please do - this is an interesting question.
regards
ww

Hmmm. There may not be any contradictions in nature, but there are contradictions in how humans perceive nature: wavicles, for instance, and much of quantum mechanics (is the cat alive or dead?).

The people to whom I refer, I have know for over 30 years. (I know: How unCalifornian of me!) They not only talk-the-talk of being friends, they walk-the-walk.

I too have relatives and other people I know who I cannot depend on to 'have my back', not because they do not have good will towards me - they do - but because their deeds make them untrustworthy. So I interact with them pleasantly, but do not rely on them.

If I have more thoughts or observations on this, I will be glad to discuss them further with you.

Jan

That is interesting. I remember what my first philosophy teacher - very straightforward, little Russian lady - said: there are no contradictions. If you think there is one, check your premises; you will find that one of them is wrong.
So, you have 2 premises: that people with completely different views of the world from yours are "gracious...imaginative". Is this truly true? Are they indeed honest, for example? If you questioned them carefully and relentlessly, would they admit that yes, they do believe that it is a proper, moral, correct action to take from you, by force, to give to another. That person is not your friend.
Another premise is that these people are your friends. "Friend" is a serious word which I don't award to anyone lightly. I know my friends will have my back in any and every situation which might occur, with no hesitation - and that I would do the same for them. Is this true for you and your friends?
You might want to check these premises to assure yourself that they are true, that these people really are what you think they are. Try them with the hot-button issues of the day and consider their responses. I'll be interested to hear your results. Maybe they're secret Objectivists?
I have a brother, and as long as we talk about what a nice day it is, or how good dinner is, you would think we are friendly. We are not. He is a communist of the most rabid, non-thinking kind, and he is in fact my deadly enemy. Because he really does not think, I doubt he has ever had that thought. But I have, and I have absolutely no doubts about in which direction he will run, in what type of emergency. This is no longer as painful as it once was.
As I said, I'll be interested in what happens for you in this situation.
ww

You are right. No one talks about wealth creation - except to excoriate the 'rich'...many of whom are the wealth creators.

Jan

Good questions, winterwind. Since you and I largely agree in our personal perspectives, it is also difficult for me to understand the socialist stance. When I try to understand something, I tend to try to put myself 'inside' of it...but I cannot really do this with socialists.

Like many of us in the Gulch, though, I have spend most of my life being the 'one thing is not like the other' person in the room. I have come to realize that there are genuinely people whose intrinsic models of the universe are hugely different than mine.

Some of these people have become my close friends - they are flaming liberals. Nonetheless, they are gracious, generous with their own possessions, supportive, honest, intelligent and imaginative. How can this happen? How can so many blasted nice geniuses believe that because they are willing to give money to support people who do not work that it is OK for them to take my money to do the same? I am evolving some theories, but don't feel that I have this problem captured yet.

These people have my respect as individuals, because they have earned it over the course of decades.

Jan, the observer

From reading what the Holy Father has been publicly saying, it would seem that the primary task of the Catholic Chuch, which heretofore was spreading the good news of salvation, has become humanism. If this is the case (and as a matter of fact is no more valid or invalid than any other 'ism'), then the tax advantages that the Church has always enjoyed should in fact be removed. As with all other charities, there should be tax exemptions for their charitable works, but their books should be open for inspection by the relevant taxing authorities just as they are to the other many hundreds of humanist organizations.

Amen!

It's interesting to note how man's mind (innovation) is ignored in all this redistribution talk. It would seem that, if man's mind has nothing to do with wealth creation, that anybody should be able to acquire wealth; just go out and pluck it off the tree where it grows. If one's labor is the driver, then there should be no shortage of anything, unless you're lazy. In either case, the redistributionists want you to give to the lazy or the incompetent, in the name of "humanity."

Luv this great definition of organized religions.

Both. He is a democrat.

Noticed that? Politics is now a religion, and if you do not belong to the "right" one, you are very, very evil. Then, of course, there is no "right" one.

I find it absolutely arrogant that the Church will flout anyone elses law that they don't want to follow, but anyone who does not want to follow their law is a heretic, evil, damned and excommunicated. Yet priests diddle little boys and we get "never happened", which morphs over 20 years to "oops, sorry". And they throw huge sums of not their money to pay off the victims. Then they claim the high holy ground as being the only people who can talk to God, and start charging for it again. Yuck...Religion is just an excuse for no self responsibility. Although the dumbocraps and liberals have taken lessons from them in the name calling and labeling methods.

and if we keep on betting on "spending our way out" of
this unholy debt, we may never "have what we got." -- j
.

jlc, I'm kinda on the same path with you until you get to the people who disagree with you and think that there is no "yours", there is only "ours".

This is a real question, no sarcasm intended.
How can such people behave with integrity? I define integrity [actually, my brand-new OED defines it] as soundness of moral principle; the character of uncorrupted virtue, esp. in truth and fair dealing; uprightness, honesty, sincerity.

How can someone who truly believes what I have produced, or obtained honestly, is actually his? That is certainly not fair dealing.
How can someone who behaves with no concern for the consequences of his actions [remember the woman with the 10+ children?] believe that I should help support those children? I didn't beget them or bear them; what concern are they of mine? Is it virtuous to bring children into the world knowing that someone else must support them?

I'd love to go on, but I truly don't get it either side of your statement. I see no integrity in them, and no reason for my respect - or yours.

Your thoughts?
ww

me too, please!

The pope has a plane and a "nation" all his own, lead by example sir, take them to your house - at your expense. Then, when we see how well that works out, come and ask us again.

That makes it worth writing, if for no other reason, Allosaur!

I wonder if the pope really talks to God. He didn't even open or close with a prayer when he addressed congress today. But he does talk to Obama, Mm!

I lived on mine for a little over a year in the mid 70's. sometimes I wish it hadn't ended.

I think that Pope Francis is the most interesting and genuine pope to surface in a long time. It is a damn shame that he is a Socialist, but this should not come as a surprise: He has himself voluntarily chosen that as his personal lifestyle (and he does seem to mean it).

I totally disagree with his philosophy, but I am aware that many people of the world actually believe in it and would chose it for themselves. I soooo do not understand this personally - but I do understand that any system of governance needs to take this human tendency into account: We live in a real world where people are socialist and/or religious and we cannot ignore it.

I think Francis believes what he says, but I do not like or support his plan. I want the US gov to firmly keep illegal immigrants out of the US. I am quite willing to be open-handed about work visas and legal immigration policies but I want illegal immigrants gone.

I and my ancestors, for a number of generations, have invested our efforts (and our taxes) in creating a physical infrastructure that makes our lives better. The only people who have a right to that infrastructure are the people who made it and their invited guests - legal immigrants and visitors.

But there are lots of people who disagree with me and who think that what I have belongs to them by right. I can disagree with those people, but still understand that their views and philosophies are real - and if they behave with integrity, I may have a lot of respect for them.

Jan, "may" is a big word

I didn't think that the President of Mexico should have been there to lecture Congress either, but there I go thinking again.

AJ,
It seems there are to many on this forum who have no sense of humor. I doubt that the pope has as much belief in jesus as I have in Arn Rand.