From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Family values defined
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:10:28 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Sep29.012728.14560@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> pmy@vivaldi.acc.virginia.edu (Pete Yadlowsky) writes:
|Richard Pitts writes
|
|>>have one, then fine, have one. But that's not enough, is it? You
|>>intend to foist your preference on everyone else, too, as you so
|
|>I think not - I am not presenting something fake or on the sly.  You
|>presume that I am forcing my preference and not leading by example,
|
|Right on cue. I figured you'd come back with that one, and it's a
|lie. "Live and let live" is one of the basic tenets, if not the
|principal tenet, of a free society. That you dismiss this fundamental

Are we in your so called "free society" in America - is that what
we are????????????

Why do we have so many laws regulating the so called RIGHT you have 
to "live and let live" - we have to regulate what people want to do.

I grew up in America, but a friend of mine from Inner Mongolia (near
India) stated the observation that to have a society one had to
give up some of one's rights.

|requirement for harmonious human coexistence suggests strongly that
|you are opposed to the concept of free society. To where will you

No you are for you don't want to conform - we have to conform to some 
extent.

|lead by example? Away from this more-or-less free society to a New
|Fascism? Who's going to follow you? Those who already agree with you,

Balance is the key not the fact that someone has authority.  That
is why we have the three branches of government - they keep each
other in check.

|of course, and perhaps a few others. Nonconformists will somehow have
|to be forced, or you will have to learn to share your world with
|them, i.e. "let live" (I'm sure you have no problem with the "live"
|part). You have already expressed your unwillingness to do the
|latter. Guess what that means. 

Duh, you must be more brillent than I - please tell me.

|>>Now, you can either somehow force
|>>the single parent to marry, or impose sanctions against single parent
|>>families, or you can compassionately accept their condition and find
|>>it in your heart to provide assistance _if_ _asked_. Which path do
|>>you think Jesus would have taken? 
|
|>My friend, either you use Jesus as a ploy for your point or you have
|>something against my view and Jesus will make the correct position
|>know.
|
|If reminding misguided, control-obsessed christians of Jesus's
|demeanor and teaching is a ploy, then so be it. Now, how about
|answering the question? Which path do you think Jesus would have
|taken?  

The answer would be "GO AND SIN NO MORE" if the person was not in
sin, then the could continue to do what they were doing.

However, the ploy to which I referred, is that your use of the appeal
of my Lord's desires not because you follow them, but because I do.
I do conform to His wishes and plan.  You use them as a tool of argument.

Again, Jesus often told people to "go and sin no more" after he healed
them or pronounced the forgiveness of their sins, as they so needed.

|>Just for your information, I extend compassion - not only to 
|>those in my own family, but those outside of my family - Christian or not.
|
|I see no compassion at all in your attitudes as presented. I see only
|a self-interested drive to mold the lives of others to suit your
|liking. 

Maybe, I know someone (God) that has told give a better plan than what
the general population thinks is the right way to go.  I am not 
advocating my way - I didn't invent it.

Could you cite, specifically, where I have pushed some kind of legal 
enforcement of any of these ideas?  You do not know my personally nor
do you know that I don't lead by example.

|>Jesus said be a servant leader - NOT LORDING IT OVER THEM LIKE THE GENTILES,
|>but that doesn't mean you don't say anything nor advocate the better way.
|
|That you have decided for everyone what "the" better way is tells me
|that you would, in fact, lord it over them given the power to do so.

Ok, so leading by example completely excludes informing someone or
everyone of the goals I have.  I cannot use strong words to convey
my ideas.  You have assumed I lord it - give me an example.

|A servant leader is one who unassumingly leads without leading.

Can you name someone who fits this?  

|People quite naturally follow him, without word or beckoning on his
|part, simply because they like what they see. Obviously, there are

Again, he is obviously limited to non-verbal communication, I guess.
Why can't he also give his ideas.  On this media (Usenet) what else
can one do but use words??????????????   You are not advocating I
not use Usenet, are you, if I want to be a servant leader?

|many, many who do not like what they see in the so-called New Right
|and its Family Values(r). I know servant leaders. Some servant
|leaders are friends of mine. You're no servant leader. 

Oh.  How do you know - I guess see my day to day activities and know
my heart, correct?   Do the servant leaders you know ever speak
about their ideas/goals?  What do they say?   Isn't it more that I
disagree with your servant leaders and your own ideas rather than
my not being a servant leader?

|>>Who gets to decide what's 'better'? You have two choices:
|>>force everyone to embrace your values, or learn to accept and even
|>>love the diversity, eccentricity and scariness that is human
|>>nature. What's it gonna be? 
|
|>You decide.  I think you have some preconceived idea about my 
|>desires and abilities.  
|
|I've already made _my_ decision. You want me to decide for you too?

No, you rightly say you've made your choice.  It doesn't really matter
what I decide.

|Just answer the question: What's it gonna be? Give me some reason to
|abandon my preconceived idea, if you can. 

BECAUSE IT IS PRECONCEIVED - you have a problem with my ideas and
not my service, for you don't know my service.

|>>>I guess you see no problems in society?????
|>>Society has no mind with which to have problems. Indiviual people
|
|>Come on - society is made of the people.
|
|'Society' is an abstraction, regardless of its components.

Oh.

|Abstractions do not have problems. But that's beside the point. Read
|the next few lines again. See if you can find the point contained
|therein. Pay special attention to the last sentence: 

Yes, sir - by the way, I'm not really dense - it must be my ideas
that make you think I'm slow.  Can you not tolerate my words, like
you want me to tolerate yours?????????????

|>>[...] and it's for individual people and families (of all
|>>kinds) to deal with their own problems as they see fit. You're not
|>>smart enough or wise enough to do this for them.
|
|See it? Good. Now address it, please.

I claim no wisdom of my own, for this life.  I ask God for wisdom
and I seek it in his written word, for He does give wisdom freely and
doesn't chide us for not knowing.

Again, your preconceived idea or bad experience has blinded you to 
God's plan.

|>>And if you try to do
|>>so, you can damn well expect to get your mouth bloodied sooner or
|>>later. It happens time and time again, but you guys just never learn. 
|
|>Thanks for the warning.
|
|Oh, it's not a warning so much as a reminder. Didn't you study history in
|school? Don't you read the papers? 

I'll count it worhty to suffer for the cause of Christ.

|>Force doesn't win over justice - it may prevail temporarily, but it
|>doesn't win. 
|
|Fascinating. The words come out your mouth, but they don't seem to
|enter your ears. 

You misunderstand - you have obviously confused justice with your idea
and confused force with your intolerance of my ideas.  Justice will
prevail.

|>>Just what are you putting up? I'll tell you: an
|>>arbitrary, sectarian standard to be used to browbeat and harass those
|>>who do not prefer your precious model, that's what. 
|
|>Every thing is good but practically everything can be used for evil.
|>I don't advocate returning evil for good.  However, that still doesn't
|>mean we should promote a better way (ie, don't through the baby out
|>with the bath water.)
|
|Once again, just how do you think you're going to 'promote' this
|'better' way? By example? What will you do when you find that many
|people are going to turn their noses up at your example? 

Keep being an example, working as unto the Lord.

|>>show's message. I've said nothing against your values themselves
|>>(which I'll happily let _you_ keep), nor have I the slightest
|>>intention of abridging your right to free speech. Can you extend
|>>these courtesies to others?   
|
|>My friend you have the right and you so speak.  If you want to
|>point out my restriction on your right to free speech, the do so -
|
|I've no doubt you guys'd censor any number of publications and
|broadcasts given half a chance. Some are already doing or attempting
|just that. And how about tolerating others' values? That would mean
|having to live and let live, and we can't have that. It's bad for
|'society' (i.e. the New Fascisti). 

We say we hold a tight line on values, you claim to be have more 
freedom/light, but you actually far exceed us in the area of
intolerance proportional to each of our camp's view/stated policy.

Can't ideas be presented?   Or is that only if they agree with yours?

|>The emphasis was  given to the State not being able to influence the
|>Church, however, the  Church could and should influence the State. 
|
|Yes, the catholic church, the mormon church, the various protestant
|churches, the jewish 'church', the satanic church, the buddhist
|church, the atheist church...everybody here gets to vote. Nobody gets
|preferential treatment. That's the general idea.

Well, let us do it.  

|>>Again, it's up to each family to improve itself, according to it's
|>>own wishes and conception of 'improve'. You're not competent to do
|
|>Again, one has to have a goal to know one is improving.
|
|The point is that it's the up to the individual, not you or anyone
|else, to set personal goals and priorities.  

This is true - change comes from within, but the knowing the truth
can set you free.

|>>that for them. When individuals and families take care of themselves
|>>(with help, if requested), society will take care of itself. 
|
|>SO I am to help people improve themselves in ways I believe are not
|>good???  
|
|No, you are to help people in ways that you and THEY believe are
|good, or keep your nose out of their business. 
|
|>>>live and let live is a individualist attitude
|
|>>An attitude _you_ benefit from in this country as much as anyone
|>>else, lest you forget. 
|
|>In some areas I would agree.
|>Do I benefit from the live and let live attitude in moral areas?
|
|huh? Given that 'live and let live' is itself a moral attitude, I
|should think the answer to your question is quite obvious. The point
|is, you're benefitting right now from a principle you would deny
|others. 

Give a specific in the moral area, in which I benefit - again, I 
guess I'm too slow or uninformed.

|>I guess
|>I don't have any way of helping people by setting up a plan and
|>putting it on paper, do I?
|
|Depends on whether it's a good plan, doesn't it? 'Good' intentions
|are dangerous when there's neither compassion nor wisdom behind them. 

Agreed.

|...
|There are any number of rights I won't give up for your (and Mr.
|Potatoe Head's) twisted vision of society. 

Name one.

|Peter M. Yadlowsky              |  Wake! The sky is light!

Sincerely,
Richard Pitts
-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu       |    
Atlanta, GA                --|-- 
                        -|-  |  -|-
                         |   |   |