|
In
responding, let me choose to enumerate my comments according to whatever
paragraphs they apply to in his statements.
1-10) The writer tells of how information about nudist
locations that had been given on a message board had offended him. He does
not tell why, but takes for granted that everybody ought to understand his
message whether or not he understands theirs. Exposure to anything that
has stayed beyond a person's range of experience is normally approached
with a bit of trepidation, which might be interpreted by most normal
humans as 'offense', especially when baseless cultural standards are at
play.
1) Nudism appears to have been equated to immorality, but
for reasons not given (and not findable in any historical documents
applicable to American society). He equates it to whimsical behavior,
indecency, and immorality, and leaves the reader wondering where the
connection is. Does he not know that, other than in areas heavily
influenced by the unnatural Christian religion, nakedness was common among
our European forebears? Does he not know that most nudists in America
profess the Christian religion, and that many nudist websites have sprung
up on the Internet to display the biblical references in support of their
beliefs?--and that none exist against them. God supposedly created humans
naked, called it "Good," and gave them protective covering to use after
their banishment from His perfect garden. Do you really expect to be other
than naked in Heaven or Hell? Do you know of any reasons for why sin-free
angels ought to be made to wear garments?– or why God Herself might find
it necessary to cover Her sinful body?
2) The Philosophy of Tolerance offends this person, whereby
he pronounces himself intolerant. Upon what grounds does he justify that
attitude? It can't be from religious grounds: the main religions in our
country claim to promote 'love' in their literature. In fact, in the
religion of Christianity, Christ himself gave a direct order to "judge
not", and to "love your neighbor as yourself." Of course, the writer makes
no mention of exactly what actions he expects nudists will be taking to
"degrade society".
3) The so-called philosophy of there being no absolute
truth does not state what truth he is talking about. If he is talking
about the shallow philosophy of Determinism, I have already put up
a page about that. His
mention of lacking moral standards, I have found while dealing with this
common lament, is a lack of his moral standards, which are the
least moral
of any standards that get expressed and, among people of most cultural
backgrounds, the items of his list are definitely aberrant or abhorrent,
whichever he may have intended.
4) The connection between nudism and sexual indecency is
unjustified. Sexual indecency is actually more apt to be found at your
local church than at a nudist camp, as you'll learn by taking notes and
keeping track while watching the evening news. See for yourself, you are
wrong about this. Nudists have nothing to hide. The so-called "hard and
fast morals", as taught by our parents, have led to a nation with the
highest rate of criminal conviction and imprisonment in the world. Don't
you think it's time to question their value, instead of pointing fingers
at those who have taken note of this factual information and seek
to implement standards that actually work (whether all of us understand
that of them or not)?
5) In accusing the writer of information about nudism of
"being without spine", are you somehow adjudging him as weak when he
performs an act he believes to be right? That just does not make sense in
any way I can construe it.
6) To answer the question, it may be difficult to say
something is wrong because you are also expected to know why.
Especially regarding notions of right and wrong that are culture based
(meaning they have no natural basis), you have to explain why your beliefs
in right and wrong are more valid than anyone else's. You just can't take
all of that for granted in a mixed society like the United States, and
expect yourself to be treated in anyway different from the way you treat
others. If they are tolerant of you, they deserve your respect in return.
7) Okay, now tell us: Why do you find the things you call
"immoral" to be so appealing? Your words imply that the very fact of
things being "appealing" is what makes them immoral. The connection is
definitely invisible if there at all. Is it that they appeal to you,
but you are afraid of them? See item #5.
8) Again, you are judging another's values as less valid
than your own. That is wrong and, in fact, it is immoral. That is part of
my values system. Understood?
9) Now, then, tell me: Where is it set in stone that we are
supposed to judge others' moral behavior as a part of our responsibility?
Responsibility to what? How can you accuse anyone else of moral
bankruptcy when your own words tell everybody who'll pay attention that
very same thing about you? In what era of the USA did we have a "moral
compass", other than the laws by which we are expected to guide our own
actions? Is there something in all that you refer to that goes against
those laws?
10) The president Bush to which you referred has often been
compared to Hitler in many of his pronouncements and actions, including
this one, which does repeat words very much like those Hitler used, and in
accordance with those with whom he has surrounded himself. If you will
study history, you will know that much of that criticism is definitely and
unquestionably justified. It too often appears that he has used the path
once taken in Hitler's rise to prominence as a map for his own ascension.
As more and more of the public seems to be taking note of such, he has
begun losing face as a lame duck in his second term. Take that for
whatever it's worth, and investigate it as you will.
11) First, what culture do you refer to as "our culture"?
America is a hodgepodge of cultures, of which I am a member of one and you
are definitely of another. We share little of culture, and I find your
expressions entirely offensive and feel I have as much right to feel
offended as anybody else. I just might whine about it slightly less, and
also take steps to learn whether my feelings can be justified in any
logical way. I am offended because I recognize that what you are seeing as
filth, indecency and desensitized immorality emanates from your own mind
and gets laid onto those whose views differ from yours. To relearn, as you
said, requires me to forget what I have learned, rather than to relearn
anything. I feel offended that you so blithely disregard my hard-won
facts-based ideals as something to be relearned, when you offer nothing
tangible in your own behalf. Your statement about people like me lacking
spine when we have taken it upon ourselves to improve our knowledge and
awareness of the parameters of human existence, I find, may be the most
offensive of all the unwarranted and unfounded gripes in your list. You
have not a leg to stand on in any of your extremely erroneous post, and
anyone with an unbiased mind could define immorality according to the evil
results of applying any of it to their own lives.
In closing, you
made it obvious you have been referred to as an "intolerant bigot" and "RightWing
Fundamentalist" in the past. You don't have to mention 'God' to have
people who possess any amount of awareness about current events to
recognize the nature of your accursed and evil fascistic proclamations.
Yes, I did find them appalling, and that is why I felt it necessary to
post this page on my website.
If you want to
understand what I said to you, you may need my
Glossary.
If you need to learn about
natural standards of
morality and ethics,
click on the various links
offered in this sentence. If
you want to learn more about
naturism
and nudism
(two different aspects
of being a
naked human) look at the set of links in this sentence. If you want to
read about another way to understand political systems, the links in this
sentence will take you there.
I offer a large
number of informational pages on this website, with links to many others,
that have resulted from a studious lifetime interest in matters such as
the one you gave rise to. I am, at my advanced age, still actively
learning and passing on new knowledge as I learn to understand it. Still,
with all this work, I would have to make a lifetime effort to undo the
damage I could see you wreaking in just one somewhat active day.
I have observed a
weakness in Nature that allows destruction and devastation to be far more
spectacular and effective than could be hoped for by anything with
constructive merit. Shock and Awe is not a construction industry tool:
Just watch a building get destroyed, and compare that momentary
distraction to the months (and sometimes years) it took to build it. You
will see in only one event where religion gets its power, and of what evil
nature it is. |
