Guest guest Posted April 29, 1999 Report Share Posted April 29, 1999 Hi , I think that the question of semantics comes into play with the value question.For example, a dictionary definition I have is, " consider worthy' And what I am saying is that what one community considers worthy may have no importance to another community. I think that this can hold true for individuals as well/. therefor I consider vales to be relative and, at times a cause of decisiveness. However because values do not have the permanence and universality of truth, I do not think that this must degrade the concept of values. I disagree that opinions are a better word for the simple reason that opinions are " about a subject,' why values can be the driving force for opinions. I think that values are important, actually because they are relative. If I say I value something today, I am in allowing for the possibility that I may later decide that well,value A isn't as important as I believed it was hindsight. While it was once useful, a concept, idea, fro example is has not passed the test of time. Truths, on the other hand imp will pass the test of time. This is one way of determining truth, I believe. If it is true, it will remain true. As for the Boy Scout question, Dale, the eagle scout claims that he holds dear the values that he learned in Scouting. He justdoes not believe that only heterosexuals are entailed to claim those values as bring exclusively theirs. Among the values the BSA claims to hold are honor , bravery, and honesty for example. The Boy Scout thing has given me pause, though. In many ways I think you can draw parallels to AA. While Scouting state nowhere in it's literature that it is anti gay, now it is claiming that it considers homosexuality to be immoral. Would gays sign up if it's policy were up front? Unlikely. Also, it Scouting receives public support of many kinds. If AA was up front that it is a religion, as recent court decisions have decided it to be, would as many problem drinkers stick around after an beginners meeting? AA style treatment receives public support. If treatment centers were clear that they are using a religious treatment modality, would there be more attention on the state/ church issues raised. Something to ponder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 1999 Report Share Posted April 29, 1999 Hi Doug, Actually it wasn't our minister who made those comments, she's in Boston this week. I think that on the East/ west question, it is importance to remember what a construct this idea is. The bible was put together in what we now call the middle east, for example. The middle east today is certainly no bastion of democratic governments As for Eastern thought, Buddha made it is mission to relieve sentient beings of suffering. He taught freedom from the bondage of attachment, for example. Confucius had a " golden rule " idea in his writings that is almost identical to that of Jesus. When Dr. Luther King was formulating his ideas about nonviolence, he looked to Gandhi as well as Jesus. This is why I maintain that truth does not know boundary or culture. It is not limited by geography. The search for it, I believe is a human struggle. I will allow my own search to be limited. Leaving AA was a great first step, if you will for my own search. I no longer find it necessary to fit truth into neat 12 step boxes where it could never fit anyway. I am free, and that the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 1999 Report Share Posted April 29, 1999 Judith, Much to ponder i your post about symbolic language. While I do think that there are truths, it cannot be ignored how many people believe that they hold " the truth. " they can't all be right. AA for example tends to believe that it has the truth about alcoholism. I think that's why the subject of truth can become engender feeling that are similar to those felt by followers of religion. I think that truth much be searched for with great care. i also believe that great care must be taken not to confuse truth with what one simply prefers to believe. As for the enlightenment, I think that it is a great place to look for in a search for political truth. However, I still cannot accept those thankers were the alpha and omega concerning human truth. they were still limited by their place and time. I think that several centuries later, we can see that the ideas of life and liberty have been greatly expanded to include women and blacks, for example. So I still hold that these great truths are human, not western. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 1999 Report Share Posted April 29, 1999 Doug, Only a very cursory view of Buddhism would say that it teaches that the world should be ignored. Rather, the nature of reality should be remembered. There is a big difference. BTW, I believe that Jesus taught to be in the world, but not of it. to my mind this is not much different. And, just as Buddhism has been used to prop up despots, a certain type of Christianity say that pain in this life should be " ignored, ' because the next world is where the rewards are. As for 12 step parallels, The early AAs were Christians, of course not Buddhists. In fact, 12 step religion has never really caught on in Asia to any great extent. therefore Doug, I would ask, hat you show more sensitivity to those of us who are not Christian. And please avoid sweeping statements about world religions. I will do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 1999 Report Share Posted April 29, 1999 Hi , A question? Is it possible to really live in someone else' vision, even that of the framers. I think that one of the best words that I have heard to describe American democracy is experiment. To me, the America is not a stagnant vision of men long dead, but rather a vibrant reality. Truth as such, cannot be threatened by AA or anyone else. However, our liberties can be. So I guess I am more concerned about the rights of Americans here and now, than I am about the founders vision. As far sighted as they were, in the end the framers were fallible human beings imo. And I don't think America. in 2000 ce is anything that the founders could have imagined in their wildest dreams. that does not mean that I consider contemporary American life so bad, however. As a matter of fact, as a gay man, I don't know if there has ever better time to be alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 1999 Report Share Posted April 30, 1999 Hey Doug, Buddhism is one of the world's oldest religions. Therefore I hardly think that it constitutes a fad. Buddhism, which is concerned with compassion for all sentient beings, could hardly be an excuse for a lax moral attitude either. Just about everyone I knew in AA professed to be of one protestant denomination or another. Of course I met a few Catholics, and a handful of Jews. Early AA was unabashedly Christ ion, and the steps still reflect that early influence. AA is a child, of course, of the Oxford group, which considered itself a Christian group, and was led by Christian clergy. I was viewed very suspiciously in AA for because of my Unitarian views. Unitarianism has welcomed Eastern thought since at least the mid nineteenth century. Again, hardly a fad. While Hollywood types are latching onto the Dail Lama these days to seem hip, I remember not that long ago when born again Christianity was all the rage here. Accenting Jesus was a great way to jump start a career. Almost as good as joining the Betty Ford clinic. Finding Jesus, and getting sober certainly put one on the road talk show sainthood. In AA meetings in my area, many members make a point of saying that Jesus is their higher power. I am not implying, however, that Christianity is not a serous religion just because people occasionally join it frivolously, in the same way you may have latched onto Buddhism I am not a Buddhist, but I take Eastern thought very seriously. So once again, I request that you not disparage other religions. I wouldn't even disparage 12 step religion, if they only would admit it is one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 1999 Report Share Posted April 30, 1999 , I agree with you in on the question of private accommodation. However, the Boy Scouts should be up front in their beliefs. But you see the receive funding from groups that aren't anti gay, so they soft peddle this belief in order not to offend. How many people know they also kick out atheists? The BSA is saying that excludes atheists and gays on religious grounds. Fine. All I ask is that they are clear about this with all the groups who they accept funds from. This case may help. I heard, for instance, that the United Way is reconsidering funding the BS in ?Connecticut. They are exercising their freedom to fund who they choose. Our Unitarian Universalist Assn. no longer cooperates with the Boy Scouts because of their atheist/gay stance. So yes, as long as they are open about their beliefs, the may hold them. I do resent my gay tax dollars supporting them in any way. Like my property taxes paying for a public school where they meet fro free. If a church puts them up, fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 1999 Report Share Posted April 30, 1999 , I really liked your response. thanks for putting so much time into it. I want to thank you and this list for your help in my AA withdrawal period. What kind, thoughtful, thinking people we have on this list. It is a pleasure to be associated with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 1999 Report Share Posted April 30, 1999 , I wasn't quite sure what you were saying in the start of you letter. I am not concerned with offending anonymous 'group " in your my request for your being more conscious about the anti Buddhist tone of your response. I take Eastern thought very seriously, and am personally offended when it frivolously put down as, " like AA. " Also, as I pointed out in my letter, Buddhism as long been an influence in my denomination (since the 1850s) so I also am offended on that level. I think that is unfair to link the problems of AA with any world religion. AA borrowed freely from many sources in formulating the steps. However, if you read AA history, as unfortunately I have, you find that most of Bill 's theology was derived from a Christian sect (cult) called the Oxford Group. Of course it was not traditional Christian doctrine, but it claimed to be the real Christianity, unlike those staid and tired mainstream denominations. Some Born Again groups call AA a cult because the HP is not defined as Jesus Christ, and there is no stand on the Trinity. One well known Methodist says that AA religion offends his view of Christianity as well. (Jack Trimpey www.rational.org/recovery.) So while AA claims deep Christian roots, Christianity has not universally accepted it by any means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 27, 2000 Report Share Posted March 27, 2000 My problem with " differing values " is that it excludes the idea of truth. I've always felt that the Declaration of Independence was the codification of certain truths which are not subject to opinion. When we decide that each person's opinion of " values " is as valid as the next, we fall into the hands of those who would restrict our freedoms based on such concepts as " family values " . I've always felt that, rather than a quest for values, we should seek truths. I hold certain truths to be self evident. Among these are the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Yet because of the conservative political atmosphere of our present day we have executions, mass imprisonments and the forced religion of AA. The search for " values " should be, instead, a search for truths. ============== Judith Stillwater wrote: > > > > Yes, I certainly hope that values will differ from person to > person. > Yet I hope that they will promote life and health for everyone. > > --- > > Kayleigh > > hear hear! > > judith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 What people do in defense of their values is one thing -- the values they hold are another. I imagine that both Savanarola and Pope would have put " religion " at the top of their list, yet their behavior was very different. (Of course, we can do some second-guessing here, and say that really Savanarola's highest value was power. And yet I doubt whether he would have agreed.) When I say I approve of differing values, I mean that if we all had the same values and acted upon them in the same way, we would be too homoogeneous to be interesting to one another. Perhaps more accurately I appreciate people prioritizing values differently -- despite what I said to Judith. For example, someone who puts public service highest on their values list will behave differently from someone whose highest priority is family. I guess we could get into a muddle here, trying to distinguish between values, beliefs and behaviors. But mainly I just mean that if we all put the same thing on the top of our list, then only one thing would ever get done. (As I once said to Diener, in another context.) --- Kayleigh Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >My problem with " differing values " is that it excludes the idea of >truth. I've always felt that the Declaration of Independence was the >codification of certain truths which are not subject to opinion. When we >decide that each person's opinion of " values " is as valid as the next, >we fall into the hands of those who would restrict our freedoms based on >such concepts as " family values " . I've always felt that, rather than a >quest for values, we should seek truths. I hold certain truths to be >self evident. Among these are the rights to life, liberty and the >pursuit of happiness. Yet because of the conservative political >atmosphere of our present day we have executions, mass imprisonments and >the forced religion of AA. The search for " values " should be, instead, a >search for truths. >============== >Judith Stillwater wrote: >> >> >> > Yes, I certainly hope that values will differ from person to >> person. >> Yet I hope that they will promote life and health for everyone. >> > --- >> > Kayleigh >> >> hear hear! >> >> judith > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Get 3 months FREE and a chance to WIN a trip to London, England when >you receive, manage and pay your bills online with Paytrust.com! >Stamps, checks and bills in your mailbox are history. Enroll Today! >http://click./1/3556/1/_/4324/_/956591651/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 Well said -- how many " values " are there exactly? It's the " any values you like " trend that is so compatible with " the god you make as your HP " that prevails in AA. Truths are another matter -- values are trivial incomparison and have been promoted to " absolutes " in the same culture that favours the lunatic pluralism of AA (itself contained within the prevailing AA dogmatic totalitarianism) -- just like out society -- ok -- choose what you like, but you all chose from the same bag. > >Reply-To: 12-step-freeegroups >To: 12-step-freeegroups >Subject: Re: Re: Core Values >Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:59:07 -0500 > >My problem with " differing values " is that it excludes the idea of >truth. I've always felt that the Declaration of Independence was the >codification of certain truths which are not subject to opinion. When we >decide that each person's opinion of " values " is as valid as the next, >we fall into the hands of those who would restrict our freedoms based on >such concepts as " family values " . I've always felt that, rather than a >quest for values, we should seek truths. I hold certain truths to be >self evident. Among these are the rights to life, liberty and the >pursuit of happiness. Yet because of the conservative political >atmosphere of our present day we have executions, mass imprisonments and >the forced religion of AA. The search for " values " should be, instead, a >search for truths. >============== >Judith Stillwater wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, I certainly hope that values will differ from person to > > person. > > Yet I hope that they will promote life and health for everyone. > > > --- > > > Kayleigh > > > > hear hear! > > > > judith ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 I guess we all see things differently; to me there is not one truth. The truth looks different to different people, and I am more interested in hearing different versions of the truth than I am in assigning a value judgment of " true " or " false " to someone's perspective. If I am interpreting the messages below correctly, this makes me a wimp or a hedonist or some such thing. Very well, your truth about me is that I am a wimpy hedonist who doesn't have the character to commit to one set of values, developed by someone other than myself, for the rest of my life. AA's truth about me was that I have a lifelong incurable disease, treatable only by meetings. I reject both ideas in favor of my own self-perception: I am a human being trying to make sense of an awful lot of conflicting information, do what is expected of me, and have a little fun before I die. Before I posted my values I knew I was taking the risk of having someone belittle them. I think I am probably beginning to take this a little too personally. My values are my values; they're not up for debate. and if you dislike me because of my values then at least you've made your decision based on an honest picture of what is most important to me. Judith > > > > Yes, I certainly hope that values will differ from person to > > > person. > > > Yet I hope that they will promote life and health for everyone. > > > > --- > > > > Kayleigh > > > > > > hear hear! > > > > > > judith > > ______________________________________________________________________ __ > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 I didn't want to edit out any of your post, because it is well written and demonstrates your point. No offense taken. As you say, math is not philosophy. The Declaration of Independence is indeed the embodiment of admirable values but, when it was written, slavery was " OK " (defining " OK " as " legal " ). Wholesale slaughter of indigenous peoples was " OK " (defining " OK " as standard operating procedure at the time). These are crummy values by modern standards, at least in my social circle. That's what I mean when I say the truth is dynamic. Yesterday I was younger than I am today; I do not remain 3 years old forever. Is it no longer true that I was once 3 years old? Am I lying when I say that I am now 40? Am I weak because I can't commit to one age, or the set of values I held at one age? My answer is no--I am adaptable and resilient. I am human. These are rhetorical questions. I'm married to a philosopher and discussing issues like this with him makes me tired and crabby, while it seems (maddeningly) to energize him. I like thinking in abstract terms; it's not illegal to think in abstract terms; and it is valuable, for me at least, to think in abstract terms in that it provides much-needed context for respectful negotiation and compromise with people who have very different values from my own. In a world of 6 billion people, hundreds of cultures and subcultures, geographic and political schisms, where new information is being uncovered every day, I think negotiation and compromise are important and becoming moreso all the time. I'm afraid I feel my heels digging in, and I just don't want to have a protracted debate about this stuff. I appreciate what you're saying, and that you are saying it well and respectfully. My attention span is too short to continue thinking about this, however Judith > > I guess we all see things differently; to me there is not one truth. > The truth looks different to different people, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 thanks Doug. I hear ya Judith > Judith -- I read your values and would go along with any of them. Please > don't take my stuff about the el4evation of individual " values " above > universal " Truth " personally, it's abstract not particular -- your values > are what you live by. But we can't all live by them. A value only derives > content from its truth function. The truth is one and infinite, the values > are multiple and finite. I admire anyone who is workng things out for > themselves rather than being force fed dogma,lies, half-truths, and moral > blackmail by the step Nazis. > yrs > Doug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 Here here! Well said Judith! > > > > > Yes, I certainly hope that values will differ from person to > > > > person. > > > > Yet I hope that they will promote life and health for everyone. > > > > > --- > > > > > Kayleigh > > > > > > > > hear hear! > > > > > > > > judith > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > __ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at > http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2000 Report Share Posted April 24, 2000 In principle I agree, sort of, but I believe that translating values into truths might result in a collection of truths too complicated to be of any use. There are values that almost everyone holds (which I like to think of as moral " truths " ), and then there are moral problems about which reasonable people differ. So the idea that different people can have different values doesn't necessarily exclude the idea of truth. When you consider how people ought to go about living their lives, you take in a whole spectrum of things that range from standards that ought to apply to everybody, to things that are really just a matter of taste or preference. And somewhere in the middle there is a big gray area. In an ideal world perhaps, the businessman and the poet could agree on all questions of " value " , and could agree that their differences are personal preferences, but in the real world this just doesn't happen. It's interesting that you pick out the " family values " crowd, because these folks are very likely to rail against " moral relativism " while arguing that their values should be imposed on everybody. --wally -----Original Message----- >My problem with " differing values " is that it excludes the idea of >truth. I've always felt that the Declaration of Independence was the >codification of certain truths which are not subject to opinion. When we >decide that each person's opinion of " values " is as valid as the next, >we fall into the hands of those who would restrict our freedoms based on >such concepts as " family values " . I've always felt that, rather than a >quest for values, we should seek truths. I hold certain truths to be >self evident. Among these are the rights to life, liberty and the >pursuit of happiness. Yet because of the conservative political >atmosphere of our present day we have executions, mass imprisonments and >the forced religion of AA. The search for " values " should be, instead, a >search for truths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 , I do believe that one of us is missing the other's point. Why can't some values, such as the unalienable right to life, stem from self-evident truth, while others remain a matter of preference or convention? -- wally -----Original Message----- >But, there IS a conflict- a glaring one. The Declaration Of Independence >states that it is a TRUTH that we are endowed with the UNALIENABLE right >to life. My " values " are vehemently opposed to the death penalty, being >largely reliant on acceptance of the Declaration. Anyone's " values " that >support the death penalty are WRONG. Unless we are to denounce the >Declaration Of Independence, the death penalty is in violation of the >TRUTH and I believe that this is an example of differing values >excluding the truth. Remember, Hitler had " values " . >============================== >wally wrote: >> >So the idea that different people can have different values doesn't >necessarily exclude the idea of truth. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 Kayleigh -- Thanks for your edifying note on Hitler and the German electorate. Re you earlier --I believe Jefferson had serious theological difficulties with racial equality, and resorted to the disturbing phrase " equal creation " at a crucial point to cover his views, which were fundamentally dualist. I won't go on -- working from memory, and don't want to be an under-informed Brit speaking out of turn to educated Americans on your philosopohical home-ground. Yours, Doug. > ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 Actually the Reichstag elected the Chancellor, not the German electorate. Hitler was chosen when this process broke down because he was viewed as having the ability to put together a coalition government. Unfortunately I know far more about Hitler than about Jefferson, but I do know that Jefferson owned slaves. --- Kayleigh Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >Kayleigh -- >Thanks for your edifying note on Hitler and the German electorate. >Re you earlier --I believe Jefferson had serious theological difficulties >with racial equality, and resorted to the disturbing phrase " equal creation " >at a crucial point to cover his views, which were fundamentally dualist. I >won't go on -- working from memory, and don't want to be an under-informed >Brit speaking out of turn to educated Americans on your philosopohical >home-ground. >Yours, >Doug. >> > >________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Get 3 months FREE and a chance to WIN a trip to London, England when >you receive, manage and pay your bills online with Paytrust.com! >Stamps, checks and bills in your mailbox are history. Enroll Today! >http://click./1/3556/1/_/4324/_/956684856/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 Yes, is it not correct to say that Hitler was stuck in place by a German establishment scared stiff of internal instability and the possibility of the Fatherland going Communist? His real popular appeal, beyond what was secured by murder, thuggery, and lies, lay in his strategies for reducing unemployment, etc., ideologically premised on his shared vision of restoring Germany's national grandeur. The historian Shirer notes that while Hitler did reduce unemployment the standard of living did not rise. The German people became loyal robots in the factories building the terrible Nazi war machine. Or as Country Joe and the Fish once put it, " There's plenty good money to be made by supplying the army with the tools of the trade " . I can seeAH now at Control Freaks Anonymous, " My name is Adolf and I'm a recovering Fuhrer " . Yours, Doug. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 Often when I advance the writings of Jefferson, someone will remind me that Jefferson was a slave owner, as if I didn't know of that fact. I know of that fact very well. Perhaps the greatest constitutional scholar in American history is Leonard Levy. His list at Amazon is about a mile long. Levy wrote a book called " Jefferson and Civil Liberties: The Dark Side. " which I read many years ago, and I am well aware that the man was no saint. Chester wrote a book called " The Wolf by the Ears: Jefferson and Slavery " which details Jefferson's contradictions on the issue. Slavery is wrong and evil, but this does not blind me to the importance of much of Jefferson's writings. The reason I place Szasz above the likes of Mill, Jefferson, and the dozens of others I have read on the topic of liberty, is because Szasz tells us why. He articulates the dehumanization process like no other person I have read. Afterall, millions of people in this country are forced to pray each year, and yet not one of the many religious liberty organization that I know of has come forward to lead the fight for us. We are dehumanized. These are the closing words to " The Manufacture of Madness: A Comparative Study of the Inquisition and the Mental Health Movement " : " In this book, I have tried to display the forms in which the perennial scapegoat principle manifests itself in the modern world. To this end, I have traced the transformation of medieval ideas about witches and their persecution by priests into our contemporary ideas about madmen and their persecution by physicians. We have thus seen that, whenever men have wanted to degrade, exploit, oppress, or kill the Other, they have always declared him to be not " really " human. This has been a characteristic feature of human conquests, enslavements, and mass murders throughout history. Indeed, the oppressor is always confronted by the question of whether the victim is or is not a (fully) human being. This was the basic issue in the systematic anti-Semitism of Spain and Germany; in the European witch-hunts; in American Negro slavery; and in the modern, virtually worldwide persecution of the mentally ill. For if the victim is *not* fully human, if he is *not* a person, it follows that he can lay no more claim to the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the Constitution, than can a cat, a dog, or any other non-human being. The language of the Constitution, said Frederick s in 1895, is " 'We the people'--not we the white people, not even we the citizens, not we the privileged class, not we the high, not we the low, but we the people....we the human inhabitants; and if Negroes are people they are included in the benefits for which the Constitutionof America was ordained and established. " I suggest that what s said about the Negro, we now extend and apply to the so-called mentally ill: If they are people, they, too, are included in the benefits for which the Constitution of the United States was ordained and established. And if they are not people, what are they? " > >> > >So the idea that different people can have different values doesn't > >necessarily exclude the idea of truth. > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > >Get 3 months FREE and a chance to WIN a trip to London, England when > >you receive, manage and pay your bills online with Paytrust.com! > >Stamps, checks and bills in your mailbox are history. Enroll Today! > >http://click./1/3556/1/_/4324/_/956674362/ > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > > > > > > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 I saw a program about a Jewish woman whose grandmother had lived in Germany under Hitler. The grandmother had taken home movies of Berlin, the daughter went to the same place and took the same shot--it was really cool. They interviewed the family and one of the uncles or great uncles, someone who had been there, said that there was no support or sympathy for the idea of a whistle blower in German culture at that time. I can't remember the question, but he didn't seem surprised that all of Germany went along with a madman. That's the kind of historical detail that blows my mind: this guy was Jewish, *and* he was German as well, and saw therefore from 2 viewpoints that seem impossible to combine. I think a lot about this stuff, because I have German ancestors as well (also Irish and Norwegian). I also like Berlin Stories by Isherwood, because it gives a sense of everyday life, of how people talked to each other and interacted. Just one more anecdote. In one of my writing classes, the instructor was from Germany. We were all supposed to share a story from our lives, something that shaped us irrevocably. He wrote about being a little boy, the first day of the school year; described the sandwich his mother had made; and then described being shown a film of something like the liberation of a concentration camp. Ouch. Heritage isn't always pretty. Judith > Yes, is it not correct to say that Hitler was stuck in place by a German > establishment scared stiff of internal instability and the possibility of > the Fatherland going Communist? His real popular appeal, beyond what was > secured by murder, thuggery, and lies, lay in his strategies for reducing > unemployment, etc., ideologically premised on his shared vision of restoring > Germany's national grandeur. The historian Shirer notes that while Hitler > did reduce unemployment the standard of living did not rise. The German > people became loyal robots in the factories building the terrible Nazi war > machine. Or as Country Joe and the Fish once put it, " There's plenty good > money to be made by supplying the army with the tools of the trade " . I can > seeAH now at Control Freaks Anonymous, " My name is Adolf and I'm a > recovering Fuhrer " . > Yours, > Doug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 All I meant, Tommy, is that the nature of " self-evident " truths does change. --- Kayleigh Zz zZ |\ z _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' _ ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) >Often when I advance the writings of Jefferson, someone will >remind me that Jefferson was a slave owner, as if I didn't know of >that fact. I know of that fact very well. Perhaps the greatest >constitutional scholar in American history is Leonard Levy. His list >at Amazon is about a mile long. Levy wrote a book called " Jefferson >and Civil Liberties: The Dark Side. " which I read many years ago, and >I am well aware that the man was no saint. Chester wrote >a book called " The Wolf by the Ears: Jefferson and Slavery " >which details Jefferson's contradictions on the issue. Slavery is >wrong and evil, but this does not blind me to the importance of much >of Jefferson's writings. > >The reason I place Szasz above the likes of Mill, Jefferson, >and the dozens of others I have read on the topic of liberty, is >because Szasz tells us why. He articulates the dehumanization >process like no other person I have read. Afterall, millions of >people in this country are forced to pray each year, and yet not one >of the many religious liberty organization that I know of has come >forward to lead the fight for us. We are dehumanized. These are >the >closing words to " The Manufacture of Madness: A Comparative Study of >the Inquisition and the Mental Health Movement " : > > " In this book, I have tried to display the forms in which the >perennial scapegoat principle manifests itself in the modern world. >To this end, I have traced the transformation of medieval ideas about >witches and their persecution by priests into our contemporary ideas >about madmen and their persecution by physicians. We have thus seen >that, whenever men have wanted to degrade, exploit, oppress, or kill >the Other, they have always declared him to be not " really " human. >This has been a characteristic feature of human conquests, >enslavements, and mass murders throughout history. Indeed, the >oppressor is always confronted by the question of whether the victim >is or is not a (fully) human being. This was the basic issue in the >systematic anti-Semitism of Spain and Germany; in the European >witch-hunts; in American Negro slavery; and in the modern, virtually >worldwide persecution of the mentally ill. For if the victim is >*not* fully human, if he is *not* a person, it follows that he can >lay >no more claim to the rights enumerated in the Declaration of >Independence, the Declaration of the Rights of Man, or the >Constitution, than can a cat, a dog, or any other non-human being. > The language of the Constitution, said Frederick s in 1895, >is " 'We the people'--not we the white people, not even we the >citizens, not we the privileged class, not we the high, not we the >low, but we the people....we the human inhabitants; and if Negroes >are people they are included in the benefits for which the >Constitutionof America was ordained and established. " > I suggest that what s said about the Negro, we now extend >and apply to the so-called mentally ill: If they are people, they, >too, are included in the benefits for which the Constitution of the >United States was ordained and established. And if they are not >people, what are they? " > > > > > > >> >> >> >So the idea that different people can have different values doesn't >> >necessarily exclude the idea of truth. >> > >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >--- >> >Get 3 months FREE and a chance to WIN a trip to London, England >when >> >you receive, manage and pay your bills online with Paytrust.com! >> >Stamps, checks and bills in your mailbox are history. Enroll >Today! >> >http://click./1/3556/1/_/4324/_/956674362/ >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >--- >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- >> Before you buy. > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws. >http://click./1/3020/1/_/4324/_/956687876/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2000 Report Share Posted April 25, 2000 Kayleigh, When I wrote my post, I had not even read your remark about Jefferson. Just a coincidence. The post took about ten minutes because of the pasting, and then when I went back to messages, there was your post. I was basically refering a remark from Pete a month or so ago. I quoted Jefferson, and his remark was something to the tune of " Yes, Jefferson the slave owner. " Tommy > >> >> > >> >So the idea that different people can have different values doesn't > >> >necessarily exclude the idea of truth. > >> > > >> > >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >--- > >> >Get 3 months FREE and a chance to WIN a trip to London, England > >when > >> >you receive, manage and pay your bills online with Paytrust.com! > >> >Stamps, checks and bills in your mailbox are history. Enroll > >Today! > >> >http://click./1/3556/1/_/4324/_/956674362/ > >> > >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >--- > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > >> Before you buy. > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > >Accurate impartial advice on everything from laptops to table saws. > >http://click./1/3020/1/_/4324/_/956687876/ > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > > > > > > > > --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- > Before you buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.