Atheistic morality

[shickingbrits]

A person chooses their own God and the morals associated with that God. They choose to follow them or not. I choose God as presented by Jesus, and follow his lead as I see fit. I obviously haven't given up all and followed him, brushed the dust off my feet when not welcomed, removed my hands and body parts to prevent sin. I have chosen merely to follow the central command to the best of my ability.

I choose to do so because it is a logical, equal, encompassing standard that I would hope others also live by. It also suits me.

I believe in eternal life. It's the echo of existence through the halls of eternity. Once something exists, it is. If we consider time doesn't exist then existence takes place at the same time, always. Our acts will reverberate around the universe forever. From a personal perspective, I have only known existence and I will know existence until the end of time. Knowing I will exist until the end of time, I should know that the actions that I do must reflect that. If I choose to use the few actions I have to bring cruelty in the world, oppression, hate, disgust, or love, fellowship, joy, and comfort, that is the eternity I have created.

Believing that my actions are eternal, that I exist, and that I will exist forever in the world I create, I choose to create the best world I can. To do so, I don't have to reinvent the wheel, I can choose to follow the examples of people who created beautiful eternities for themselves and listen to what they say about how they did it. Jesus had some pretty eternal actions that he could feel comfortable living with, he has a pretty sound moral philosophy which he himself upheld, believes in eternal life, says God created us all as equals. If I could emulate him and create as beautiful an eternity, then it's not a harmful endeavour.

No harm can come to me except the harm I choose to create. If I had to die for what I believe, it would not bring shame on me or darken my world.

People who cannot create their own beauty exist and they are intent to drag you with them. Like an ungrateful kid receiving a great gift they shout, this isn't what I asked for. They rebel against existence and in their rebellion turn it dark. They cry over spilt milk, destroy the atmosphere with their tears, and then say the party sucks. Well, that was it. That was your 8th birthday forever, that is who you were and the world you created forever.

When you put actions into the perspective of eternity, a moral code becomes quite easy. Heaven and hell become quite clear. No one would want to shoot a person over some Nikes for eternity. Such actions become possible and are encouraged in a passing world of instant or near instant gratification.

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

[AndyDufresne]

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

How shickingbrits imagines atheists:





--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

If you choose to follow examples in the Old Testament then you would be ignoring the words and acts of Jesus, and therefore not Christian.

The beef is that probably no one on this site came to be atheist without considering there was a God. Most of us grew up with religions on the street corner. Chang knew the concept of God before rejecting it. In other posts he's written we can get a sense of why:

1. Why would God let bad things happen he asks?
2. God is a man in the sky, he says.
3. The Church did horrible things.

I would respond:
1. The abyss that God balances life against is deep
2. God is every particle we know, you have created a strawman,
3. Yes and none were or will be sanctioned.

There were definitely a lot more reasons that Chang decided there was no God, but it was an active decision. He could have had any God he wanted, but he preferred to have none.

In not having God, he robs life of its direction. He does make a choice (not everybody does) and his choice reflects his belief that life has no direction. He says we are the product of random mutations. He could have attributed the variety of life to God, but decides it's the absence of God which created it.

These decisions are not isolated from reality but will come to impact his activities, his world view, his willingness to be an oppressor, to be oppressed to let others be oppressed. When he comes to make these decisions, they will meet the backdrop of his belief system and stem from there.

I'm not saying his is guaranteed to make harmful decisions, I just believe when a harmful opportunity presents itself to the backdrop of his beliefs, nothing is there to prevent it. I'm not saying that a Christian won't make harmful decisions, but I believe a true Christian has a backdrop to prevent him from doing so.

Unlike extreme militant Muslims, right? Oh wait...

Apparently, your concern is in fact beyond religion v. atheism. If you reject that, it seems that you're being arbitrary.

[Metsfanmax]

shickingbrits: do you believe that atheists have a higher crime rate than Christians? If so, please provide data to support that claim.

[PLAYER57832]

God-worshippers have a pre-fab set of rules handed to them on a platter by their god.

Government-worshippers have a pre-fab set of rules handed to them on a platter by their government.

Rules and morals are not the same thing.

'You are not allowed to kill people' is a rule. 'Killing people is wrong' is a moral.

Nonetheless, government-worshipers consider it so. I can't count the number of times that I've chastised someone for engaging in some dishonest business practise, only to have them reply, "It's perfectly legal!"

At that point I want to beat them in the face with a crowbar and scream, "Legal does not equal moral!!!" but unfortunately that act, in and of itself, is immoral in most cases. Plus, being products of the public school system, they really do think that legal equals moral, so they just wouldn't get it anyway.

You cannot judge an ethic by people who reject or object to it.

[shickingbrits]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

[BigBallinStalin]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Here's a religious, morally good practice:

Public stoning (no weed allowed).





Sure, Jews today can't do that in the US cuz it's a crime and because they've deemed it immoral... How did that happen? Did they rewrite the Torah or is something else external to religion causing people to behave morally good?

[PLAYER57832]

A person chooses their own God and the morals associated with that God. They choose to follow them or not. I choose God as presented by Jesus, and follow his lead as I see fit. I obviously haven't given up all and followed him, brushed the dust off my feet when not welcomed, removed my hands and body parts to prevent sin. I have chosen merely to follow the central command to the best of my ability.

I choose to do so because it is a logical, equal, encompassing standard that I would hope others also live by. It also suits me.

Fine, but you also have to acknowledge the many people who have and still do claim to follow Christ in ways that I (and you.. though our standards might well differ) find abhorrent.

No harm can come to me except the harm I choose to create. If I had to die for what I believe, it would not bring shame on me or darken my world.

This is a very dangerous line of thinking. The line between "I am willing to die, if necessary for my belief" and "If I die, it will not bring shame" is quite wide. The first is a statement of necessity. The second can be seen to almost embrace that eventuality. Christ in no way teaches us to seek death. He tells us it might come, but only if necessary should we seek it...only if there is no other real choice (rejecting Christianity would not be considered a real choice). Seeking death in the name of religion, to glorify the religion or themselves is what extremists do. It is not what Christ truly teaches.

When you put actions into the perspective of eternity, a moral code becomes quite easy. Heaven and hell become quite clear. No one would want to shoot a person over some Nikes for eternity. Such actions become possible and are encouraged in a passing world of instant or near instant gratification.

This might be how you have found a purpose and code of life, it is similar to an explanation I might give (though not the same, even though I, too, am Christian). HOWEVER, and this is a pretty big "however", it is not the only way one can come to a good moral code.

If you will ever communicate truly with people who are not Christian, who think differently from you on any front.. you need to understand their feelings, rather than your rejection of their views and your perception of what you think they think.
[/i]

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

This is not necessarily true.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

A person chooses their own God and the morals associated with that God. They choose to follow them or not. I choose God as presented by Jesus, and follow his lead as I see fit. I obviously haven't given up all and followed him, brushed the dust off my feet when not welcomed, removed my hands and body parts to prevent sin. I have chosen merely to follow the central command to the best of my ability.

I choose to do so because it is a logical, equal, encompassing standard that I would hope others also live by. It also suits me.

I believe in eternal life. It's the echo of existence through the halls of eternity. Once something exists, it is. If we consider time doesn't exist then existence takes place at the same time, always. Our acts will reverberate around the universe forever. From a personal perspective, I have only known existence and I will know existence until the end of time. Knowing I will exist until the end of time, I should know that the actions that I do must reflect that. If I choose to use the few actions I have to bring cruelty in the world, oppression, hate, disgust, or love, fellowship, joy, and comfort, that is the eternity I have created.

Believing that my actions are eternal, that I exist, and that I will exist forever in the world I create, I choose to create the best world I can. To do so, I don't have to reinvent the wheel, I can choose to follow the examples of people who created beautiful eternities for themselves and listen to what they say about how they did it. Jesus had some pretty eternal actions that he could feel comfortable living with, he has a pretty sound moral philosophy which he himself upheld, believes in eternal life, says God created us all as equals. If I could emulate him and create as beautiful an eternity, then it's not a harmful endeavour.

No harm can come to me except the harm I choose to create. If I had to die for what I believe, it would not bring shame on me or darken my world.

People who cannot create their own beauty exist and they are intent to drag you with them. Like an ungrateful kid receiving a great gift they shout, this isn't what I asked for. They rebel against existence and in their rebellion turn it dark. They cry over spilt milk, destroy the atmosphere with their tears, and then say the party sucks. Well, that was it. That was your 8th birthday forever, that is who you were and the world you created forever.

When you put actions into the perspective of eternity, a moral code becomes quite easy. Heaven and hell become quite clear. No one would want to shoot a person over some Nikes for eternity. Such actions become possible and are encouraged in a passing world of instant or near instant gratification.

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

Precisely. It is so precious because it is transient. I recognize that in myself and in the lives of others.

Consider two people who spend their money differently. Each has $100, but one has a line of credit for some greater amount, say $500. Who appreciates the $100 dollars more? Who spends it more wisely and with greater care? Who uses it to spend on food and essentials (or maybe a gift for a loved one) and who just says, "oh, that's just 1/6 of my total purchasing power atm?"

-TG

[PLAYER57832]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Here's a religious, morally good practice:

Public stoning (no weed allowed).


Sure, Jews today can't do that in the US cuz it's a crime and because they've deemed it immoral... How did that happen? Did they rewrite the Torah or is something else external to religion causing people to behave morally good?

Punishment is a part of any society and probably every ethos. The type of the punishment considered valid is based on the society. Judaism changed because Jewish people changed, as has every religion changed with its people.

[Metsfanmax]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Nice dodge. Do you think that the rate for murder/rape/insert evil crime here is higher among atheists than among Christians? If so, please provide evidence for this claim.

[shickingbrits]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Here's a religious, morally good practice:

Public stoning (no weed allowed).




Sure, Jews today can't do that in the US cuz it's a crime and because they've deemed it immoral... How did that happen? Did they rewrite the Torah or is something else external to religion causing people to behave morally good?

Sure, there are social constraints. But social constraints like society is in constant flux. Universal truths are harder to come by.

If a sect wishes to perform stoning of its own people for breaking their own laws, the best I could do is let that society self deteriorate. Trying to influence with anything but a positive example is an act in self defeat. I do expect people to use the best of their understanding in choosing God. Created equally and for eternity is my understanding, but others may choose all sorts of self destructive activities. I think many have tried to come up with religions but they broke down in and of themselves. Without Christianity, we wouldn't still have Jews. None of the importance of being the chosen people would exist and they would drop a lot of their concepts.

[shickingbrits]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Nice dodge. Do you think that the rate for murder/rape/insert evil crime here is higher among atheists than among Christians? If so, please provide evidence for this claim.

No.

The evidence, you wouldn't have asked if it were yes.

[shickingbrits]

A person chooses their own God and the morals associated with that God. They choose to follow them or not. I choose God as presented by Jesus, and follow his lead as I see fit. I obviously haven't given up all and followed him, brushed the dust off my feet when not welcomed, removed my hands and body parts to prevent sin. I have chosen merely to follow the central command to the best of my ability.

I choose to do so because it is a logical, equal, encompassing standard that I would hope others also live by. It also suits me.

I believe in eternal life. It's the echo of existence through the halls of eternity. Once something exists, it is. If we consider time doesn't exist then existence takes place at the same time, always. Our acts will reverberate around the universe forever. From a personal perspective, I have only known existence and I will know existence until the end of time. Knowing I will exist until the end of time, I should know that the actions that I do must reflect that. If I choose to use the few actions I have to bring cruelty in the world, oppression, hate, disgust, or love, fellowship, joy, and comfort, that is the eternity I have created.

Believing that my actions are eternal, that I exist, and that I will exist forever in the world I create, I choose to create the best world I can. To do so, I don't have to reinvent the wheel, I can choose to follow the examples of people who created beautiful eternities for themselves and listen to what they say about how they did it. Jesus had some pretty eternal actions that he could feel comfortable living with, he has a pretty sound moral philosophy which he himself upheld, believes in eternal life, says God created us all as equals. If I could emulate him and create as beautiful an eternity, then it's not a harmful endeavour.

No harm can come to me except the harm I choose to create. If I had to die for what I believe, it would not bring shame on me or darken my world.

People who cannot create their own beauty exist and they are intent to drag you with them. Like an ungrateful kid receiving a great gift they shout, this isn't what I asked for. They rebel against existence and in their rebellion turn it dark. They cry over spilt milk, destroy the atmosphere with their tears, and then say the party sucks. Well, that was it. That was your 8th birthday forever, that is who you were and the world you created forever.

When you put actions into the perspective of eternity, a moral code becomes quite easy. Heaven and hell become quite clear. No one would want to shoot a person over some Nikes for eternity. Such actions become possible and are encouraged in a passing world of instant or near instant gratification.

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

Precisely. It is so precious because it is transient. I recognize that in myself and in the lives of others.

Consider two people who spend their money differently. Each has $100, but one has a line of credit for some greater amount, say $500. Who appreciates the $100 dollars more? Who spends it more wisely and with greater care? Who uses it to spend on food and essentials (or maybe a gift for a loved one) and who just says, "oh, that's just 1/6 of my total purchasing power atm?"

-TG

Suppose there were two guys who each had 10,000. One guy thinks he only has one week to spend it, the other guy thinks he needs to stretch it as long as possible. The first guy goes to whores, sleeps in nice hotels, does coke. The second guy gets married and settles down with a princess and they live happily ever after.

[Metsfanmax]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Nice dodge. Do you think that the rate for murder/rape/insert evil crime here is higher among atheists than among Christians? If so, please provide evidence for this claim.

No.

So then why are you still talking about this?

[shickingbrits]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Nice dodge. Do you think that the rate for murder/rape/insert evil crime here is higher among atheists than among Christians? If so, please provide evidence for this claim.

No.

So then why are you still talking about this?

Because of the writers of the laws.

[shickingbrits]

A person chooses their own God and the morals associated with that God. They choose to follow them or not. I choose God as presented by Jesus, and follow his lead as I see fit. I obviously haven't given up all and followed him, brushed the dust off my feet when not welcomed, removed my hands and body parts to prevent sin. I have chosen merely to follow the central command to the best of my ability.

I choose to do so because it is a logical, equal, encompassing standard that I would hope others also live by. It also suits me.

Fine, but you also have to acknowledge the many people who have and still do claim to follow Christ in ways that I (and you.. though our standards might well differ) find abhorrent.

No harm can come to me except the harm I choose to create. If I had to die for what I believe, it would not bring shame on me or darken my world.

This is a very dangerous line of thinking. The line between "I am willing to die, if necessary for my belief" and "If I die, it will not bring shame" is quite wide. The first is a statement of necessity. The second can be seen to almost embrace that eventuality. Christ in no way teaches us to seek death. He tells us it might come, but only if necessary should we seek it...only if there is no other real choice (rejecting Christianity would not be considered a real choice). Seeking death in the name of religion, to glorify the religion or themselves is what extremists do. It is not what Christ truly teaches.

When you put actions into the perspective of eternity, a moral code becomes quite easy. Heaven and hell become quite clear. No one would want to shoot a person over some Nikes for eternity. Such actions become possible and are encouraged in a passing world of instant or near instant gratification.

This might be how you have found a purpose and code of life, it is similar to an explanation I might give (though not the same, even though I, too, am Christian). HOWEVER, and this is a pretty big "however", it is not the only way one can come to a good moral code.

If you will ever communicate truly with people who are not Christian, who think differently from you on any front.. you need to understand their feelings, rather than your rejection of their views and your perception of what you think they think.
[/i]

My problem with atheists is that they feel their existence is random and transient and they will act accordingly.

This is not necessarily true.

My point about doing harm is that it is the inflictor who receives the harm. If you hurt or kill me, you have only cause yourself to suffer with that as you hold the guilt rather than me.

[warmonger1981]

Is religion nothing more then the surrender of reason to the reason for surrender? For some reason humans are conscious matter having a basic understanding over good. Its when the human analysis of anything gets compartmentalized it can easily get corrupted. Everything is not be seen in one dimension. Hence science that is never concrete no matter how far you break it down.

[BigBallinStalin]

Wasn't Jesus executed as a criminal? I can think of quite a few crimes that would be acceptable morally, but are against the laws. Illegal assembly, vandalism, vagrancy, failure to cooperate with an investigation, serving alcohol without a license, practising medicine without a license. Jesus wouldn't have made it to passover these days.

A good man and a good citizen are not one and the same.

Here's a religious, morally good practice:

Public stoning (no weed allowed).


[img]http://boingboing.net/filesroot/1282669094909.jpegmg]

Sure, Jews today can't do that in the US cuz it's a crime and because they've deemed it immoral... How did that happen? Did they rewrite the Torah or is something else external to religion causing people to behave morally good?

Sure, there are social constraints. But social constraints like society is in constant flux. Universal truths are harder to come by.

If a sect wishes to perform stoning of its own people for breaking their own laws, the best I could do is let that society self deteriorate. Trying to influence with anything but a positive example is an act in self defeat. I do expect people to use the best of their understanding in choosing God. Created equally and for eternity is my understanding, but others may choose all sorts of self destructive activities. I think many have tried to come up with religions but they broke down in and of themselves. Without Christianity, we wouldn't still have Jews. None of the importance of being the chosen people would exist and they would drop a lot of their concepts.

Presumably, you don't think it's morally permissible to stone a woman to death for cheating on her husband. Why do you think that? Is there anything in the Bible which states that you must not stone women for cheating on their husbands?

Or do moral claims originate beyond the Bible? If so, then how do you know that your moral claim about stoning is correct?

I just believe when a harmful opportunity presents itself to the backdrop of his beliefs, nothing is there to prevent it. I'm not saying that a Christian won't make harmful decisions, but I believe a true Christian has a backdrop to prevent him from doing so.

Like what? Even the threat of eternal damnation doesn't prevent all Christians from committing crimes, nor do the Ten Commandments. If you say, "cuz they're not true Christians," then that's the 'no true Scotsman' fallacy, so your argument needs to be fleshed out on this.

Constraint on bad behavior can be independent of religion since religiously derived moral principles have substitutes--like moral principles derived from reason/logic. So... I don't understand your contention against a morality that doesn't appeal to a god's authority (and which doesn't rely on a circular argument about a holy book being the word of the lord because the holy book says that it is).

[shickingbrits]

Where in the Bible does it say you shouldn't stone a woman?

There are many things that could be said to discuss this from a Christian perspective. What I mean by a Christian perspective is that Jesus came to replace the laws, but didn't provide the Church the power to change his laws.

Jesus never harms in the Bible. He stops a crowd from stoning a woman and does not himself stone her. The Golden Rule.

Of course moral claims can originate outside of the Bible. On the other hand, the Golden rule is the one from which all the other laws are derived. The ruling class has been prevented from committing many atrocities due to the moral backing of the population. As the constraints of religion become threadbare in the social fabric and they are replaced with ideals of survival of the fittest at their root, what changes may we see in the world? What changes have we already seen?

Even with the Church and religion so prominent in society for the last thousand years, the number of atrocities has been great. How much greater when the perpetrator has the moral authority to do whatever they will?

[BigBallinStalin]

So.... what's your view on "atheistic morality"?

[shickingbrits]

I would say that atheistic morality/capitalism/evolution combination dictates most of the US's policies. Self-interest to get as much as you can to show how much better you are no holds barred. It's the world view that allows the US to trash countries, to let the financial insiders trash the markets, to provide piss poor services at sky high prices, to imprison the highest rate and number of people anywhere.

The combination takes away the level playing field of equality and throws everyone into a race with a whole heaping pack of punishment at the heels and a single carrot dangled at the end. If we are the only conscious life to ever exist, what does the current state of the planet say about existence? In their drive to outdo each other they poisoned their water, dirtied their air, fought wars and brutalized each other, were paranoid of each other, hoarded money and knowledge, condemned each other.

I can't see how we as the only known conscious beings can't behave in a more robust manner. We don't lack the intelligence, we lack the firm intent. But BBS is a dick, I should have a better house than him. And when we move up a notch we say we should have a better house than Nietzche and so it goes. Why not say, isn't it great that we all have great houses? That the earth should be a great house?

The birds have the trees and the rabbits their holes but the son of man has nowhere to lie his head.

We dont build for the glory and use of man, but we build so that man may be unequal. And man won't ever be going anywhere until the joint efforts are meant to be used equally.

We have a lot of technology on the horizons or just coming into use. I would prefer they weren't coming to the current marketplace being sold by the current vendors at the current prices. The world needs a lot more commons to store, share, compete with technology, knowledge and tools using an open and fair worldwide distribution system. The pervading worldview of those who wanted to be more equal than the rest of this prevents it.

Go forth and do stem cell research, but share it, make it available for the betterment of man not so a company can dole it out to maximize profits. After all the lies that were told to invade Iraq, at the end of the day it was through the good intentions of the average citizen that the few hungry neo-cons, oil boys, and arms dealers could carry on. Support our troops, going to free the people from an oppressor. Where is the morality when you play on morality to achieve the opposite of it? Such morality lies in survival of the fittest. If stem cell research is the product of such a morality then, hold back stand clear of the realm of God.

[shickingbrits]

Is religion nothing more then the surrender of reason to the reason for surrender? For some reason humans are conscious matter having a basic understanding over good. Its when the human analysis of anything gets compartmentalized it can easily get corrupted. Everything is not be seen in one dimension. Hence science that is never concrete no matter how far you break it down.

I think the corruption was already there, its just easier to store in a compartment.

[chang50]

I think I understand shick now....he's judging atheists by how he would behave if he was one.This judging of other people of whom he has no empathy with has led him to his strange conclusions.I encourage someone with this stunted and limited perspective to continue with their present delusions as they would present a real menace to society if they embraced reality.It's unusual to see anyone condemn themselves with their own words as comprehensively as he has.

[BigBallinStalin]

I think I understand shick now....he's judging atheists by how he would behave if he was one.This judging of other people of whom he has no empathy with has led him to his strange conclusions.I encourage someone with this stunted and limited perspective to continue with their present delusions as they would present a real menace to society if they embraced reality.It's unusual to see anyone condemn themselves with their own words as comprehensively as he has.

That and he doesn't understand the roll of profit-and-loss in motivating people to improve other people's lives while getting paid to do it in a manner which minimizes costs.

After reading that long post, it's like considering to climb the Great Wall of China...