You cannot apply “objective” if the supernatural is involved. And I mean “supernatural” as not directly observable or measurable – as in above nature or outside nature.
If we live in the matrix, it is a bit of a wasted effort in speculating as to what is really going on. But it is fun. From: Cameron Crum Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 11:28 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan Chuck, you can get to the same conclusion with simple logic and objective morality based on natural law. I'm happy to elaborate with sources for anyone who cares to listen. To the peanut gallery, please don't start a lecture on morality if you don't understand the word objective. Most of the time when I enter into these discussions, "Your morality is not my morality speech." That would be subjective morality, not objective. On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: No offense meant, I just like kicking around the philosophy ball with folks that have opposing points of view. Only way I learn things. From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 10:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan I'm pulling back from this discussion. It's a no-win, and there are other hills I'd rather die on. Picking my battles so to speak. On Mar 13, 2016 11:50 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: If I have a strong feeling that the guy in the sky that created all of us hates the murder of babies, yes I will try to stop that via legislation. How is that persecution? Just trying to carry out the wishes of the boss. He has promised me a pretty nice apartment if I give it a good try. Persecution? From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 10:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan So you wish to force your religious beliefs on others via legislation, in a country created to escape persecution from religion? On Mar 13, 2016 11:38 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: Here is why a churches need to be involved with reproductive care, contraception, or abortion. If you believe there is a God, Creator, Savior etc. >Then if you believe that entity cares about these things (listed above). >>Then if you believe that the mind of that entity has communicated its wishes with man. >>>Then if you believe that those wishes are contained in doctrine of churches or bodies of scripture. >>>>Then the church and its doctrine trumps all laws of man. The church needs to be involved in all facets of life. If you believe the above. You can claim to be agnostic or atheistic but a smart person should hedge their bets against actually not knowing that they are totally right about that. Could be that every time you eat spaghetti you are committing a mortal sin. Could be. For me and mine, I will take my particular flavor of Christianity and do my thing, while you do your thing. But if I have an opportunity to legislate away things I consider mortal sins, I will try. From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 6:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan Why does any church need to be involved with reproductive care, contraception, or abortion? Those are medical issues. On Mar 13, 2016 6:48 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> wrote: Actually, my belief is here in the deep south we have a church on every corner. Let the churches handle it....they are more than capable. My tax dollars aren't needed for this. (or many other things) ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Hohhof To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 6:18 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan What many people who lose sleep over Planned Parenthood are actually upset about is they offer birth control. Some people obsess about poor people having sex without the punishment of getting pregnant. See this if you forgot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh%E2%80%93Sandra_Fluke_controversy I don’t understand how you can be extremely anti-abortion yet also extremely anti-contraception. Less unwanted pregnancies = less abortions. Which is the lesser evil? I think it comes down to some people are obsessed with sex, especially “other” people having sex. #nosyneighbors #getalife From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 5:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan Did you research that video? You should. It's not what you think. On Mar 13, 2016 5:41 PM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> wrote: Yah, i'm kind of like Chuck here. I don't care about gay marriage. I'm not gay, I know a handful of gay people. Not my cup of tea but the government doesn't have any right telling them what they can or can't do. Same with adoption for a gay couple - shut up gov'mt. Now, I'm not so sure on that. When I was growing up there were few gay couples who had "come out" and we thought if the girl had a different last name than her mommy we thought that was odd. Quite a bit different now but it could still screw with a kids head in terms of "traditional marriage". It would be hard to NOT state that traditional marriage has gone to hell in this country. But then again, so many "traditional" things have gone to hell. How many women stay at home and take care of the family while dad goes to work? I am in favor of defunding planned parenthood. The videos pretty much got to me. It's MY TAX DOLLARS. Defund it. There are plenty of other non-government-funded entities who can do that work. Any tax is bad :) I'm going to stop there, i will get in trouble... lol ----- Original Message ----- From: Josh Reynolds To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan His stances: Gay marriage is wrong He doesn't support adoption for a gay couple Defund planned parenthood Raising corporate tax is bad Voted yes for more sentencing and prosecution for juveniles. Wants to drill in ANWR Voted no on tax credits for renewable energy. Voted no on 4 weeks paid parental leave for federal employees. Votes for PATRIOT act over and over Voted to allow warantless electronic surveillance against us citizens Denied additional funding that would provide expanded child healthcare "Let's build a fence!" Voted NO on reporting / deporting illegal immigrants who received hospital treatment Etc. A few things I like him on, but mostly he's a "nope" for me. On Mar 13, 2016 4:46 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> wrote: Hey, I said I liked him. Just not full on man crush. I didn’t see how his math added up for the budgets he proposed. There were some missing pages where magic happened to balance the budget. Seemed like the same old voodoo economics. So “man crush”, is that like Trump and Putin? At least Putin is supposedly an 8th degree black belt. He would probably take care of the protester himself. If Trump thinks he can bully the Putins of the world, I’m not so sure. I think McCain could take him in a fair fight. Hell, Bernie could probably take him. I was never fond of Nixon, but the photo of the “kitchen debate” with Khrushchev is a treasure. http://spectator.org/articles/41740/how-handle-bully-nixon-vs-khrushchev From: CBB - Jay Fuller Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 4:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [AFMUG] Paul Ryan I have actually followed Paul Ryan since the first time he appeared on the national stage. Very impressed with him. Could almost call him my "man crush". I'd be interested in hearing what you do not like about him Ken. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ken Hohhof To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 2:04 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Donald Trump's Supporters Love Him Even More AfterChicago Violence I think the "establishment" is missing why people are fed up with them, I'm not convinced it's about left or right. If I had to single out one person as the poster boy for why the establishment has failed us, it would be Mitch McConnell. All 4 leaders in Congress have only been worried about their own power and re-election, but McConnell is the worst of a bad bunch. I don't agree with Paul Ryan's economics or some of his politics, but I like what he has said since being elected Speaker. I would like to see if they are just words, or if he would translate them into actions. I don't think we will get to find out, election politics seem to have rendered him irrelevant. And Mitch the Turtle would have to be replaced with someone actually interested in governing. I wonder what conservative goals could have been accomplished in the 7 years Mitch has spent trying to make Obama fail no matter how much damage it causes. Tort reform? Modifications to Obamacare? Fix sequestration? Tax reform? Immigration reform? Mitch doesn't care. Mitch cares about Mitch. That's the problem with the establishment, they spend all their effort on getting elected and staying in power, they don't even pretend to do their job. And let me be clear, I'm not saying Pelosi, Reid and Boehner were much better, it's just McConnell is the most blatant hack of the bunch, every time I see him on TV I feel he is giving me the finger. I am probably fooling myself that Paul Ryan would be different, but I don't think we'll find out. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Prince Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2016 1:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Donald Trump's Supporters Love Him Even More After Chicago Violence IMO, Obama moved right, and the Republicans moved further to the right. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 3/13/2016 6:01 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote: > Obama moved right as much as the Republicans moved left. Everybody's idea > of compromise these days is you come to where I am and I'll make a deal.
