill a child because they choose to follow Christ?
Is it wrong to impose an economic system on s country that forces children into prostitution?
Is it wrong to ingest legal substances that harm children?
You’ll need to be much more specific in your question, or provide some clarification.
It’s wrong to intentionally, specifically target children for killing? Is it wrong to place a bomb factory under or next to a children’s hospital? If it is wrong, then wouldn’t those who choose to do so be at fault?
As a general rule, I’d suggest that killing anyone who is innocent, who has caused no harm, or who should be protected rather than killed is wrong.
So to clarify, when God in the Bible told Israel to go in to a Nation and make slaves of all the people in the nation, God was commanding something that you would say is wrong, at least today. Clearly, indisputably wrong, morally evil, even. Is that correct?
On The Killing Children question, I mean... is taking action or targeting areas that you know will result in killing innocent men women and children a moral wrong? Like for instance, the US targeting Hiroshima for an atomic explosion... Are you saying that THAT was a great moral evil?
I'm not sure if you're attacked enough to understand why I'm asking you these questions. On my part, I am consistent. I'm always opposed to slavery, I always oppose killing children, always oppose sexism, always oppose racism, etc etc.
With you and conservatives, the fundamentalist camp, it is not at all clear that you all believe these things consistently. You'll agree with Mohler and me, I suppose, that Evangelical support for Trump exposes of vast vein of hypocrisy and inconsistency, is that right?
You've evaded giving clear answers when pressed on matters like slavery or Hiroshima, so I'm not at all sure that you consistently oppose slavery or killing babies. So, if you want to comment here, you will answer the questions. It's a reasonable thing to ask, given how vague and elusive and dodgy you have been.
"You’ve deleted clear answers, while hiding from clarifying questions like the coward you are. You’ve chosen to lie about the content of the comments you’ve deleted, like the coward you are. " Craig knows whereof he speaks.
"You’re trying to come up with ammunition, and diverting attention from the questions your afraid to answer." Craig knows whereof he speaks. He practices what he's preaching.
Who does Craig think is anti-Semitic? I don't see him naming anyone.
I mean, given that Craig himself is anti-Semitic.
It is woefully, but factually false and dishonest to suggest you ALWAYS oppose killing children while at the same time supporting laws and politicians that advocate and/or permit the killing of children. Thus, you supporf the killing of children and the many politicians and organizations the support, defend, enable and actually kill children...by the thousands.
Also, it seems crystal clear that this subject is the direct result of, NOT questioning what practices you oppose, but the clear and unmistakable habit of choosing only to condemn those of a conservative bent who are alleged to have engaged in what you oppose, and then whining about it when someone wonders where your outrage is when lefties engage in thise very practices. It is THIS inconsistency that provoked such wonder at your previous post noting Dems calling out Dems for bad behavior.
By "this subject", I refer to the subject of this post. Sorry for any confusion.
It’s always a lesson in human depravity to watch Marshall define who is a child and Craig define who is innocent.
To them, the thousands in chain cages, separated from parents our government can’t find because... no records: they are not innocent children to Marshall and Craig.
To them the hundreds of thousands of children of illegal immigrants living here are not innocent children.
To them the millions of intergenerational poor and penned up children of slaves and forcibly divested Jim Crow survihors are not innocent children.
To them, girls aren’t fully innocent children. They’re dangerous temptresses who should control themselves before they get a white boy in trouble.
Even to them, unimaginably to Craig, the tens of thousands of white children falling headlong into opioid addiction does not constitute a national emergency devastating our young.
“Build the Wall!”
Sickening. Disgustingly, utterly sickening. Shockingly horrific if dwelt upon.
Dan,
It looks like you’ve completely abandoned your earlier facade that you’re interested in conversation and truth.
I'll leave that comment, just to respond: I KNOW that you probably THINK that you answered the questions, directly and clearly.
I'm telling you that you have absolutely not.
LOOK ONE MORE TIME AT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS you have not answered:
So to clarify, when God in the Bible told Israel to go in to a Nation and make slaves of all the people in the nation, God was commanding something that you would say is wrong, at least today. Clearly, indisputably wrong, morally evil, even. Is that correct?
On The Killing Children question, I mean... is taking action or targeting areas that you know will result in killing innocent men women and children a moral wrong? Like for instance, the US targeting Hiroshima for an atomic explosion... Are you saying that THAT was a great moral evil?
I know you responded saying something about "conditions..." I'm just asking you a simple question:
DO you think targeting people, including children, for death is wrong in ALL circumstances?
Your hesitation and wanting to raise exceptions and qualifiers SUGGESTS that you do not think so, but you tell me.
To further clarify, I gave a specific example that conservatives tend to support the targeting and killing of children, Hiroshima.
DO you think that the deliberate bombing of the whole city of Hiroshima - KNOWING that would kill children, as well - was a great evil/wrong?
I'll give you ONE LAST answer to show some honor and indicate that YOU are interested in conversation and truth. Answer those questions, clearly, directly, unequivocally.
I don't care who was president during the bombing, I want your answer REGARDLESS of who was president. I want your answer about "god commanding slavery..." were THOSE instances an example of a moral wrong? Are you trying to play some sort of weaselly game and say, "Well, THOSE weren't CHATTLE SLAVERY, so they were cool..."? You sound like a sniveling, dodgy con-man, not someone interested in conversation and truth. Here's your chance to be clear.
IF I had to guess, based on what conservatives usually say, you'd say, "NO, if GOD 'commanded' it, then it wasn't wrong, so NOT EVERY INSTANCE OF SLAVERY is wrong... the enslaving of people by Israel in the bible was not wrong..." but you tell me. I SUSPECT you make an exception.
Or, I SUSPECT that you'd say, "Hiroshima was an unfortunate situation... it wasn't ideal that those children died/were slaughtered... it was Japan's fault, not ours... but no, I can't say that WE were wrong for bombing Hiroshima... it SAVED lives..." In other words, NOT EVERY INSTANCE of killing children is wrong, but you tell me.
It's not my credibility or understanding that is on the line.
And, please, God, don’t let me forget the thousands of children gunned down in school and away from school: Craig and Marshall do not find them innocent children worthy of collective national action either.
20 children between 6 and 7 gunned down en masse. Almost all white children. Even that does not outrage their inhumanly narrow understanding of innocence and children.
As I review these comments, it is clear that you have no true regard for truth and honesty. There's nothing "dodgy" about comparing what is referred to as slavery in Scripture versus what generally comes to the mind of Americans today. For my part, I stand by the proper response to a command from God: "Yes, Lord. I'll do what you want." The command does not matter. If God commands it, it is not evil or immoral because He is God. He is not subject to laws He enacts for OUR behavior. This is true regardless of whether or not He would actually command you or me to commit an act that makes you wet yourself. So, if you're going to frame your question as you do, you fail in the asking. I'll reword it for you so that it isn't idiotic:
"So to clarify, when God in the Bible told Israel to go in to a Nation and make slaves of all the people in the nation, God was commanding something that you would say is wrong for us to do on our own volition, but not by His command."
That's better. It reflects how a believer should respond to the Creator of All Things.
Are you hearing God telling you to enslave black and brown people right now?
Clearly you're still hearing yourself tell you you're clever. Don't listen. It's just an idiot talking.
You’re talking to yourself, again, Marshall.
Wow
Post a Comment