How Does Morality Change?

[mtrycrafts]

Wrong, he agreed to sign a bill and then Ann Coulter had a fit and backed off. ...

And a few others that he listens to constantly for advice like Hannaty and Rush.

 

[Irvrobinson]

And a few others that he listens to constantly for advise like Hannaty and Rush.

His loyal base wants ongoing proof that he listens to them and he acts accordingly. And loyal it is, with an 80%+ approval rating. Backing down to the Democrats is not appealing to his base; who knows what Trump really thinks about a wall. His base wants conservative judges and no backing down. So far he's delivering in spades.

 

[ryanosaur]

Perhaps I'm too utilitarian and existential in my thought process... but morality and politics are more exclusive than inclusive, especially within the social conservative movement. I see more examples of amorality in the m.o. of what our "leadership class" engages in.
But if we wish to discuss morality, how do we define that? Yes, what's happening is both unfortunate and horrific. Including the well documented inciting of violence exhibited by the orange one himself. Do we reward a thug in the name of the greater immediate good of ending the shutdown, even though that simple act would not simply be an acknowledgement of the humanity inherent in its accomplishment, but rather an acceptance and further encouragement of the divisive rancor and racism fueling the last 10+ years of American politics (being the complete disregard of a twice-elected President in Obama, including his right to have his pick for the Supreme Court at least voted on by the Senate; and the anti-Islamic furor that has poisoned us and deeply changed the spirit of America)?

Always do as you would have others do. That is my morality. By my actions, I am responsible for all. This is how we each should endeavor to lead our lives.
And then, is building a wall the greatest good for the greatest number of people?

No. Not even close.

(Yes, our politicians should all be term limited. Nowhere did our founding fathers really expect, to the best of my knowledge, that we would ever have a leadership class as we seemingly do now: you were meant to serve your term or two, then go back to your farm/business/family and carry on with your life.)

(Also, its been well defined now that Reagan, the beaming star of republicanism in my youth and younger-adult life, could not actually be a republican in todays party.)

 

[KEW]

Perhaps I'm too utilitarian and existential in my thought process... but morality and politics are more exclusive than inclusive, especially within the social conservative movement. I see more examples of amorality in the m.o. of what our "leadership class" engages in.
But if we wish to discuss morality, how do we define that? Yes, what's happening is both unfortunate and horrific. Including the well documented inciting of violence exhibited by the orange one himself. Do we reward a thug in the name of the greater immediate good of ending the shutdown, even though that simple act would not simply be an acknowledgement of the humanity inherent in its accomplishment, but rather an acceptance and further encouragement of the divisive rancor and racism fueling the last 10+ years of American politics (being the complete disregard of a twice-elected President in Obama, including his right to have his pick for the Supreme Court at least voted on by the Senate; and the anti-Islamic furor that has poisoned us and deeply changed the spirit of America)?

Always do as you would have others do. That is my morality. By my actions, I am responsible for all. This is how we each should endeavor to lead our lives.
And then, is building a wall the greatest good for the greatest number of people?

No. Not even close.

(Yes, our politicians should all be term limited. Nowhere did our founding fathers really expect, to the best of my knowledge, that we would ever have a leadership class as we seemingly do now: you were meant to serve your term or two, then go back to your farm/business/family and carry on with your life.)

(Also, its been well defined now that Reagan, the beaming star of republicanism in my youth and younger-adult life, could not actually be a republican in todays party.)

I always try to be mindful of politics and actual making choices for the betterment of our lives (morality?) as two discrete motivators in DC. Unfortunately, with the extreme rhetoric Trump has chosen, I think politics is at a high and morality at a low among the current leadership.
Interestingly, I , personally am convinced that Mitch McConnell deliberately gave Trump enough rope to hang himself on "the wall induced shutdown" when he declared he would not vote on anything Trump had not approved. On the surface, it looks like tremendous display of solidarity/loyalty. However, by not presenting Trump with a reasonable compromise signed by the house and senate, he is leaving it to Trump to dig his hole as deep as he wants (although Mitch may have decided it was deep enough since it looks like they may be starting to talk compromise bills soon). Mitch knows how to play the DC game very well!

 

[Alex2507]

I remember Republicans that held up money for NJ when a natural disaster hit because it would add to the debt.

There was other spending tied to that proposal that the right rejected. I brought that point up to my conservative BIL and got schooled for not having a fuller understanding of the event than a cute FB meme. It took my BIL less than 5 minutes to find the pertinent info on his phone and then start gloating. Look further into the incident before trying to use it as ammo.

 

[Alex2507]

dolidarity

Is that the glue that binds dotards?

 

[Hetfield]

There was other spending tied to that proposal that the right rejected. I brought that point up to my conservative BIL and got schooled for not having a fuller understanding of the event than a cute FB meme. It took my BIL less than 5 minutes to find the pertinent info on his phone and then start gloating. Look further into the incident before trying to use it as ammo.

Nope because that was the end result. They held up money for a natural disaster. Then I remember when Texas had a disaster and they passed a bill and had tears in their eye because we to help these people. They are frauds period. I remember what happened, I live in NJ.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[KEW]

Is that the glue that binds dotards?

Thanks, fixed it!

 

[KEW]

I am hoping that I remember correctly that there is a bill on its way to prevent tying the government budget to other activities. in other words government shutdowns would not be a tool for forcing other items.
I am hoping after the current fiasco the political will is there to prevent future recurrences.

 

[herbu]

Thanks for the discussion, but the wall was just an example. My question is about changing morality. Perhaps instead of Chuck's clips, I should have used the Pelosi quote, "... most of us, speaking for myself, consider the wall immoral, ineffective, expensive, and the president said he promised it. He also promised Mexico would pay for it. So, even if they did, it's immoral still ... ".

When did a wall become immoral? We've used walls forever, and still do. Instead of walls, I could have used abortion. 50 years ago it was generally considered immoral. Now the majority doesn't think so. 100 years ago racial discrimination was accepted. Now not so much. Please don't start a debate about any of these examples. I'm simply asking how morals change.

In my mind, morality transcends race, creed, color and politics. I don't care where you're from or who you are, some things are immoral. So how do those things change?

 

[KEW]

Thanks for the discussion, but the wall was just an example. My question is about changing morality. Perhaps instead of Chuck's clips, I should have used the Pelosi quote, "... most of us, speaking for myself, consider the wall immoral, ineffective, expensive, and the president said he promised it. He also promised Mexico would pay for it. So, even if they did, it's immoral still ... ".

When did a wall become immoral? We've used walls forever, and still do. Instead of walls, I could have used abortion. 50 years ago it was generally considered immoral. Now the majority doesn't think so. 100 years ago racial discrimination was accepted. Now not so much. Please don't start a debate about any of these examples. I'm simply asking how morals change.

In my mind, morality transcends race, creed, color and politics. I don't care where you're from or who you are, some things are immoral. So how do those things change?

Once Trump inextricably tied the wall to racism it became immoral!
So I don't believe there was a change in people's morality, I think it was the image of what the wall means that changed. If Trump had simply talked about additional barriers to maintain border security I don't think there would be any mention of morality or much push back.

 

[ryanosaur]

I would hope that such things like common sense and decency are coupled with changing morality.
After all, Judeo-Christian morality has many flaws, but somewhere along the line, thankfully, we stopped selling wives and children into slavery. Or the exercise of debating the death penalty using the same book that says: thou shalt not kill and an eye for an eye. Most would agree that war is immoral, yet we were taught to sing onward Christian soldier (perhaps it is true that we will never know peace as long as our society speaks using metaphors of war). Perhaps the atrocities of the inquisitions were immoral?
Shifting gears, war is also good for business. Is business immoral? Capitalism is based on exploitation of the worker, after all.
Apropos of this conversation about how morality changes, I am reminded of the quip: very carefully. Yet that’s clearly not been our historical experience.
Most simply it is a combination of emotion and sensibility, perhaps, that drives a change in morality. Applied individually or societally, I could see those mechanisms at play in how we change our ideas of right, wrong, and acceptable.

 

[Steve81]

So how do those things change?

I would expect primarily through exposure to new thoughts and ideas that challenge the convictions one currently holds. Couple that with the internet, social media, etc., and it's easier to see why things are changing much more quickly than they have in the past.

 

[lovinthehd]

Thanks for the discussion, but the wall was just an example. My question is about changing morality. Perhaps instead of Chuck's clips, I should have used the Pelosi quote, "... most of us, speaking for myself, consider the wall immoral, ineffective, expensive, and the president said he promised it. He also promised Mexico would pay for it. So, even if they did, it's immoral still ... ".

When did a wall become immoral? We've used walls forever, and still do. Instead of walls, I could have used abortion. 50 years ago it was generally considered immoral. Now the majority doesn't think so. 100 years ago racial discrimination was accepted. Now not so much. Please don't start a debate about any of these examples. I'm simply asking how morals change.

In my mind, morality transcends race, creed, color and politics. I don't care where you're from or who you are, some things are immoral. So how do those things change?

You could simply have asked the question without dragging politics, particularly your personal politics, into it,, eh? Sort an immoral approach....

 

[herbu]

You could simply have asked the question without dragging politics, particularly your personal politics, into it,, eh? Sort an immoral approach....

But it was politics that prompted my confusion. Almost every Democrat supported a wall until Trump. Now suddenly almost every Democrat is against it. And their elected leader, (for over 30 years), calls it immoral. To my mind, morality in a society doesn't change that quickly and completely. To my mind, it is pure politics.

So I'm wondering if it really is the perception of morality that changed, or is it just politics? And if it is morality, how did that happen?

There is such a chasm between the Left and Right, discussion without vitriol is hard to find. I know very good and smart people on both sides. And I wonder how so many good and smart people can be so full of hate that they abandon their ability to discuss and reason. So I try to understand the Left's perspective of particular divisive issues. Today it is the wall. Is there a reason for the party reversal other than politics? I don't want to hear why a wall is bad. I want to hear what changed that turned a good wall 5 years ago, into a bad wall today.

 

[Swerd]

I've tried to stay out of this thread. This morning I can't. (Arresting Roger Stone has got me hopped up .)

Shutting down the federal government displays contempt for 800,000 federal employees. The Narcissist in a Fright Wig has stiffed them as he previously stiffed contractors and employees in construction projects. His efforts to shut down the federal government for personal political gain are MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE.

 

[shadyJ]

But it was politics that prompted my confusion. Almost every Democrat supported a wall until Trump.

Not true, but I didn't know you were so heavily involved with Democratic party policy resolution.

I don't want to hear why a wall is bad. I want to hear what changed that turned a good wall 5 years ago, into a bad wall today.

Your question is based on a false premise. But nice try at gaslighting.

 

[lovinthehd]

But it was politics that prompted my confusion. Almost every Democrat supported a wall until Trump. Now suddenly almost every Democrat is against it. And their elected leader, (for over 30 years), calls it immoral. To my mind, morality in a society doesn't change that quickly and completely. To my mind, it is pure politics.

So I'm wondering if it really is the perception of morality that changed, or is it just politics? And if it is morality, how did that happen?

There is such a chasm between the Left and Right, discussion without vitriol is hard to find. I know very good and smart people on both sides. And I wonder how so many good and smart people can be so full of hate that they abandon their ability to discuss and reason. So I try to understand the Left's perspective of particular divisive issues. Today it is the wall. Is there a reason for the party reversal other than politics? I don't want to hear why a wall is bad. I want to hear what changed that turned a good wall 5 years ago, into a bad wall today.

I'm sorry, when did almost every democrat support a wall? You pull that out of your butt?

 

[highfigh]

Interestingly, I , personally am convinced that Mitch McConnell deliberately gave Trump enough rope to hang himself on "the wall induced shutdown" when he declared he would not vote on anything Trump had not approved. On the surface, it looks like tremendous display of solidarity/loyalty. However, by not presenting Trump with a reasonable compromise signed by the house and senate, he is leaving it to Trump to dig his hole as deep as he wants (although Mitch may have decided it was deep enough since it looks like they may be starting to talk compromise bills soon). Mitch knows how to play the DC game very well!

IMO, McConnell is a lap dog and that may get him replaced, although he IS the longest-serving Senator from Kentucky, so, I guess, they like him. That could change. Probably not, though.

 

[highfigh]

I've tried to stay out of this thread. This morning I can't. (Arresting Roger Stone has got me hopped up .)

Shutting down the federal government displays contempt for 800,000 federal employees. The Narcissist in a Fright Wig has stiffed them as he previously stiffed contractors and employees in construction projects. His efforts to shut down the federal government for personal political gain are MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE.

How would you describe the previous shut-downs?