- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Objective Truth
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
In this age of utilitarian and situational ethics, is there such a thing as objective, ultimate truth? Is there ever a situation when someone besides the state can be the arbiter of what is right and wrong?
a very difficult question and thought provoking.
- Time
- Post link
(for those of you scratching your heads: for SHAME!)
anyway, public opinion currently puts objective truth at this moment (unfortunatly) in the hands of the left wing media. Don't believe me? ask yourself the last time that any right wing media was described as "objective" when it is no more biased than the left?
true objective truth? well the only one that could know that would have to be someone removed from all possible temptation that might sway desicions. They must be omnicient, eternal, and perfect(uncapable of bias, prejudice, hatred, etc). In other words? The only possible objective truth is God (but that isn't an objective viewpoint is it? true though)
- Time
- Post link
Yep. And according to them, there is no right and wrong; it's whatever "feels right for you."
Episode II: Shroud of the Dark Side
“Back when we made Star Wars, we just couldn’t make Palpatine as evil as we intended. Now, thanks to the miracles of technology, it is finally possible. Finally, I’ve created the movies that I originally imagined.” -George Lucas on the 2007 Extra Extra Special HD-DVD Edition
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
- Time
- Post link
"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Skipper
the objective ultimate truth is this: 41
*scratches head* yeah I know for shame, but I don't get it. Can someone explain it to me? - Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Skipper
easy: its the answer to life, the universe and everything, plus its the value of 6*7
Wouldn't that be... 42? Or am I missing something here?
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
- Time
- Post link
(and boy did you walk into that one)
(go read hitchikers guide to the galaxy)
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: PSYCHO_DAYV
IT'S A CATCH 22.
That loophole in where in order to escape the army you must be insane, but if you don't want to be in the army you're not?
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Skipper
well that explains why everything is so scewed up now doesn't it?
(and boy did you walk into that one)
(go read hitchikers guide to the galaxy)
Damnit! Um, I've meant to, but... er... shut up!
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: Nanner Split
All of the truths to which we cling to depend greatly upon our own point of view.
Hi. Been away since I started this thread.
Anyhoo...reducing truth to a matter of perception is the same as saying there is no truth. For if we all possess truth, how can anyone be right about anything? Perceptions and point of view are a zero-sum game...everyone's got a different one. Like the song by Buffalo Springfield says: Nobody's right, if everybody's wrong. As someone said above, the leftist dominated media is good at force feeding the message: Whatever feels good is good for the person doing it, if you don't accept it and believe it to be right you're evil.
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
As someone said above, the leftist dominated media is good at force feeding the message: Whatever feels good is good for the person doing it, if you don't accept it and believe it to be right you're evil.
Hmnn... don't you think you're exagerating a little bit? I don't think the media enforces this particular dogma. Take the whole fast food issue, for example. The media is highly opposed to bad eating habbits, which is supposed to FEEL good but is not exactly a good thing. And I think no political consideration or opinion is related to that kind of thought.
Now, I only mentioned one crude example out of my mind right now, can you mention one to prove your statement?
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleiteQuote
Originally posted by: JediSage
As someone said above, the leftist dominated media is good at force feeding the message: Whatever feels good is good for the person doing it, if you don't accept it and believe it to be right you're evil.
Hmnn... don't you think you're exagerating a little bit? I don't think the media enforces this particular dogma. Take the whole fast food issue, for example. The media is highly opposed to bad eating habbits, which is supposed to FEEL good but is not exactly a good thing. And I think no political consideration or opinion is related to that kind of thought.
Now, I only mentioned one crude example out of my mind right now, can you mention one to prove your statement?
I should clarify that when I say "media", I'm not talking of the "news media" or the "print media" in particular, however I'm talking about the majority of media, the bulk of media, including television, and movie production media.
Anyone who makes a "value" judgement in today's society is branded as trying to force their beliefs and opinions on others. ie: When the pope declares the anti-life position as being wrong, he's denounced as being out of the mainstream, stuck in the dark ages.
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Anyone who makes a "value" judgement in today's society is branded as trying to force their beliefs and opinions on others. ie: When the pope declares the anti-life position as being wrong, he's denounced as being out of the mainstream, stuck in the dark ages.
Well, no one is forcing people to accept their ideas. It's up to the individual to agree or disagree with them. What is dangerous is the manipulation of the idea, changing facts so one could be misleeded to support a particular idea.
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleiteQuote
Originally posted by: JediSage
Anyone who makes a "value" judgement in today's society is branded as trying to force their beliefs and opinions on others. ie: When the pope declares the anti-life position as being wrong, he's denounced as being out of the mainstream, stuck in the dark ages.
Well, no one is forcing people to accept their ideas. It's up to the individual to agree or disagree with them. What is dangerous is the manipulation of the idea, changing facts so one could be misleeded to support a particular idea.
Agreed 100%.
http://ttrim.blogspot.com
- Time
- Post link
Quote
Originally posted by: ricarleiteQuote
Originally posted by: JediSage
As someone said above, the leftist dominated media is good at force feeding the message: Whatever feels good is good for the person doing it, if you don't accept it and believe it to be right you're evil.
Hmnn... don't you think you're exagerating a little bit? I don't think the media enforces this particular dogma. Take the whole fast food issue, for example. The media is highly opposed to bad eating habbits, which is supposed to FEEL good but is not exactly a good thing. And I think no political consideration or opinion is related to that kind of thought.
Now, I only mentioned one crude example out of my mind right now, can you mention one to prove your statement?
Ric: I got this today and it kind of touches on this issue. I get a daily email from the site, Breakpoint.org
"Words Matter
Combating Orwellian Distortions
August 16, 2005
The other day I was watching a news segment about British leader Tony Blair's decision to come down hard on those who engage in the kind of hate speech that incites violence. The program then ran videotape of a radical Islamic cleric standing on a London street corner. If Britain did not get out of Iraq, he warned, the streets of London would run with blood. The show then cut to scenes of the July 7 terrorist bombings, when the streets did indeed run with blood. It was a grim reminder of the link between violent talk and violent actions—Blair was right to throw the cleric out.
But a few minutes later I turned the channel and watched a segment on gay "marriage." A gay activist was loudly accusing those who speak out against gay "marriage" of engaging in hate speech—as if it were just like the Muslim Terrorists.
So-called "hate speech"—that is, any criticism of the gay agenda—has been banned on many college campuses, so say the activists, because it will incite violence. But will it?
Come on, who is running most of the AIDS hospices in America? That's right: It's Christians. "Hate filled bigots"? Hardly.
In reality, redefining Christian arguments as hate speech and bigotry is often an attempt to shame and silence us. And all too often, this strategy works. It not only stifles legitimate opposition; it changes the way people think about controversial moral and political issues.
Before his tragic death in Iraq, reporter Steven Vincent wrote in National Review Online that "Words matter. Words convey moral clarity. Without moral clarity, we will not succeed in Iraq. That is why the terms the press uses to cover this conflict are so vital."
For example, Vincent wrote, mainstream media outlets like the New York Times use terms like "insurgents" and "guerrillas" to describe the Sunni Triangle gunmen "as if these murderous thugs represented a traditional national liberation movement." But when the Times reports on similar groups of killers operating in Latin American countries, "they [often] utilize the phrase ‘paramilitary death squads.' Same murderers, different designations." This is important, Vincent added, because words like "insurgents" and "guerillas" have claims on our sympathies that "paramilitaries" lack.
Similarly, reporters claim the U.S.-led coalition "invaded Iraq and "occupies" it today. "We could more precisely claim," Vincent says, "that the allies liberated the country and are currently reconstructing it … These definitions reflect the nobility of our effort in Iraq." Anyone who cares about success in our struggle against Islamofacism, or upholds principles of moral clarity and lucid thought—should combat such Orwellian distortions of our language."
Vincent was absolutely right, and his warning against the abuses of language should be heeded. When our kids are watching the news, we need to help them recognize why one term is chosen over another, and how the reporter uses words to shape our views, whether it's gay activism or modern terrorists.
In a world that pretends not to know the difference between hate speech and legitimate arguments, we must be ever-vigilant against those who twist language to suit their purposes—purposes often designed to silence and deceive.
Get links to further information on today's topic
For printer-friendly version, simply visit www.breakpoint.org and click on Today's Commentary. The printer-friendly link is on the left-hand column.
Copyright (c) 2005 Prison Fellowship
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. "
http://ttrim.blogspot.com