Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

I didn't see a blood red sun, but darkening skies have happened many times before so not so sure this even qualifies as a precursor for biblical prophesy. Not to nit pick, just saying. I really have no quarrel with those that use the gospel as a good moral compass, just as I have no quarrel with those with a good moral compass without the gospel. Whatever works.

---

What moral compass would you use? "an eye for an eye" as the Jews would say. seems to me that is the one in operation over there at the moment. Perhaps you would use the Muslim five pillars until you realise this requires you to subjectate others in the name of religion. Perhaps you would like to sit under a tree and contemplate until you find your nirvana? doesn't stop you from violent confrontation of others as the Rohingya have found. Would you embrace Shinto? Hinduism, with its casts. Tal, I pick the Gospel, it speaks of love

I have always had my own moral compass Clete taught by my parents and elders of different sects and "religions', of which no religion has a corner market on right from wrong. Now they all may have their own flavor of tradition, dogma, and ceremony, many trabal and local and region, but no less the same.

LOL, the gospel of love has never stopped conquest and commerce Clete, and has it's own conflicts through time. I am sincerely happy it works for you and others however, flawed humans can screw up love too!

Quote:

---

I have always had my own moral compass

---

Does everyone else get to have that privilege? If, for instance, the guy who steals your car thinks that he was following his "own moral compass", then does that make it OK for him?

I don't know of anything more dangerous than a culture where everyone has an independent moral compass. You can go ahead and prepare for chaos.

Quote:

---

LOL, the gospel of love has never stopped conquest and commerce Clete, and has it's own conflicts through time.

---

That is largely untrue concerning conquest. As to commerce, I'm not sure what is wrong with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Does everyone else get to have that privilege? If, for instance, the guy who steals your car thinks that he was following his "own moral compass", then does that make it OK for him?

---

I think those that do evil, or wrong as criminals are crossing a boundary of good behavior as set in LAW, and punishable by that LAW.

Quote:

---

I don't know of anything more dangerous than a culture where everyone has an independent moral compass. You can go ahead and prepare for chaos.

---

As long as your moral compass doesn't take you beyond the boundaries set in the law, then there is no chaos but ORDER. Isn't that why we make the laws of the land to establish order, or are you saying religious law is above the secular law of the land? That in my mind would be more dangerous given the many religions of this land, where a vote could outlaw one religion and sanction another, and even one sect of a religious belief over another sect.

The freedom to practice ones religion of choice is sacrosanct to our basic freedoms and you are against that?

Quote:

---

That is largely untrue concerning conquest. As to commerce, I'm not sure what is wrong with that.

---

The ancient churches and religions were built on commerce as well as conquest to spread whatever religious doctrine they were ascribed to. The king was the head of the church and what he said goes.

You know what is more frightening than a Right Winger to a leftist or more frightening than a socialist to a Republican? ANARCHY! The lack of ORDER in a land is a scary thing. What frightens any people in any land more than just about anything is the potential for the LACK of Law & Order. Moral compasses are the starting points for Law & Order (example is why do wear "SWEAR" on a Holy Bible?)….But the simple fact is that lawlessness and no "structure" are frightening to the vast majority of the world. Religion lends itself to the architecture of civilization and society: And, what you say is true in that the King was the head of the Church (King Henry The VIII) but it is also true that, to some extent, the Head Of The Church was also the King (i.e. the Pope) many centuries ago.

Quote:

---

I think those that do evil, or wrong as criminals are crossing a boundary of good behavior as set in LAW, and punishable by that LAW.

---

It used to be lawful to own slaves, so are you saying it was good, moral behavior to do so? It was also against the law to assist runaway slaves, so were they criminals who were "crossing a boundary of good behavior as set in LAW?" It used to be set in law that women could not vote. Was that good, moral behavior as well? Now I don't think you would agree with any of that. The law does not establish morality. The law will hopefully reflect morality, but that still leaves unanswered the question of how to establish morality.

Quote:

---

As long as your moral compass doesn't take you beyond the boundaries set in the law, then there is no chaos but ORDER

---

Nazi Germany and the former USSR were both very orderly. I don't think I would say they were moral. Besides, when you say that my moral compass must not take me beyond the boundaries of the law, then you are imposing your moral value on me and in doing so showing that a person really cannot have his/her own moral compass since it must, of course, be subject to Tal's moral imperative concerning the law. You are, in reality, agreeing with my previous statement that everyone having his/her own moral compass would result in chaos.

Quote:

---

The ancient churches and religions were built on commerce as well as conquest to spread whatever religious doctrine they were ascribed to. The king was the head of the church and what he said goes.

---

There is only one King over the Christian church. He is permanent.

You still have not said what is wrong with commerce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Does everyone else get to have that privilege? If, for instance, the guy who steals your car thinks that he was following his "own moral compass", then does that make it OK for him?

---

I think those that do evil, or wrong as criminals are crossing a boundary of good behavior as set in LAW, and punishable by that LAW.



As long as your moral compass doesn't take you beyond the boundaries set in the law, then there is no chaos but ORDER. Isn't that why we make the laws of the land to establish order, or are you saying religious law is above the secular law of the land? That in my mind would be more dangerous given the many religions of this land, where a vote could outlaw one religion and sanction another, and even one sect of a religious belief over another sect.

The freedom to practice ones religion of choice is sacrosanct to our basic freedoms and you are against that?



The ancient churches and religions were built on commerce as well as conquest to spread whatever religious doctrine they were ascribed to. The king was the head of the church and what he said goes.

---

Tal, what I have to say about every man's moral compass is this, if it existed we would not need the ten commandments, but as we are told, in those days everyone just did whatever they thought was right, and it didn't work, it fell short of the obviously required standard. Now by suggesting the your moral compass is good enough you place yourself on the same level, and we know that even the ten commandments wasn't good enough, it was a shadow, because our own nature didn't allow us to comply

Quote:

---

our own nature didn't allow us to comply

---

Well stated.

Oh come on. This isn't about moral compasses, it's about the reality that some don't have one nor want one. No amount of beating them over the head with a bible will change that. You have had the ten commandments and even earlier versions for thousands of years now and still here we are filling up prisons and jails as fast as they can be built. Even those with so called moral compasses slip slide into bad behavior too as you mentions with slavery, which in America were good upstanding Christian men with the money and influence to write the laws to justify their actions and beliefs until it changed after a lot of blood and guts. That didn't stop the struggle as to this day people are still trying to get there justice and just as many are still writing laws to make it hard. So spare me the sermon about moral compasses and your bible, because I've seen how that's used to justify bad behavior.

Your gospel got you to where you are, and I'll just stick with what got me where I am. We're still equals folks in the same boat. Can't we just be grateful for the boat and share the love?

Quote:

---

Your gospel got you to where you are, and I'll just stick with what got me where I am. We're still equals folks in the same boat. Can't we just be grateful for the boat and share the love?

---

This is why discussing this with you is a waste of time, I think I smell some sort of alternative belief system here

Quote:

---

You have had the ten commandments and even earlier versions for thousands of years now and still here we are filling up prisons and jails as fast as they can be built.

---

Which is exactly the point that Clete was making.

Quote:

---

Even those with so called moral compasses slip slide into bad behavior too as you mentions with slavery, which in America were good upstanding Christian men with the money and influence to write the laws to justify their actions and beliefs until it changed after a lot of blood and guts

---

But you said that as long as a person was obeying the law, they were acting morally. That's not my belief, it's yours.

Quote:

---

So spare me the sermon about moral compasses and your bible, because I've seen how that's used to justify bad behavior.

---

Uhm...you're the one who brought up the subject of a moral compass. I am simply saying that if everyone acts on their own moral compass, then you better buy a gun and keep your doors locked. Many areas in our country are already at that place. That's the very reason that Jefferson made his moral appeal to God and not to the moral compasses of mankind. "All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.."

jlisenbe: You best keep your doors locked and guns at ready as a matter of course....If you aren't armed, you are a victim....Law Enforcement rarely arrives at a residence in time to prevent anything and average Police response times are getting longer...relying on the police to protect your abode and what all is in it is not going to cut it.

Why don't you just say only certain Christians can have a moral compass and stop beating around the bush. Then at least we can understand the basis for your narrow minded prejudices on this subject, and understand you think you are one of them. I find that type of passive aggressive position to be well suited for some, but not others, and can respect it but not go along with it. I just find no love in gloom and doom and fire and brimstone as a convincing argument to follow your lead, or as a consequence of not doing as you say. and many Christians agree with that and take a different approach than just your basic fundamentalism, based on your literal interpretations of your own bible.

I cannot even say you are the mainstream of your own religion as dedicated to it as you seem to be, but different approaches is hardly an alternative that you tolerate. I mean you seem to use the L word, but hardly apply it where it can be felt as genuine at most times so yeah just come clean and admit it's not for everyone and everyone doesn't subscribe to it. You don't get to use your beliefs as an excuse not to row the boat we are all in the same direction. Unless of course you can walk on water and have no need for a boat to navigate the sea of life.

I thought love was about everybody, and not just the select few that you deem fit for it. Isn't that rather discriminatory? Why can't you just be a good human, rather than your version of a good Christian?

Quote:

---

Why don't you just say only certain Christians can have a moral compass and stop beating around the bush.

---

I haven't said that because I don't believe it is true.

Quote:

---

I cannot even say you are the mainstream of your own religion as dedicated to it as you seem to be, but different approaches is hardly an alternative that you tolerate. I mean you seem to use the L word, but hardly apply it where it can be felt as genuine at most times so yeah just come clean and admit it's not for everyone and everyone doesn't subscribe to it. You don't get to use your beliefs as an excuse not to row the boat we are all in the same direction. Unless of course you can walk on water and have no need for a boat to navigate the sea of life.

---

Honestly, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

I thought love was about everybody, and not just the select few that you deem fit for it. Isn't that rather discriminatory? Why can't you just be a good human, rather than your version of a good Christian?

---

The love of God is for everyone. As to being a good human, the Bible teaches, and I think you would agree with this, that no one is absolutely good or can even approach it. We have all sinned and come short of God's glory. We can't even agree on what it means to be a "good human", much less be able to do it. And it is certainly not sufficient to stand and say with great pride, "I am better than you!"

But the topic was the moral compass you say you have. I have simply tried to point out that no one gets to operate on the basis of his/her own individual set of moral standards. If we did that, we'd be sunk in the mud because the world is full of people whose moral standards are atrocious. That being the case, we better have a standard that sits above human ideas and concepts. You appeal to the law, and I think that's a good appeal so far as it goes, but the law does not make people moral, and we even can have laws which are not moral themselves. If you believe the law makes people moral, then try walking certain neighborhoods in Chicago at midnight and see how much the law controls morality.

JL, I can only speak for myself and not you, or the multitude of other humans, but in no way do I consider myself better than any other. I give it my best shot and leave others to do the same. Right or wrong that's just ME. No the law doesn't make anyone moral, and indeed some think they are above it and there may well be a double standard in how and who those laws are applied to, but the law should define acceptable behavior to have any semblance of order, and as more facts and data presents itself then the more we can change or define the law through orderly processes. You're not suggesting we abandon those processes by which we derive that order are you? Just because some places are more dangerous than others for whatever reason does not mean the law can bring morality to those that break the law and I have never inferred such a thing.

It does hold into account the actions the law says is unacceptable. Yeah, over time the concept of unacceptable has changed and no doubt keep changing as we evolve, grow and learn, because what do you expect from flawed humans, a PERFECT system? That's rather naïve.

Now I can agree in the greater picture and things beyond us humans, and for me that means a relationship with a God that I understand and that's where MY moral compass is derived. I put nothing between that and as flawed a human as I may be I do my best. Look elsewhere for perfection because I ain't it.

glad we got that out of the way, now back to more mundane things, in what way does Iran shooting down a Ukrainian plane change the status quo?

As it turns out, it does appear that the peace loving Iranians did shoot down the plane, so your question is a really interesting one. I wonder if they bought the missile with some of the money Obama gave them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

As it turns out, it does appear that the peace loving Iranians did shoot down the plane, so your question is a really interesting one. I wonder if they bought the missile with some of the money Obama gave them?

---

I have no doubt that after the successful test by Putin of shooting down airliners in the Ukraine they wanted to try it out, but with no american planes nearby what were they to do? well the Ukraine appeared to be a friend of Trump, so hey presto, here is a message

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

As it turns out, it does appear that the peace loving Iranians did shoot down the plane, so your question is a really interesting one. I wonder if they bought the missile with some of the money Obama gave them?

---

Obama didn't give them any money. The money they got was their own -- after the US dropped sanctions that unfroze Iranian money held in banks around the world.

convienent story, Obama should have gone further and brought them in from the cold

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

convienent story, Obama should have gone further and brought them in from the cold

---

"Convenient story"? Truth! Research it. I dare you!

So Obama allowed nearly 2 bil to go to a terrorist state and we're supposed to feel better because it was their money being held by the U.S. government? Sorry. I don't feel better. The money should never have been released. It is on the same level as releasing money to Nazi Germany in 1940. It was completely irresponsible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

So Obama allowed nearly 2 bil to go to a terrorist state and we're supposed to feel better because it was their money being held by the U.S. government? Sorry. I don't feel better. The money should never have been released. It is on the same level as releasing money to Nazi Germany in 1940. It was completely irresponsible.

---

I won't post the history and reasoning here. Do you want a link to read?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

"Convenient story"? Truth! Research it. I dare you!

---

Do you think I am ignorant of the truth. Obama "earned" a peace prize for doing nothing and that is what he did in the Iran deal, negotiated only what the Iranians were already doing. A lost opportunity

Quote:

---

I won't post the history and reasoning here. Do you want a link to read?

---

If you have reasoning to justify giving nearly 2 bil in cash to one of the major terrorist states in the entire world, then state it here. I'm not interested in a link to nowhere. And it would need to be more substantial than asserting that since Obama did it, it must surely have been a wonderful thing to do.

There you conservatives go again. Taking the facts of history and dismissing them or worse twisting them and cherry picking those facts to fit a narrative that works for you. So many links have been supplied and discussed on this matter already so just insisting on them again accomplishes exactly what? A second chance at ignoring, dismissing, or twisting the facts?

How loud did you holler about HC's wrong doing and how many investigations into Benghazi did repubs have that were highly public? What were the results after all that hollering and investigating? She was totally cleared of EVERYTHING by of all people the dufus's own administration. Still you repeat the lies as loudly as ever. I think you serial haters have a real zest for liars and cheaters while you smear everybody else to cover for your own hate and lies and cheating.

So while the dufus touts his great accomplishments and you cheer him on and defend his lies and incompetence, nobody feels safer and are still looking for the next shoe to drop, abandoned the containment of ISIS, elevated Vlad to fill the vacuum of his cowardly retreat, and circle the wagons around the lying cheating dufus hunted for the truth which can only be defended by more lies and cheating as Iran threatens to get the bomb it already willingly gave up. The dufus lies are almost as strong as the right wing zeal to believe them and find blame in everybody and everything else.

If that's the example of your moral compass I would love to see you explain yourself to Jesus. I doubt you even get that far since following a proven liar with a history of cheating and stealing surely leads straight to hell. If not, then there must be no such thing.

Quote:

---

She was totally cleared of EVERYTHING by of all people the dufus's own administration.

---

Uhm...no, she wasn't. She had a private email server in her home. She conducted official government business on that server. She had classified information on the server which was, by the way, unsecured. When that information became public, she destroyed half of the data on the hard drive. She also made a point of destroying every government issued cell phone she had been given. Then FBI director Comey, now known to have been corrupt, found that she was guilty of criminal behavior but then declined to bring charges against her. So in what universe does all of that amount to "being cleared"? Her incredibly reckless and irresponsible behavior is public record and the facts above are unquestioned.

Quote:

---

I doubt you even get that far since following a proven liar with a history of cheating and stealing surely leads straight to hell.

---

I did not follow Obama and Clinton. I am also not a supporter of Trump, but I will vote for him rather than vote for amazingly corrupt and incompetent people like Clinton, Sanders, Warren, or Spartacus. I will also not refuse to give him credit for his accomplishments, as you are doing, simply because you hate him. The economy is roaring, we are energy independent (thought to be impossible just 20 years ago), we are restoring sanity to the federal judiciary, and unlike your heroes, he supports the right of unborn children to live rather than be cruelly put to death in the womb, and he supports the right of Israel to exist in peace.

The Iranians have killed more IRANIANS this last two weeks than the Americans have...A LOT MORE! Damn plane was loaded with IRANIANS! This on top of the 70 or so IRANIANS that OTHER IRANIANS CRUSHED DURING THE FUNERAL PROCESSION FOR THEIR DEAD TERRORIST who was already merely burnt pieces (there was no body). If you don't get an inkling that the IRANIANS are an uncivilized bunch, you aren't watching: Iranians at the top in Iran are bat crap crazy...They are crazy as run over dogs! I have know Iranians in the professional world that are the finest people you would ever want to meet but the one's leading Iran are selfish zealots who are taking a potentially great nation right into hell.

Stop it with this nonsense that Obama gave the Iranians THEIR money back: BULLS&$T! That's like putting lipstick on a pig...its still a pig! In no way should any measure of "whose money it really is" override the COMMON SENSE NOT TO GIVE MONEY TO A TERRORIST STATE! In no way can you contrive an argument that supports such a supposition! FROZEN? UNFROZEN? THE IDEA ITSELF WAS HALF-BAKED!

Quote:

---

In no way should any measure of "whose money it really is" override the COMMON SENSE NOT TO GIVE MONEY TO A TERRORIST STATE!

---

Well said.

If all you say is true, then why has HC not been prosecuted? I mean with all your EVIDENCE why has that not happened? Economic gains made by Obama continued under the dufus and why you liberal/dem haters cannot acknowledge that is symptomatic of your disdain for the simple facts of the matter.

I have had my doubts before whether you beleived the lies of the dufus out of desperation or ignorance, but I conclude now that it's a combination of both! I don't see that changing either, as long as a corrupt dufus is allowed to get away with his lies cheating and stealing with bo accounting.

If nothing else maybe the senate trial will reveal facts to the people.

Quote:

---

If all you say is true, then why has HC not been prosecuted? I mean with all your EVIDENCE why has that not happened?

---

Which of the facts I noted above are you denying happened? Comey himself acknowledged that it all happened and that HC was technically guilty of breaking the law. Do you really deny any of that?

Quote:

---

Economic gains made by Obama continued under the dufus and why you liberal/dem haters cannot acknowledge that is symptomatic of your disdain for the simple facts of the matter.

---

I have no problem in acknowledging that and never have. I just hope you can acknowledge that Trump took an economy which was OK and has it roaring along.

Quote:

---

I have had my doubts before whether you beleived the lies of the dufus out of desperation or ignorance, but I conclude now that it's a combination of both! I don't see that changing either, as long as a corrupt dufus is allowed to get away with his lies cheating and stealing with bo accounting.

---

It's not a case of believing Trump. It's a case of simply looking at the utter lack of evidence the dems have managed to come up with and seeing that in no way can you toss a pres out of office on that basis.

As I've been saying for weeks, give us the names of those witnesses who testified to having personal, first-hand knowledge of Trump's supposed wrong doing. Who are they? Truth is, the dems case is so weak that Pelosi is afraid to send it to the Senate. It's over.

This is nothing more than hatred of Trump, pure and simple. It has nothing to do with justice.

Dems have been calling for those witnesses since this started so let's not ignore the fact the dufus has specifically blocked them, so why you have no clue as to their names are beyond me and you still haven't answered the question of why repubs haven't prosecued HC if what YOU say is true? That's all I asked and if you cannot answer then say so. I'm not disputing your facts just the FACT repubs haven't acted on them after all that hollering and chanting.

Quote:

---

I'm not disputing your facts just the FACT repubs haven't acted on them after all that hollering and chanting.

---

That's fair enough. I would conclude that she was unspeakably foolish in her behavior, but it could not, evidently, be demonstrated to be criminal.

Still, the fact that she went to such great lengths to destroy half of the data on the hard drive just stinks to the high heavens. It certainly has all the appearance of guilt. Can you think of any reasonable explanation for that? The truth seems to be that the pro-abortion crowd is willing to cut HC, BC, and BaO all kinds of slack in these matters, while the pro-life crowd is willing to do likewise with DT, so neither crowd has any entitlement to the moral high ground in politics.

Can we get back to "current events"?

Seems the Iranians have pretty well backed down. Of course, shooting down a civilian airliner wasn't exactly the smartest move they could have made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Seems the Iranians have pretty well backed down. Of course, shooting down a civilian airliner wasn't exactly the smartest move they could have made.

---

You have to think their military may not be under strict control. Just one more nail in their coffin

Well the Iranians have admitted they shot down the passenger plane by mistake so that episode is solved at least for now, and after some thought though, the whole notion of protecting these shadow and proxy forces under the official government umbrella is somewhat despicable in of tself. While I don't like the way the dufus crew is handling this with all kinds of excuses and justifications that just don't smell right, and still think it was a gross over reaction, and they were looking for anything to make a point, and a bad guy in plain sight just fir the bill. It's somewhat disturbing when you cannot be straight with your own government about such a huge course of action with the spin that followed.

Can't say this was entirely on the dufus though as we have watched congress after congress defer it's responsibility to the executive branch as presidents have grabbed more power in the absence of congressional guidance. It's not just military actions of which I speak but domestic policy as well and that's the heart of the problem. Every other year during elections our elected officials just disappear from governing completely, and not that the are working very hard before an election either. Now that we have a fellow in the WH who is only to glad to step into the vacuum, and deal his dirty deeds, and spin them any way he sees an advantage for himself, know full well his party will do nothing to restrain check or balance whatever urges he may have on any subject.

LOL, they can't remove him for sure since he is the party and without him they have NOTHING, NADA, zip! So we have a lying cheating dufus who operates in full view with his antics without a peep from his party with absolutely no shame. Allies, friends, or foes are but pawns for the dufus enterprise, and our government is just the trappings of his own delusions. Putting a bell on the cat is inadequate as the real issue is getting the bull out of the china shop, or what will be left of it.

In other words, the economy is great, we are now amazingly energy independent, and we just took out a despicable foreign murderer, but I hate Trump, so I'm still going to be filled with vitriol. I get it.

That's just it, you don't get it. Your words are far from the mark, as wages are growing slower than prices, considering unemployment is historically low, and is being energy independent saving you any money? Consider the costs of having multiple jobs and the costs of transportation to get to those jobs to keep the lights on, and forget groceries and rent. Sure the overall economy looks great, but huge swaths of the population aren't even a part of it.

And what happens when that debt you are supposedly so worried about catches up to us? No JL I don't think you get it at all.

Hmm. Where to begin? First of all, wages are actually growing faster than inflation and is better than the Obama years when, I'll bet, you were not complaining about it. I would agree it needs to get better, but still you're having to make things up now in order to complain. Being energy independent is incredibly important from the perspective of national security, and it is wonderful to know that we are not throwing billions of dollars into the pockets of Arab sheikhs in order to buy oil. Now we are beginning to be the ones who are selling gas and oil. Debt is a concern for sure, but between the two of us, I'm the only one who was concerned about it when your beloved Mr. Obama was setting records with national borrowing. You couldn't have cared less back then. The only reason you mention it now is because you are desperate to find something to complain about with Mr. Trump.

https://www.theguardian.com/business...ot-saying-much

The biggest question is why are two retired guys up at 3:00 in the morning? I thought retired people were supposed to sleep late.