[BartSimpson]

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=208129

The relevant part of the article:

$1:

Zahar continued to discuss what he said was the inevitable decline of the US "empire," saying "any state without morality will not survive. Morality is not only having money. Morality is having justice. You are not implementing the justice."

"You are going sooner or later to suffer from the same problem when your power decreased and the power of others, for example, China, India, Japan, as your history (shows) becomes more supreme," he said.

“Look to the British empire. Look to the French empire. Look to the German power. What was the cause of their destruction? Their immoralities. So I am not here fabricating or inventing a story or a theory. This is well known."

Here's a Hamas terrorist stating quite clearly something that I've often said on this forum. The Muslim extremists that liberals all too often make excuses for hate the West for the immoralities that the liberals themselves have promulgated!

Homosexuality, abortion, pornography, divorce, all of these things that have been championed in the West by liberal deconstructionists are things that the Muslims hate about the West.

And the man is right that our systems cannot flourish without morality. That's something that the French secular humanist de Toqueville said two centuries ago that the American form of representative democracy could only continue so long as the American people were a moral people. Absent that morality that restrained individual excesses the freedom of America was transformed from liberty to license.

So here's a Muslim radical getting to the heart of things and denouncing everything Western liberals hold dear.

Where's Sandorski to call him a xenophobe?

[DrCaleb]

I'm not disagreeing with the sentiment, but:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Here's a Hamas terrorist stating quite clearly something that I've often said on this forum. The Muslim extremists that liberals all too often make excuses for hate the West for the immoralities that the liberals themselves have promulgated!

Morality is a relative thing. What is immoral here may not be there. His morality should not be used as a measuring stick for everyone. In Singapore, it is expected to eat certain foods with one's hands. But if you spit gum on the street, you could end up in jail.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Homosexuality, abortion, pornography, divorce, all of these things that have been championed in the West by liberal deconstructionists are things that the Muslims hate about the West.

Let them hate. Doing what is morally right is not always what is easiest.

[BartSimpson]

Jogging down the same path as the Romans is not a good idea.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Jogging down the same path as the Romans is not a good idea.

Which is what I agree with. What I disagree with is having someone else enumerate to you the mistakes 'Romans' made. Those should be subjective.

[DerbyX]

$1:

Homosexuality, abortion, pornography, divorce, all of these things that have been championed in the West by liberal deconstructionists are things that the Muslims hate about the West.

If you believe that these things are championed by liberal deconstructionists then let me set you straight.

Homosexuality: It is entirely a sign of a just and moral society that treats homosexuality with the equality it deserves. Its religious bigotry that opposes it. Why do you think it is that all those societies you despise are ones intolerant of homosexuality, an intolerance you invariable admire in them?

Abortion: Freedom of choice for women, nothing more. Women have been fighting for that right and they consider it justice and moral. We are a better society for allowing it then we were when it was banned.

Pornography: Cavemen had pornography and no its not deviant. It is entirely normal regardless of what a bunch of celibate church charlies say.

Divorce: Oh yes. Much better to force women to stay married to men who abuse them or have people suffer in loveless marriages (and invariably cheat). Blaming liberals for divorce is just the grossest miscarriage of justice I've heard for a long time.

Did you join some evangelical group or something because this is a rant straight from the pulpit being delivered from a minister who secretly visits gay prostitutes while cheating on his wife.

I look around and see the greatness of our society as a product of liberalism and a rejection of social conservatism.

Oh, for the record they don't hate us for our morality or lack thereof.

They hate us for our occupations and bombs.

Seems to me you hate us for our morality .... not them.

[Wada]

Dismissing Geneva Conventions, using torture and etc. are immoral? Who da thought.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Which is what I agree with. What I disagree with is having someone else enumerate to you the mistakes 'Romans' made. Those should be subjective.

The mistakes the Romans made are not subjective. Rome no longer exists and it did not voluntarily cease to exist. Therefore, their mistakes were substantive.

[BartSimpson]

DerbyX DerbyX:

If you believe that these things are championed by liberal deconstructionists then let me set you straight.

Take it up with the fellow from Hamas.

[DerbyX]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DerbyX DerbyX:

If you believe that these things are championed by liberal deconstructionists then let me set you straight.

Take it up with the fellow from Hamas.

He didn't say it, you did. All he did was say a society without justice will fall.

[raydan]

I have to agree that immorality is subjective... but I have a question.

Does immorality cause the decline of an empire?
or
Is immorality only a symptom of a failing empire?

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Which is what I agree with. What I disagree with is having someone else enumerate to you the mistakes 'Romans' made. Those should be subjective.

The mistakes the Romans made are not subjective. Rome no longer exists and it did not voluntarily cease to exist. Therefore, their mistakes were substantive.

From your quoted article:

$1:

“Look to the British empire. Look to the French empire. Look to the German power. What was the cause of their destruction? Their immoralities. So I am not here fabricating or inventing a story or a theory. This is well known."

He is claiming their immoralities alone are what killed Rome. Their mistakes were not all moral. I am saying if the USA is immoral, it needs to return itself to what it thinks to be moral. It is not up to some random Muslim to determine what is and is not moral. Some Muslims believe that having a dog is immoral, because their minds are easily subjugated.

So the return to morality will be subjective.

[DrCaleb]

raydan raydan:

I have to agree that immorality is subjective... but I have a question.

Does immorality cause the decline of an empire?
or
Is immorality only a symptom of a failing empire?

Long debate, that one!

I'm of the opinion it's a sign, not a cause. Many other things have to slip, but losing one's morals I think is just a sign of that decent.

[DerbyX]

What about changing morals? Some see them as declining while others see them as improving. My 4 examples are just that. Lots of people consider it a sign of declining morality as we become more accepting of them while others like me consider it a great moral step forward.

[raydan]

DerbyX DerbyX:

What about changing morals? Some see them as declining while others see them as improving. My 4 examples are just that. Lots of people consider it a sign of declining morality as we become more accepting of them while others like me consider it a great moral step forward.

I think that's what we mean when we say it's subjective.

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

I have to agree that immorality is subjective... but I have a question.

Does immorality cause the decline of an empire?
or
Is immorality only a symptom of a failing empire?

Both.

And immorality being perceived as subjective is, itself, a symptom of immorality.

Is Hugh Hefner immoral? He doesn't think so. Does that mean he's not immoral?

The Mormon men in Bountiful who marry 15 year old girls certainly don't think they're immoral.

The ramifications of Western immorality is that with each new thing we allow and tolerate in society we end up allowing yet more as our threshold of decency is pushed back yet again.

Now we're faced with the reaping of the whirlwind as polygamists argue that if gays can marry because 'marriage should not be defined by the state' then what's the reason for banning polygamy?

Consequently we find ourselves in the quandary where almost nothing will be defined as immoral save for morality.

Really, we have come to the point where moral people and moral values are considered negatively.

How long can a society stand when the underlying reasons why people treat each other decently are no longer?

Why shouldn't I cheat on my wife and have an affair with your 14 year old daughter? Who are you to judge?

Think that's an exaggeration? There's people who want the age of consent lowered to 14 and even younger. Once that happens then a 14 year old girl (or boy) having an affair with a much older person will be legal.

Yes, I agree that there's negatives to strict moral codes but there's also greater negatives to a strict absence of moral codes.