<p>Point being, those with completely different world views can find common ground in specifics and reason--there is hope. I dont see your problem.</p>
<p>
As I said, what <em>you</em> (the subject) have rigorously determined to be correct. That is, we act on what we believe to be true, not what we know to be false and not on ethical or moral ambivalence. When so doing, it should be given that we have rigorously (to the best of our abilities, in view of time and circumstance) determined our truth to be correct; meaning, not based on anecdotal views, as above.</p>
<p>Fortunately, most people will only act on what they believe to be true. Fortunately, truth is a high standard to reachthe highest. There would be moral/ethical chaos otherwise.</p>
<p>well truths have their little pecking orders too. That I'm anticipating my morning coffee is not an absolute truth . It's just a humble little truth but one upon which I can act with absolute certainty, with my bean-grinding an appropriate and fitting response to condition of not-having-yet-had-my-morning-coffee-ness.</p>
<p>It's Fair Trade, Em, just so you know I got the ethics covered,..</p>
<p>fathers fear feathers,.and yes, when you consider flight and all it stands for, to kill waterfowl simply to construct a dust-vanquishing device, to bring them down to earth so we can tend to our book-lined shelves,..still, the daughter will fly and feathers must come from somewhere</p>
<p>
[quote]
lay back on the couch, ari, and tell us just how you have come to associate 'hope for humankind' with 'sour notes'. What fs wrote was a compliment, albeit backhanded. Why do such positive appraisals make you uncomfortable? The way you deflected, one might suppose the hypothetical girlfriend to have been reading over your shoulder?..fire away.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>rorosen,</p>
<p>FS has a way of being "cute" by claiming to "praise" but in reality being backhanded. She then professes to wonder how anyone could ever have any ill-will toward her posting.</p>
<p>I think that she prefers it this way. It gives her targets and people to whet her vocabulary on.</p>
<p>Clearly, I should have spent more time forgetting the words I've been taught and learned through reading the classics and cramming SAT vocab--much like my critics have done--in view of the fact that they offend so. </p>
<p>More time watching sit-coms and ABC's Monday Night Football. It is now obvious to me that its talking-head, John Madden, is the greatest communicator of our time, at least when judged by the standard of forgetting.</p>
<p>As to backhand comments, you'll have to direct me to your forehands, Ari--even backhands would suffice...your serve.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Clearly, I should have spent more time forgetting the words I've been taught and learned through reading the classics and cramming SAT vocab--much like my critics have done--in view of the fact that they offend so.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just because you're a black belt in a martial art doesn't mean you run around beating the crap out of everyone you see. You learn discipline and "the right time and place" for things. </p>
<p>Just because you memorized tons of SAT words...oh you get the point.</p>
<p>"What a shame indeed. The Founding Fathers wouldn't dream that the average American have a gun for anything other than hunting. Such gross misinterpretation!"</p>
<p>Then your social studies teachers have done a great job at brain washing you. The supreme court justice quoted below was appointed by James Madison, so, I dare say he WAS a founding Father, or at least first generation removed. The reason for the right to bare arms stands out loud and clear in his quote. Anything else is pure spin. Period.</p>
<p>The Constitution's Second Amendment prohibition against government interference in the "right to keep and bear arms" is the one assurance that ensures all other rights. As noted by Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison: "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."</p>
<p>To tomslawsky...I was being sarcastic hehe. I am absolutely pro gun ownership, with none of the Assault Weapons Ban or Automatic Weapon Ban garbage.</p>
<p>Speaking of brainwashing, my ex US Hist teacher was the keynote speaker at our graduation. Wow, that whole 15 minutes was a political rant. Pretty much every level headed parent and student thought it was ********. Obviously, she is very respected by the school board for being a devout liberal.</p>