|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 6, 2018 21:39:38 GMT
Well, who, and why that person? Who else is supposed to decide what I'll accept? I don't even understand your question. Think about it this way: what does "not accepting it" amount to? I mean in practical terms.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 6, 2018 21:42:05 GMT
Who else is supposed to decide what I'll accept? I don't even understand your question. Think about it this way: what does "not accepting it" amount to? I mean in practical terms. Refusing to deal with the person anymore if the person won't keep hands off and reporting it if serious enough. I'm pushing 50. I don't play games or put hands on anyone so it doesn't need to happen to me.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jul 6, 2018 22:30:07 GMT
Are you saying it would be okay to punch me so long as it's not so bad that it needs treatment (and I don't bruise too badly)? Yes, the sort of punch that wouldn't require any medical attention and that there would be no sign of a few days later. (Which wouldn't be much of a punch.) I'd be surprised if anyone else agrees with you.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 6, 2018 23:14:13 GMT
I in no way said that there is only one set of absolute morals. I literally said in the statement you quoted that there are a few moral standards. The OP made it clear that there are differing moral standards, so not sure why you even wasted time bringing it up. YOU claimed that there were a few moral standards in 1st century Christians that are the same today. Presumably you live by those still and would they be the 10 commandments? What on earth does that have to do with absolute objective morality? Do you know what that means?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 6, 2018 23:41:39 GMT
YOU claimed that there were a few moral standards in 1st century Christians that are the same today. Presumably you live by those still and would they be the 10 commandments? What on earth does that have to do with absolute objective morality? Do you know what that means? OK. WE will go back a step. What are the few moral standards in the 1st Century that are the same today?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:07:42 GMT
Think about it this way: what does "not accepting it" amount to? I mean in practical terms. Refusing to deal with the person anymore if the person won't keep hands off and reporting it if serious enough. I'm pushing 50. I don't play games or put hands on anyone so it doesn't need to happen to me. Right, so regarding reporting it, isn't that other people deciding what someone can and can't do? That's what I'm referring to re "who is anyone to decide"-- the point being that we decide all the time what other people are to accept.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:14:56 GMT
Yes, the sort of punch that wouldn't require any medical attention and that there would be no sign of a few days later. (Which wouldn't be much of a punch.) I'd be surprised if anyone else agrees with you. Me too, especially on this board, since a bit part of the board's shtick is to moralize in high gear about some really trivial shit. Of course, the board is just reflecting a vocal segment of society in this.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 7, 2018 0:20:30 GMT
I'd be surprised if anyone else agrees with you. Me too, especially on this board, since a bit part of the board's shtick is to moralize in high gear about some really trivial shit. Of course, the board is just reflecting a vocal segment of society in this. Violence is not trivial, especially not domestic violence.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:21:39 GMT
Me too, especially on this board, since a bit part of the board's shtick is to moralize in high gear about some really trivial shit. Of course, the board is just reflecting a vocal segment of society in this. Violence is not trivial, especially not domestic violence. It is when it's something with basically no physical effect. Not that that is what I was referring to re "some really trivial shit," though.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 7, 2018 0:21:49 GMT
Refusing to deal with the person anymore if the person won't keep hands off and reporting it if serious enough. I'm pushing 50. I don't play games or put hands on anyone so it doesn't need to happen to me. Right, so regarding reporting it, isn't that other people deciding what someone can and can't do? That's what I'm referring to re "who is anyone to decide"-- the point being that we decide all the time what other people are to accept. And? I don't see why that is a problem in the case of not being physically bullied or harassed by others.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 7, 2018 0:23:31 GMT
Violence is not trivial, especially not domestic violence. It is when it's something with basically no physical effect. Then you accept it happening to you if you think it's so inconsequential. I don't see it as trivial. You have no right to decide it doesn't matter to me or anyone else.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:24:51 GMT
Right, so regarding reporting it, isn't that other people deciding what someone can and can't do? That's what I'm referring to re "who is anyone to decide"-- the point being that we decide all the time what other people are to accept. And? I don't see why that is a problem in the case of not being physically bullied or harassed by others. What are the criteria in your view for when deciding what other people are to accept is and isn't a problem?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 7, 2018 0:26:21 GMT
Violence is not trivial, especially not domestic violence. It is when it's something with basically no physical effect. Not that that is what I was referring to re "some really trivial shit," though. Of course it is a matter of degree, butt particularly in a domestic violence situation, the fact that a significant other would resort to violence at all, is problematic.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 7, 2018 0:26:42 GMT
And? I don't see why that is a problem in the case of not being physically bullied or harassed by others. What are the criteria in your view for when deciding what other people are to accept is and isn't a problem? When you're infringing on their rights to be left alone. Nobody should have to accept any physical contact/hitting/whatever. Especially if someone says to cut the crap, you are to cut the crap.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:26:53 GMT
It is when it's something with basically no physical effect. Then you accept it happening to you if you think it's so inconsequential. I don't see it as trivial. You have no right to decide it doesn't matter to me or anyone else. What gives you the right to decide any consequences for anyone?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 7, 2018 0:28:13 GMT
And? I don't see why that is a problem in the case of not being physically bullied or harassed by others. What are the criteria in your view for when deciding what other people are to accept is and isn't a problem? The answer is very simple. What they perceive as a level of unacceptable violence.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 7, 2018 0:28:24 GMT
Then you accept it happening to you if you think it's so inconsequential. I don't see it as trivial. You have no right to decide it doesn't matter to me or anyone else. What gives you the right to decide any consequences for anyone? And what gives you the right to think you can just hit/horseplay/slap someone for sh!ts and giggles?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:30:45 GMT
What are the criteria in your view for when deciding what other people are to accept is and isn't a problem? The answer is very simple. What they perceive as a level of unacceptable violence. So you get to decide what other people are to accept when it involves certain actions that you feel strongly about. Just by fiat, or?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 7, 2018 0:31:58 GMT
Then you accept it happening to you if you think it's so inconsequential. I don't see it as trivial. You have no right to decide it doesn't matter to me or anyone else. What gives you the right to decide any consequences for anyone? Each person has the right to decide for themselves what is acceptable behaviour towards them.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 7, 2018 0:32:04 GMT
What gives you the right to decide any consequences for anyone? And what gives you the right to think you can just hit/horseplay/slap someone for sh!ts and giggles? Your stance is that no one should be able to decide for anyone else what they have to accept re the behavior of others, right?
|
|