Political Crossfire Forums

[Puzzle Peddler]

Quote: Why is this fair?

Why do people deserve to be equal?

[zelda]

Quote: So you're saying that when Jesus said, "Sell all thou hast and give to the poor," he was just envious, and wanted others' money for himself? When he chased the moneylenders out of the temple, he was just envious and wanted their money for himself? You're saying that the only reason anyone but a slave would object to slavery is because they don't have any slaves themselves?
oh ok, i get it now. well you see,me i don't believe there is a god up there and so all discussions involving jesus and dogmas etc are bound to fail right from the very beginning. so let's not go there!

Quote: You are the one claiming there is no such thing as a sincere objection to injustice, only envy for its beneficiaries.
i didn't claim that. i just said that i believe facts are more important than words, actively doing something to change things for the better is much more important than discussing about it.

Quote: slavery is exploitation, selling, mistreatement etc of human beings by human beings. Quote: And what is wrong with that? Think hard.
:? nothing.

Quote: rich p. hiltons don't sell, trade or own other human beings. Quote: I see. So, as long as they are not actually made chattels, people can be robbed, mistreated, exploited, starved, tortured and killed for the unearned profit of the Paris Hiltons of the world, and anyone who objects to any of it is only envious of those who pocket the proceeds?
yes, wow, my point exactly!! :roll: look, i don't have enough patience to untwist the words you put in my mouth or my words that you deliberately twisted.

Quote: OK. I understand where you're coming from: the kindest interpretation of your views is that you are afraid that if there were no poor people, you would have no one to practice your virtue of charity on.
no, i'm simply realistic and i understand very clearly that poor people will never cease to exist. poor people don't exist because rich people want to, but because of so many economical, social, political etc reasons that you have to be completely naive to really believe the statement you made above.

Quote: The meaning is very clear: you have made a false, despicable, and evil claim about the motivations of those who oppose injustice, including me, and I am calling you on it. You just cannot permit yourself to understand the meaning of my words, because then you would not be able to avoid knowing that you are a servant of Evil.
oh, please stop...! servant of evil, despicable evil claim, really now... it's not out of laziness that i won't respond to this...

Quote: ok, please make me understand something. what institution, what institutionalized injustices are you talking about?? Quote: The systematic legal violations of people's rights that result in private appropriation, almost always by the rich, of publicly created value, and the associated public appropriation through taxation, almost always from working people, of privately created value.
are you...suggesting a....communist state?...

Quote: what is the solution to it? Quote: Secure, equal rights to life, liberty, and property in the products of one's labor.
practically you mean... because all of these things actually do exist and are generally respected, except parts of africa, asia, war-zones..

Quote: because in my opinion this "institution" is called luck or fate or whatever and these are things you can't really change. Quote: Yes, well, I guess the difference between your opinion and mine is that mine is a reasoned and informed one.
this is a matter of common-sense, not information.

Quote: By accusing those who are trying to stop it at the institutional, political and philosophical level of envy.
get over it!! i was just wondering if maybe you weren't a bit envious of this lucky, rich chick. i wasn't accusing anyone of anything, i'm saying that this is not the way to make things move!

[quote]Wrong. There is a systematic injustice involved, just one that you are either unable or unwilling to understand.[quote]
i've seen you are religious. why can't you accept that these things were sent by god?systematic injustice...this sounds like there was a conspiracy theory involved, is there any?

Quote: The fact that there will always be poor and rich people is not an excuse for forcibly making the poor poorer and the rich richer, any more than the fact that there will always be tall and short people would excuse forcibly shortening the short and stretching the tall.
ok, and what do you suggest?
and one more question: finally is it fair that p.h. inherited a fortune while others are starving to death? why/why not?
this was the initial question of the thread and i'm curious to hear your answer on this specific issue,not on the general perspective of fairness and unfairness.

Quote: ?? :rofl: I have been accused of many things, but I have to say this is the first time I can remember having been accused of that.
and i doubt it'll be the last.

[AllAmericanMan]

forthegreatergood wrote: Why is this fair?

Here is something to debate. Paris Hilton, the Hilton heiress who was born with millions, who is able to live a lavish lifestyle, who is on numerous magazine covers who humans buy to read, who is famous, who some envy, who wears a fur coat that creatures die for her to wear, who has a dog she pampers called Tinkerbell, who is on a show called the Simple Life that basically makes fun of those who are not rich who do labor to survive, a show which people watch.

Compare that to those who are not born into wealth and comfort, those who struggle to find food to eat, and experience suffering?

Why is this fair? If you believe in reincarnation, or even if you do not, why do you think this occurs? What is the solution?





Paris Hilton with coat made by killing creatures Paris Hilton with creature she nurtures

Paris Hilton mocking those who have to earn money



Great post. I really wish americans would stop being so apethetic and realise if we all stood together and demanded a solution one would no doubt be brought into existence. Unfortunately were too distracted with American Idol to give a damn.

[Roy L]

Puzzle Peddler wrote: Quote: Why is this fair?

Why do people deserve to be equal? "Being" equal is not the same as having equal rights.

[Roy L]

zelda wrote: Quote:
You are the one claiming there is no such thing as a sincere objection to injustice, only envy for its beneficiaries.
i didn't claim that. ??? Yes, of course you did. Quote: i just said that i believe facts are more important than words, actively doing something to change things for the better is much more important than discussing about it. Was feudalism ended by people serving soup to hungry serfs, or by people who created an ironclad moral and philosophical case that it was wrong? Quote: Quote:
Quote: rich p. hiltons don't sell, trade or own other human beings. I see. So, as long as they are not actually made chattels, people can be robbed, mistreated, exploited, starved, tortured and killed for the unearned profit of the Paris Hiltons of the world, and anyone who objects to any of it is only envious of those who pocket the proceeds?
yes, wow, my point exactly!! :roll: look, i don't have enough patience to untwist the words you put in my mouth or my words that you deliberately twisted.] I am not twisting your words. I am explaining to you what they mean. You need to understand that selling, trading and owning human beings is not the only way their rights can be violated.
Quote:
Quote: OK. I understand where you're coming from: the kindest interpretation of your views is that you are afraid that if there were no poor people, you would have no one to practice your virtue of charity on.
no, i'm simply realistic and i understand very clearly that poor people will never cease to exist. poor people don't exist because rich people want to, but because of so many economical, social, political etc reasons that you have to be completely naive to really believe the statement you made above. I am trying to help you understand how the economic, social and political reasons work. And it's not easy.
Quote:
Quote: The meaning is very clear: you have made a false, despicable, and evil claim about the motivations of those who oppose injustice, including me, and I am calling you on it. You just cannot permit yourself to understand the meaning of my words, because then you would not be able to avoid knowing that you are a servant of Evil.
oh, please stop...! servant of evil, despicable evil claim, really now... it's not out of laziness that i won't respond to this... I know. It's out of fear of becoming unable to avoid knowing that I am right.
Quote: Quote:
Quote: ok, please make me understand something. what institution, what institutionalized injustices are you talking about?? The systematic legal violations of people's rights that result in private appropriation, almost always by the rich, of publicly created value, and the associated public appropriation through taxation, almost always from working people, of privately created value.
are you...suggesting a....communist state?... No, I am suggesting freedom and justice.
Quote: Quote:
Quote: what is the solution to it? Secure, equal rights to life, liberty, and property in the products of one's labor.
practically you mean... because all of these things actually do exist and are generally respected, except parts of africa, asia, war-zones. That's where you are flat wrong. Those rights are routinely violated in every country of the world, and that routine violation of people's rights is the major cause of poverty, violence, war and most other evils.
Quote: Quote:
Quote: because in my opinion this "institution" is called luck or fate or whatever and these are things you can't really change. Yes, well, I guess the difference between your opinion and mine is that mine is a reasoned and informed one.
this is a matter of common-sense, not information. No, it's a matter of your uninformed and ill-considered "common sense" belief being wrong and my informed and thoroughly considered views being right.
Quote:
Quote: By accusing those who are trying to stop it at the institutional, political and philosophical level of envy.
get over it!! When you retract your accusation and apologize. Quote: i was just wondering if maybe you weren't a bit envious of this lucky, rich chick. No, you weren't. You were trying to avoid responding to or even thinking about my arguments by impugning my motives. Quote: i wasn't accusing anyone of anything, Yes, you were. You were explicitly accusing me of being motivated not by any concern for justice or human rights, but only by envy. Quote: i'm saying that this is not the way to make things move! ?? Oh? Tell me when a people was ever liberated from oppression by private charity rather than passionate advocacy of liberty and justice.
Quote:
Quote: Wrong. There is a systematic injustice involved, just one that you are either unable or unwilling to understand.
i've seen you are religious. I'm not. I just thought you might be. Quote: why can't you accept that these things were sent by god? Because God seems to change His mind about what to send, depending on what people do. Quote: systematic injustice...this sounds like there was a conspiracy theory involved, is there any? Probably. Certainly there have often been such conspiracies in the past.
Quote:
Quote: The fact that there will always be poor and rich people is not an excuse for forcibly making the poor poorer and the rich richer, any more than the fact that there will always be tall and short people would excuse forcibly shortening the short and stretching the tall.
ok, and what do you suggest? Freedom, justice, and an end to the lies. Quote:
and one more question: finally is it fair that p.h. inherited a fortune while others are starving to death? why/why not? No, it's not, but it has nothing to do with inheritance per se. It's how that fortune was obtained, held and increased. IOW, it also wasn't fair that her father and grandfather ever got most of that money in the first place, and AFAICT the same is true of almost all large fortunes.

[Puzzle Peddler]

Quote:
"Being" equal is not the same as having equal rights.

If you are trying to say that they ought to have equal rights, then I rephrase:

Why should all human beings be granted equal rights?

[Roy L]

Puzzle Peddler wrote: Quote:
"Being" equal is not the same as having equal rights.

If you are trying to say that they ought to have equal rights, then I rephrase:

Why should all human beings be granted equal rights? What we might call "moral rights" (not legal ones) are not "granted" by some kind of authority, but arise naturally in a social context. They are equal because all people have equal moral capacity, and there is no valid a priori basis for discrimination among them (maybe that will someday be possible, but that's neither here nor there). People come to have different levels of rights a posteriori, as they reveal different levels of moral capacity: criminals and the insane may thus be deprived of their right of liberty, etc.

Anyway, if you think some should have fewer rights than others a priori, you need to make a case for such discrimination.

[Puzzle Peddler]

Quote: What we might call "moral rights" (not legal ones) are not "granted" by some kind of authority, but arise naturally in a social context. They are equal because all people have equal moral capacity, and there is no valid a priori basis for discrimination among them (maybe that will someday be possible, but that's neither here nor there). People come to have different levels of rights a posteriori, as they reveal different levels of moral capacity: criminals and the insane may thus be deprived of their right of liberty, etc.

Anyway, if you think some should have fewer rights than others a priori, you need to make a case for such discrimination.

What do you mean by "moral rights" in terms of its physical implications? Does it simply mean that if one person violates another person's "moral rights", we can then rightly deem that person as immoral?

[Roy L]

Puzzle Peddler wrote:
What do you mean by "moral rights" in terms of its physical implications? Does it simply mean that if one person violates another person's "moral rights", we can then rightly deem that person as immoral? No, the implication is that they are exhibiting impaired moral capacity, so their rights are no longer going to get the same respect others' rights get. Violate others' rights enough, and you end up in jail or a mental hospital, or on the gallows.

[AllAmericanMan]

How about instead of arguing about what is right and wrong, we focus on the positive? Lets focus on helping and loving each other instead of our differences. Lets focus on being compassionate for other people. Instead of dismissing this and saying the world isnt fair, how about getting off your spoiled ass and helping make it fair?

[Roy L]

AllAmericanMan wrote: How about instead of arguing about what is right and wrong, we focus on the positive? Lets focus on helping and loving each other instead of our differences. Lets focus on being compassionate for other people. Instead of dismissing this and saying the world isnt fair, how about getting off your spoiled ass and helping make it fair? The first step in solving any problem is to understand it. That step has not been taken by even 1% of those who recognize that there is a fairness problem.

[Izzibeth]

wait... wait.. hold on...

Paris Hilton.... beautiful? have any of you actually looked at that girls face? she has got a lazy eye and her nose takes up half of her face! i admit her body looks better than mine any day but.... *shudder* talk about a buttah-face.

i'm....i'm seriously, guys. take a real good hard look at that girls face.

okay i'm done...

[Gwijde]

AllAmericanMan wrote: How about instead of arguing about what is right and wrong, we focus on the positive? Lets focus on helping and loving each other instead of our differences. Lets focus on being compassionate for other people. Instead of dismissing this and saying the world isn't fair, how about getting off your spoiled ass and helping make it fair?

I couldn't agree more, indeed, the world isn't fair. But the world will never bee and you can try and change the world but that is a huge task. I suggest change YOUR world, support organizations that fight poverty, do some volunteering work,... Options are limitless. It might only be a small difference you make, but you make a difference in the everyday life of poor people. And if more people (let's hope all people :) ) follow your example; the world will become a better place automatically. But don't count on fairness; because it is something you have to create.
Off course this asks a huge effort and dedication but hey, it's worth a try isn't it?

[Roy L]

Izzibeth wrote: wait... wait.. hold on...

Paris Hilton.... beautiful? have any of you actually looked at that girls face? she has got a lazy eye and her nose takes up half of her face! i admit her body looks better than mine any day but.... *shudder* talk about a buttah-face.

i'm....i'm seriously, guys. take a real good hard look at that girls face.

OK, so she's no Natalie Portman or Liv Tyler. And the makeover has been a bit on the extreme side:

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/104957.jpg

But IMO even in the Before picture she was pretty hot, so deal with it. If you take a good hard look at a lot of actresses' faces, they are just not that good looking -- some are downright plain if you ask me: Drew Barrymore, Tori Spelling, Cate Blanchett -- outrageously miscast as the staggeringly beautiful (sorry, no) elf queen Galadriel in LOTR -- and Jennifer Aniston come to mind.

[Izzibeth]

Roy L wrote: Izzibeth wrote: wait... wait.. hold on...

Paris Hilton.... beautiful? have any of you actually looked at that girls face? she has got a lazy eye and her nose takes up half of her face! i admit her body looks better than mine any day but.... *shudder* talk about a buttah-face.

i'm....i'm seriously, guys. take a real good hard look at that girls face.

OK, so she's no Natalie Portman or Liv Tyler. And the makeover has been a bit on the extreme side:

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/104957.jpg

But IMO even in the Before picture she was pretty hot, so deal with it. If you take a good hard look at a lot of actresses' faces, they are just not that good looking -- some are downright plain if you ask me: Drew Barrymore, Tori Spelling, Cate Blanchett -- outrageously miscast as the staggeringly beautiful (sorry, no) elf queen Galadriel in LOTR -- and Jennifer Aniston come to mind.

i'm gonna have to go with a *shudder* every time i see Paris Hilton. i think the South Park version was dead on. i also think Drew Barrymore and Tori Spelling are horrendous. Cate Blanchett is on my list of ladies i'd like to look like however.

yeah, i know most actresses are actually just regular ol' people with a lot of makeup and money. ^_^ i was simply saying "eeeeewwwwwww!!!!!!!" to Paris Hilton. she's so icky!! hehehe hope i'm not offending anyone. :P but P.H. is a dawg.

[thefranzkafkafront]

'Fair' is a mental construct it exists no where in nature nor human society.

Striving for it tends to incur terrible consaquences as well.

[jawsome]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: 'Fair' is a mental construct it exists no where in nature nor human society.

Striving for it tends to incur terrible consaquences as well.

That is an absurd thing to be said. The same should be said about rights and justice by your rationalization.

[Roy L]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: 'Fair' is a mental construct it exists no where in nature nor human society. Nonsense. What's unfair about a lottery, a baseball game, or a voluntary trade to mutual benefit?
Quote:
Striving for it tends to incur terrible consaquences as well. But not as terrible as not striving for it....