Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
CHE?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 307347" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>Thanks for the link and I thought he had some good points of how things will look in the future. I remember as a kid in the early to mid 60's when segregation was still in play, when the bunch of us went to town (yeah we lived in Mayberry) for the Saturday matinee movies one of us who was African American had to sit upstairs and the rest of us had to sit down stairs. Now to a bunch of 8 and 10 years olds this made no sense as the rest of the time we fished together, played ball together, built forts and treehouses together but at the movies it was different. That was in that day the accepted moral norm. Now 40 plus years later it would be societally immoral to have us sit seperately at the movie theater. It very well over the next 20, 30, 50 years that what we call moral may see changes. </p><p> </p><p>At the turn of the century (19th to 20th) certain drugs were completely legal and in many cases were in common use. Coca-Cola for example had cocaine among it's ingredients but starting with the end of Prohibiition a societal shift started taking place towards certain drugs that at one point were common and completely legal and within a 20 to 30 year cycle had become a immoral substance to be hated and society seeked out it's destruction. </p><p> </p><p>Were both a case of moral advancement? Or was it a case of agendas being sold as moral causes? In the case of African Americans, white politicians who for years enforced segregation now encouraged de-segregation but one might make the case that de-segregation was all about adding more voters to the rolls that could be manipulated and but de-segregating especially along economic lines, the overall standard of living goes up and thus so does the tax base, giving the politician more money to spend and buy votes and power. Which was the real motive?</p><p> </p><p>In the case of drugs, it doesn't take much research to conclude that drug became illegal after the repeal of prohibition in order to eliminate the competition for the benefit of alcohol. It's a known that alcohol can in some cases be as bad if not worse that some illegal drugs both in human toll and physical negative effects but morally we defend alcohol and shout the evils of various illict drugs. Was it morality that passed the laws or an effort to protect a monopolistic position or rather create one? Again, what was the real motive? I guess we may have to let history play out to decide which answer is the right one.</p><p> </p><p>Years ago a good friend who was a preacher gave a sermon about the nature of man over time and he used the 60's song about the Tinnee-Winnie-Poka Dot Bikini and the shock the 2 piece caused in America. 40 years later it's the thong that's the shocker and the 60's bikini that is the height of modesty. Funny how that all works.</p><p> </p><p>Every group claims moral standanding whether it be religion, politics or jsut societial customs. The socalled left claims the right steal and abuses economically and socially and the right turns around and makes the same claims of the left. Baptists will trash the Methodist and Catholics and visa versa and all of them together will bash the 7th Day Adventist and Mormons. And then we expand out and do the same across the globe at each other. How do you stop it? Pass a law and the gov't determines the route everyone will take but one thing for certain is someone will not get to live their own life and must now conform to someelse's standard enforced as a matter of law. How do they repsond? Politicians, lobbyist, blogs, websites, etc. to convince to gov't to amend the law to their way and disenfranchise those who had been in position of upperhand. Once done, what do the new disenfranchised so? Follow the same course the others took so in the end, no one is truly happy and there is no societal peace. And you wonder why we are all no longer just plain old Americans anymore!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 307347, member: 2189"] Thanks for the link and I thought he had some good points of how things will look in the future. I remember as a kid in the early to mid 60's when segregation was still in play, when the bunch of us went to town (yeah we lived in Mayberry) for the Saturday matinee movies one of us who was African American had to sit upstairs and the rest of us had to sit down stairs. Now to a bunch of 8 and 10 years olds this made no sense as the rest of the time we fished together, played ball together, built forts and treehouses together but at the movies it was different. That was in that day the accepted moral norm. Now 40 plus years later it would be societally immoral to have us sit seperately at the movie theater. It very well over the next 20, 30, 50 years that what we call moral may see changes. At the turn of the century (19th to 20th) certain drugs were completely legal and in many cases were in common use. Coca-Cola for example had cocaine among it's ingredients but starting with the end of Prohibiition a societal shift started taking place towards certain drugs that at one point were common and completely legal and within a 20 to 30 year cycle had become a immoral substance to be hated and society seeked out it's destruction. Were both a case of moral advancement? Or was it a case of agendas being sold as moral causes? In the case of African Americans, white politicians who for years enforced segregation now encouraged de-segregation but one might make the case that de-segregation was all about adding more voters to the rolls that could be manipulated and but de-segregating especially along economic lines, the overall standard of living goes up and thus so does the tax base, giving the politician more money to spend and buy votes and power. Which was the real motive? In the case of drugs, it doesn't take much research to conclude that drug became illegal after the repeal of prohibition in order to eliminate the competition for the benefit of alcohol. It's a known that alcohol can in some cases be as bad if not worse that some illegal drugs both in human toll and physical negative effects but morally we defend alcohol and shout the evils of various illict drugs. Was it morality that passed the laws or an effort to protect a monopolistic position or rather create one? Again, what was the real motive? I guess we may have to let history play out to decide which answer is the right one. Years ago a good friend who was a preacher gave a sermon about the nature of man over time and he used the 60's song about the Tinnee-Winnie-Poka Dot Bikini and the shock the 2 piece caused in America. 40 years later it's the thong that's the shocker and the 60's bikini that is the height of modesty. Funny how that all works. Every group claims moral standanding whether it be religion, politics or jsut societial customs. The socalled left claims the right steal and abuses economically and socially and the right turns around and makes the same claims of the left. Baptists will trash the Methodist and Catholics and visa versa and all of them together will bash the 7th Day Adventist and Mormons. And then we expand out and do the same across the globe at each other. How do you stop it? Pass a law and the gov't determines the route everyone will take but one thing for certain is someone will not get to live their own life and must now conform to someelse's standard enforced as a matter of law. How do they repsond? Politicians, lobbyist, blogs, websites, etc. to convince to gov't to amend the law to their way and disenfranchise those who had been in position of upperhand. Once done, what do the new disenfranchised so? Follow the same course the others took so in the end, no one is truly happy and there is no societal peace. And you wonder why we are all no longer just plain old Americans anymore! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
CHE?
Top