I agree with you. If I have more than enough food and a good family is starving, I would share. We both agree here, great!
But the problem is it isn’t just that simple, is it? What happens if someone tried to invade my home and take from my family? What if the last time I let someone into my home because they told me they were in need they tried to kill my children? Am I not also entitled to be extremely wary of those I do not know? What do I know of your motives, your world views, etc.?
If life were this simple the world would be a wonderful place devoid of victims and perpetrators, but it isn’t. I believe wholly that virtually all human conflict arises due to a differentiation on how differing parties view the same reality we’re all apart of.
I mean, if you believe that you have a god who wants you to kill non-believers then if I’m a non-believer how can we coexist in peace? You don’t even believe this world runs on the same constraints that I do. It’s like if one of us felt that jumping off a cliff wouldn’t not only not kill us, but would grant us boons, yet the other of us just believes jumping amounts to suicide. How do we both exist in this same space then? We cannot even agree on how reality is.
Remember George Floyd? The man was convicted of many felony offenses, one being when he held a gun to a pregnant woman’s stomach while his companions robbed her home. He was later martyred as a shining example of black sub-culture. They’ve made statues showcasing him in angel wings in his honor.
The man was evil. How can I coexist knowing what he did with the fact that there are people out there who believe he was good? This isn’t just a different opinion, it’s a fundamental viewpoint of righteousness and morality itself. If we cannot even agree on what’s good and what’s not, how can I trust that every person who claims they are starving is deserving of my food? EVEN if I have more than enough to go around. Maybe I want to save ample amounts for my family. Maybe I want some so I CAN give it to those in need, but I have my own ways to vet who those people are. There are roughly 10 billion people on this planet and billions of them believe the world holds some kind of “magic” - be it some kind of god, ghosts, or other form of supernatural, and no amount of evidence changes those minds at any rapid pace.
So again, I agree with you, but it just isn’t that simple. What I DO know is this: I am a good person who wants to help GOOD people in need and condemn those who are evil. I am not religious, I am anti-government, and I believe all people deserve to be treated equally under any moral laws we might enforce. I want you to be able to live your life however you like so long as you are not harming the innocent, but you are not entitled to what I have as if you are wise and just and I am petty, stupid and cruel. EVEN if I have LOTS more than you.
I agree with you. If I have more than enough food and a good family is starving, I would share. We both agree here, great!
But the problem is it isn’t just that simple, is it? What happens if someone tried to invade my home and take from my family? What if the last time I let someone into my home because they told me they were in need they tried to kill my children? Am I not also entitled to be extremely wary of those I do not know? What do I know of your motives, your world views, etc.?
If life were this simple the world would be a wonderful place devoid of victims and perpetrators, but it isn’t. I believe wholly that virtually all human conflict arises due to a differentiation on how differing parties view the same reality we’re all apart of.
I mean, if you believe that you have a god who wants you to kill non-believers then if I’m a non-believer how can we coexist in peace? You don’t even believe this world runs on the same constraints that I do. It’s like if one of us felt that jumping off a cliff wouldn’t not only not kill us, but would grant us boons, yet the other of us just believes jumping amounts to suicide. How do we both exist in this same space then? We cannot even agree on how reality is.
Remember George Floyd? The man was convicted of many felony offenses, one being when he held a gun to a pregnant woman’s stomach while his companions robbed her home. He was later martyred as a shining example of black sub-culture. They’ve made statues showcasing him in angel wings in his honor.
The man was evil. How can I coexist knowing what he did with the fact that there are people out there who believe he was good? This isn’t just a different opinion, it’s a fundamental viewpoint of righteousness and morality itself. If we cannot even agree on what’s good and what’s not, how can I trust that every person who claims they are starving is deserving of my food? EVEN if I have more than enough to go around. Maybe I want to save ample amounts for my family. Maybe I want some so I CAN give it to those in need, but I have my own ways to vet who those people are. There are roughly 10 billion people on this planet and billions of them believe the world holds some kind of “magic” - be it some kind of god, ghosts, or other form of supernatural, and no amount of evidence changes those minds at any rapid pace.
So again, I agree with you, but it just isn’t that simple. What I DO know is this: I am a good person who wants to help GOOD people in need and condemn those who are evil. I am not religious, I am anti-government, and I believe all people deserve to be treated equally under any moral laws we might enforce. I want you to be able to live your life however you like so long as you are not harming the innocent, but you are not entitled to what I have as if you are wise and just and I am petty, stupid and cruel. EVEN if I have LOTS more than you.
If you have lots because you stole, I’d like the lots returned to the rightful owners
And I’d agree with you.