Has this forum changed your mind?

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Fido
 
Reply Tue 20 Jan, 2009 11:09 am
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:
The check is in the mail. :shifty:

Like Groucho said: I trust you...I'll take a check for ten dollars and the rest in cash...

manored wrote:
Good for you: the greater one is on the inside less he lets out to the outside world in his everday life, being his greatness only noticiable then he focus the said greatness on something. Assuming that their lack of knowledge about you is not due to lack of communication, that is Smile

personally I dont believe people should approach their relatives just because their relatives will die one day, mostly because I do not believe that those who die vanish forevermore and "pos-live" winhout these feelings, but rather continue to exist in another forms. And because I believe in immortal life, one is fate-bound to eventually re-meet everone, including his dear relatives... Thought it seens most people dont find as easy to see things this way as I do.

Thats quite early for a baby to be talking actually words, usually children take like 5 years to become understandeable Smile Perhaps you got a genius son, thought its probally to early to tell. You could write on things whose name he learns their name, like writing "monkey" on the monkey, so that maybe he will learn to write while learning to speak. It will also be funny to attempt to convince your neighboards to let you write on then Smile

Greatness is no goal for anyone who can enjoy their relationships... We's all just folks here, and putting yourself first, when it denies the life, reason, and necessities of others is crazy, and ultimately futile... Only a democracy that puts personal greatness aside, and asks each their needs, their goals, and what help they need from all to get there, will get us there... No one does it alone... We have different abilities, but the goal is one we want to reach together, and we should look on it as a tragedy if we need to leave any by the wayside... We all have a paradise within us, and a map to that destination... Our friends and family have brought us near to that common destination, and yet, before we can reach that shining in our dreams we will bury many we love, who have loved us... Nothing is so much of an impediment to our personal and human progress as guilt, or regret; and nothing is more regretable than leaving our old lonely, and ungratified by our recognition... We should give to each their due, and to no one sooner than our own... We deny our own existence when we deny our parents... This much is true, that paricide was the worst crime because it was a denial of ones own being, and ones claim to right which we get through our parents... No one should return evil for good, but good for good and good for evil because ultimately such tit for tat behavior puts all our goals further beyond our reach... We can all be great simply by not being petty, but we should lift all mankind... To lift oneself is easy enough with block and tackle... Take on the tasks of giants if you would be great... Walk in the footsteps of the great, and pick up their fallen banner; but before great deeds, embrace great thoughts, and leave no one behind...
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Tue 20 Jan, 2009 04:22 pm
@Fido,
I have to agree with Fido, relationships are important. Marriages...why?!?!?

And fascism... you're going to have to explain it's greatness. The way I see fascism is you pick up the banner, and you put it back in its place, but it has not the chance to fall down again. What fun is that?
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 20 Jan, 2009 05:28 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401 wrote:
I have to agree with Fido, relationships are important. Marriages...why?!?!?

And fascism... you're going to have to explain it's greatness. The way I see fascism is you pick up the banner, and you put it back in its place, but it has not the chance to fall down again. What fun is that?

I do not support fascism, and I prefer informal to formal relationships, but all relationships, meaning all forms of relationship require a sacrifice... Again, not all communities requiring a sublimation of individuality are fascist... Often it is by choice, to preserve both life and freedom for the entire community... Only among the party was sublimation of individuality a choice for the Nazis...Everyone else went along to get along, except for crazies like the swing kids, and the Edelwies pirates... Leave it to the kids to do what the adults dare not to do...
 
StupidBoy phil
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 01:58 am
@ACWaller,
I think it depends in large part what you see as changing my mind. If, by changing my mind, you mean in the strictest denotative sense then of course it has. I shape my thoughts and views around the evidence I have, and what I've picked up here weighs in on that.

If, by changing my mind, you mean that I've done a 180 on a position, or something close to, then no. Then again, I have very few firmly formulated opinions that are likely to be controversial enough for someone to talk about them, and nobody has brought any of them up that I've seen.
 
manored
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 10:41 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Like Groucho said: I trust you...I'll take a check for ten dollars and the rest in cash...


Greatness is no goal for anyone who can enjoy their relationships... We's all just folks here, and putting yourself first, when it denies the life, reason, and necessities of others is crazy, and ultimately futile... Only a democracy that puts personal greatness aside, and asks each their needs, their goals, and what help they need from all to get there, will get us there... No one does it alone... We have different abilities, but the goal is one we want to reach together, and we should look on it as a tragedy if we need to leave any by the wayside... We all have a paradise within us, and a map to that destination... Our friends and family have brought us near to that common destination, and yet, before we can reach that shining in our dreams we will bury many we love, who have loved us... Nothing is so much of an impediment to our personal and human progress as guilt, or regret; and nothing is more regretable than leaving our old lonely, and ungratified by our recognition... We should give to each their due, and to no one sooner than our own... We deny our own existence when we deny our parents... This much is true, that paricide was the worst crime because it was a denial of ones own being, and ones claim to right which we get through our parents... No one should return evil for good, but good for good and good for evil because ultimately such tit for tat behavior puts all our goals further beyond our reach... We can all be great simply by not being petty, but we should lift all mankind... To lift oneself is easy enough with block and tackle... Take on the tasks of giants if you would be great... Walk in the footsteps of the great, and pick up their fallen banner; but before great deeds, embrace great thoughts, and leave no one behind...
I dont mean greatness as in potential to be famous or do great deeds, but greatness as in great knowledge and wiseness, nor the fact that I am making a comment about greatness means I am saying people should focus in being great. One should focus into being what he wants to be.

Also the poetry you put in that post overly complicates what is simple. But like I said I believe that life is a never-ending journey, and therefore to fear regret is foolish, as there are no paths forward, not a forward at all: Relationships are only as important as the importance you chose to give then.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 10:45 am
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401;43830 wrote:
I have to agree with Fido, relationships are important. Marriages...why?!?!?
How old are you, Holiday?
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 12:43 pm
@Aedes,
Why a legally binding contract is what I mean.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 12:47 pm
@ACWaller,
Because there are implications for property ownership, taxes, inheritance, child custody, privacy laws, insurance, employee benefits...
 
Joshy phil
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 01:09 pm
@Aedes,
I don't believe that i have been on the forum long enough, or participated enough, for it to have been able to change my mind.
However, what I cannot deny is that I am grateful for a place where I can post my thoughts and theories, no matter how insane, then having a debate with others who are often the same way inclined.
In this world of what can only be described as 'ignorance', it is nice to have a community of thinkers; of people who use logic and questions things, rather than just accepting them.
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 01:17 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:
Because there are implications for property ownership, taxes, inheritance, child custody, privacy laws, insurance, employee benefits...


And the need for these authenticities are a product of what? Does compassion need further trust mechanisms?
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 01:59 pm
@ACWaller,
Yes. It keeps you from making $500 to give some guy down the street your spousal dental benefits that your employer pays $1000 for.

And at the other swing of the pendulum, this is why gay and lesbian couples want marriage recognition.
 
Holiday20310401
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 02:29 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes wrote:
Yes. It keeps you from making $500 to give some guy down the street your spousal dental benefits that your employer pays $1000 for.

And at the other swing of the pendulum, this is why gay and lesbian couples want marriage recognition.


Look, all these benefits I do not see why we need legalities to ensure their trust.

In the compassionate act of a lifelong relationship, does there seriously need to be legalities to ensure the couple gets incentive (for lack of a better word)?

And why would the act of compassion/relationship require a further act of authenticity to express the fact?

I suppose maybe I am young to understand this, but without all these benefits attributed societally to the couple, what is it about the legal contract that is needed to complete the act of committing to a life long relationship?

I mean, surely no couple is going to say or admit to the idea that it was in their primary interest to get married because of the legal/civic virtues. But then again, this is where I am lost.
 
Icon
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 02:36 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401 wrote:
Look, all these benefits I do not see why we need legalities to ensure their trust.

In the compassionate act of a lifelong relationship, does there seriously need to be legalities to ensure the couple gets incentive (for lack of a better word)?

And why would the act of compassion/relationship require a further act of authenticity to express the fact?

I suppose maybe I am young to understand this, but without all these benefits attributed societally to the couple, what is it about the legal contract that is needed to complete the act of committing to a life long relationship?


Sometimes, the act of legally binding the relationship can be a sign of committment. The act is more important than the legalities of the matter. When you are in love you will go to any lengths to prove to the other person that you are not going anywhere. Besides, marriage is tradition and as much as I hate tradition, it is something which will likely mean a great deal to your spouse. After all, the only reason not to is the fear that you may change your mind.

Holiday20310401 wrote:

I mean, surely no couple is going to say or admit to the idea that it was in their primary interest to get married because of the legal/civic virtues. But then again, this is where I am lost.

Wrong! It is called a marriage of convenience. Happens all the time, especially in the upper class where marriage is often used as a way for big business (especially long standing empires) to merge using their offspring to "continue the empire" according to how the parents see fit. You must be young, there is a lot you have to learn..


And on a final note: I do not see how any of this is relevent to the topic at hand. A marriage thread might be more appropriate.
 
Khethil
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 03:05 pm
@ACWaller,
ACWaller wrote:
I was just wondering, has anyone changed their philosophical position on anything as a result of participating in this forum?

You know, I read this question and initially thought "Naw..." but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that wasn't true. Through many of the ideas and opinions stated here, my view's become more focused in some areas while gaining breadth in others. Some positions I held; staunch and steadfast have softened while others - in light of support I've read here - have forced me into 'taking a stand'. It's kind of nice

As far as radical Oh "My God I was wrong! I now see the Light"-moments; no, haven't felt one of them in a long while.

Thanks
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 03:09 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401;44030 wrote:
Look, all these benefits I do not see why we need legalities to ensure their trust.
Employers negotiate a group rate for employee benefits, like health insurance. Employees can opt to have their salary reduced in order to get that benefit. Let's say, for instance, you can opt to reduce your salary by $500/year for individual coverage or by $750/year to cover both you and your spouse.

If there were no such legal entity as marriage, you could go pick some guy on the street who will pay you that full $750 to get covered under your policy -- I mean that's MUCH cheaper than going off and buying a policy on his own.

But why would an employer bother to negotiate rates for family coverage if you're just going to go out and profit from it? He'd do a lot better to just offer you individual coverage and save the extra money (or put it into salaries). In other words, the existence of such an entity as legal marriage makes it possible to have employer-based benefits for families.

Holiday20310401;44030 wrote:
In the compassionate act of a lifelong relationship, does there seriously need to be legalities to ensure the couple gets incentive (for lack of a better word)?
It allows the government to provide monetary incentives for stable families (namely tax credits), which it considers in society's interest. In other words, it gives incentive to actually make that commitment formally.

Holiday20310401;44030 wrote:
And why would the act of compassion/relationship require a further act of authenticity to express the fact?
That part doesn't need the legal status. It's everything else that does. I mean if you've got a 401k or a 403b, but you don't have a will, if you die that money automatically goes to your spouse (unless you've legally declared otherwise). If you're not married, then the government has no way of determining who it goes to. If you're critically ill, then your spouse is automatically entitled to know private medical information about you and can make medical decisions on your behalf. If you're married things said between you and a spouse are legally held as privileged -- not so with any old person.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 03:29 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Holiday20310401 wrote:
And the need for these authenticities are a product of what? Does compassion need further trust mechanisms?

Traditionally Marriages were a form of treaty between families where eventually the shared blood would force affection and a durable peace... I use marriages as an example of forms because they are in mineture what all forms like society, or community, religions and institutions are...Marriages all have their economy and their politics, and they depend upon trust and honor; and people are realized and recognized in them...Like many forms they rely upon tangible statements and exchanges, of wealth and affection, public blessings, and curses, consent of the community, witnesses... As you see from our recent ceremony, such public displays are not so uncommon. And yet everyone knows that the form, and the formula are not enough to make the relationship work... Form is no substitute for relationship...People can get by better on relationship without the form; but there is always the form...People in love know they are married...Only fools will not admit what they cannot deny...
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 03:41 pm
@ACWaller,
Aedes; all the things you mentioned: Law, property etc. are forms in their own right structuring other relationships... And it is very much a house of cards because if relationships are not working on one level they are not likely to be working on other levels, so people withdraw their trust, and form new relationships outside of the form of society, and let the rest of society get by without them... I think it is good when people can cut their own deals, and make their own rules, and make their private oaths whether for love or mutual support... We do not need government and law so much as it needs us... We can re form the government...All we have to do is remove our trust and the thing will fall down like a termite eaten barn. And it happens all the time...
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 03:51 pm
@ACWaller,
Fido, the LEGAL entity of marriage is distinct from the historical, cultural, and religious entity specifically because of these techicalities and practicalities.

Historically, in a less existential time, I don't think the question of 'why marriage?' Would ever have come up.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 21 Jan, 2009 05:07 pm
@ACWaller,
If you are saying that when forms are working people do not question them; I would agree... But the history of human kind has been the history of changing forms... Forms are how we comprhend the world and how we manage the world... Clearly we have as much form surrounding the relationship of marriage as we ever have, and all with less meaning... First of all, families are not at war, and not even potentially at war... Nor is there much property or rights at issue for most of us... Yet the relationship does protect rights, and for that reason the Gay/les want equality... I have a book I'll bet you would enjoy called Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia by W. Roberston Smith...
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 06/19/2024 at 04:21:08