Firefighters watch house burn to ground.

[Chou Toshio]

You are missing my point. My point is: How do you know you are right on ethics, and why should others of inherently different views accept your view as right?



"Human primarily culture secondary," is truly naive.

"Humanity" is just a collection of organisms that currently happens to have similar enough genetic material to interbreed. Any one species though, is just a temporary crossroad of genetics-- in thousands or millions of years it could become any number of completely different types of species/existences. Any notion of some ultimate truth or moral ruling born from something as flimsy and temporary as our "existence as human beings" is frankly laughable in my opinion.

I can turn your own argument around at you, and point out the real truth-- before we are humans, we are singular living things part of earth's biosphere. As living things, what matters to us is not some broad collective group of organisms. Goshawks in America do not give a crap about goshawks in Japan. What matters to living organisms is ME-- myself, my family, my tribe-- ME. Not some loose group of widely spread organisms that happen to be closely genetically related enough at the moment that we could interbreed if we happened to meet. Identity as a species is completely momentary from an evolutionary perspective. That is why I say ethics born from such an identity is ridiculous.



In order to coexist peacefully, groups and differences between groups are important to understand, and must be respected. Looking back at Asia in World War II, what led Japan to war, fed the war, and even now continues to perpetuate the hostility between Japan and China-- it almost all comes down to cultural differences, and inability of people to understand and reconcile with those differences.

If you truly want to be an open-minded citizen of the world, someone who can truly make a difference-- what is important is not to enforce your views on the other party, but to instead to try and understand their views. You must learn to ask, not tell. You must learn to accept and forgive, rather than attack or enforce.

Sometimes that means leave and let be, because the other simply will not change. Being able to forgive differences and allow the other to let be is the most important thing. Sometimes those of different cultures will never see eye to eye.

Forgiveness is of the utmost importance. Humans are imperfect. No one even knows (certainly not you) what "perfect" is anyway.

You will notice that I have never, in this thread, prescribed to know what is the perfect ethical truth, nor have I ever tried to enforce my views on the way you live your lives. What is more important is to forgive people of differences, and understand that there will always be people who view it differently-- and at some level you have to learn to forgive them. Unless of course, you mean to go to war.

 

[TheAmazingFlygon]

You are missing my point. My point is: How do you know you are right on ethics, and why should others of inherently different views accept your view as right?

I think I am right for my opinion on this subject at least is respectful of everyone and just. People aren't force to accept my view point; they are free to believe what they want as long as it doesn't interfere with the liberties of others. In fact, different opinions is good as long, as mentioned above, that they are respectful of people's liberty. If I am right - or should I say if I bring up the best idea - then there is no reason for them to not accept it except if they can disprove it and bring a better one. Fact is, the firefighters refused to help someone in a dangerous situation and it was their job to do so because of money. They should pay their dept to society for not helping these people in a situation of danger and these people should pay, afterwards, an higher amount of money (to prevent people from abusing the system). Other than that, this is simply an example to show how this firefighter system doesn't work and is much worst than the previous one: some things can't be privatized, some things must belong to society.

EDIT: I just saw you edited your post so don't worry if I did not respond to it, I'll respond to it later.

 

[Invective]

When the liberty of others is destroyed, you can call it hate speech. You don't have the right to express the fact that you firmly believe black people should be enslaved for instance,

Actually it is quite legal for me to say "I believe all African-Americans should be enslaved." As long as I do not tell people act upon my beliefs, it is legal. We enjoy speech that allows us to state our views, once we urge people to take action is when it become illegal.

nor should you have the right to incite people to take arms for that would destroy the liberties of some.

This is not a right we enjoy in the United Stated, thankfully.

Whether one is offended or not isn't the question. Even if one doesn't care, any hate speech that wouldn't respect his liberties should be illegal. Minorities have to right to express their desire and their ideas as long as they do not violate other peoples liberty.

This is true, I suppose. However, it is a slippery slope to determine which type of speech does not "respect" anothers liberties.

For instance, Mexican workers could express their rage about the fact that they are viewed as illegal immigrants and therefore less paid, etc.

They can express their rage as long as they are deemed by authorities to be not acting in a non-inciting manner, actually. Subjective, yes, but currently the way that infringes upon their rights the least.

, but they shouldn't have the right to say that native USA citizens should be beaten or something else for that.

They do not have this right.

The same way a Neonazi minority shouldn't have the right to say we hate Jews

Actually, everyone has the right to say "We hate [certain ethnic group, cultural group, nationality, race, creed, gender, age group etc]" as long as all they are doing is expressing their feelings for said group. Once they begin to advocate for any infringements on one's rights, it becomes illegal.

, they are monster for they exist.

Now this, I am not so sure on but I believe we have the right to say this as it is still expressing our beliefs. As long as it is beliefs and nothing that will cause people to rage in the streets, it is perfectly legal. Now, if I am wrong on this last point, someone please correct me.

(Whoops, I'm a tangent :/)

 

[Chou Toshio]

I think I am right for my opinion on this subject at least is respectful of everyone and just. People aren't force to accept my view point; they are free to believe what they want as long as it doesn't interfere with the liberties of others.

That is a rather ridiculous statement to make considering we could easily (as in we definitely) have differences of view regarding what is/isn't "interfering with the liberties of others."

In fact, different opinions is good as long, as mentioned above, that they are respectful of people's liberty.

No one knows exactly what "respecting people's liberties" means.

If I am right - or should I say if I bring up the best idea - then there is no reason for them to not accept it except if they can disprove it and bring a better one. Fact is, the firefighters refused to help someone in a dangerous situation and it was their job to do so because of money. They should pay their dept to society for not helping these people in a situation of danger and these people should pay, afterwards, an higher amount of money (to prevent people from abusing the system). Other than that, this is simply an example to show how this firefighter system doesn't work and is much worst than the previous one: some things can't be privatized, some things must belong to society.

The fact is that the firefighters perfectly executed their job and social function of protecting all houses in their jurisdiction (their town and those in the other town who had paid for their services).

The above is simply my view, and the view of many in this thread as well. You are in no place to tell us we are simply, ethically wrong-- because you have no way to claim yourself ethically right. This is the bottom line.

Pointing fingers at America simply makes the bigotry of your posts more ridiculous.

 

[Mountain Dewgong]

Hey guys, keep in mind this is an isolated and unique case, not the norm. Wouldn't be right for me to judge Australia because a man locked his daughter up in the basement and raped her for decades, spawning offspring or for me to judge Canada for another incredibly unique and horrific event.

It's easy to look at something and when it happens in one country, think it's an horrible example of how people can be but then to look at the same event occur in America and say "Pfft, only Americans."

Not that you guys care, like any other culture or country you hold yourselves as the prime example of "civilized" and any other culture with differing views as backwards. Now isn't that quite a healthy attitude?

Was I the only one to notice that this actually happened in Austria and not Australia? And that the first words in the article (from CNN Europe) are AMSTETTEN, Austria (CNN).

 

[MrIndigo]

Was I the only one to notice that this actually happened in Austria and not Australia? And that the first words in the article (from CNN Europe) are AMSTETTEN, Austria (CNN).

I think a similar case actually did happen here, but yeah, the Frietzl case is Austria.

 

[Arcturus]

I think people are putting too much blame on the firefighters and not enough on the homeowners who purposely ignored the rules of the area they lived in. While I think the protocol in use is extremely dumb, it is what it is, there's no use in debating whether it's right or wrong. It was accepted by the citizens living there, whether through a vote, or through their inaction in trying to get things changed.

You know you have to pay $75 to get fire department coverage, why would you neglect to pay it? That's way more irresponsible to me than the firefighters who were ordered by their superiors to stand down. It's like not having an anti-virus and constantly going on shady websites. They took that risk and look what happened. If thinking like this makes me an asshole, then allow me to wipe my mouth with TP, I have no sympathy for them. It's $75 dude, and it's once a year, how hard is it to pay and not worry about this happening? I'm willing to bet they didn't have homeowners insurance either, which will suck even more for them. It was a crappy deal all around, but you take the consequences of your actions, it's part of your responsibility as a homeowner.

The one positive from this is that things will be changed now out of necessity. Better late than never right? Maybe they'll take the money out via taxes, or the county scrounges up enough money for their own fire department (the better choice IMO). And I'm sure people in other areas of the US will now make sure they know what all the rules and regulations are so something like this doesn't happen to them.

 

[TheAmazingFlygon]

You are missing my point. My point is: How do you know you are right on ethics, and why should others of inherently different views accept your view as right?



"Human primarily culture secondary," is truly naive.

"Humanity" is just a collection of organisms that currently happens to have similar enough genetic material to interbreed. Any one species though, is just a temporary crossroad of genetics-- in thousands or millions of years it could become any number of completely different types of species/existences. Any notion of some ultimate truth or moral ruling born from something as flimsy and temporary as our "existence as human beings" is frankly laughable in my opinion.


I can turn your own argument around at you, and point out the real truth-- before we are humans, we are singular living things part of earth's biosphere. As living things, what matters to us is not some broad collective group of organisms. Goshawks in America do not give a crap about goshawks in Japan. What matters to living organisms is ME-- myself, my family, my tribe-- ME. Not some loose group of widely spread organisms that happen to be closely genetically related enough at the moment that we could interbreed if we happened to meet. Identity as a species is completely momentary from an evolutionary perspective. That is why I say ethics born from such an identity is ridiculous.

Our humanity is primary, even over being part of the animal kingdom for we are much different that an eagle for instance; we have a developed conscience. This collection of organism, this identity, is what defines us. Yes, we are selfish and lazy beings for it is human nature, but we must live together as humans firsts in order to survive and acquire happiness. One must open his self to others in order to acquire that state of happiness, our ''goal''.

In order to coexist peacefully, groups and differences between groups are important to understand, and must be respected. Looking back at Asia in World War II, what led Japan to war, fed the war, and even now continues to perpetuate the hostility between Japan and China-- it almost all comes down to cultural differences, and inability of people to understand and reconcile with those differences.

If you truly want to be an open-minded citizen of the world, someone who can truly make a difference-- what is important is not to enforce your views on the other party, but to instead to try and understand their views. You must learn to ask, not tell. You must learn to accept and forgive, rather than attack or enforce.

Sometimes that means leave and let be, because the other simply will not change. Being able to forgive differences and allow the other to let be is the most important thing. Sometimes those of different cultures will never see eye to eye.

Forgiveness is of the utmost importance. Humans are imperfect. No one even knows (certainly not you) what "perfect" is anyway.

You will notice that I have never, in this thread, prescribed to know what is the perfect ethical truth, nor have I ever tried to enforce my views on the way you live your lives. What is more important is to forgive people of differences, and understand that there will always be people who view it differently-- and at some level you have to learn to forgive them. Unless of course, you mean to go to war.

Wait what? Since when did I mention not to respect differences and different cultures? What I said was that our humanity is primary, our culture secondary. And also, to turn your example of Japan and World War II against you somewhat, this wouldn't have happened if their culture wasn't more important than coexisting with other humans of simply different cultures.

The fact is that the firefighters perfectly executed their job and social function of protecting all houses in their jurisdiction (their town and those in the other town who had paid for their services).

The above is simply my view, and the view of many in this thread as well. You are in no place to tell us we are simply, ethically wrong-- because you have no way to claim yourself ethically right. This is the bottom line.

Pointing fingers at America simply makes the bigotry of your posts more ridiculous.

Yes, some Nazis used the same argument:'' we were simply obeying to orders''. The firefighters job is to protect citizens from fire regardless of whether or not you paid through taxes or through the 75$ annual payment the service which they did not do. I have claims of myself having a better system than yours; this incident wouldn't have happened in Canada, nor in any other country sharing the same type of firefighter system. I am not pointing at all Americans, I am pointing to those who let this kind of stuff happen.


To answer your other post, liberties of other could be considered as their rights as a human being. Also, never did I state I was the wielded of some truth -- if such a thing even exist.

 

[Chou Toshio]

I am not even going to address your unfounded and narrow-minded ideas regarding identity of humanity.

Wait what? Since when did I mention not to respect differences and different cultures? What I said was that our humanity is primary, our culture secondary. And also, to turn your example of Japan and World War II against you somewhat, this wouldn't have happened if their culture wasn't more important than coexisting with other humans of simply different cultures.

I never said that either culture was "wrong," rather that such tragedies occurred simply because both cultures were unable to understand and reconcile.

Yes, some Nazis used the same argument:'' we were simply obeying to orders''.

The Nazis? Really? You want to compare the firefighters here to the Nazis?

Question: Is right and wrong so obvious here that you would go to war over this issue? Is it so obvious that you would forego trade with the US?

No? Well than it'd be best not to go off on how backwards, unethical or uncivilized you think the US is.

The firefighters job is to protect citizens from fire regardless of whether or not you paid through taxes or through the 75$ annual payment the service which they did not do.

Erm, no . . . their job is obviously to protect those citizens under their jurisdiction, which obviously doesn't include those who didn't pay.

I have claims of myself having a better system than yours; this incident wouldn't have happened in Canada, nor in any other country sharing the same type of firefighter system.

And I have claims that your way of doing things isn't necessarily the best. Do you know this town? These people? The logistics of firefighting in that area? Fire outbreak statistics? Performance statistics? Have you seen their budget, reviewed their maintenance costs, salaries, members, and other pertinent information?

No?

Well than I find your uneducated claims of knowing what's best for them better than they do pretty laughable.

I am not pointing at all Americans, I am pointing to those who let this kind of stuff happen.

Do you want to re-read your earlier post about America and try and claim this again?

 

[TheAmazingFlygon]

I am not even going to address your unfounded and narrow-minded ideas regarding identity of humanity.

Nice way of saying you lack an argument against my sayings and no, I am not narrow-minded.


I never said that either culture was "wrong," rather that such tragedies occurred simply because both cultures were unable to understand and reconcile.

Never said that you mentioned culture was wrong, I only said that if their culture was secondary and their humanity primary, this wouldn't have happened.

The Nazis? Really? You want to compare the firefighters here to the Nazis?

Question: Is right and wrong so obvious here that you would go to war over this issue? Is it so obvious that you would forego trade with the US?

No? Well than it'd be best not to go off on how backwards, unethical or uncivilized you think the US is.

I am comparing the excuses both used, not their crimes.

Erm, no . . . their job is obviously to protect those citizens under their jurisdiction, which obviously doesn't include those who didn't pay.

Protecting someone in a situation of danger is their job and they must do it regardless of whether the family paid or not, this payment issue can be viewed afterwards. Besides, this system is bad, firefighter services should not be privatized, it should be controlled by the government and paid through taxes.

And I have claims that your way of doing things isn't necessarily the best. Do you know this town? These people? The logistics of firefighting in that area? Fire outbreak statistics? Performance statistics? Have you seen their budget, reviewed their maintenance costs, salaries, members, and other pertinent information?

No?

Well than I find your uneducated claims of knowing what's best for them better than they do pretty laughable.

Yes, I know this town. No I do not know these people. No I do not know the logistics of the firefighter service that let that crime happen. No I do not know the fire outbreak statistics. No I do not know the performance statistics. Yes I have seen other pertinent information such as the buget and costs. What they think is good for them might, in reality, not be.


Do you want to re-read your earlier post about America and try and claim this again?

I re-read it, and yes I shall claim it again.