Democrats versus Republicans

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by wind_magic

What you just said is not unique to your own understanding - having an understanding of God typically goes hand-in-hand with knowing that you were given two hands and a brain and that you should use them.

Uh, that is why the sentence contains "many of us".

Maybe I mistakenly thought that was a clue which stated that MANY OF US think this way - US being human beings.

[craigimass]

"never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth'

Well, this is something I have been saying for decades - that a righteous person does not have to follow the law. Looks like conservatives have been making up all the BS about law and order. After all, according to this outlook, we should simply pick and choose as to the laws that we follow based on what our inner guide and God tells us.

[PBzeer]

Sounds like a good resume for an Executive VP, though usually one looks for someone with a track record for that position. Not much beef for a CEO though. Which I think was the purpose of saying "run your company".

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by PBzeer

Sounds like a good resume for an Executive VP, though usually one looks for someone with a track record for that position. Not much beef for a CEO though. Which I think was the purpose of saying "run your company".

Always depends on the situation. Steve Jobs had no engineering, design or management experience and still does not - other than "on the job". Woz invented the apple way before he got his engineering degree. The folks who designed the Mac hardware - some of them had almost no education formally, but they "understood" how things work.

In terms of a President who has to have a patina of understanding of 10's of thousands of subjects (or a veneer, whichever you like), the ability to have lots of other smart people around is a must. Not loyal people (ala GW), but smart people....who often disagree with you.

In other words, the last admin was "my way or the highway" - which might have worked if "my way" had even a slight bit of intelligence, forethought or experience in it. The current admin is "hire the best and brightest and let them do their thing and report to us, and we'll sort through the viewpoints and attempt to make the proper decisions". That style of management is more to my liking.

Granted, I never ran a big company. We are talking in the low millions each year - but I did it for 20+ years and with various types of businesses. I would be the last one to say I know the big corporate world, which works more on a dog eat dog track.

[wind_magic]

Originally Posted by craigimass

Uh, that is why the sentence contains "many of us".

Maybe I mistakenly thought that was a clue which stated that MANY OF US think this way - US being human beings.

Hmm, I thought I knew what you were saying until you said this, now when I go back and look at what you wrote in this new context I have to admit I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

[PBzeer]

So, potential would be enough for you to turn over your livelihood to?

[wind_magic]

See this is the kind of thing I'm having trouble following craigimass.

Originally Posted by craigimass

"never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth'

Well, this is something I have been saying for decades - that a righteous person does not have to follow the law.

I agree with that, wrote a whole post about it - HERE, sounds like you agree with it too since you've been saying it for decades.

Looks like conservatives have been making up all the BS about law and order.

So what exactly are you saying with that statement ? Are you saying that conservatives create laws and you don't agree with the entire concept, that you think we should ignore what laws we don't agree with, or are you saying that you are a conservative and you just don't agree with some of the laws your party has made, or what ?

After all, according to this outlook, we should simply pick and choose as to the laws that we follow based on what our inner guide and God tells us.

And then you end your post apparently conflicting your own opening sentence, here it seems like you do NOT, in fact, think that people should "pick and choose" in your words, that you believe people should follow the law regardless of what they think about it ?

I'm just trying to figure out where you are coming from, maybe I just missed a subtle nuance of what you said, or that this post has to be taken in context with something you wrote in previous posts for it to make sense ?

[PBzeer]

Picking and choosing laws is not something exclusive to reliegious people. I would venture to say that the sincerely religious person is more likely to accept laws that are contrary to their beliefs then those of a more anarchist point of view. Render unto Caesar ......

[craigimass]

Ah, fine distinctions......

I think I have a brain, ethics, morals and a mind in order to figure out what is right and then be obedient to that.

You (or some others) think that you should not be obedient to yourself, but to some perceived or imagined God who sits somewhere outside of yourself and tells you what to do.

Obviously, people fall all over that curve.

And, again, the popularity contest does not figure in. It does not matter if the majority of people the world over smoke, drink, dance, jump up and down at midnight or believe in multiple Gods (Hindus, natives, etc.).

What matters if what YOU believe and how you act out on it.

And, yes, you can be right and you can be wrong at the same time. If you think that smoking dope is 100% OK even though it is illegal, it is not a sin against God or Man or yourself. It may be a slight breaking of the law.

I'm just playing with Buckleys words, which I would never use as a sig since the interpretation could be so broad. To me, they say "listen to my dead ancestors and the lord". Now, that could mean my alcoholic ancestor who operated an elevator.......or it could mean the deep intelligence within myself which was fashioned over the centuries by the sum total of my forebears (hmm, that is no a word I use much...might be wrong).

A nicer sig might be Carlins......
"The real reason that we can't have the Ten Commandments in a Courthouse?
You cannot post "Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery"
and "Thou Shall Not Lie" in a building full of lawyers, judges and
politicians! It creates a hostile work environment! "

Too long for a sig, but there are lots of them which I would guess are more clear than being in some ways obedient not to myself, but to God and my Ancestors.

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by PBzeer

Picking and choosing laws is not something exclusive to reliegious people. I would venture to say that the sincerely religious person is more likely to accept laws that are contrary to their beliefs then those of a more anarchist point of view. Render unto Caesar ......

Then I must be sincerely religious, because that is the way I feel. I pay all my taxes and do all teh BS required to be "legal" in as many ways as possible.

That goes against many viewpoints I have heard here of the government taking away what is yours, etc. etc.

With that viewpoint - the proper one IMHO - we don't have to worry at all about taxes being raised, etc. - it's just part of Caesar.