Search
Not Logged In
0
Your Username:
Your Password:

[ sign up | recover ]

Discussion Forums » Movies
Harry Potter Deathly Hallows part 2
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 22:48
SoA
Post Count: 252
You seem to enjoy putting words in my mouth, so to speak. I have not anywhere said there was not "witchcraft" in these books. I simply said that they do not teach a child "witchcraft". Honestly, I think you are just scared of what you do not know or understand.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 22:52
Conservative Values
Post Count: 51
you are not reading what i am saying, so i will break it down for you as if i am talking to children.

witchcraft is ACCEPTABLE, PROMINENT, AND ENCOURAGED in these books. that is ANTI CHRISTIAN. get it now?? or should i give you more scripture?
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 22:58
Chris
Post Count: 1938
Let's take another approach to the debate?

*Ahem*

-Who gives a shit if it's anti-Christian?
-Even if kids were to start practicing witchcraft, it would be absolutely harmless, considering magic doesn't exist.
-These books are on the correct (if I may) side of the moral specturm. Guess where you are, CV?
0 likes [|reply]
27 Jul 2011, 18:58
American
Post Count: 221
@Anonymous Source - (1) On principle, Christians should (if it were). (2) That is true, though my Wiccan sister would argue differently and [try to] curse you. (3) I don't know that a fictional world can be on a moral spectrum, but morality depends on where you get it from. If he gets his from the Old Testament, then, to him, he's on the right side. If from New Testament, he is proper in saying it isn't Christian, but should stop making a huge, freakin' deal out of it. If you're not religious at all then there can be no true oral spectrum, so the point would be moot anyway.
0 likes [|reply]
27 Jul 2011, 19:06
American
Post Count: 221
Um. Moral spectrum* not "oral spectrum" *facepalm*
0 likes [|reply]
27 Jul 2011, 19:25
Chris
Post Count: 1938
"If you're not religious at all then there can be no true moral specturm"

What.
0 likes [|reply]
27 Jul 2011, 21:23
American
Post Count: 221
How can there be? What you consider wrong may not be wrong to someone else. And you cant really say or prove they are morally wrong.
0 likes [|reply]
27 Jul 2011, 22:06
Chris
Post Count: 1938
The concept of morality is the same kind of concept as the first amendment. Your rights end where someone else's begins.
0 likes [|reply]
29 Jul 2011, 04:21
American
Post Count: 221
So who are you to tell someone else their morals are wrong, or on the wrong side of a spectrum? Especially if yours end where theirs begin? There is no "spectrum of morals," there is merely "my morals."
0 likes [|reply]
29 Jul 2011, 04:46
Chris
Post Count: 1938
I'm not telling anyone anything. If the implication wasn't clear that the moral spectrum is determined by the general consensus of society, then I apologize, because that's what I meant.

Everyone knows the difference between right and wrong. There's a grey area, and that's where most sociological problems come into play, but it still pretty much boils down to, if you're doing something for the greater good, then it's pretty much good. If you're doing something for the greater bad, or have inherently flawed logic in an attempt at "good" then it's bad. "Bad" being something that negatively affects other people. Is this easy to understand? Because I feel like I'm not articulating this coherently.

I'm also over-simplifying because I just have zero interest in carrying on a legitimate discussion with anyone on Bloop anymore, but I don't mind discussing this with you.
0 likes [|reply]
29 Jul 2011, 16:10
kein mitleid
Post Count: 592
@Anon: That is the problem with "greater good" morals, though. You have stated the essential flaw -- that what a majority consensus determines is morally correct. Therefore, it assumes that the moral majority is always "right" regardless of the individual.

For example, say in a village, there are twenty people, all farmers. Only one farmer has carefully planned for the future, saving seed for the next season, and being frugal such that he has extra stores of food and supplies. Suppose said village is struck by a massive famine. The other people catch wind he has saved for the future, and come to consensus that it is their right to his goods, as it will serve the "greater good" so they break into his barn, take all his supplies, and distribute it among themselves. Is this moral?
0 likes [|reply]
29 Jul 2011, 17:49
Chris
Post Count: 1938
kein: I probably fudged up my explaining. Sure, there are all kinds of gray areas when it comes to morals, but I'm sure there are enough people in the world who know the difference between right and wrong to keep society in general running smoothly. But if you break it down, look:

Farmer saved for the future on his own dime. Nothing morally wrong with that. Massive famine hits and he decides not to share with the rest of the community? Moral gray area, even with the religious definition of "moral." People breaking in to steal all his food? It begins raining moral flaws. They can come to a consensus to steal his food, but has anyone said that it's the morally right thing to do?

(Again, I probably should step away from this discussion, because I'm having an extremely hard time articulating my fragmented thoughts on the matter.)
0 likes [|reply]
29 Jul 2011, 22:19
American
Post Count: 221
@Anon: Who determines what the "greater good" is?

I suppose that's just an add on to what kein mitleid said, but it stands to reason. If morality is based upon ones personal morality ("your morals begin where mine end"), then how is there a spectrum? If it is based on the "greater good," then who decides what that is?

I have no problem with lack of articulation, because I am just as bad myself. I'm fine with coming to an understanding (even if it's "agree to disagree") via repitition as opposed to getting into an unnecessary argument because of a misunderstanding.
0 likes [|reply]
31 Aug 2011, 16:35
Chris
Post Count: 1938
American: Oh, I should clarify a slight modification in my opinion. Morals are learned from your upbringing, i.e. parents.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 23:03
SoA
Post Count: 252
Having read these books multiple times & having bought my eight year old sister her own box set of these books, I completely disagree with you {{and honestly don't understand the need you seem to have to be disrespectful towards me & other members in this forum}} that they encourage anyone to use witchcraft. The book speaks of two sides of magic, good & evil. The school in the book teaches the characters in the book what to do if faced with an evil person. The author has not anywhere written that children or adults should go out & try & do what she has written in these books. Any "potion" or spell that she has written these characters saying or making is made up of these that are not real. You ever hear of a bazar stone? I sure haven't. These books are fiction. Purely meant to encourage a child to use their imagination & to encourage children to read. They also teach a child about the consequences of their actions. Like I said before these books got me reading. Now I read fiction, non fiction, mystery, & romance. Before that I spent my days in front of a television set, rotting my brain out with cartoons & other stupid shows. So I have no problem allowing & buy my sister the books. I will even allow my children {{when I have them}} to read these books. It's not witchcraft it's magic.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 23:06
Chris
Post Count: 1938
It's not witchcraft it's magic.

What?
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 23:10
SoA
Post Count: 252
Meaning what he is trying to describe is different then what the books are talking about.

Witchcraft, in the way he's meaning it, is harmful towards people. That's why Wiccans are so quick to say that what they do is not harmful {{and it isn't}}, they respect mother nature & all that she created & they respect human beings. they do not believe in harming people because of the believe that it will come back to them 10x worse.

The books purely bring about a child's imagination & their wonder in things magical.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Jul 2011, 23:22
love♥nik
Post Count: 1010
@SoA do you mean a bezoar? That is real. Traditionally they were thought to be cures to poisons, thus JKR's use of them. ^___^
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 02:30
Conservative Values
Post Count: 51
i do not see how any of this is relevant because they are teaching CHILDREN something that is clearly ANTI CHRISTIAN. i am not for banning the books, because i know there are a lot of anti christians in america, and LORD KNOWS those people could use a little reading, but i am saying that these books are anti christian, plain and simple, and it would be morally wrong for a GOD fearing family to allow their children to read it.
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 02:33
SoA
Post Count: 252
Well that's your opinion so have at it. I politely disagree but what would life be like if we were all the same? kind of boring I think.

So at this point I think we should just agree to disagree on this subject.
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 03:05
Bellatrix Lestrange
Post Count: 234
@ C♥ali Girl :
*randomly butts in* D:
I agree with your statement that life would be boring if we were all the same! P:
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 03:09
SoA
Post Count: 252
You can butt in on these when ever you like. I find your opinions very valid :D
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 03:11
Bellatrix Lestrange
Post Count: 234
@ C♥li Girl :
Cheers! ^_^
{And I just noticed that I added an extra 'a' in your name.. O:
I wish these forums had a damn edit button! xD.}
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 03:13
SoA
Post Count: 252
@Bellatrix: An edit button would be awesome cus sometimes my brain goes faster then my fingers XD LOL
0 likes [|reply]
23 Jul 2011, 03:18
Bellatrix Lestrange
Post Count: 234
@ C♥li Girl :
I wish I could say 'sometimes' for me, lol.... xD.
Post Reply
This thread is locked, unable to reply
Online Friends
Offline Friends