[Vision2020] [CORRECTED LINK] Give Devoted Military a Worthwhile War to Fight

[Tony]

Chas, that has to be the most sincere, gracious and thoughtful posting I 
have yet read on this forum.  Thank you.

The answer to your final question is, absolutely!  I am already convinced 
that the war in Iraq is an unfortunate situation premised on unsound Intel, 
I just remain unconvinced that Bush was aware of the falseness of said Intel 
prior to our action - further, I am not convinced that a full pullout of our 
troops would be in our best interests in the long term.  As for abortion, I 
am quite aware that it is the woman's choice.  My only argument would be 
with the morality and humanity of the decision to terminate.  I don't feel 
she should kill her child even if the decision is ultimately in her hands.

Chas, I don't feel I have to win the argument every time, that would be an 
unreasonable expectation given the intellectual capacity of posters like 
you.

Have a wonderful New Year.           -Tony
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chasuk" <chasuk at gmail.com>
To: "Tony" <tonytime at clearwire.net>
Cc: "Tom Hansen" <thansen at moscow.com>; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] [CORRECTED LINK] Give Devoted Military a 
Worthwhile War to Fight


> On 12/28/06, Tony <tonytime at clearwire.net> wrote:
>
>> Tom, add all your organizations opposed to the war together and you have 
>> a minority of vets overall.  My point stands.
>
> Truth has never been decided by the majority, nor by an appeal to
> authority.  In other words, no matter how numerous or impressive a
> list of Iraqi war opponents Tom conjures, it doesn't make him right.
> However, that Tom isn't demonstrably right doesn't make him
> automatically wrong, just it doesn't make you automatically right.
>
> This contentious issue can never be decided with infallibility.
> History won't even tell us; hindsight teaches different lessons
> depending on the agenda/viewpoint of the interpreter.  Sometimes, it
> teaches no lessons at all.
>
> I am opposed to the war because I am a pacifist.  My pacifism is not
> absolute; I am not opposed to the use of violence under ALL
> circumstances, but most of the time.  In this war, I do not believe
> that our participation is moral or justified.  The current
> administration hasn't persuaded me otherwise, and I have no patriotic
> compunction to support our government when I feel it has made the
> wrong decision.
>
> I don't think that you are stupid for supporting the war, nor do I
> think that Tom is clever for opposing it.  I remain as intellectually
> neutral/agnostic as possible on matters than are undecidable.  When
> passions interfere, logic disintegrates, and meaningful dialogue
> becomes an impossibility.  I know, I am frequently incapable of
> reigning my passions, but I do try, honestly.
>
> I will tell you a true story that is perhaps relevant.  Years ago, I
> became friends with a Baptist minister who was willing to discuss
> anything dispassionately, even the validity of his faith.  We politely
> argued for about 18 months, nearly every day, with me championing the
> non-theistic side.  I wasn't interested in persuading him, these were
> mere intellectual games.  However, I finally, and quite accidentally,
> converted him to atheism.  He cried a lot.  I felt bad, and tried to
> turn him back to Christianity.  He had a nervous breakdown shorty
> afterwards, and we lost contact, so I've never known whether his faith
> was ever restored.
>
> I respect that type of Christianity.  Not because he "converted," but
> because of his intellectual integrity.  It is the type of intellectual
> integrity to which I aspire, but have sadly seldom achieved.  Still,
> even though this level of integrity is often beyond my capabilities, I
> still expect it of everyone.  not that they have achieved it, of
> course, but that it is a goal to which they aspire.
>
> When I say "everyone," I am engaging in hyperbole.  I don't really
> mean everyone; not everyone has any intellectual aspirations or
> pretensions at all.  Some, even with the aspirations, aren't
> temperamentally capable of it.  Some are just stupid.  I am NOT
> suggesting that you, or Tom, or even most people on this list fall
> into the latter category (yes, there are a few).  In your case, you
> demonstrate the intellectual ability, but I genuinely don't see the
> intellectual integrity.  You seem more keen on winning the argument at
> all costs than on seeking a facsimile of truth.
>
> So, I ask you this: do you value intellectual integrity?  If Tom's, or
> someone else's, argument persuaded you that the war in Iraq was wrong,
> or that abortion was the woman's choice, would you ever admit it
> publicly?
>
> This question is sincere.  I am not baiting, trolling, or insinuating
> anything.  I ask because I consider Vision2020 an important forum, but
> I only enjoy participating if I believe that my adversaries and allies
> are participating as honestly as I am.
>
> Chas
>
>