Fair Share?

[babe]

Liberals never bother to acknowledge or come to terms with the other side of the equation of inequality of outcome...the inequality of effort, skill, talent, values, morality, choices, parenting, IQ, attitude, motivations.

Yeah, it takes a certain type of effort to become rich. One person can put a lot of effort into participating on a chat forum while someone else could use all that time doing something constructive like building a house and they will have different outcomes. It would be silly to expect or desire the same outcome for a different type of effort. Liberals need to quit slamming their fists against the laws of nature in their unworthy quest for equality of outcome. Quit pulling down the crabs trying to escape the bucket of mediocrity. Quit coveting their neighbors wife.

I was with ya, clear to the part about the crabby mediocre unhappy wives being desired by anyone. If the progressives want them, good riddance. Nothing a progressive meddler on the grand scales of society needs more than trouble at home.

Considering the essential homogeneity of a populace divided only by unthinking reactions to mass media/public educational false paradigms useful only for dividing people from one another without any basis in fact, I'd expect a good research project on infidelity along ideological lines would show no difference in morality for Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives.

Even religions have a hard time drawing in people that are in any way different from the norms of the community.

JazzFanz, however, are more intelligent, more moral, and the very best coaching talent available for free. We all know Corbin must go.

 

[PearlWatson]

I was with ya, clear to the part about the crabby mediocre unhappy wives being desired by anyone. If the progressives want them, good riddance. Nothing a progressive meddler on the grand scales of society needs more than trouble at home.

Considering the essential homogeneity of a populace divided only by unthinking reactions to mass media/public educational false paradigms useful only for dividing people from one another without any basis in fact, I'd expect a good research project on infidelity along ideological lines would show no difference in morality for Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives.

Even religions have a hard time drawing in people that are in any way different from the norms of the community.

JazzFanz, however, are more intelligent, more moral, and the very best coaching talent available for free. We all know Corbin must go.

You little devil. I could have stopped at "Quit coveting" or way back at "Liberals!"

 

[babe]

You little devil. I could have stopped at "Quit coveting" or way back at "Liberals!"

You mean the first word, "Liberals"???

Actually, the part about "Quit Coveting" could be generally applied to every scheming politician who wants to raise taxes, "protect" stuff from others, or even wanting to have the biggest post count.

Probably close to being universally good advice.

The problem with good advice is that nobody is going to listen, and people generally are satisfied with merely giving it, and it's too hard to actually follow.

It is, however, at the heart of this thread. The whole idea of discussing "Fair Share" is to argumentatively justify public covetousness.

 

[PearlWatson]

You mean the first word, "Liberals"???

Actually, the part about "Quit Coveting" could be generally applied to every scheming politician who wants to raise taxes, "protect" stuff from others, or even wanting to have the biggest post count.

Probably close to being universally good advice.

The problem with good advice is that nobody is going to listen, and people generally are satisfied with merely giving it, and it's too hard to actually follow.

Yeah it should have been "Liberals!" *huge sigh*

 

[PearlWatson]

I found a great post by Moe that fits this thread nicely.

The notion of karma comes with lots of new-age baggage, but it is an old and very conservative idea. It is the Sanskrit word for "deed" or "action," and the law of karma says that for every action, there is an equal and morally commensurate reaction. Kindness, honesty and hard work will (eventually) bring good fortune; cruelty, deceit and laziness will (eventually) bring suffering. No divine intervention is required; it's just a law of the universe, like gravity.

Karma is not an exclusively Hindu idea. It combines the universal human desire that moral accounts should be balanced with a belief that, somehow or other, they will be balanced....
...Liberals in the 1960s and 1970s seemed intent on protecting people from the punitive side of karma. Premarital sex was separated from its consequences (by birth control, abortion and more permissive norms); bearing children out of wedlock was made affordable (by passing costs on to taxpayers); even violent crime was partially shielded from punishment (by liberal reforms that aimed to protect defendants and limit the powers of the police).

Now jump ahead to today's ongoing financial and economic crisis. Again, those guilty of corruption and irresponsibility have escaped the consequences of their wrongdoing, rescued first by President Bush and then by President Obama. Bailouts and bonuses sent unimaginable sums of the taxpayers' money to the very people who brought calamity upon the rest of us. Where is punishment for the wicked?

As the tea partiers see it, the positive side of karma has been weakened, too. The Protestant work ethic (karma's Christian cousin) holds that hard work is a duty and will bring commensurate rewards. Yet here, too, liberals have long been uncomfortable with karma...
...One of the biggest disagreements between the political left and right is their conflicting notions of fairness. Across many surveys and experiments, we find that liberals think about fairness in terms of equality, whereas conservatives think of it in terms of karma...

I gotta go back and get the link now.

https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php...-notion-of-Karma&p=60410&viewfull=1#post60410

 

[babe]

"karma" is considered a degenerate, false notion by Mormons.

Mormons believe God is God because he obeys true principles, that the universe, including matter and energy, as elements, can not be created or made, but have always existed. No voice speaking from nothing ordering "Exist" to anyone or anything, defying the logical question of how God exists in the first place.

Science from its departure from mysticism and alchemy has postulated a connection between action and result, and independent self-existing principles governing nature in some observable and predictable ways.

liberals, in my opinion or analysis, think about "fairness" in purely rhetorical terms, and use it only as part of some sort of "progressive" management, in their own interest and power, over others. They are disciples of philosophers whose work was bent on denying responsibility, accountability, or any relevant moral imperatives applicable to themselves in derogation of their Nietzschean assertion of their own power over everyone and everything, for their own benefit exclusively. Whatever else they say, it's just a determined deception to deflect criticism and sideline opposition.

Liberals, judged in terms of their actions, are everything God isn't. The decision of our lifetimes is which will make the better God for us.

 

[PearlWatson]

"karma" is considered a degenerate, false notion by Mormons.

Mormons believe God is God because he obeys true principles, that the universe, including matter and energy, as elements, can not be created or made, but have always existed. No voice speaking from nothing ordering "Exist" to anyone or anything, defying the logical question of how God exists in the first place.

Science from its departure from mysticism and alchemy has postulated a connection between action and result, and independent self-existing principles governing nature in some observable and predictable ways.

liberals, in my opinion or analysis, think about "fairness" in purely rhetorical terms, and use it only as part of some sort of "progressive" management, in their own interest and power, over others. They are disciples of philosophers whose work was bent on denying responsibility, accountability, or any relevant moral imperatives applicable to themselves in derogation of their Nietzschean assertion of their own power over everyone and everything, for their own benefit exclusively. Whatever else they say, it's just a determined deception to deflect criticism and sideline opposition.

Liberals, judged in terms of their actions, are everything God isn't. The decision of our lifetimes is which will make the better God for us.

I found a couple instances that could be considered karma.

Alma 19:80 And ye shall have good rewarded unto you again; for that which ye do send out, shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore the word restoration, more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth him not at all.

D&C 130:20-21"[t]here is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated" .

 

[babe]

I found a couple instances that could be considered karma.

Alma 19:80 And ye shall have good rewarded unto you again; for that which ye do send out, shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore the word restoration, more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth him not at all.

D&C 130:20-21"[t]here is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated" .

I can't believe you know this stuff, Pearl. You're amazing.

Find something like this in the Bible, if you can.

I've been thinking, a little, about how ideas "snowball" over time. One Brow has been campaigning hard to drive the development of mankind towards some higher plane in his estimation of things, for example. If you go back a year or two and compare his work, you might see how it has developed.

We humans do develop or change over time as ideas work their way through our minds and appear to need to be improved somehow. . . .

The concept of "revelation" as in Mormonism has an element of changeability in it, an unstated belief that it's OK to change, maybe a belief that somehow God is developing humanity along some necessary course. . .. but it's different from the Old Testament, and so is the New Testament fundamentally inconsistent with the Old Testament in some respects. The Old Testament has some elements of changeablity in "God" as well, but does not assert that it's good. God repents of making man and comes damn close to annihilating mankind in a just disgust. God refuses to re-issue a higher law when it's too clear it's useless to expect people to value it or follow it.

But clearly, the concept of "God" in the Old Testament is that God is absolute, and has the human characteristics of self-awareness and self-interest, and demands reverence from man, and intends consequences to us for not caring.

But the "karma" concept looks like a retreat from believing in an actual person "God" who is a "Father" to mankind back to some kind of mysticism about things unknowable. . . .with consequences. just sayin'.

 

[One Brow]

Liberals never bother to acknowledge or come to terms with the other side of the equation of inequality of outcome...the inequality of effort, skill, talent, values, morality, choices, parenting, IQ, attitude, motivations.

I acknowledge all of those, and see the effect they have. I don't know of any liberal who denies they exist or play a factor. Could you point one out? The issue with many conservatives is that; while acknowledging the role of effort, skill, talent, values, morality, choices, parenting, IQ, attitude, and motivations; the ignore the effects of luck, connections, differential treatment in educational settings, differential talent/moral/skill/attitude/motive estimations based on surface features, differing punishments being meted out for similar infractions, etc. (I could add another dozen items, at least). Closing to you eyes to the latter doesn't make them go away; saying that the former are important doesn't detract from the importance of the latter.

Liberals need to quit slamming their fists against the laws of nature in their unworthy quest for equality of outcome.

Equality of opportunity would be sufficient, thanks.

Quit coveting their neighbors wife.

I have to wonder if your use of "wife", as opposed to "goods", is a subconscious fear coming through or a deliberate troll.

 

[PearlWatson]

I can't believe you know this stuff, Pearl. You're amazing.

Find something like this in the Bible, if you can.

I've been thinking, a little, about how ideas "snowball" over time. One Brow has been campaigning hard to drive the development of mankind towards some higher plane in his estimation of things, for example. If you go back a year or two and compare his work, you might see how it has developed.

We humans do develop or change over time as ideas work their way through our minds and appear to need to be improved somehow. . . .

The concept of "revelation" as in Mormonism has an element of changeability in it, an unstated belief that it's OK to change, maybe a belief that somehow God is developing humanity along some necessary course. . .. but it's different from the Old Testament, and so is the New Testament fundamentally inconsistent with the Old Testament in some respects. The Old Testament has some elements of changeablity in "God" as well, but does not assert that it's good. God repents of making man and comes damn close to annihilating mankind in a just disgust. God refuses to re-issue a higher law when it's too clear it's useless to expect people to value it or follow it.

But clearly, the concept of "God" in the Old Testament is that God is absolute, and has the human characteristics of self-awareness and self-interest, and demands reverence from man, and intends consequences to us for not caring.

But the "karma" concept looks like a retreat from believing in an actual person "God" who is a "Father" to mankind back to some kind of mysticism about things unknowable. . . .with consequences. just sayin'.

Not really. I peeked in on an internet conversation on karma involving Mormon's and those are the 2 Book of Mormon passages they came up with.

The Bible example is easy: GALATIANS 6:7 (KJV) 7: Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

I don't understand why you delved into revelation but I found it highly interesting. You have such talent for tying everything in a neat little bow in the end. I've always liked your style and grace.

 

[babe]

Not really. I peeked in on an internet conversation on karma involving Mormon's and those are the 2 Book of Mormon passages they came up with.

The Bible example is easy: GALATIANS 6:7 (KJV) 7: Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

I don't understand why you delved into revelation but I found it highly interesting. You have such talent for tying everything in a neat little bow in the end. I've always liked your style and grace.

As I've been thinking of our little exchange in here yesterday, another reference came to mind. Jesus' exhortation "Cast your bread upon the waters, and after many days it will return to you" defies all experience and logic with bread, which would in water just fall apart, and in a river be eaten by the fish and such, and moves the mind right into a mystical framework of some inexorable reality of nature's propensity for justice operating on a "karma-like" level. Some scholars draw connections enough with Jesus' teaching to make out the rudiments of an argument that he went to India and was educated there, and brought some of that back home.

"Do unto others as ye would have them do unto you" could be read in a similar light, and indeed the idea is present in the older asiatic religions as well.

 

[PearlWatson]

I acknowledge all of those, and see the effect they have. I don't know of any liberal who denies they exist or play a factor. Could you point one out? The issue with many conservatives is that; while acknowledging the role of effort, skill, talent, values, morality, choices, parenting, IQ, attitude, and motivations; the ignore the effects of luck, connections, differential treatment in educational settings, differential talent/moral/skill/attitude/motive estimations based on surface features, differing punishments being meted out for similar infractions, etc. (I could add another dozen items, at least). Closing to you eyes to the latter doesn't make them go away; saying that the former are important doesn't detract from the importance of the latter.



Equality of opportunity would be sufficient, thanks.



I have to wonder if your use of "wife", as opposed to "goods", is a subconscious fear coming through or a deliberate troll.

That was actually a good reply. I acknowledge most of those factors but don't think it is the proper role of the government to try to step in and compensate for some of those things. Where government is the cause of those inequalities they need to get out of the way. Christ and benevolent people are the cure, otherwise.

Equality of opportunity can't always be achieved because circumstances are out of people's hands, and sometimes the choices people make eliminate opportunities, but the human spirit has the capacity to rise above a lot of natural inequalities and mistakes if they have the freedom to do so and aren't hampered by oppressive government interference.

That's just the biblical reference.