Author Topic: Is It Ethical? (Read 562992 times)

jj1000 · « **Reply #360 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:07:22 AM »

Its been animal and human nature to take care of ones own tribe, pack, flock etc, before others since the beginning of time. Now that the world has gone all "peacy" we need to start justifying our actions? I'm sorry but I'm calling BS. This is the natural order of the wold, this is how we have survived for 3000 years. Some Johny come lately ideology has a problem with it, sure we can also make up nice and peacy answers but IMHO its not necessary. Especially in this case.

HelpMe · « **Reply #361 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:24:26 AM »

Quote from: jj1000 on August 13, 2012, 11:07:22 AM

Its been animal and human nature to take care of ones own tribe, pack, flock etc, before others since the beginning of time. Now that the world has gone all "peacy" we need to start justifying our actions? I'm sorry but I'm calling BS. This is the natural order of the wold, this is how we have survived for 3000 years. Some Johny come lately ideology has a problem with it, sure we can also make up nice and peacy answers but IMHO its not necessary. Especially in this case.

Quote from: AJK on August 13, 2012, 11:00:47 AM

You say religion, I say club.

I don't see a practical difference, though, of course, I am open to being enlightened otherwise.

What if I decide all white people are my family/club? Can I then treat whites better than blacks? I am just pointing out why it is better to let this one go or you can try and change the PC world we now live in.

jj1000 · « **Reply #362 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:37:01 AM »

Quote from: HelpMe on August 13, 2012, 11:24:26 AM

What if I decide all white people are my family/club? Can I then treat whites better than blacks? I am just pointing out why it is better to let this one go or you can try and change the PC world we now live in.

I said no reason to justify. So in part I am agreeing with you. Call it let it go or don't justify the question they have similar results. Anyway your still wrong though. Was it not PC that 99% of the black vote went to president Obama? I don't think anyone accused them if that. Even in the PC world we live in we see hypocrisy and favoritism usually towards minorities. I still stand by what I said in my last post.

HelpMe · « **Reply #363 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:41:40 AM »

Quote from: jj1000 on August 13, 2012, 11:37:01 AM

I said no reason to justify. So in part I am agreeing with you. Call it let it go or don't justify the question they have similar results. Anyway your still wrong though. Was it not PC that 99% of the black vote went to president Obama? I don't think anyone accused them if that. Even in the PC world we live in we see hypocrisy and favoritism usually towards minorities. I still stand by what I said in my last post.

Most blacks voted for Obama because they are racist, plain and simple.

ETA: To get this back OT is it ethical to vote for someone because of the color of their skin?

AJK · « **Reply #364 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:42:17 AM »

Quote from: HelpMe on August 13, 2012, 11:24:26 AM

What if I decide all white people are my family/club? Can I then treat whites better than blacks?

Sneaky.

"Better"--at least the way you're employing it--is a dangerous and ambiguous word.

If by "better" you mean can I choose to refrain from subjugating Caucasian-Americans, while at the same time attempting to subjugate African-Americans, then no, I cannot treat "whites better than blacks."

If, however, by "better" you mean can I choose to give $100 of my charitable donations to charities which operate in predominantly "white" neighborhoods, while only giving $10 of my charitable donations to charities which operate in predominantly "black" neighborhoods, then yes, I'd say absolutely.

See the difference?

Ergel · « **Reply #365 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:55:28 AM »

Quote from: AJK on August 13, 2012, 11:42:17 AM

Sneaky.

"Better"--at least the way you're employing it--is a dangerous and ambiguous word.

If by "better" you mean can I choose to refrain from subjugating Caucasian-Americans, while at the same time attempting to subjugate African-Americans, then no, I cannot treat "whites better than blacks."

If, however, by "better" you mean can I choose to give $100 of my charitable donations to charities which operate in predominantly "white" neighborhoods, while only giving $10 of my charitable donations to charities which operate in predominantly "black" neighborhoods, then yes, I'd say absolutely.

See the difference?

+1
The point is that this is going above and beyond, not the letter of the law

Ergel · « **Reply #366 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:56:20 AM »

Quote from: HelpMe on August 13, 2012, 11:41:40 AM

Most blacks voted for Obama because they are racist, plain and simple.

ETA: To get this back OT is it ethical to vote for someone because of the color of their skin?

If you feel he represents you better because he's black I don't see the problem

HelpMe · « **Reply #367 on:** August 13, 2012, 12:05:11 PM »

Quote from: AJK on August 13, 2012, 11:42:17 AM

See the difference?

Of course I see the difference. In the first example you openly discriminated against blacks. In the second example you tried to hide the fact that you discriminated against blacks.

We are actually on the same page but I am just pointing out how easy it is for someone to twist what is going on.

AJK · « **Reply #368 on:** August 13, 2012, 12:22:42 PM »

Quote from: HelpMe on August 13, 2012, 12:05:11 PM

Of course I see the difference. In the first example you openly discriminated against blacks. In the second example you tried to hide the fact that you discriminated against blacks.

We are actually on the same page but I am just pointing out how easy it is for someone to twist what is going on.

You did it again. Your dubious use of the word "discriminate," the all-powerful D-word, which is unfortunately thrown around these days with reckless abandon, casts my hypothetical in a pejorative light, a light you know was not intended.

You choosing to have beef over chicken is <gasp> discriminating against chicken. But, as I'm sure you're well aware, that does not mean you are breaking the law. There are indeed types of discrimination, as I just showed, which are perfectly innocuous.

So, yes, someone who intentionally wants to manipulate and twist can always find what to manipulate and twist. That doesn't (and/or shouldn't) affect the underlying, non-manipulated, non-twisted meaning.

Lamdan · « **Reply #369 on:** August 13, 2012, 12:43:55 PM »

Kesef talveh es ami, that's why it can't be with interest, not because it's a club.

shmuelb · « **Reply #370 on:** August 13, 2012, 05:27:16 PM »

You all are great at explaining. I am pointing out again that taking interest or keeping taus akum is not unethical racism or discrimination, nothing wrong at all. I made a point of rentals and used clubs as a metaphor.

HelpMe is rightly pointing out that no matter how clear and simple something is, many are not interested in understanding, they seek to complain. They will twist everything. OK, that said, is the rental concept simple as pie?

About club and religion, it was a metaphor but more apt to apply to Judaism than other scenarios (Color or other race/religion). Jews are accepting of converts, we do not seek them but accept sincere converts (not those who want to join just to get the bennies like free housing in Germany or fin/aid from the Israeli gov). We do not damn or ... anyone who does not convert or believe (except NaNachs, not to talk about that here or now).

Im kesef talve is the source of qualifying the prohibition of neshech, interest. There is no reason that it is evil, sly, unethical etc. to take interest from anyone. Some may feel otherwise and the rental and club metaphor should clear that up very simply. We are not scared of explaining, we have nothing to hide. For those interested to know.

HelpMe · « **Reply #371 on:** August 13, 2012, 05:46:42 PM »

Quote from: shmuelb on August 13, 2012, 07:59:27 AM

Many have "asked" over the centuries why Jews can take interest from non-jews but not from jews. (MoV)

This is only based on what I have seen. No matter how you try to explain this most non Jews will look at this as a form of prejudice/discrimination/favoritism. This is not even counting the ones who will twist everything said to their benefit.

shmuelb · « **Reply #372 on:** August 13, 2012, 05:52:29 PM »

OK, but do you understand it or do you feel the explanation is complicated/twisted etc?

HelpMe · « **Reply #373 on:** August 13, 2012, 05:55:50 PM »

Quote from: shmuelb on August 13, 2012, 05:52:29 PM

OK, but do you understand it or do you feel the explanation is complicated/twisted etc?

The explanation is clear. Of all the things that have been explained to me this is the one that might be the hardest to accept.

Lamdan · « **Reply #374 on:** August 14, 2012, 01:27:36 AM »

Quote from: shmuelb on August 13, 2012, 05:52:29 PM

OK, but do you understand it or do you feel the explanation is complicated/twisted etc?

I personally believe that it isn't the true explanation. (I know the "you" in the above quote was HelpMe.) I think a openminded guy like HelpMe could accept the slightly harsher yet what I believe is the true explanation, it's the haters that I am scared of, so I won't discuss further. (I have a right to be scared of haters, my great-grandparents, great uncles and great aunts, were killed by haters in the holocaust, as so many ppl on these forums grandparents were). Enough said.

shmuelb · « **Reply #375 on:** August 14, 2012, 05:39:08 AM »

I think I am more explaining why the question does not start, rather than explaining an answer, idk if that makes sense

Ergel · « **Reply #376 on:** September 30, 2012, 08:45:57 AM »

Recently purchased an expensive piece of delsey luggage. the first time I used it the handle bar broke. Submitted a claim on Thursday night to amex for purchase protection. Was credited over shabbos.
Now the question is would it be ethical to claim to delsey to fix the luggage. Based on the concept of subrogation it seems as if amex has purchased my rights to claim on delsey. However they will never execute this right.
What do you think?

Ergel · « **Reply #377 on:** September 30, 2012, 12:24:08 PM »

No one with any opinion on the matter? How about one of the lawyers from a legal standpoint?

meshugener · « **Reply #378 on:** September 30, 2012, 12:35:09 PM »

Most people here don't really care about these problems.

Ergel · « **Reply #379 on:** September 30, 2012, 12:41:12 PM »

Quote from: meshugener on September 30, 2012, 12:35:09 PM

Most people here don't really care about these problems.

That's sad

Topic Wiki

Author Topic: Is It Ethical? (Read 562992 times)