'What if' ~ "Risk Management" for family day

[TOM4CWB]

Checking; Interesting post yesterday:

"With an infinite universe, and an infinite number of parallel universes, mathematics says that there are an infinite number of Gods being worshipped. Your one God rule is out.

The real mind boggler is that there are an infinite number of Tom's supporting the old CWB."

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/EUGQFH03apc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Cheers

[farmaholic]

I should never comment on a topic as
controversial and sensitive as
religion/spirituality. My first comment
would be there is a huge difference
between religion and spirituality, I
think you can be one and not the
other(both ways)!!
I don't think it matters what you
believe in as long as you believe in
something. And allow others to believe
in what they want. Just because they
may believe in something different
doesn't make them wrong. I simply want
to live in peace and harmony with the
people around me and my surroundings.
To each their own....

Happy Family day everyone....

[TOM4CWB]

Farmaholic,

THe largest threat for many multi-generational farms... is dealing with this third dimension of our family farms...

How we respect each other, build trust and a culture of hope for the future... are key to all parts of a sucessful family farm.

We can be top producers... expert marketers... and prosperous families materially...

If we do not have peace and understanding; going forward... the chances of the farm breaking apart are exponentially greater.

Have a great Family Day!

[rhoff]

"Just because they  
may believe in something different  
doesn't make them wrong"

Farmaholic Do you see how your statement is self
refuting? I believe something that is different than
what you believe,if my belief is right it makes
yours wrong . So either I'm right which makes you
wrong or I'm wrong which Would also make you
wrong,according to your own statement.
I understand your goal is to be inclusive and
respectful however your actually attacking those
who believe in absolute truth.

[farmaholic]

Holy Shit rhoff--there is no right or
wrong, as I said to each their own. Even
the atheist has a belief. I didn't think
it was that hard.......

[rhoff]

"there is no right or wrong".
Wow that's quite the truth claim you just made. My
belief is that there is a right and wrong. Are you
telling me my belief is wrong because yours is
right?

[farmaholic]

What part of to "each their own" don't you
get??? Believe what you want and I will
believe what I want, and I will leave
right and wrong out of it, to make it
simple for you.

[ColevilleH2S]

farmaholic I don't bother arguing with absolutists, or as some call them, fundamentalists. They obviously are suppressing the part of the brain that allows one to imagine being in someone else's shoes. Usually, consideration and empathy stop at the edge of their social circle.

[TOM4CWB]

Interesting arguments:

If you say there is no 'right or wrong' and everything is
relative... if you believe this to be true... you are still
'absolutely' saying that position is correct and my view
[the opposite] is incorrect.

Taking this position takes faith and belief... no
different than someone who says there is 'black and
white' truth as well as faulty views of reality.

So the end point comes right back around.... If the
realist says everything is relative... and it turns out
there are NO ABSOLUTES... Fine with me... if this turns
out to be true I lose nothing.

However... If I am correct... and there is a 'Right and
Wrong' ethically and morally... I am fine with that as
well. The relativist is hooped... as they instead will be
incorrect. Bad ending for them.

I think the old adage... that if you do not stand for
something... you can be tricked into nearly anything...
stands the test of time!

Cheers!

[rhoff]

Farmaholic you say you will leave right and wrong
out of it but you just finished saying in your earlier
post that there is no such thing as right and
wrong. Coleville your speaking out of ignorance in
regards to what I believe-the only thing you Know
about me is that I believe in absolute truth. The
point I was trying get Farmaholic to understand is
that he was denying absolute truth by using an
absolute truth claim-it's self defeating and doesn't
make sense.
If you think your being tolerant by saying all
beliefs are good and there is no right or wrong
your not.your actually saying that nobody can
possibly speak truth except you.
Example....
" there is no such thing as absolute truth,and I'm
absolutely sure about it"

[ColevilleH2S]

Good argument Tom, the circle it traced made me dizzy. But look at it this way, Right and Wrong must surely be a human construct, since it's definition has clearly changed over time as our society has evolved. Slavery and women's rights have clearly changed as time has progressed, so who is right or wrong with those issues, the person in 1713 or the person in 2013? It's relative to your surrounding society.

[rhoff]

Coleville if right and wrong is only a human
construct then how should the world decide who's
idea of right and wrong to adopt and for how
long? If one group of people feels it would be
"right" to occupy and kill and **** another people
group how do you say that is wrong?If there idea
of "right" is a human construct and your idea of
"wrong" is a human construct then you have no
basis to disagree with them. The only thing you
could say is that you don't prefer the agressors
actions. If you demand they stop they will just call
you an absolutist.

[TOM4CWB]

Coleville,

How each person treats others... is what counts.

Best example I can think of is this:

Do Not Judge Others

7 “Do not judge others, and you will not be judged. 2
For you will be treated as you treat others.[a] The
standard you use in judging is the standard by which
you will be judged.[b]
7:2a Or For God will judge you as you judge others.
7:2b Or The measure you give will be the measure you
get back.

The Golden Rule

12 “Do to others whatever you would like them to do
to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the
law and the prophets.

22 On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord!
We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in
your name and performed many miracles in your
name.’ 23 But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away
from me, you who break God’s laws.’[Matthew 7]"

Clearly the intents of the heart... are what is going to
be looked at.

Cheers

[farmaholic]

Thanks for the help Coleville, I
understand it now....INTOLERANCE....

[ColevilleH2S]

And again Tom, all good points. But I'll drag this back to my societal evolution theory. If "in their heart" a Eighteenth century nobleman felt it was right in both his eyes, and the eyes of his God, to own black slaves, did that make it right? And by who's standards?

I suspect if you asked the nobleman about the Golden rule he would say, the slave is not fully human, and therefore the golden rule does not apply.

Fast forward to today. I ask myself if hogs I may own should be afforded human-like rights. I would say no, a pig is not a human, therefore the golden rule should not apply.

The society of 1700 said the nobleman was right, but our society says he was wrong. Today's society says I am right, but what about 300 years from now?

There is, and always will be interpretation and grey zones of morality. It all depends on who you ask and the surroundings they are in. Which brings to mind another question. Is the moral code that an allied soldier followed during the fighting in WW2, the same code he followed in civilian life after the war? I say no, it depends on circumstances.

I'm not saying there is not a moral code, or not a right and wrong. I'm just saying they are fluid and fuzzy. And not hard and fast, as some would say.