"Tani Jantsang©" <tjsrno@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:13t9cmo96df4959@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "flower of romance" <flowers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:qr1Bj.3607$5i5.1879@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "lorax666" <yronwode.com@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:47d38a6f$0$36367$742ec2ed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> you could just switch allegiances to a different
>>> god. that way the "sin" set would also change.
>>
>> you could. some of us did.
>
> There is another way to see this. Let us say that your God is the
Cosmos
> itself - or the dark force in nature. Let us say that this god has only
> what is absolutely and literally true to tell us. This is what this god
> says:
>
> 1. Nothing is good or bad unless you think it is good or bad.
> 2. All things are permitted, the only exceptions being purely physical
> ones. (I.e., you are not permitted to breathe water because, as a human,
> you simply can't do that. You are not permitted to walk through a wall,
> because as a being made of matter, you can't.)
>
> That's it. Nothing else.
something i've contemplated before now. I mean who or what has authority
over us other than the ohysical constraints as you pointed out. True you
could go on a killing spree and get gunned down for your troubles but you
took the **** of no'one. ;)
>
> Now, one might ask why have a god at all, if those are the only 2 things
> told to you by this god? Well, heh, if a GOD said it and it's written
in
> a BOOK - then heh - you know how the rest of that goes. What kind of
> society would we have? Maybe no society? Anarchy leads to gangs - I
> won't even debate that no-brainer.
But the gods never said anything about it being written in a book. People
did then told us it was gods.
If I was a god, I wouldn't bother trying to talk to people. I would just
make them extinct.
>
> However, in time, people would get the idea that "tit for tat" doesn't
> always work out, even if the gang were doing tit for tat (that's, more
or
> less, a kind of golden rule that not just humans tend to follow - there
is
> more cooperation in the animal world than there is competition).
Someone
> might get the other idea that "well, if EVERYONE did this thing, what
> would happen?" And what might happen might seriously suck. Or it might
> be seriously good.
>
I agree. The term "law of the jungle" always amuses especially when you
should look and see that there is a lot of order in the jungle. trouble
with
tit for tat is that it never is. tit is responded by tat and them sum
which
is in turn responded by a greater amount of tit and it's not everyday i
get
to say that.. eventually it results in war..
> Someone would come along and claim that this God had 3 rules, or 4, or 5
-
> and you know how that goes. They'd be laws - with a bit of that
emphasis
> for those that need it: the old "GOD said it."
Yeah and they stick the odd extra one in here and there aswell. You see
all
this dogma of all these religions and most of it has **** all to do with
thier gods
>
> On the other hand, if someone, some person with brute force and a
> following, decides that something is good for him and his gang and ****
> everyone else - that person could also come up with rules 6, 7, 8 and so
> forth - and enforce those rules until, eventually, in a few generations
-
> nobody knows that anything changed - and this new regime becomes the
> status quo.
All too familier
>
> I have a very good reason, one on one, to know HOW such things end up
> turning out - and that's from personal experience of seeing it literally
> happen with something amoral and 100% individualistic. In the hands of
> other people, even THAT can become something very different. Personally
> seen it.
>
We've all seen such things but few regocnize it for what it is.
> So let us say that humans evolved out of the need for any gods. Then
> they'd have "the ruler" and what "the ruler said" - i.e., laws. Ok, the
> congress. The house of reps. Oooo, the Supreme Court (9 ****ing people
in
> black robes - HOH sound familiar?). Doesn't matter if the laws are just
> or not. Some of our laws are ridiculous - stupid beyond measure. But
> nonetheless, almost impossible to overturn even if the majority wants
them
> overturned - and this is SUPPOSED to be a gov of, by, and for the
people.
> Yeah, how long did THAT last? Not long.
>
That's it you see. We are supposed to be puppets; obey these stupid laws
without question but we are thinking creatures. Though most of us aint
Geniuses we are capable of spotting stupid laws. some rebel some don't.
Some
of us aren't sontent to be sheep.
>
>
>
>
>>>
>>> nocTifer
>>> luckymojo.com@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>
>
|
