Eye Openers

[chalice]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+8 May 2004 - 01:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 8 May 2004 - 01:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-clocker@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature. [/b][/quote]
I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by chalice+8 May 2004 - 02:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (chalice @ 8 May 2004 - 02:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:46
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker

@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature.

I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob. [/b][/quote]
As indeed have I, in a rather sad way.

One can only hope that he has not chosen to pander to the lowest common denominator.

[vidcc]

i didn&#39;t deny that religion (or choice of which religion) has caused problems, i was talking about the "serious" issues raised, such as landmines, gun control and slavery. My bad i was looking at your post in the vein of these issues rather than other unmentioned issues.
That said taking your points on board do you not feel that if our parents and grandparents decided to just accept things such as Hitler back then as many here are suggesting we should accept things that go on today the world would be a better or worse place?
Perhaps the original post would have been better edited to take out the "barbie" issues but i decided to leave it in tact so as not to be seen as biased.
Obviously kiwi fruit is far more an important issue to some than 150 countries known to use torture.

[Cyclepath]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+8 May 2004 - 01:53--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 8 May 2004 - 01:53)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by chalice@8 May 2004 - 02:50

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:46
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker

@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature.

I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob.

As indeed have I, in a rather sad way.

One can only hope that he has not chosen to pander to the lowest common denominator. [/b][/quote]
Sycophantic obsequiousness

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Cyclepath+8 May 2004 - 03:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cyclepath @ 8 May 2004 - 03:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:53

Originally posted by chalice@8 May 2004 - 02:50

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:46
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker

@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature.

I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob.

As indeed have I, in a rather sad way.

One can only hope that he has not chosen to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Sycophantic obsequiousness [/b][/quote]
No thanks, but I appreciate the offer.

[chalice]

Welcome back, Rampant Rabbit.

[chalice]

Originally posted by Cyclepath+8 May 2004 - 02:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cyclepath @ 8 May 2004 - 02:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:53

Originally posted by chalice@8 May 2004 - 02:50

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:46
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker

@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature.

I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob.

As indeed have I, in a rather sad way.

One can only hope that he has not chosen to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Sycophantic obsequiousness [/b][/quote]
Extraneous verbiage. That&#39;s like saying "servile servants".

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by chalice+8 May 2004 - 03:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (chalice @ 8 May 2004 - 03:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Cyclepath@8 May 2004 - 02:00

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:53

Originally posted by chalice@8 May 2004 - 02:50

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 May 2004 - 01:46
<!--QuoteBegin-clocker

@8 May 2004 - 02:04

Etc., etc....blah,blah,blah.
I&#39;m with the hobbes of last night on this one.
Today&#39;s more contrite and judicious hobbes wimped out.

This is pure drivel.

Are you suggesting that bunny boy may have chosen to be politically correct, or to back off from offending the hard of thinking.

Surely not, in my experience the chap tells it as he sees it and does not pander to those with delusions of adequacy.

Are we now be in the presence of a more mellow and understanding rabbit. That would be such a shame. I had always valued the chaps honesty, never thinking that he would temper his posts, for fear of offending the sensitive of nature.

I hope not.

I&#39;ve always enjoyed Hobbes&#39;s honest and forthright slaps in the gob.

As indeed have I, in a rather sad way.

One can only hope that he has not chosen to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Sycophantic obsequiousness

Extraneous verbiage. That&#39;s like saying "servile servants". [/b][/quote]
Or tautology

[hobbes]

Let me summarize the thread (with additions):

Me: The book is crap

Vidcc: But the point is that the world could be made better, or should we accept it as it is.

Me: We should always strive to improve, but it is very difficult to actually CHANGE the world because problems often shift onto others. My example was the industrial revolution in the US and the parallel to what is happening in India today.

Vidcc: so that&#39;s it?

Me: No, one giant step would be a unified religion. Yes, I know that does not change human nature, but when you place divine rules in front of people, who believe, it WILL affect behavior. You use fear to modify their actions. SAcrifice now for a greater reward in the afterlife. ALL religions are based on this.

A unified religion would actually erase EACH and EVERY diety based conflict, it would create a single tethering point which would bind the entire planet. One God tells us to act by "I&#39;m third mentality". In whatever you do consider how your actions will effect God first, Others second, and Yourself third. The religion should be tolerant and ask for forgivness and not punishment for those Athiests and Agnostics who turn away. They should be pitied, not crucified.

This would be a huge start to a world in which we start to thinking about the planet as a whole and not just about our country.

For we Athiest and Agnostics, as long as governments maintain separation between the church and the state, we don&#39;t really cause much of a ruckus.


To think that picking up landmines is how to improve the planet is to miss what the actual source is. You can pick up all the landmines you want, someone will just be placing them somewhere else.

It is really quite easy to control drugs, teenage pregnancy, guns. Just take away people&#39;s freedoms like they do in China or like the Taliban did with opium. We could start shooting drunk drivers at the road side.

Freedom is something we treasure, but it is also something that requires people to act responsibily and many don&#39;t.

Problems like guns, drugs and teenage pregnancy are what we are accepting by attempting to maintain the greatest individual freedoms.


Also, if you decide that we should devise a global system of government in which all are equally provided for and more work equal no additional reward, you will find a lazy stagnant world, much like a VA hospital.

Human greed does drive innovation and technologic progress.

For every give, there is a take. Human nature is tightly ingrained and making a NET change is quite difficult.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by vidcc@7 May 2004 - 19:18
j2 you may have a point about "the way things are" in your quote, but it&#39;s only valid because we allow it to be.&nbsp; If a product can be improved or made safer don&#39;t you feel it should be?

I haven&#39;t the slightest idea what this means, vid.

Do you posit "equality of result" is attainable, and that a properly supreme effort will effect this?

Have you by any chance conducted a successful cloning?



Okay-I&#39;ll meet fire with fire:

Here is a foolproof way to insure equality of result....

Give everyone a law degree.