[MD] But WHY should we love others?

[Jon Bennett]

Steve,
It is a slam dunk when it comes to justice and the level of law. It's a slam
dunk when someone is unloving, or unjust, to YOU!
When someone, or the government abuses you, takes away your freedom, the
reality of these questions seems to emerge, and in a stark way.

Conflict in human affairs is inevitable. You live in a world of order, only
because these problems were answered definitevly before.

The current disorder in our society is the result of questioning and
abandoning those answers.

You, we, are living on the currency of earlier ages. You, we, only have the
freedom to muse on such ideas, because they have been solved before.

When the reality of these "new" ideas blossom, and you see the social chaos
that results, then you will understand why such questions not only matter,
but are absolutely vital.

Thanks,
Jon



On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Steven Peterson
<peterson.steve at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:59 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > Wow!  Can you write!  I don't really like your question because
> > it's too nebulous.  I don't know what you mean by: love, we or
> > others?
> >
> >
> > Marsha
>
>
> Hi Marsha,
>
> I don't like the question either. It's not my question. It is a
> question that many believers seem to think is a slam dunk against
> atheism but is instead one I think ought to be unasked because of
> faulty premises as I tried to explain in the original post.
>
> As for the undefined terms you asked about, I just use them in the usual
> ways...
> love: when someone else's well-being is a prerequisite for your own
> we: the people who are being asked "why should we love one another?"
> other: any being who is not you.
>
> Best,
> Steve
>  Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>