Mark Sanford: I’ll Lay It Out: It’s Gonna Hurt
Mark Sanford began by saying parts of the story of his disappearance are true; then he apologized to his family, referring to his children as “jewels.” Sanford then apologized to his staff and the people of his state. He talked of “laying the cards on the table” with his father-in law, and apologized to him, too. He said he was a person of faith and invoked God.
But what was he apologizing for? It took long enough to get to the bombshell: “I developed a relationship with a dear dear friend from Argentina.” The governor said he was “committed to walking through the process with Jenny and the boys,” but it’s not sure what that process would involve.
Sanford said he’d resign as chairman as the Republican Governor’s Association. Upon taking questions, he claimed his family knew about the affair before his trip to Argentina, that it’s something they’ve been working through for five months.
The relationship began innocently, he said, eight years ago, and a year ago he advised the woman with whom he was involved to get back with with her husband and two kids because that was “God’s law.” In fact, it was striking how often he mentioned God. He is now “trying to get my heart right.”
“You just can’t make this stuff up…”
June 24th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
To the political career of Mr. Sanford.. RIP
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Craig said: To the political career of Mr. Sanford.. RIP
K: Well, I guess he could re-up as a Dem because, after all, ‘its just about sex’…
June 24th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Wouldn’t it be funny if this relationship with a “dear dear friend from Argentina” turned out to be a gay relationship?
If so, don’t conservatives think that God hates the gays and therefore Sanford is gonna burn in hell for all eternity for doing one?
TDro319 Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Never mind. I hear he’s been cheating on his wife with a married woman. The conservative God still loves him. And it’s okay for republicans to be adulterers. Not democrats.
June 24th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Interesting development…
Argentinians tend to be fairly old school w/ regards to this kind of stuff, the woman he is involved with will likely be as shunned/shamed in a similar way a woman in the US would have been at the turn of the century.
He will likely say ‘oops, sorry’ with his wife by his side at some public press conference and get back to his life/career.
Meanwhile, the Argentinian woman’s life will never be the same.
craig7120 Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Good point Um, although not knowing the womans background could it be she has diplomatic ties somehow?
how do you meet a Gov.?
common circles perhaps?
Agreed, it will be interesting how this story plays out.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Hard to say how they met, it sounds like a long term relationship, so he might not have been a governor when they met…
craig7120 Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Reread… 8yrs? wow, dudes been racking up those frequent flyer miles.
speaking of flyin any new news about what brought down the airliner?
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
speaking of flyin any new news about what brought down the airliner?
They are still looking into it, the working theory is gravity.
(nah, I don’t know – haven’t followed the story)
EricG Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
“speaking of flyin any new news about what brought down the airliner?”
Psychic powers tell me many things about the airliner. But the news has very little to tell me.
Logic weighs in too. If it was a terrorist attack then why wouldn’t anyone claim credit in terror orgs?
I say malfunction.
But it could have been a missle for all we know…
June 24th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
He screwed up. He has owned up to it. God still loves him. God is his father as He is our father. We, as fathers, love our children even when they screw up. We forgive our children and hope they learn from their mistakes.
God forgives us when we seek Him and He never again brings up our past sins.
Gov. Sanford will probably do the right thing now and resign his governorship. He and his family will try and make amends. I will pray for him and his family. We should all pray for him and his family.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I will pray for him and his family. We should all pray for him and his family.
He’ll be fine, he’ll hold a tearful press conference with his wife by his side and say ‘I’m sorry’ and that will be it.
The Argentinian woman is who could use some prayers. She’s screwed.
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Cara, my God tells me to pray for those who stumble and for those who suffer. My mom always told me it takes two to tango. This woman knew what she was doing so she is just a culpable. But my prayers are with her also.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
My mom always told me it takes two to tango. This woman knew what she was doing so she is just a culpable.
Obviously, and I didn’t say otherwise, only that the repercussions will likely be harder on her than him.
But my prayers are with her also.
Funny, you didn’t mention her the first time. Just him and his family. (And I guess you still aren’t praying for her family) Because he is a dude, and she’s a chick? Or because he is a United Statesian and she is an Argentinian?
How do you make all this time for all this prayer? I know you are usually busy praying against homosexual married couples being allowed the same civic rights as heterosexual married couples.
Which takes top priority? Homosexuals being unhappy, or this guy and his family? (we have already established that the Argentinian woman and her family are pretty low prayer priority for you)
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
You can pray for everyone everyday Cara. God knows what is in your heart and mind. You pray for Congress as a whole. You pray for all America’s leaders as a whole. You don’t name them one by one. God knows who you are praying f0r. You can pray for every Chinese and it will only take a few seconds. It really isn’t rocket science.
4moreyears Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Right daddio, all that AND Catholic Domestic Terrorist Timothy McVeigh and Rapist-Murder Ted Bundy ALL prayed the prayer and we get to see them on the other side-charming.
PLUS there is NO reason you can’t “govern” and cheat on your wife, or beard. Ask Larry Craig, David Diapers Vitters and little Bill Clinton. Per Alan Greenspan, “Bill Clinton was a remarkably effective presdent”.
You just got to keep those stress levels down:)
EricG Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
“We, as fathers, love our children even when they screw up. We forgive our children and hope they learn from their mistakes.”
Absolutely. We agree on this point and the rest of your initial comment.
I do have a little philosophical edge you might not like however … what could your children do that would have you throwing them in a pit of fire to burn slowly for all eternity? What specific thing could they do to make you torture them to an inch of their lives and then revive them just to repeat the process?
The ’skip the long-part’ version of what I’m saying is that I personally don’t believe in Hell. The rod of ‘Hell’ was made to keep people in line, in my view.
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
I respect your opinion here Eric. There is nothing my children that would have me throw them in a pit of fire to suffer for eternity. But I am only a human. I am not God. I don’t pretend to know even a fraction of what God knows and what and why God does certain things.
I do believe there is a Hell. Jesus talked about it. Jesus took the sin of the world and laid them at Satan’s feet in Hell after he died on the cross. He, Jesus, then defeated death on the third day and walked out of the tomb. Jesus is risen. I believe that.
I am not condemning your view Eric. But my comments are what I believe. Once again I would just say that I respect your views. I just disagree.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
But my comments are what I believe.
Don’t forget that Willy also believes God ‘puts us in situations’ like rape and the Holocaust to ‘teach us a lesson’. (sidenote, I hope Willy is not a teacher)
Willy’s god is a cruel, deranged psychopath, of course he thinks God would throw us in a pit of fire to burn for all eternity.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Eh, Um Cara, the words “cruel” and “deranged” have no meaning without a transcendent moral source. How quick people are to criticize when God Himself defines what is correct and what is not. Anything else is conjecture or arbitrary.
I’m not saying it is easy to find that out, but by whose standards is a supposed “Hell” cruel? Based on your limited idea of what you believe Hell to be? Could not Hell just be eternal separation from God? Is that not what you are choosing to do in the Christian faith if you reject God?
placefield Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Why does the moral source need to be God? Besides the exact meaning in interpetation of all words evolve over time.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Flap,
Um Cara, the words “cruel” and “deranged” have no meaning without a transcendent moral source.
I don’t need a supernatural force to tell me that (any number of horrible things that occurred during the holocaust, for example) are cruel.
I can imagine myself in that situation and understand that it is not something I would like very much, so probably other people do not either.
How quick people are to criticize when God Himself defines what is correct and what is not.
I was criticizing Willy for blaming God for the holocaust and rape.
As for what God thinks is correct or not, who knows? Every single person who believes in Him has a different idea of what God thinks is right.
Some folks think he doesn’t approve of a black man and a white woman marrying.
Some folks think he doesn’t approve of two chicks marrying.
Some folks think you can’t wear cloth made out of two different materials.
And some folks apparently think he approves of rape as long as you learn something from it.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Placefield, then what is the transcendent moral source that has any value? Other than supernatural, it seems like anything else is worthless.
Alan had a caller last night who asked him about it and Alan said “I believe hurting or harming someone is wrong.” Based on…what? What other humans think? Tradition? Do animals follow that “morality”? Truly, if all we are is evolved primates, what’s the difference? Is there any absolute morality other than propagating the species?
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Other than supernatural, it seems like anything else is worthless.
Perhaps you lack empathy? I know you once said you would be a Satanist if you weren’t a Christian, because you could do anything you wanted.
Do you feel empathy, Flap? Do you really need a supernatural being peeking over you shoulder to keep you from raping and pillaging?
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
“horrible things”
Um Cara, WHAT makes them horrible? WHY should anyone agree that they’re horrible? Just because most people believe that? Most people in Germany might have believed the opposite. Most anti-Semites might think killing Jews is okay. WHY is that wrong? So if a bunch of crazies get in power, might makes right.
“has a different idea of what God thinks is right”
Of course, but I believe that absolute truth exists. If not, then we’re back to conjecture and no basis for morality. I can’t say for certain that morality MUST be based on the Christian Bible, but if you don’t get it from a supernatural source then you get the laughable atheistic source proffered by Christopher Hitchens: “human solidarity.”
When you look at the evils of the 20th century, I’m not sure if humans have an inborn moral compass. And even if we do, what do we measure that against? There must be a transcendent source. That’s all I’m saying.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Um Cara, WHAT makes them horrible?
I explained that already:
I can imagine myself in that situation and understand that it is not something I would like very much, so probably other people do not either.
So, for example, if I think about being forced to shoot my parents in the head, for example, I can imagine that I would be very distressed. It would be ‘horrible’.
And I don’t think it takes a supernatural force to make it so.
I’m not arguing that there is no supernatural super being (I don’t think it possible to disprove an omnipotent being, nor do I have any interest whatsoever in doing so) – I just don’t think the fact that we have morals are a proof of the supernatural.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
“Perhaps you lack empathy?”
My personal feelings are irrelevant. I said I would be a Satanist because it is perfectly logical to believe that if there is no God and no hereafter that everything should be about ME. Nihilistic existentialism is pretty darn reasoanble. Grabbing all the gusto life can offer at the expense of others. Isn’t that what animals generally do? Instinct.
“Do you really need a supernatural being peeking over you shoulder to keep you from raping and pillaging?”
You keep dodging my question. If you can tell me inherently WHY harming others is wrong without invoking God essentially or saying “it just is” then I’ll agree with you. Don’t animals rape each other? Aren’t we the product of Darwinian evolution by natural selection?
Where’s the yardstick, Um Cara? Other than ad hominems about me lacking empathy or “I should know better,” how can we really measure what is moral and what is not?
placefield Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Flap,
Um Cara stole the word right out of my mouth. Empathy. To be honest I don’t know where it comes from, but I have it. Combine that with compassion and that is the entire moral compass I feel I need. And yes to people who lack both of those capacities it would probably seem silly.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
“that is the entire moral compass I feel I need”
But my moral compass may be to slam doors shut in people’s faces and take all the pennies out of the “give one get one” tray at convenience stores.
WHY is your moral compass and empathy any more valid than mine? Maybe I feel empathy for only white people and I hate everyone else.
Where is the yardstick for measuring it, placefield? Society? I refer you back to Nazi Germany. Parents? Lots of evil parents. The good of fellow humans? That’s a matter of opinion.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
My personal feelings are irrelevant.
I think they are – if you lack empathy, then I can understand why you can’t understand what I (and Placefield) are saying. Perhaps you just can’t relate to what we are talking about. There are certainly people incapable of feeling empathy, perhaps you are one of them.
You keep dodging my question. If you can tell me inherently WHY harming others is wrong without invoking God essentially or saying “it just is” then I’ll agree with you
No, I don’t. I have answered your question directly, several times. And not once did I say ‘it just is’.
Where’s the yardstick, Um Cara? Other than ad hominems about me lacking empathy
I wasn’t insulting you, I was asking a question (which you have not answered).
Nihilistic existentialism is pretty darn reasoanble. Grabbing all the gusto life can offer at the expense of others.
Not when you are a critter as relatively weak as a human. We are social, communal critters. It would be pretty damn non adaptive if we ran around ‘grabbing the gusto’ at the absolute expense of the others in our community.
placefield Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
“WHY is your moral compass and empathy any more valid than mine?”
Never said it was to anybody but me.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Where is the yardstick for measuring it, placefield? Society? I refer you back to Nazi Germany.
Well, the godless commies joined us in defeating Nazi Germany.
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
Whoa Cara–I NEVER BLAMED GOD for the holocaust. WOW!! God gives man the free will to do what he wants. Hitler choose to kill 6,000,000 Jews. God had nothing to do with that. But did we learn anything from that? Maybe we did. I think we did.
But God will judge each of us for the choices we make in this life.
I will blame you for taking my statements on this COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT. I will not hold that against you though Cara.
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Rape? Never blamed God for allowing rape to happen. Again refer to my comments above.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
I NEVER BLAMED GOD for the holocaust.
Sure you did. You said he put us in situations like the Holocaust to teach us a lesson. (You made the same comment about rape).
I argued that as far as how I understood Christianity, it was a consequence of his granting us free will, that he didn’t micro manage.
Daddio Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
What did I just say?
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
“There are certainly people incapable of feeling empathy, perhaps you are one of them.”
Your answer: I have plenty of damn empathy, and you can’t answer my questions so you resort to insulting me. I have a question for you: will you cram it? I need an answer. “It’s not an insult, just asking.”
Do you think abortion affects me personally? Not a single bit. I have sympathy for those lives lost. And before TDro chimes in, yes I have sympathy for war deaths as well.
“Never said it was to anybody but me.”
So, morality is purely personal. So I can hate blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, and it’s okay. So Hitler’s morality was perfectly valid?
“It would be pretty damn non adaptive”
Why should I care about adaptivity? I’m not talking about the ability of me to cause evolution, I’m talking about the way I live my life. It benefits ME the most. I enjoy my life. I don’t care about the grand scheme. Again, WHY should I? You can’t give me a good reason why I should.
–
You or placefield still cannot tell me on what basis anyone should believe rape or hurting others is wrong (other than not getting thrown in jail). If there were no laws, why should I follow the Golden Rule? Why are those things wrong?
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Your answer: I have plenty of damn empathy, and you can’t answer my questions so you resort to insulting me.
OK, I believe you – your inability to understand what we were saying led me to believe it was a possibility that you do not. I know two people who can not feel empathy, thought you might be the third.
Why should I care about adaptivity? I’m not talking about the ability of me to cause evolution, I’m talking about the way I live my life. It benefits ME the most. I enjoy my life. I don’t care about the grand scheme. Again, WHY should I? You can’t give me a good reason why I should.
Yes I did.
Because you, like all humans, are a weak, social, communal critter. And your community will kick you out, or otherwise deal with you, if you ‘grab their gusto’.
You or placefield still cannot tell me on what basis anyone should believe rape or hurting others is wrong
Yes, I did:
I can imagine myself in that situation and understand that it is not something I would like very much, so probably other people do not either.
If there were no laws, why should I follow the Golden Rule?
If I keep repeating myself, the SPAM filter is going to kick in. See above.
Kregg Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
PLace said: Um Cara stole the word right out of my mouth. Empathy.
K: I think you guys need another word here than empathy. At it’s heart empathy is simply the recognition of another’s feelings. If I’m correct, Flap is talking about one’s motivations toward selflessness being divinely conceived and inspired while Place and Um are saying that such selflessness is innate within humanity but ‘empathy’ doesn’t adequately define what Place and Um want it to, IMO.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
while Place and Um are saying that such selflessness is innate within humanity but ‘empathy’ doesn’t adequately define what Place and Um want it to, IMO.
I haven’t really talked about ’selflessness’ at all. I’m saying I can put myself in the shoes of a kid forced to shoot his parents and think ‘gosh, that would suck beyond all measure of suckatude’ so I know it is wrong to make a kid shoot his parents.
While Flap may think it selfless to avoid raping and pillaging one’s neighbors, I think it is actually in one’s best interest to get along with your neighbors, if you are a weak, social, communal critter – like a human.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Um Cara, your argument is tautological.
It’s this: “I should follow the Golden Rule because I should follow the Golden Rule.” You answered me by essentially restating my question.
“Flap is talking about one’s motivations toward selflessness being divinely conceived and inspired”
Well, I agree to an extent, Kregg, but human nature is evil from a Christian perspective. We want to do bad things.
From a biological, secular perspective, we are evolved primates, so I see no reason from that angle to NOT want to do anything else than be selfish or duplicitous or whatever. I see no reason to be in a community OTHER than to eventually benefit oneself. Kinda like climbing the corporate ladder, I’m sure. Step over people and be nice ONLY to help yourself. Again, that is selfishness.
“‘gosh, that would suck beyond all measure of suckatude’ so I know it is wrong”
Well, I think gay marriage sucks, so “I know it is wrong.” Come on, that’s no basis for morality because YOU somehow inherently think it’s wrong or right. That’s the whole point. A supernatural source must be the basis or it’s completely arbitrary.
I think hurting people is good, so I know it is right. Again, all opinion.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Um Cara, your argument is tautological.
Hmm… gotta look up ‘tautological’, but if that is what you are calling my argument, it must mean ’super duper good’…. lets see…
Hey, wait a minute, it doesn’t mean super duper good, that must mean you didn’t know the meaning of it when you used it.
Thanks for the new word, I like words.
It’s this: “I should follow the Golden Rule because I should follow the Golden Rule.” You answered me by essentially restating my question.
No, I didn’t.
I think hurting people is good, so I know it is right.
I’m pretty sure you lack empathy, dude. Go have a quick convo with a psychologist. Your community is going to put you into a box if you do what you consider ‘good’.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
“I’m pretty sure you lack empathy, dude.”
Another ad hominem!
My turn: I’m pretty sure you’re an idiot, dude. I can’t have empathy for you because I’m not an idiot. But I can have sympathy. Is that good enough? Go have a quick convo with a high school and get your GED if you can.
If you honestly believe I think hurting people is good and wasn’t just trying to prove a point (that you never refuted), then perhaps you’re the one who needs the psychologist. I guess I overestimated your intelligence.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Another ad hominem!
Come on, you said hurting people is good. If you were able to put yourself into the shoes of the poor schlep you are thinking about hurting, you would realize it is not good.
If you honestly believe I think hurting people is good and wasn’t just trying to prove a point (that you never refuted), then perhaps you’re the one who needs the psychologist.
No, no, I believe you weren’t trying to prove a point that I never refuted (especially considering I refuted every point you made, multiple times).
If you are suggesting you weren’t serious that you think hurting people is good, I believe you (please don’t hurt me, I said I believe you!).
I’m pretty sure you’re an idiot, dude.
Now that is an ad hominem attack! And it hurts (which you think is good, or not, or it’s a point you are trying to make, or something. Whatever it is, I bet it has something to do with abortion.)
I guess I overestimated your intelligence.
I think we all know that is not possible.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Um Cara, you never proved why rape is bad or why I should do anything good. All you did is attack me with “you’re not empathetic” and something about the Golden Rule.
I know rape is bad. I “feel” that it is bad, but I also “feel” that other things are bad, and other people disagree with my feelings. WHO IS RIGHT and ON WHAT BASIS are those things morally correct or incorrect? Because of a law? Because society thinks it’s the case? Because of parents? Those are all fairly arbitrary. How can you have moral absolutes without the supernatural?
And why should I care about abortion? To you, apparently, morality is relativistic, so there’s no true wrong or right. So murder and rape is therefore not bad, because you may think it is and someone else may think it isn’t.
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Um Cara, you never proved why rape is bad or why I should do anything good.
Sure I did. A couple different ways.
Remember the whole thing about being a weak, social, communal critter that if he wants to survive he probably shouldn’t piss the community off?
Remember the part about knowing that you wouldn’t want to be raped, and how crummy that would make you feel, you know that you wouldn’t like to make another person feel that way?
To expand on that a bit – it is in your best interest not to do something you know will make the other person feel crummy, because odds are the other folks in your community are going to peg you as the type of person that likes to do things that makes people feel crummy, and peg you as a danger to the community, and stick you in a box.
All you did is attack me with “you’re not empathetic”
No, I asked you if you had feelings of empathy, as you seemed confused as to why hurting other people was wrong. Later, when you confessed that you thought hurting people was good, I suggested you see a shrink, because it sure sounded like you didn’t have empathy. Then you said you thought hurting people was good because it make a point and I was an idiot, or something… I don’t feel like scrolling back up.
I know rape is bad.
Hey, me too!
I “feel” that it is bad
Me too!
but I also “feel” that other things are bad
Me! Too! Wow! We are practically soul mates, dude! I’m so glad we have had this chance to bond. Maybe we should stop here for the night, since we are agreeing so much!
To you, apparently, morality is relativistic, so there’s no true wrong or right.
No, no, no… We just agreed that rape was bad, remember?
So murder and rape is therefore not bad,
Oh dear. It’s like you are two different people in one body… Now, don’t get riled up, but are you schizophrenic by any chance?
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Um said: I haven’t really talked about ’selflessness’ at all. I’m saying I can put myself in the shoes of a kid forced to shoot his parents and think ‘gosh, that would suck beyond all measure of suckatude’ so I know it is wrong to make a kid shoot his parents.
K: Right, but the dictionary definition of ‘empathy’ is “the ability to understand and share the feelings of another” and doesn’t go far enough to describe the action you take BECAUSE of your empathy. That action is one of ’self denial’ or “selflessness”. Simply ‘understanding’ or ’sharing’ a kid’s horror over being forced to shoot his parents is not enough. The action you TAKE when you ‘understand’ or ’share’ is what Flap was talking about. Its the motivation to do something other than serve yourself – or selflessness. And, if I get him correctly, he proposes that a ’self-denying’ action is divinely inspired, probably because of his view than”non-divine’ man acts only in his personal best interest.
U: While Flap may think it selfless to avoid raping and pillaging one’s neighbors, I think it is actually in one’s best interest to get along with your neighbors, if you are a weak, social, communal critter – like a human.
K: While it – in some respects – is in one’s selfish best interest to ‘get along’ such a proposal doesn’t explain the unselfish acts of love that people perform every day. I believe Flap is proposing that those acts of love – which may be clearly AGAINST the personal well-being of the actor – are divinely inspired in that they are not natural to a self-serving human and must come from an outside source.
Um Cara Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:45 am
I believe Flap is proposing that those acts of love – which may be clearly AGAINST the personal well-being of the actor – are divinely inspired in that they are not natural to a self-serving human and must come from an outside source.
Nah, there are other explanations/proofs of altruistic behavior. Read Ayn Rand’s ‘Virtue of Selfishness’ for example –basically she argues that even apparent altruistic acts have a self serving basis, if I recall correctly – I was in 8th grade when I read it (along with every other adolescent Rush fan in history).
I also saw a recent scientific study of altruistic behavior a couple months ago, I’ll try to dig it up (didn’t read it, it being Psychology, which is boring as hell to me).
Anyway, like I said earlier – not trying to disprove omnipotent supernatural superbeings, not possible, and I’m not at all interested in doing so. I just disagree that altruism (or apparent altruism) is Proof.
And who needs proof anyway, I thought it was supposed to be about faith w/ the Dude.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Um said: Nah, there are other explanations/proofs of altruistic behavior. Read Ayn Rand’s ‘Virtue of Selfishness’ for example –basically she argues that even apparent altruistic acts have a self serving basis, if I recall correctly – I was in 8th grade when I read it (along with every other adolescent Rush fan in history).
K: Sort of ‘altruistic selfishness’, huh? ;-) I’d think that such a basis for altruism would pay scant returns or – at least – cause a conscious decision making process within the individual regarding the personal ‘value’ of an altruistic act before undertaking it. Under such a proposition an individual who gives $1,000 to charity rather than spend it on himself has essentially ‘purchased’ $1,000 of ‘good feelings’. Or, the missionary Dr, who foregoes a lifetime of easy living to tramp through the jungle to inoculate the natives against disease is motivated to do so because it makes him feel better than relaxing in his Condo at the beach. Or, the soldier who throws himself on a grenade to save his comrades does so because it makes him feel good for the split second he remains alive.
K: If altruism is selfish what does one then describe ‘love’ as, Um?
U: I also saw a recent scientific study of altruistic behavior a couple months ago, I’ll try to dig it up (didn’t read it, it being Psychology, which is boring as hell to me).
U: Anyway, like I said earlier – not trying to disprove omnipotent supernatural superbeings, not possible, and I’m not at all interested in doing so. I just disagree that altruism (or apparent altruism) is Proof.
K: I’m interested in hearing your definition of ‘love’ as relates to altruistic acts because Flap is definitely talking about a divine motivation for love.
U: And who needs proof anyway, I thought it was supposed to be about faith w/ the Dude.
K: In the end, it is faith that is both generated by love for Christ AND acted out through love for Christ. Love for Christ brings us to the salvation table, an on-going loving relationship with Christ KEEPS us at the salvation table.
Kregg Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
The Eric said: The ’skip the long-part’ version of what I’m saying is that I personally don’t believe in Hell. The rod of ‘Hell’ was made to keep people in line, in my view.
K: Eric, there are many people who interpret the ‘hell’ verses in the bible to mean NOT an eternal burning and suffering but an eternal death – unconcsious, feeling nothing, dead. It is, perhaps, a more accurate interpretation of ‘hell’ than a place of eternal agony for those who refuse God.
libpatriot Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Kregg Reply, June 24th, 2009 at 6:33PM
You’re right, Kregg, in that many people DO personally interpret the ‘hell’ verses to mean eternal death rather than eternal suffering, and believe that the real tragedy of being cast into Hell is missing out on Heaven.
In addition, some denominations, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists, officially teach that the human soul is mortal like the body, and that souls cast into Hell burn up and live no more.
Eric, @ 3:58 pm: “The rod of ‘Hell’ was made to keep people in line, in my view.”
Thomas Jefferson saw it that way, also.
Kregg Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
The Eric said: The ’skip the long-part’ version of what I’m saying is that I personally don’t believe in Hell. The rod of ‘Hell’ was made to keep people in line, in my view.
K: Eric, there are many people who interpret the ‘hell’ verses in the bible to mean NOT an eternal burning and suffering but an eternal death – unconcsious, feeling nothing, dead. It is, perhaps, a more accurate interpretation of ‘hell’ than a place of eternal agony for those who refuse God.
Kregg Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
well, it seems I can’t place my response to The Eric in the place I want it – under his comments.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
“I can imagine myself in that situation and understand that it is not something I would like very much”
You’re essentially restating the Golden Rule. Who cares? Why should I follow the Golden Rule? Because you think I should? Because society thinks I should? Because it’s the “right thing to do”? What is “right”?
I know you recognize Darwinian evolution. Do animals follow the Golden Rule? Why should we? There’s nothing inherent in evolution that says we must somehow have our consciousnesses raised or we should be “better” than our animal brethren.
Other than not breaking the law to avoid jail, why should I do anything positive to help others?
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
You’re essentially restating the Golden Rule. Who cares? Why should I follow the Golden Rule?
Because you, like all humans, are a weak, social, communal critter. And your community will kick you out, or otherwise deal with you, if you ‘grab their gusto’.
Other than not breaking the law to avoid jail, why should I do anything positive to help others?
I can imagine how nice I would feel if someone did something nice for me. When I do something nice for another, I feel a bit of that good feeling reflected back. Ayn Rand would say I’m being selfish when I do something nice for another. (but she was a bit of a joyless person, IMO)
It’s all related to that empathy thing that I am starting to believe you do not feel.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
“And your community will kick you out”
How many playboys are there in the world contributing nothing and grabbing gusto? Paris Hilton? I don’t see her being kicked out of anywhere and she is (probably) contributing nothing. She doesn’t have to obey the Golden Rule. On what basis should she?
“It’s all related to that empathy thing that I am starting to believe you do not feel.”
Because I am taking an extreme position you assume I embody everything about that extreme position? I thought you were smarter than that, Um Cara.
On top of that, empathy is a matter of opinion. Empathy for you might not be empathy for me. Can you not see that? What kind of empathy does a white supremacist have when he lynches a black person? He may have PLENTY of empathy for white people…who is to say what he does is wrong?
Um Cara Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Because I am taking an extreme position you assume I embody everything about that extreme position? I thought you were smarter than that, Um Cara.
No, it was just a reasonable answer for why you have such a hard time grasping the concept of not needing a superbeing to decide for us that it is wrong to force children to shoot their parents.
As mentioned, I know two people who are incapable of feeling empathy and their thought processes are similar to what you have been espousing.
On top of that, empathy is a matter of opinion. Empathy for you might not be empathy for me. Can you not see that? What kind of empathy does a white supremacist have when he lynches a black person? He may have PLENTY of empathy for white people…who is to say what he does is wrong?
Seems like a good argument for there not being a single arbiter of right and wrong or presumably there wouldn’t be this variability you point out.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
“not needing a superbeing to decide for us that it is wrong to force children to shoot their parents.”
It is commonplace in some cultures to kill children if they are female. As far as I can tell, without a superbeing there’s absolutely no way to rationally or logically say that is wrong.
“Seems like a good argument for there not being a single arbiter of right and wrong”
That’s my point, although I don’t know if you meant it in that way. Without a Superbeing, there IS no arbiter of right and wrong and it’s all conjecture.
I’ll go back to your original criticism of Daddio: “Willy’s god is a cruel, deranged psychopath…”
There’s no single arbiter of right and wrong, so that is strictly your opinion. Being cruel and deranged isn’t bad or good. Without a supernatural morality source, it’s neutral. So you criticize the SOURCE of morality without having a non-arbitrary basis for one yourself.
craig7120 Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Flap putting the golden rule on any species other than the ones that invented it is weak. Most animals do follow somewhat of a golden rule. There are some exceptions but I wouldnt think survival being one.
Survival cannot be a penalty against the golden rule, right?
TDro319 Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Daddio is just upset because we’re picking on another republican hypocrite.
June 24th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Wonkette wins the headlines so far…
“Fox news Flash- Mark Sanford is an um DEMOCRAT!”
“It’s Father’s day and everyone’s wounded, Mark Sanford will find true love if he follows his hard-on”…
you just can’t make this stuff up…
June 24th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
WOW, he resigned from the old RGA but joined the new RGA, Republican Gets Ass.
GOP = Guilty Old People
These people are nuts.
FuRyUs Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
When does he get HIS standing ovation?
Or is that only with Senators?
June 24th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Ho hum. Another family values Republican bites the dust.
Nothing to see here, please just move along.
Don’t cry for me Argentina
The truth is I never left you
All through my wild days
My mad existence
I kept my promise
Don’t keep your distance
June 24th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHA
June 24th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Are Irony and Hypocrisy Republican political platforms now? I can’t stop laughing at their idiocy. SOCIALISM and NO! That’s all they got. They don’t even have social issues because the gay is starting to be mainstream. And their politicians aren’t satisfied with their wives. Why do these poor women stay with these pigs? They’re even complaining that they can’t fundraise well with Sotomayor. But she’s a racist! HAHAHAHA! Fools. A party of fools…
June 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Well, hey, if he accepted Christ as his personal savior he can do any damn thing he wants and be sure he’ll get away with it, not just here, but in the hereafter, and for all eternity.
And he can be certain, too, that republikkkans everywhere will applaud with enthusiasm when he gets back to the office.
FuRyUs Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
This is so hilarious! I’m lovin the spin these strategists on TV are trying. Family Values. OK.
Manson Family Values…
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Two in one week? It’s two-fers.
“Don’t cry for me Argentina
The truth is I never left you
All through my wild days
My mad existence
I kept my promise
Don’t keep your distance…”
FuRyUs Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
I hope we don’t find out Sanford and Ensign we’re doing each other too…
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
“he can do any damn thing he wants and be sure he’ll get away with it”
Why do you care? If you believe in no afterlife, then you can do the same thing, and by that standard he can too.
RDM Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Flap said: Why do you care?
Maybe because Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organization.
” De lazy debbels”.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
There’s more of God in Atheism than in all of Christianity’s hosannas and hail Marys.
flap Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
“Non-Prophet Organization”
Not bad…
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Rocky said: Well, hey, if he accepted Christ as his personal savior he can do any damn thing he wants and be sure he’ll get away with it, not just here, but in the hereafter, and for all eternity.
K: Part of accepting Christ as personal saviour is accepting Christ’s way of doing things and would necessarily preclude a person from ‘do[ing] any damn things he wants and be sure he’ll get away with it’. Unless, you understand that the mental/motivational change upon surrender to Christ (and following) leads one to WANT to obey its easy to mistake salvation as a ‘get out of jail free’ card.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Actually,
As I understand this :
To accept Christ’s free gift has no other strings attached. It’s a grace thing, nothing we can do to improve on it. Just believe in Christ.
All things are lawful, but all things are not good for me. There are no rules, just love God-love your neighbor.
These are not required. It’s a motivation shift. Considering God first, considering others before me, this changes things considerably. No additional rules or regulations.
The way some would have us believe, Christ is like fire insurance, turn or burn. Bullsh#t. Either God is a God of love or I want nothing to do with Him. A lot of ‘christians’ throw the whole fear God trip at us. They mistake fear for awe, reverance. What kind of love requires fear? Love casts out fear.
Is God a God of anger who wants to save us from His anger?,
Or
Is God a God of love that wants to save us from ourselves, our insticts run wild?
For me it is like this, if I love my wife I want to do things that please her, not things that bum her out. If I love my neighbor, I want to do good things for them, respect them, treat them well.
None of this behavior is required, it’s just a new motivation.
I am becoming less and less of a selfish bastard, more and more considerate of others.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Actually,
James said: As I understand this :
To accept Christ’s free gift has no other strings attached. It’s a grace thing, nothing we can do to improve on it. Just believe in Christ.
K: The most basic translation from the greek of ‘grace’ basically means ‘because he wants to’. Christ offers us a saving relationship ‘because he want’s to’. Interestingly enough, we offer back our relationship by our own grace – if you will – because WE want to. Its an oversimplification of the concept of grace but it describes that God wants relationship with us and – if we respond to Christ’s ’standing at the door and knocking’ – we want relationship with God. No HAVE to in it. God’s love draws us. We respond. God’s love changes us. We respond. A never ending cycle.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:50 am
James said: All things are lawful, but all things are not good for me. There are no rules, just love God-love your neighbor.
K: The 10 commandments ought properly be understood not as ‘rules you must obey’ but as a yardstick of your relationship with God. KJV translates the phrase “if you love me follow my commands”. ASB (as I recall) translates the same phrase “as you love me you will follow my commands”. A lot of Christians see the rule rather than the measuring device. All of the ‘law and the testimonies’ HANG on – or are instituted upon – the the concept of ‘love God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind’ and ‘love your neighbor as much as you love yourself’.
J: These are not required. It’s a motivation shift. Considering God first, considering others before me, this changes things considerably. No additional rules or regulations.
K: If ‘consideration’ is ‘love’ I fully agree. Love is the motivation rather than one’s former selfishness.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 11:53 am
James said: For me it is like this, if I love my wife I want to do things that please her, not things that bum her out. If I love my neighbor, I want to do good things for them, respect them, treat them well.
None of this behavior is required, it’s just a new motivation.
I am becoming less and less of a selfish bastard, more and more considerate of others.
K: Now, you are running up against Um’s counter on another thread that altruism is basically selfish and he would necessarily posit that your ‘loving’ actions toward your wife are – essentially – selfishly motivated.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Kergg,
Dig it bro. “No have to in it.” Absolutely.
The”standing at the door and knocking” reference from Rev. is directed at believers.
Does this mean that we can be way off base, as a church, as believers ? I think so, todays church reeks of Rev. type descriptions.
I love that “GOD draws us”. The enemy drives, and by the way, we have 3. The world, the flesh, and the devil. I always take note of the order they are in. I believe the order is significant.
2 commandments take care of everything.
God saw us ADHD types coming and simplified the deal. To see the rule and not the love is a very common mistake that I have fallen into far too often. Lord save me from myself and my adherence to rules.
I struggle with Um’s dilemma often. If I do the unselfish thing, it invariably feels right and good. I benefit. Catch 22.
I have to remember that God is love and knows how I best function. When I do the right thing I fit into the parameters of my design better. I get the bonus of feeling good about not acting selfishly. My brain wants to explode when I try to figure it out. I just try to do it.
Peace and love to you fellow travelers !!!
Um Cara Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Kregg and James,
Now, you are running up against Um’s counter on another thread that altruism is basically selfish and he would necessarily posit that your ‘loving’ actions toward your wife are – essentially – selfishly motivated.
That’s not me – that’s Ayn Rand, I wasn’t saying I subscribe to that view (as I mentioned in another thread, I see her as a bit of a joyless prig), I was just referencing it.
Actually, I do not consider altruism selfish, though I do think one receives more than one gives when one performs a selfless act! (uh oh, am I violating the second law of thermodynamics here?)
craig7120 Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
I do think one receives more than one gives when one performs a selfless act! (uh oh, am I violating the second law of thermodynamics here?)
LOL Im so proud of myself, I get that joke. yaaaaaaaa me
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
James said: The”standing at the door and knocking” reference from Rev. is directed at believers.
K: I think you’ll find its directed at non-believers also. The reason you have come to God in the first place is because Christ has been ‘knocking on your door’ inviting you. Without that initial persistence by Christ you would still be “self”-motivated and “self”-interested because fallen man knows no other condition. Upon your opening the door to Him he continues to ‘knock’ on each and every door within you over time as you build a stronger love relationship with Him by association, by prayer, by reading your bible, and by contemplating heavenly things. By doing these things you give the Holy Spirit permission to change your attitudes. Remember, “by beholding we become changed…”. The biblical process of sanctification is that of continuing to open doors as Christ knocks on each and every ’self’ oriented issue within your life.
J; Does this mean that we can be way off base, as a church, as believers ? I think so, todays church reeks of Rev. type descriptions.
K: Yes. Believers are not immune from misinterpreting the bible. Nor are they immune from ’self’ interest.
J: I love that “GOD draws us”. The enemy drives, and by the way, we have 3. The world, the flesh, and the devil. I always take note of the order they are in. I believe the order is significant.
K: Then you’ll love the book I sent.
J: 2 commandments take care of everything.
K: A single reality explains the purpose of all the commandments. God is love. Love to God – and love to man OUT of, or emanating from – that love to God encompasses the purpose of all the law and all the commandments. Unfortunately, His statement that all of the commandments and all of the law are pointed toward that fact is often missed and supplanted with a list of rules and regulations that make no sense when applied backwards – or missing the purpose of their implementation.
J: God saw us ADHD types coming and simplified the deal. To see the rule and not the love is a very common mistake that I have fallen into far too often. Lord save me from myself and my adherence to rules.
K: Or, ADHD is the norm and God wrote his law for us and its the over-thinkers that have screwed it up… ;-)
J: I struggle with Um’s dilemma often. If I do the unselfish thing, it invariably feels right and good. I benefit. Catch 22.
I have to remember that God is love and knows how I best function. When I do the right thing I fit into the parameters of my design better. I get the bonus of feeling good about not acting selfishly. My brain wants to explode when I try to figure it out. I just try to do it.
K: Consider that the ‘good feeling’ is a bonus for the sacrifice you make toward others in love. I just don’t think personal satisfaction is the causation of that self-sacrifice. The causation is love.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
He he he he he
I get it.
Sorry, I was busy watching the excorcism.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Um said: That’s not me – that’s Ayn Rand, I wasn’t saying I subscribe to that view (as I mentioned in another thread, I see her as a bit of a joyless prig), I was just referencing it.
K: You’re right. Sorry…
U: Actually, I do not consider altruism selfish, though I do think one receives more than one gives when one performs a selfless act! (uh oh, am I violating the second law of thermodynamics here?)
K: Physical law does not cover all things… ;-) For one who loves, one ALWAYS gets back more than one invests. But, then, where does love come from if not the supernatural? If man is by nature self-serving where does his altruism come from? It has to be from that which is outside him.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Kregg,
ADHD is the norm—–over-thinkers have screwed it up.
Great way to put it bro.
The causation is love.
Yah bud, my motivation has changed. ‘Give to get’ is something I try to stay clear of.
Funny how it feels so good…….no James !!! stop over-thinking this !!!!! ARGHHH.
He he he
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
James said: Funny how it feels so good…….no James !!! stop over-thinking this !!!!! ARGHHH.
K: Sometimes black REALLY IS black, and white REALLY IS white. We miss these simple things while creating grey and off-white and, and, and…
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Over- thinkers anonymous for you and me bro.
I just joined a little facebook group that my buddy Darrin started up. “Judgemental Christians” is the group. All those with plankeye are welcome. I can’t get into the solution until I recognize the problem.
Fellowship is good for the soul.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
“Judgemental Christians anonymous” is the group.
Kregg Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
James said: Over- thinkers anonymous for you and me bro.
K: Membership for all on one point or another…
K: Just a question on the facebook group: How would a christian who has a ”plank in his eye” re his judgmentalism see his was clear to join? Seems that anyone who RECOGNIZES their judgmentalism has already had their plank removed… ;-) Sort of a group for the cured? ;-)
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Is it like humility?
The moment you feel that you have it, well, that’s a sure sign that you do not.
I get pissed of at say, gluttonous people yelling about adulterers, greedy people yelling about lazy people, etc..
I catch myself in the act of judgementalism, it does not mean I have it licked. I’ve made some progress though.
June 24th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
I know that just about every Democrat alive is having an orgasm of schadenfreude.
People make horrible choices…Republican and Democrat. Democrats generally choose not to promote or emphasize family values. Republicans promote them, and then when they make a mistake, Democrats are gleeful about it.
Marital fidelity and family values are extremely important. It’s too bad that a couple of Republicans have fallen through in that regard.
FuRyUs Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
It’s more like a pattern now. A pattern of Republican whores.
June 24th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Family values.
So important that one family is seldom enough to satisfy the craving and you have to start a second family!! Or, a third?!
June 24th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
And I thought we would have another “client #9″
June 24th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Two weeks in a row two “Family Values” Republican officials reveal they are … hypocritical cheaters.
Week No. 1 Sen. John Ensign (R-Nevada) confesses to an extramarital affair with a married staffer. Week No. 2 Gov. Mark Sanford (R-South Carolina) confesses to having been unfaithful to his wife, and having jetted off — during Father’s Day weekend! — to Argentina to be with him mistress. (And he his state to have to function without him.)
For anyone believing that some things happen in threes … who will be the next elected Republican to announce having had an affair? (Governorship and Senate are already covered. How about from the House? … New York’s ex-Rep. Vito Fosella was months ago! A “new” name for Week No. 3, people?)
Are the residents of Nevada and South Carolina going to tolerate allowing these two — Ensign and Sanford — to continue to represent them?
June 24th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
I don’t know who said wha but what in the heck is this about??:
“You or placefield still cannot tell me on what basis anyone should believe rape or hurting others is wrong”??
Kregg Reply:
June 24th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Lefty said: I don’t know who said wha but what in the heck is this about??:
K: Its about the source of human compassion and morals… ;-)
June 24th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
[...] “I have been unfaithful”: Alan examines today’s shocking confession by South Carolina Gov. Mark [...]
June 24th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
“I know rape is bad. I “feel” that it is bad, but I also “feel” that other things are bad, and other people disagree with my feelings. WHO IS RIGHT and ON WHAT BASIS are those things morally correct or incorrect? Because of a law? Because society thinks it’s the case? Because of parents? Those are all fairly arbitrary. How can you have moral absolutes without the supernatural?”
There are no absolutes unless we agree that there are.
average james Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Absolute agreement !!
I think.
Maybe.
craig7120 Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
How can you have moral absolutes without the supernatural?” Uh?
you gotta make something up for ‘your’ morals to be absolute? that is perhaps the craziest thing I ever read.
craig7120 Reply:
June 25th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Some bring more to this earth party then necessary.
Why all the baggage?
June 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pm