Good Does More Harm Than Evil

Continued: the turkey finally made it out of my yard. Unfortunately, I missed the event, I was changing a CD in the stereo when he left, so don't know if he flew or found the open gate . Took him about a half hour. He just kept pacing. That bird is a lot like me.




munk
 
Apocryphal story, maybe.

I'd a friend whose family raised turkeys, when he was a kid. Said domesticated turkeys are stupid enough that they'll stand out in the rain, look up at the raindrops, and drown when they drip down their nostrils.

Some days you're the raindrop; some days you're the turkey, I guess.
 
Before this goes any further, everyone needs to understand that the same sort of rules as are posted for political discussions apply to religious ones or any other discussion.

Hate language of any sort will not be tolerated. Since we are apparently in a learning mode, I chose to not ban this time.

This example will have to serve to all...please review the sticky
 
Since we are apparently in a learning mode, I chose to not ban this time."
Nasty


Nasty, so I know- I need to know- has something happened in this thread that is bannable? Have I or some person said something that would warrant our being banned? I do not understand and would like to. Thank you.



munk
 
perhaps I'm not enlightened....:(....but of most mistakes are made mostly by good people....then what constitutes a "bad person"?
 
Daniel Koster: perhaps I'm not enlightened........but of most mistakes are made mostly by good people....then what constitutes a "bad person"?

I've wondered that many times. We can usually agree a murder is 'bad', but once you leave obvious actions that harm another behind, it becomes a grey area of culture- at least to some extent. Right?



munk
 
munk - Hate language has been defined by the US Supreme Court. There was a post suggesting that a religious group should be killed. By Spark's direction, that is a ban offense. You probably saw the rules when you were a Mod. They still apply.
 
Oh, I didn't see the post. Ok, I got it.
To put it in my layman's terms, it means; "dont talk trash". I can live with that.
Thank you.


munk
 
As an aside to all:

I've sometimes wondered if a law and order approach to our family forum would work There are a significant number of you who appreciate that approach- I guess. I'd like to take any personal stuff away from this issue. I'm going to support HI forum and Yangdu in whatever venue she places her forum. If Spark's conditions, and Nasty's adherence/interpretation to the rules around here eventually stifle/changes HI forum, that is Yangdu's call. I mean, she can decide where she wants to live, right?

I don't have any particular 'pull' with Yangdu. (as I've said previously, those of you who suspect me of Vulcan mind control are mistaken- darn it!) My opinion to HI is just one friend's opinion. It is respected by my friend Yangdu, but it sure aint 'gospel'.

Each of us makes his own mind up about forum participation. And that has a direct affect upon HI.

You see, I'm changing these days. I'm trying to become a better budhist myself. There are many things in this world not to take personally.

munk
 
From munk's initial post, my reaction was that often the solution is worse than the problem.


I've been amused (well, disturbed, but sometimes you have to laugh so you don't cry) by people vowing that "this will never happen again". Some law gets passed so that something will never happen again. We can be vigilant, but life does not happen in a hermetically sealed bag. If we ban everything, than nothing will happen. None of the bad stuff, none of the good stuff. And, as was already said, no matter how many bans we put in place, someone will ignore the ban. Anybody count the number of people going the speed limit on the average interstate lately?

Regarding other points in the thread:

IMHO Liberals seem to favor the bubble-wrapped nanny state. Conservatives (in their present incarnation) favor the police state. Neither is particularly palatable to me.

No idea which particular group was targeted by the deleted hate speech. I don't like to condemn people as a group because often there is either someone driving them forward, or they have a sincere, heartfelt motive for their actions, no matter how dark or reprehensible. YMMV
 
Hate language?
What a joke.
Never said I hated anyone.

Nasty you just made my point for me.
I point out it was muslum aggression then and now, that is the problem and you call me a racist and a bigot.
Who declared Holy War?
Not me.
Who's book says the only way to heaven is converting or killing the infidel?
Not mine.
Who is completly non religious and wants peace for everyone.
That's me.
Who has no intention of allowing people to kill me for not believing in their stupid book?
That would be me.
You are a usefull idiot.
They use well meaning but stupid individuals like yourself to get what they want.

You represent HI.
Calling me a bigot and racist is libel.
It's also a lie and cowardly.
I've spent alot of money on a good product and don't want to take out your stupidity on HI.
However, I have no intention of buying products from a company that libels me.
Worse than allowing my words to be read and calling me what you will.
You erase what I said and imply I'm commiting a crime."Hate Speach"
I committed no hate speach,no bigotry,no racism.
This is your fabrication.
I have no doubt you will futher edit and attempt to humiliate me as you seem to enjoy doing this to others.

What is it they say about power?
 
munk said:
Since a loaded gun in a car means you could shoot someone if you suddenly became a murderous mad man, it is illegal in California to have a loaded gun in your car.

munk
Click to expand...

HI Munk,

That California law sucks. In Georgia our guv just passed a law that not only can you have a gun in your car with no carry permit, but that unlike the old law where the gun had to be locked in your glove compartment, you can have the gun anywhere you want in your car.

He earlier passed another law that if you find a burglar in your home you can shoot him and that you do not have to try to flee.

I would hope that would be a criminal deterrent!
 
Regarding the contents of this forum:

(I do not want to be mod at this time, btw. IN case someone thinks the following post has an agenda. So many misconceptions are assigned to me by a minority of forumites who then do not communicate them openly. This becomes a sort of weight I have to untangle. It's no fun writing with qualifiers all the time. Look at this- I say I'm Yangdu's friend, not that I have any special pull: these constant qualifiers indicate the forum is not 'open' - at least in my personal experience, and that there are unacknowledged pressures weighing our pleasent participation down.)


... I've always said this is our forum. We are ultimately the ones who decide content, within BF's guidelines. I don't know what is going on with Grappler and Nasty right now, but I do know there is a fear or restraint being excercised by many forumites about posting. They won't speak their minds here. They are either silent or leaving for "R" forumn.

This ultimately is Yangdu's ballywick. Cause and effect; less paticipatory forum and less forum. Less sales too? I don't know. Certainly less 'dream', in my opinion, of what Bill and Rusty laid out in faith and guts.

So, I don't know what is going on with this current spat, but at least Grappler said something. That is good! As an indicator of how far the place has gone to darkness this is a rare event. I wish he'd been less forcefull, but who the 'he--" (edited word) am I to have an opinion? Just a guy who used to love this place.

I hope our forum comes back some day.
I've not left and am still calling them like I see them- the way I always have.
Rusty was my best friend and this is one reason why.



munk
 
OK, to get back to the subject matter, I sure appreciate what Marsh and Tohatchi NM are saying. Darn right. Keep our conversation alive.



munk
 
Munk, what a thought provoking thread.

One of the first things that popped into my mind, was already somewhat voiced by someone here.

What is the definition of a "good" person... and conversely, what is the definition of a "bad" person? There's an old saying that "no one is 'wrong' or 'right' in most situations, because due to their own personality, expierences and code, each person is 'correct' in their own minds eye for the given circumstance." Although I believe in that philosophy to a great extent, it leaves too much room for people to be unaccountable, so it can't be embraced completely.

Do "bad people" do good things? Some would look at Pablo Escobar and say yes.

We've established good people do bad things. Do some good people not do good things nor bad things? Where do they fall with their stasis? Are they the turkey walking balk and forth in front of your gate?

I think democratic societies try to have a checks-and-balance in place by avoiding situations where a singluar person makes decisions of code, law, etc. Yet you show with the gun law example in California that this doesn't always work either. Was the group that decided to go forward all good people? All bad people? Or maybe just not diverse enough in opinion to make a good call?

Diversity in opinion can help a lot in decision making processes. If everyone thinks the same, the solutions will be miopic.

Is Fred Phelps a good person? I don't know. I see the hurt he causes though, on his renegade crusade.

**He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~ Nietzsche

m1
 
....men make beasts of themselves in order to forget the pain of being men. "
paraphrased quote from a Thompson book...the author is Johnson? bad memory.

Michelle;
That was a wonderful and fresh post you just made. Where the heck where you when I was isolated and bitter in Jr High because I couldn't find anyone to talk to?? Err....Just Kidding!!!

Bad people do do good things. And a good person's life cannot be measured by a single mistake, but is a whole that we hold.


munk
 
Daniel Koster said:
perhaps I'm not enlightened....:(....but of most mistakes are made mostly by good people....then what constitutes a "bad person"?
Click to expand...

Thats a very good question Dan. What does constitute a bad person? I find it interesting recently during this rash of rape acquittals the attitude of the person when they're released after 22 years. There have been several here in Atlanta, and without fail they're calm about it. They are not bitter or angry, etc. I'm so impressed with that. What if you missed your kids growing up and they didn't know you?? I don't think I'd be peaceful or calm. The last guy was ID'd by the victim and convicted on that. She had died years ago, but he was completely forgiving of her. She, on the other hand, probably died hating and fearing him. A complete misconception. Its wierd this 'bad person' thing.
 
Michelle said:
Michelle;
That was a wonderful and fresh post you just made. Where the heck where you when I was isolated and bitter in Jr High because I couldn't find anyone to talk to??
Click to expand...

I think I was probably a good person, running around doing bad things. ;) Okay, maybe not bad things, but most assuredly, not "wise" things. Clearly you were more advanced in thought process in Jr. High than I was. Perhaps I am only at Jr. High level currently..... but at least I keep trying to move forward.



What about MANY mistakes? Can a good person make MANY mistakes? I know I have. As recently as yesterday. They weren't intentionally bad... they were actions fueled by "the moment" without forthought. How many mistakes can one make before they turn from "good" to "bad"? It sounds like "how many licks does it take to get to the tootsie-roll center of a tootsie-roll pop" doesnt it! lol.

Is there a sliding scale of which mistakes are worse than others? Mistakes made from boastfulness, or immaturity, or anger, or ego or ID... how do they match up against mistakes of self-righteousness? Or envy? Or malice?

I'm sorry to ask so many questions but it seems I found this thread at an incredibly opportune time, because these are things I have been looking hard at for the last couple of weeks, not only in others, but also in myself.

When do our actions stop being "for the right reason" and turn into something of their own agenda of pride, or anger, or vendetta? Or do they, at the core, start out as those less-than-admirable actions to begin with, and we just fool ourselves for a while... telling ourselves our intentions are noble?

The whole judgement thing is a slippery slope.

m1
 
You're talking to the Pot, and the Kettle, Michelle. I make a whole bunch of mistakes. I have a viotile (sic) personal life at times. The artistic or inconoclastic or character disorder or ??? that distinguishes me from a MacDonald's burger also lands me in hot water. I make mistakes. Some of them are real ones, I've transgressed. I pay the dues. Occasionally I'm not allowed to pay the dues; those in the context of the incident would rather keep me labled as a bad guy or transgressor. Put that in our discussion of good and evil and the choices and roles men play.

There are also those obstacles assigned to one, either through unhappy circumstance, or bigotry and ignorance on the part of others, or a lack of good presentation by the author.

Sure it's a slippery slope.

munk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top