"criminalizing unhealthy diet" yes we do all agree this would be wrong, and the biggest reason is we can not trust the government to tell us this any government sees "unhealthy" as also means unhealthy to the economy, ect, even at the cost of it being unhealthy to humans then you also have people that see religion in it, say anti-pork, ect.... they see it as unhealthy for the soul or vegans that would prefer human health suffer if it means Animals would not be eaten you just can't trust people not to have different ideas of "healthy" then actually the best diet for our health
Interesting philosophical suggestion. What I can tell you is that everyone's personal views are always the best. Everyone outside this brain of mine is evil. If we did everything my way, planet earth would be a paradise! Believe me! I believe this, but of course everyone else thinks the same about themselves. And while my opinions are always the best, I recognize my own weaknesses. I forget things, I'm not the best in math, I'm not the strongest, I'm not the best speaker and I don't have the biggest penis! It is for these reasons I am not ruling the world.
Nah. My heaven would be many peoples hell. Thats one of the main reasons why utopia is impossible- no one agrees on what it actually is.
Wrong on both counts. Lucifer was a fallen angel, free to rebel against God. And you are implying that free will is evil, which has nothing to do with Judaism.
Even if we don't agree intellectually on that point, I have to admit that your position is better than mine.
Thank you. In my opinion, lives of all Humans are G-d's creation. Lives of all Humans have paramount value. In Scandinavia even people serving life sentences are treated humanely.
Freedom also ensures that some people will make right choices. In the same way you say freedom is evil, we can say it is not evil. But I say it's neither. The goodness and the evil are the people who make decisions.
Another x+y=0 thread. Was there something about this thread that was supposed to be novel and earth-shattering?
No they’re not, every corner pharmacy has them. Banning doesn’t work, don’t you know what prohibition was?
The bold is entirely unnecessary and presents an appeal to authority. Unfortunately, it's not just a debate tactic; it's a worldview. A hierarchical authoritarian universe where God's word filters down with authority from scripture to priests, fathers and sons. One doesn't need a supernatural deity to value human life. And indeed, the Hebrew scriptures are all about fire and brimstone. G-d valued some human lives. Others not so much. Reality requires some detachment from a religious worldview. Just enough to objectively see what's going on with us humans. And again, scripture tells us how to deal with the reality of our dual nature. Genesis 9:6 “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image. Leviticus 24:17 “Whoever takes a human life shall surely be put to death. Numbers 35:30-31 30 “If anyone kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the evidence of witnesses. But no person shall be put to death on the testimony of one witness. 31 Moreover, you shall accept no ransom for the life of a murderer, who is guilty of death, but he shall be put to death. G-d is concerned with justice. It's his main gig. I'm an atheist but I agree with him. The punishment should fit the crime, and capital punishment has an additional burden of proof. The problem I have with our system in the US is the burden of proof. I don't oppose capital punishment at all. I do think the burden of proof has been far too low, as the hundreds of wrongly convicted prove. Anyway, your opinion on what my life is worth is meaningless to what my opinion of my own life is worth. Make sense? My freedom doesn't care about your freedom. I don't know if the Hebrew scriptures touch on that - the New Testament certainly does - but the reality of the post-Enlightenment West has been an expansion of rights and liberties. It's in the detachment of religion for a moment like I mentioned that we're able to do this. Does the treatment of prisoners in Scandinavia emanate from a humanistic worldview or religion?
One certainly does not need God to value human life. But, assuming God exists, that belief in the value of life is grounded in objective fact and is not simply a subjective value proposition. Big difference.
Indeed. So does every corner drug dealer. Both the pharmacy kind and the illicit kind. Opposition to certain substances on moral grounds can have merit, but only on moral grounds. In a free society, that means you teach these morals to your family, and I teach my morals to mine. Ironically, Jesus drank lots of wine, and psychoactive drugs are the core of many ancient religious ceremonies, especially here in the Western Hemisphere. Prohibition would have been a blast, though. Imagine partying here: At one time this area of the cave was used as a speakeasy. Sadly they weren’t serving drinks down there when we visited. Lehman Caves, Great Basin NP Reefer Madness now means "buy stock in armored car services." The rest of the states need to catch up and do something about the world's oldest profession. It's obviously not going away. Can't ban that.
Freedom is Evil. Restricting Freedom is Evil. How can we find the Lesser Evil? That can be argued ad infinitum in every case.
We treat animals better than we treat people. That makes no sense. Animals CAN'T speak and yet we are okay with euthanizing them when they are suffering. A human CAN speak and can voice they are tired or sick and tired of feeling horribly and we criminalize them wanting to euthanize themselves (for the same reasons we accept it for animals). Every person has their own or no god and it's not our business to tell them how much they should be able to endure. So, if you want to talk about freedom being evil, this solidly fits into the column of "lack of freedom" and is clearly evil.