The Question - Who has the Answers?

[bloom]

There was a story in the news recently where a man from Vietnam who was living in the US decided to sell his 18 month old daughter for $7000 because he wanted the money for home improvement. From what I've heard - the selling of children is not all that uncommon in that part of the world and he couldn't see why anyone would think that there was anything wrong with that.

That seems like an obvious example of something that for most of us - would be unthinkable - because of the values of our society.


If it's one person's values for himself - what is to say that some people will come up with some ideas that make sense to them - but that seem horrible to others. Of course we have legislatures that make laws about these things - but politicians are not necessarily the best people for questions of morality.


For the purposes of this poll - Oneself is NOT one of the answers - because we know that when it comes down to it - it is ourself that makes the decision of how we will act.


So what members of society do you think do the best job of defining for others what is moral, what has value, and what it means to be human?

[BlueEyedSon]

1. 42.

[Finder]

2. I am a relativist so this was tough...

but I chose Professors and Teachers since to me they are the most educated in the variables.

Now the story in question I would need more info...was it a loving family he sold the child to?(no different than adoption) or did he sell her to a pedophile or slave operation, etc...

[bloom]

3. It may have been a loving family.

Although I think would it would be quite outrageous if people were selling their children right and left - so they add a porch to their house or whatever.

It probably was in the girl's interest to be raised by someone who valued her more than that. I guess that people do pay money to adopt children - but it seemed to me the idea was supposed to be that if someone received money for a baby - it was supposed to be about covering expenses - not like a baby was being "bought".


-------------------------------

"....He was having difficulties raising the child alone and wanted to use the money for some home remodeling," Kopp said.

Danny Vu, 37, was charged Friday with unauthorized adoption placement, a felony that carries up to six years in prison.

The daughter showed no signs of physical abuse, Kopp said. Brown County officials will probably place her in temporary foster care.

The man wanted to sell the girl "and didn't want anything to do with the baby after that," Outagamie County District Attorney Carrie Schneider said.

The man owns a nail salon in Green Bay. A salon employee told the man he knew a Grand Chute woman who was looking to adopt a baby, and the man and the Grand Chute woman were introduced, police said. A friend of the woman later called police.

Schneider said the couple wanted to contact attorneys and follow legal adoption procedures, but the man did not want to involve attorneys."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/04/22/daughter.forsale.ap/index.html

[Finder]

5. The remodeling thing is weird...

and hopefully a misinterpretation of "improved living conditions."

I tend to be slow to outrage when I read media accounts since they are rarely represented correctly.

[bloom]

4. I probably could have added "the Media"

because they end up being quite a filter for what people are exposed to.


But nevertheless - it's interesting to consider these other groups of people - professionals or not.

[beam me up scottie]

6. No human is qualified.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is the only source for answers on morality.

[Strong Atheist]

9. For just this once, I will go along with that...

I DO like lasagna and spaghetti and veal parmigiana ...

[salvorhardin]

12. And failing a consult with his holy noodle

Who is, after all, busy intelligently designing new and improved beer volcanoes on most afternoons, then I say always ask a pirate. There be nobody more trustworthy, ye landlubbers! Shiver me timbers! Yaarrr!

[Goblinmonger]

15. The FSM would not condone selling children

and he would punish the vietnamese for their consumption of RICE noodles. Oh the blasphemy.

[varkam]

39. There is no God but the FSM...

and the tortellini apparition is it's prophet. Amen.

[NMMNG]

42. Works for me

If I don't like his moral imperatives I can smother him in marinara sauce and eat him. :9

[trotsky]

7. "Best job" is rather open to interpretation.

Considering that most humans are fairly moral, and most of those haven't delved deeply into philosophy, science, or even all that far into religion, I'd have to say that it's one's family that has the most profound effect. Good parenting usually produces moral kids. Poor parenting usually produces problematic kids.

[Strong Atheist]

8. I sorta like slack, in my

whackjobbery:

http://www.subgenius.com/

[salvorhardin]

14. But isn't it better to have pasta with your slack?

And pirates. It's been proven, matey. Pirates be good at slack. Yaarrr!

[Strong Atheist]

49. Well, I do say

"Aaaarrrrggghhh!" at work when things go wrong, just like garfield...

[Zhade]

10. Atheists, of course.

I mean, isn't the point of this nonsense to once again try to make atheists look bad? Like you've done before?

So, let's skip the bullshit, I'll say "atheist", you can put forth your idiocy about "but 'we' atheists don't have a moral center", and this thread can get on to sinking like the rock it is.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

17. No, I've seen you at work before.

Call it an educated guess.

"You should be happy the philosophers are doing so well."

Now who's assuming?


"And I don't assume that Christians are all evil idiots."

Hey, good for you. Neither do I. Neither do most adults. Any reason you mention this irrelevant fact?


"It seems that there are some atheist "whackjobs" that just want everyone to say that atheists are better than everyone. Are you one of those people? They also have it in for me for disagreeing with them. It's sounds like you've joined their boat."

Don't know who they are, I've never seen them here. In fact, I'd say you're making that part up out of whole cloth.

[bloom]

20. well you are awfully concerned

that I was "try(ing) to make atheists look bad"


Are atheists above criticism? That is the implication.


For all I know the person was a Christian. I wasn't really thinking about what his religion is - but he is definitely from a different society that has different values. Am I not allowed to question anyone (who isn't a Christian)?

Seems pretty odd if only Christians can be questioned. What's up with that?

[arwalden]

28. How Did You Come Up With That?

<< Are atheists above criticism? That is the implication. >>

HUH? How did you come up with THAT?

<< Am I not allowed to question anyone (who isn't a Christian)? >>

Good grief! Are you being "victimized" in some way? Has anyone actually suggested such a thing to you? Or are you just being overwrought and dramatic for "effect"?

<< Seems pretty odd if only Christians can be questioned. What's up with that? >>

Indeed! What's up with that? --- WHERE did you come up with that??

[bloom]

31. I've caught a lot of flak

because I did not find it to be a big surprise that Christians (in the Minnesota poll) would not assume that atheists had any particular moral standards. Atheists not being a group. Most atheists are not as concerned about "Public Relations" as it relates to atheists as many atheists on this forum are. (there are not linkable things to everything - but you could probably find some things if you looked).

Also I have been told that I couldn't possibly be an atheist because no atheist would say such things.

There are quite a few that take anyone to task for implying that there are any immoral atheists or for pointing out examples. Even though Christians and religion in general are routinely castigated for all kinds of things.

If you looked you would see it. Things like:

"religion-based terror dominates the world stage, Sam Harris argues that progressive tolerance of faith-based unreason is as great a menace as religion itself"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=214&topic_id=51467

<< Are atheists above criticism? That is the implication. >>

HUH? How did you come up with THAT?

See Zhade's first post:

I mean, isn't the point of this nonsense to once again try to make atheists look bad? Like you've done before?

So, let's skip the bullshit, I'll say "atheist", you can put forth your idiocy about "but 'we' atheists don't have a moral center"

Whereas I never said that atheists don't have a moral center. I may have said that some do and some don't and you can't assume that they do just because they are atheists. Atheists not being a group and all.

Plus I did a poll where quite a few people said that they "reject religion and also "the community standards of morality". I was told that the people must be imaginary even though there were comments. While I don't have a problem with people rejecting "the community standards of morality" and replacing them with something better, for instance, I do have a problem with people who think that it is reasonable to reject all standards of morality and to do whatever the hell they want to do without regards to anyone, the community, or the earth.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=57603&mesg_id=57603

----

A lot of atheists don't want to hear about it. They just want to bash Christians and say how stupid and awful they are.

I think that people who follow liberal principles are probably alright whether they are religious or not. I also think that there are an increasing number of people on DU and in this country that are not liberal - they may be libertarian and some other thing and they don't give a crap about anyone. Some of those libertarians think that they are Christians. I think Christian libertarians are esp. nuts.

I think it makes more sense to worry about the clearly immoral people whether they are atheists or whether they say they are Christians or some other thing than it does to worry about someone like me who is merely writing out some basic, rational, and logical ideas.

[arwalden]

36. Well...

<< There are quite a few that take anyone to task for implying that there are any immoral atheists or for pointing out examples. >>

I don't believe you. I think you're exaggerating.

Who cares if there exist "immoral atheists"? What's the big deal? Immoral people of all types exist everywhere.

I think what people take issue with is when a certain few individuals continually hunt for clever ways to suggest that atheists, by virtue of being atheists, and for no other reason than being atheists, lack morality.

People who do such things should tread very carefully.


<< Even though Christians and religion in general are routinely castigated for all kinds of things. >>

I think you're probably referring to the horrible or selfish or cruel things that are done in the name of religion, or on behalf of religion, or in the guise of religion or cloaked by religion.

Yeah... lots of "morality" there, eh? :eyes:

I'm unaware of people being "castigated" by DUers simply for being Christian. That would be against the rules. If such a thing is happening, then you should definitely ALERT on it.

[trotsky]

48. You're right. She is indeed exaggerating.

I think what people take issue with is when a certain few individuals continually hunt for clever ways to suggest that atheists, by virtue of being atheists, and for no other reason than being atheists, lack morality.

You nailed it.

[Zhade]

33. "Are atheists above criticism? That is the implication."

That's nonsense, and you know it. Stop playing games - at least one other poster in this thread has referred to the way you have posted disparaging things about atheists while claiming to be one yourself.

The rest of your post is a strawman, and not worth wasting time on.

[arwalden]

35. Reminds Me Of...

... the folks who pop in to proclaim "I've-been-a-democrat-all-my-life" then go on to spew a collection of cleverly-worded rw talking points.

[arwalden]

27. Of Course That's The "Point" Of This Poll...

<< I mean, isn't the point of this nonsense to once again try to make atheists look bad? >>

The pattern I'm seeing here isn't pretty.

[Zhade]

32. Yeah, it's not like I'm pulling this out of my ass.

We've seen this waste of time before.

[Proud_Democratt]

40. Atheists also!!! ...a mixture of logic, common sense, science,

and morals.

[Goblinmonger]

13. FSM, baby

We certainly can't leave it to the godless, non-Christian Vietnamese. Stuff like selling your kids never happens in good god-fearing nations like the US.

But....wasn't there something in some "god" book about selling your daughter into slavery...what was that again?

[bloom]

18. "something in some "god" book"

I don't know - was there? You might know it better than I do.

You must have missed where I think there are many things in Christianity and the BIble that should be criticized.
--------------------

I think there is a problem if we have to allow all manner of misogyny or other "values" into this country because we don't ever want to say that our values are better than some other societies values.

I'm going to assume that you are a man. How about if some group came in and it was their custom to cut the dicks off of any man who had sex with a woman who was not his wife. You might think that that would be a bad practice for us to adopt - or for us to close our eyes to.

Over in the Netherlands they are showing movies to immigrants - such that if the immigrant is uncomfortable with things in Netherlands society - then they don't want the immigrants to join.


It may be that we as a people need to rethink some established common values. I don't think that the answer is to let everyone to do whatever they want.

[Goblinmonger]

22. That was sarcasm.

Yeah, Exodus gives the rules for selling your daughter off as a servant (KJV):

21: 7-8 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her. And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.

I think there is a problem if we have to allow all manner of misogyny or other "values" into this country because we don't ever want to say that our values are better than some other societies values.

Yes, I am a man. I think misogyny sucks. Guess which major religion in the United States is ripe with misogyny? Yep, Christianity. OK, not ALL Christianity, but the sects with the biggest numbers have horrible attitudes towards women (and I would argue that denying gay rights is, to some extent, a result of that rampant mysogyny). So, bloom, are you ready to say that the values of Christianity suck? Being an atheist, you shouldn't have any problem saying that mainstream American religions should be avoided because they "allow all manner of misogyny."

It may be that we as a people need to rethink some established common values. I don't think that the answer is to let everyone to do whatever they want.

When the hell did I ever say that? Or is that just what you would expect a non-moral-centered atheist like myself to say? Common values are fine. They certainly as hell don't have to be religious in nature. Especially those misogynistic religions.

Does it suck that there are cultures that sell people? Yes. Do we have people that do that here in the US? Yes. There is a major problem with that in the child porn industry. Is it an indictment of not having some religion? Hell no. Well, maybe it is a problem that comes from not worshipping the FSM, but we shall see when that becomes the mainstream religion (my guess is the world would be a better place if that happened).

on edit--fixed a bible verse reference to stop the smiley from coming up.

[bloom]

24. You must have missed

"...where I think there are many things in Christianity and the BIble that should be criticized. "

-------

You wrote:

"Common values are fine. They certainly as hell don't have to be religious in nature."


Good. If you were to notice - that is the subject of my poll. If you think it's about something else - that is your problem.

[Silent3]

16. Rule myself out?

For the purposes of this poll - Oneself is NOT one of the answers - because we know that when it comes down to it - it is ourself that makes the decision of how we will act.

Does this mean I can't put in a plug for my books, meditation CDs, training DVDs, and weekend-retreat seminars, given at comfortable resort hotels which just happen to be situated directly atop "sacred energy vortices", the kind that enhance your natural healing powers and psychic abilities?

[bloom]

19. I probably can't stop you.

Unless it violates a rule or something.

[Evoman]

21. Christianity of course

I believe that christianity is the basis for all morality. The ancient greeks knew that their society became great because of Jesus. I also think that the hunter/gatherer societies present in Africa and North America (indians) didn't kill each other because of their fear of hell, and because Jesus led them to morality. Why was there cooperation among ancient cavemen? Jesus. Why did the aborigines of Australia share food and resources? Jesus. Why did the Plains Indians have potlucks? To raise money for Jesus. Why did they share their hunt with their tribe? Jesus.

Christianity is THE basis for morality. And anyone who doesn't think so it wrong!!!!

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

25. This is EVOMAN we're talking about.

I think (read: KNOW) that was sarcasm on his part. Haven't you seen his plays? :D

[Evoman]

43. Lol...did someone take me seriously?

Man...its scary that things have gotten so bad that someone doesn't that this stuff was BS.

I mean seriously...ancient greeks and jesus...lol...I may be dumb, but I'm not THAT dumb.

[bloom]

51. lol - no did someone take ME seriously?

I wasn't any more serious than you.

[arwalden]

26. I Don't Understand.

Why can't it be one's own self?

I missed that story, do you have a link?

[bloom]

29. The story is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=64063&mesg_id=64072

-------------

The reason it can't be one's self is because I wanted to know where people look for answers to morality questions - outside of themselves.

Anyone could say that they have their own answers and I expect that that is true - for a lot of people - at least everyone has a synthesis depending on what they have read and experienced. But that isn't the question that I wanted to ask. I couldn't get is all explained in the title line.

[arwalden]

38. Why Must It Be Outside Of Themselves?

Do you have so little faith in someone's ability to think for themselves? Why must it come from 'with-out', why can't it come from 'with-in'? Do you think that people are unthinking robots and that morality can only come from "external" sources and that it must be taught or implanted?

Woooo-eeeeee-ooooooo!

Weird.


<< I couldn't get is all explained in the title line. >>

That's what the body is for. You didn't even try. How can I take you seriously if you don't even try?

[CarbonDate]

30. Why is "nobody" not an option?

That's what I would have chosen.

[Zhade]

34. Because the point is that SOME EXTERNAL FORCE...

...is the answer.

It's another flamebait.

[arwalden]

37. How Did You Get To Be So Smart?

:loveya:

[Zhade]

44. Painful experience!

NT!

[NMMNG]

41. Button, button, who's got the button

I was just reading an article about how attacks on gays are on the rise in Brazil. People walk by on the streets and verbally abuse gay men by saying things like "Fags should die", or even throw rocks at them. Death threats, beatings and murders are common.

The problem, gay activists say, is that while Brazilians celebrate flamboyant homosexuality as harmless fun with little connection to their own lives, many also fear everyday homosexuality as a threat to the country's Roman Catholic and now increasingly evangelical Protestant norms...


That seems like an obvious example of something that for most of us - would be unthinkable - because of the values of our society.

Oh wait--what the heck am I talking about? This is par for the course in America! :eyes:






http://www.aegis.com/news/ct/1997/CT970402.html

[hunter]

45. Who has the answers? My wife.

I follow the kiss rule.

Keep it simple, stupid.

And the other rule of the same name, which actually does involve, um, kissing... :blush:

She's Professors/Teachers for the purposes of your poll.

[Random_Australian]

46. Scientist Philosophers, except that such a small sample is unreliable.

Why? Here's my thinking.

A)Who has the most valid judgement? One who displays two characteristics, 1) Accurate knowledge of the world around them, and accurate knowledge of the limits, failings and automatic assumptions of the standard mind; and 2) Has spent a lot of time processing that information, so as to draw the most valid judgment.

Simple.

[greyl]

47. I'm happy to see philosophers are in the lead.

Although trotsky makes a good point upthread.

[bloom]

50. I think the people

who think that there is no external ideas outside of themselves upon which they base their ideas of morality and values need to get a clue.


I think it's rather funny how some people insist that that "religious" people just believe whatever someone tells them - and yet cannot admit that we are all products of our culture and society.


Jeez people - this is just a poll about where you get your influences. What's so difficult about that? (Unless you just want to argue for the hell of it - which is what I expect).

[Goblinmonger]

52. "which is what I expect"

People in the business of writing polls would call that a bias. They would argue that you are then constructing your polls to prove that bias.

I'm just sayin'.

[greyl]

54. "a poll about where you get your influences"?

Where does it say that?

[trotsky]

56. ???

some people insist that that "religious" people just believe whatever someone tells them

Can you point to any examples?

[arwalden]

57. "Can you point to any examples?"

I wonder if the non-response should be interpreted as a "no".

[rd_kent]

53. Why isnt science winning?

While science has not providedall the answers yet, it will eventually provide them in time.

[greyl]

55. Science doesn't suggest what we do with the facts, does it?

Even though this poll isn't the most perfectly conceived or executed, I went ahead and chose philosophers.

This conversation about morality/value should be continued in a new thread. ;)