Theme: Responsibility

  • THE ARC OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY AND RATIONALITY: Fundamentalism > Traditiona

    THE ARC OF CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY AND RATIONALITY:
    Fundamentalism > Traditionalism > Secular Humanism
    Fundamentalist arguments from Christians are always false. But surprisingly, moral arguments from Christians are nearly always correct – unfortunately they all too often require the fundamentalist paradigm of indoctrination to wield. When Christianity evolves into secular humanism, it ceases being a personal philosophy and becomes a political philosophy thus decreasing the personal responsibility of Christianity into the political and economic philosophy that seeks to undermine personal responsibility in favor of public ‘caretaking’ (infantilization).
    So IMO the Church of England is Correct, training in Christian teachings when young, need only produce rational application of traditional Christian morality in adulthood, and as both rational and moral it will defend against the abandonment of that responsibility in secular humanism.
    Thinking of the faith as producing responsibility for the self and commons, and insulating the self from the seductions of irresponsibility for self and commons by others, isn’t the lens through which we view Christianity. But it is however, the reason for it’s success.

    Affections
    CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-20 16:36:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1792595347178446848

  • that only means specifying the scope of crimes

    that only means specifying the scope of crimes


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-16 07:29:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1791007954432319694

    Reply addressees: @BobbyBrisket

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1791002159133155680

  • YOU CANNOT HAVE A NATURAL RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, ADVOCATE, OR INDOCTRINATE INTO, A

    YOU CANNOT HAVE A NATURAL RIGHT TO CONSTRUCT, ADVOCATE, OR INDOCTRINATE INTO, A SUPERNATURAL RELIGION – ONLY A PRIVILEGE

    –“Thanks to freedom of religion I can believe whatever I want.”–

    1. You can believe whatever you want.
    2. Freedom of belief is of course irrevocable.
    3. Freedom of the public practice of a religion IS revokable.
    4. Because the social construction of fraud by false promise of the unpromisable and the externalities produced by such fraud, is criminalizable.
    5. Because all supernatural religions are untestifiable and their false promises unwarrantable and as such unpromisable.

    Ergo, you may have the natural right to believe and think because it cannot be deprived from you.

    But then again, your capacity to speak it, advocated it, and argue in matters of the commons using it, is absolutely positively prohibitable and punishable.

    In fact the only reason it hasn’t been done more frequently, is that those false hopes, like drugs, and other fantasies, do in fact calm the minds of those less capable of survival and adaptation in the real world.

    It took me years to find justification for not outlawing all supernatural religions, because they are in fact, a violation of the demand for truthful reciprocal speech in the commons.

    In the end, it’s a simple recognition that archaic religions are cheap, because they had to be, but the world requires revised ‘religions’ in the broad sense of the term, that are not false – well, that turns out to be costly just like education.

    Don’t presume a privilege is a right.
    Don’t presume a Political right is a natural right.
    Don’t presume even a natural right is possible without others insuring it.

    Affections
    CD

    Reply addressees: @finishedyet34


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 17:56:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790441089972752384

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790433130094231861

  • GREAT QUESTION –“Q: Curt: Is understanding or agreeing with the law a pre-requi

    GREAT QUESTION
    –“Q: Curt: Is understanding or agreeing with the law a pre-requisite?”–

    1) NATURAL LAW: Well, you must understand nothing more than rights, and that you have none other than those over those demonstrated interests you have produced by your own burdens of cost. (cost in the widest sense).

    2) CRIMINAL LAW: You do not need to know criminal law but if you have the vaguest sense of Natural Law it should be obvious that one does not deprive, steal, harm, or destroy the demonstrated interests of others regardless of reason. Criminal laws license the insurer of last resort (usually the government) on behalf of the people, to use organized force if necessary to pursue, cease, detain, prosecute, perform restitution, punishment, and prevention of repetition or imitation.

    3) CIVIL LAW You do not need to know of or understand a violation of that (natural) criteria, nor intend to do it (civil tort). You need only impose a cost upon that which is not your demonstrated interest. Ignorance is no defense, although we do compensate for children, the aged, the diseased, invalids and sometimes even women for whom responsibility (restitution) exists but not always blame (punishment).

    4) ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: You do not need to know of or understand man made laws (legislation, regulation, and findings of the court). Most derive from 1, and 2, but those that constrain us from externalizing risks onto others whether intentionally or by accident (recklessness, speeding, drunk driving etc) may not be intuitive. So we are likely to receive administrative fines or punishment as ‘training’ so that we are incentivized not do so again, and so that others learn from our ‘ignorance, incompetence, or disregard’.

    5) COMMON CAPITAL LAW: You may not know and may have trouble learning or understanding the vast variety of commons that you presume are there for your use in one way or another, whether physical (material), informal(behavioral), or institutional(Organizations, Processes, and Procedures).

    6) “SACRED” LAW: Without membership in a polity with sufficient experience with the myths, traditions, rituals, festivals, then you may not know, likely will not understand, and may question ‘sacred’ laws even if you do. The “Sacred”, while of religious association, literally means ‘that which you have no right to and every obligation to defend, and are never alienated from respecting or defending. In other words violations of the sacred are the criteria by which others in the polity consider you a risk to the polity, and as such must be p punished, shunned, ostracized, or killed. Most of these sacred laws are categorically common across cultures from traditions, to moral codes, symbols and icons, taboos, spaces and objects, certain texts and rituals. All of these ‘laws’ generate demand for reciprocal altruism, and violating extreme limits on that behavior is generally unforgivable, unrestitutable, and severely punishable.

    7) NORMATIVE BEHAVIOR LAW: You may not know, may have trouble learning, and may disagree with many informal rules, because you, as most people do, confuse the moral terms by which you consent to self regulation of your behavior, with the tolerance from variation from moral norms (terms of cooperation) which have evolved in the polity – but it doesn’t matter what you think. That’s just your strategy for you with others, and your strategy has nothing to do with your strategy’s impact on the commons – as such you may be not only responsible, but blamed and punished for behaviors you believe should be tolerated but are not. Your only solution then is ‘exit’.

    That should cover the vast majority of questions about the categories of law.

    Affections
    CD

    Reply addressees: @Gyeff0


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 04:02:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790231178152120320

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790208689678229886

  • WHAT IS A CRIME? The imposition of a cost on the demonstrated interests (assets)

    WHAT IS A CRIME?
    The imposition of a cost on the demonstrated interests (assets) of others, whether bodily, family, kin, kith, material, common informal or common formal.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-14 00:30:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790177787455881323

    Reply addressees: @CatcusBlack

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1790172513751756833

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @ArdisArdor18416 @Tomiesdaugther @spaceangelvoice (burn) No I

    RT @curtdoolittle: @ArdisArdor18416 @Tomiesdaugther @spaceangelvoice (burn)
    No I’m calling you out for the fraud of attempting to justify y…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-06 20:27:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787580087795102069

  • (burn) No I’m calling you out for the fraud of attempting to justify your burden

    (burn)
    No I’m calling you out for the fraud of attempting to justify your burdening others with you genetic detritus thereby continuing the expansionary increase of the cost of your poor genes, poor character, poor upbringing, poor behavior, and deficient performance onto society and polity because you couldn’t both keep your legs closed, develop the character and economic security for motherhood, make yourself desirable for a man before and after reproduction, and hold a family together so that you weren’t a burden upon others who clearly rejected you as did your husband or boyfriend, or lover, or friend with benefits, or one night stand, or participant in the train that ran though your bedroom each night with regularity.

    Reply addressees: @ArdisArdor18416 @Tomiesdaugther @spaceangelvoice


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-06 20:27:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787580066974633985

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787571191017791706

  • The purpose of the female BODY and BRAIN is to seduce, manipulate, and regulate

    The purpose of the female BODY and BRAIN is to seduce, manipulate, and regulate offspring. That doesn’t require truth. It only requires creating a debt response in others, and using guilt to provoke the debt response. Seriously that’s all it is. Everything else consist of the female state of conflict between those instincts and intuitions and the risk, threat, and danger of using those skills on other than children.

    Reply addressees: @JackOfAwlTrades


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-05 22:11:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787243629477531649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787225880013537739

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @WomanPissedoff Quite the opposite. SHORT LIST OF FEMALE MEAN

    RT @curtdoolittle: @WomanPissedoff Quite the opposite.

    SHORT LIST OF FEMALE MEANS OF ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, EVADING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-05 17:56:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787179652940796153

  • I love that you state the unflattering truths. The unflattering truth in this ca

    I love that you state the unflattering truths. The unflattering truth in this case however, is that neither child support nor alimony should be tolerated when women trade sex for income from men, and women make more money and younger than men, in safer and less stressful work, and men are deprived of the income necessary to find another woman willing to cooperate with him and form a stable family producing stable children, instead of the plague of singlemotherhood and the plague of infantilized and mentally ill people that resulted from it. 😉

    Reply addressees: @spaceangelvoice


    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-04 19:14:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1786836916479954944

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1786827900580151334