Delano

The women's movement, the civil rights movement, Ghandi's movement. Whenever the masses gather that is power. Which is why New York has enacted anti gathering laws. Unlike yourself they recognise the potential power of the masses.

I think you have a few issues. Power, values protest. You may not be able to change people's values but you can sanction inappropriate behaviour. Protest has been effective historically in giving voice to the masses. I don't think that will change unless protest cease. Though there are laws at least in New York that male it more difficult.

Well if you do let me know. I think it will be illuminating.

You could suprise them and ask them that question, and let us know.

Troy - Aries and Scorpio are ruled by mars. Taurus and Libra see ruled by Venus. I would say that your Mars ruled signs provide competition and your Venus ruled ones provide comfort.

No I don't see any ad..

Pioneer - O think you have posted in the wrong discussion.

Cynique - Whenever a women says or shows she is not interested, I am done. Never understood the playing hard to get.

Waterstar - Feel few to post any thoughts on astrology.

Are there any sign types that you get along well with, which ones do you find challenging.

Ok

Troy its not about hurt feelings its about tone or decorum.

Troy I am part of a group that discusses ideas. There is only one rule you can attack the idea but not the person. Saying I am obtuse feels like a personal attack.

Troy wrote, "Everyone body has different priorities. Whether one "needs" to improve anything is purely subjective and, as long as they are not hurting anyone else, up to the individual -- not anyone else." Troy wrote, "Why, pray tell, would you ask about self improvement if you aren't even clear when something needs improvement?" Perhaps you can reconcile these later statements with my initial answer. Sometimes if something doesn't work I'll change it.

You asked a simple question and I gave you a detailed answer. A simple answer would be, "I believe the bombers were wrong." I could give very simple answers but I thought we were having a thought provoking discussion. That is not true. I also prefer I discussion where there are differences of opinions. Here's a parsimonious yet, mentally rigorous argument. I am clear about self improvement. Delano wrote. "Sometimes I'll change something because it doesn't work."

My beliefs are a function of my life. As a consequence I do not expect, demand or require anyone share my beliefs. Including my children. I encourage them finale up their own minds. However I also say they must own the consequences of their decisions. Quite often I'llsay to my kids I don'tthink something is a good idea. And most of the time I am right pretty quickly. So now my kids listen when I say somewis not a good idea. Sometimes they are right. And I am zuprised at the limitations or constrictions of my beliefs. I day to my kids you can do it your way or my way. But if you do it your and it doesn't work then you fix it.

I believe everyone's opinion is fitting to their life and their world view. When you are discussing beliefs the question of facts, proof right and wrong is not valid. I believe there's little doubt that felt they did they right thing. Would I have done the same if I were them. Well how could I possibly answer that question. Would I do that, no. Can I judge if it was a terrible thing yes it was. I was working at the World Financial Center during the first attempt. Er have a NYU alumnus that lost his life. No had his life taken away. With all of that I am not God, so I can judge no man. I don't even want to serve on a jury.

I believe that people can be better.

Troy. I believe o understand your point. I am just posing a counter argument. There can be other alternatives. I am guessing but I would sat that Donald Trump may feel the only improvement he needs is to make more money. There is a quote in Candide by Voltaire. "This is the possible world." Some would say that Voltaire is being ironic. The argument goes this us the best possible world, if ut weren't it would be changed. I would argue that the petsob addicted to drugs is doing the best they can possibly do at that point in time. Which in now way says or even implies that they will always be addicted to drugs. I am making a fairly subtle point which you may have missed. My argument may not be very convincing. However it does open the discussion to other possibly. Even though they may not be likely, they are not impossible. Troy you get my point but is unfathomable to you. Yes those bombers thought that what the did, was divinely inspired. Which most people would agree with tgat statement. Were they wrong, that depends on your religious beliefs. Please not the operative word in that sentence is belief not fact. I would disagree with you. A wealthy person nit giving is not unethical not matter how morally bankrupt they may be. For me ethics is about nit stealing, morality us about giving because it is just. This in my opinion is a fine distinction. Which you and others may choose nit to make I am very careful about making universal statements about what is the correct behaviour ir viewpoint fir other people. I feel that once you take a step in that direction you cab become intolerant. Ir strident that you have the truth. Although most fundamentalist would more like agree with your overall idea but argue about the application. I have no such certainty about the correction if my opinions, beliefs or thoughts. I think toy have misunderstood me. I don't think you can find any issue that everyone will agree is universally wrong. Even if we only include people of "sound" judgement. While you are diametrically opposed to my opinions. I di not feel the same way. Since I firmly believe that everyone us entitled to their opinions no matter how uninformed they may be. This is the idea behind democracy. I may nit believe in what you do, bit I will defend to the death your right to your opinion.

Troy The arguments may not be very convincing. However the show an alternative, which I believe is sufficient.

Donald Trump is a perfect trump, no improvements are needed. Most people would classify the 911 bombings in this category. Whereas the bombers feel it was their religious duty. To be charitable can be a religious imperative, but not doing so does not make one unethical. Even the believer.

Can you give me some examples. I disagree with all three points. Nit everyone would agree. Give me a few hours.

Pioneer Those men are Zen masters. There's is no ambition. There needs are met what di they need to improve. I am not making a statement about the morality or fairness or equity. Luke Lebron they are at the top of their game. You can even argue they function ad a societal warning.

Del, of course there are things you can say that are better for others. It is better for people not to wantonly kill others, and so forth. Wouldn't you agree? No I don't exactly agree with you. There have been killings that lead to good. Like examining why people kill. I would say ethics is more tactical. Whereas morals has a philosophical undertow. Most professions have a code of ethics. Whereas religion has morality tales. Ethics are in place to keep you from harming others. Morality is for not getting ostracised by a group of your peers. It is more likely to involve guilt, then financial penalties. Although there can be some overlap. It id from what the person feels not the sanctions of the governing body.

Cynique- Is it change or rather the decision/decision process to change, that us ambiguous. I don't think I am qualified to say what id better for someone else, when it's almost impossible. To judge where The Butterfly Effect will take you.