[MD] Christian Ethics and U.S. Law

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Platt]
I propose to select the best from any ethical system, including the Indian
ethical system you admire so much.

[Arlo]
An interesting point of agreement? Although I am tempted to ask, what ethics are
you ready to accept from the Indians?

[Platt]
I instinctively find that of low value. Like I said -- take the best and leave
the rest.

[Arlo]
Just what I said about the "founders". Perhaps we have some rooted agreement
here after all.

[Platt]
But never mind, my point is only that I don't give a hoot what "the Founders"
said or did.

[Arlo]
I know you don't. That's obvious. You prefer Marx.

[Arlo]
I don't care what "Marx" said, I reject a lot of what he offered, and I think he
suffered from attempting to cure an S/O disease from within S/O. Anything I
agree with, like "Freedom of Assembly", I agree with based on reason or spirit,
not on the "authority" of who said it.

[Arlo had said]
"Laws" are social contracts we agree to live by so that we can draw  some
betterness than we would without. It is a reasoned position. I  agree not to
kill because I do not want to be killed. I agree to stay off your property in
the hopes that I can procure my own little private island. I drive 55 (er,
mostly) because I want others to drive safely. I do these things not because a
"God" said so, but because reason alone tells me it is a better social
arrangement.

[Platt]
All metaphors. When does a metaphor meet the road?

[Arlo]
In pragmatic, shared convention. Where did I say "metaphor" in that paragraph?

[Platt]
Maybe you are proposing abolishing private property and living like the Indians.
But I'm not. To abolish private property is to make us all slaves to the state.

[Arlo]
I'm for living more like the Indian, specifically regarding those aspects of
his/her culture that have avoided S/O dualism... "being a part of the world",
for example. As for the latter comment, abolishing private property would free
us all, there would be no master, not state nor person. But to be honest, we
are not ready for this, Platt, its far to spiritual a life for modern man.

[Arlo previously]
Power and the ability to kill off others does not make one "hot".

[Platt]
To be able to defend one's life is.

[Arlo]
So you are saying our history with the Indian was exterminate or be
exterminated? 

[Platt]
Pirsig says the main problem with the modern world is that the reason it uses,
based on S/O logic, has a defect in it. It has no place for values. Thus, your
appeals to reason are part of the problem.

[Arlo]
Is reason inherently S/O? Do you side with Bo that "intellect" is "S/O"? If
there can be no "intellect" that is not S/O, where does that leave room for the
MOQ?

[Platt]
As I said, for a group that "got it right" they must have blown it, considering
where they are today. 

[Arlo]
Yes, "being part of the world" will always lose out to "enormous manifestations
of power and wealth". Greed wins. Desire wins. And poor non-S/O cultures get
sent to the burial grounds. Hooray for us.

[Arlo previously]
So it seems the Zen Buddhists are the only ones worthy of our total admiration.

[Platt]
Don't think so. Some of them in Viet Nam set fire to themselves. Not my cup of
tea.

[Arlo]
This was an act of resistance and to bring public awareness. But if we have to
choose between an ethical system where a few have set themselves on fire to
protest injustice, versus one with blood stains on its entire body, I'd take
the former.