Driving towards the cliff

The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

Originally posted by KellyJay
The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

Can you guess what an initial response to your statement might be?

Originally posted by KellyJay
The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

"Fear is an emotion that is easily exploited, yet it is rarely used, why? Probably due to the ethical responsibilities that come with this form of advertising." - Wikipedia, on fearmongering

Question: What ethical responsibilities come with the indiscriminate use of this tactic in a public forum? What is your justification for such use? Is it your belief that failure to turn away will lead to unimaginable suffering?

Originally posted by JS357
"Fear is an emotion that is easily exploited, yet it is rarely used, why? Probably due to the ethical responsibilities that come with this form of advertising." - Wikipedia, on fearmongering

Question: What ethical responsibilities come with the indiscriminate use of this tactic in a public forum? What is your justification for such use? Is it your belief that failure to turn away will lead to unimaginable suffering?

It’s a matter of truth and consequences, I think it is clearly true that just because we dislike
specific things that doesn't mean they become unreal or not true. And if there is a danger
involved clearly understanding it is better than denying it. So as a rule, I believe if a topic
is going to be discussed as Hell and who is going to end up there, just saying no to the
reality of it will not change the reality of it. Yes, and saying it's true and real doesn't make it
so either I admit, but according to scripture for those who claim to believe in it, there can
be no denying it, unless they want to pick and choose those parts they like and dislike,
than they have other issues to deal with not just that one.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It’s a matter of truth and consequences, I think it is clearly true that just because we dislike
specific things that doesn't mean they become unreal or not true. And if there is a danger
involved clearly understanding it is better than denying it. So as a rule, I believe if a topic
is going to be discussed as Hell and who is going to end up there, just ...[text shortened]... those parts they like and dislike,
than they have other issues to deal with not just that one.

So you believe the risk of someone you don't know suffering psychic harm is worth it.

Originally posted by JS357
So you believe the risk of someone you don't know suffering psychic harm is worth it.

I believe the risk of someone avoiding an eternal fate is worth it. Do you think it would be
the right thing to do, if you believed others were in danger not to warn them? Should I just
blow smoke up their butts and tell them all is okay nothing to see here instead?

Originally posted by KellyJay
The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

We're all going over the edge of the cliff, that's the truth of it. There is no braking, no turning away from it.

All we can do is make the most of the journey, while we still have road left ahead of us.

Originally posted by KellyJay
The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

What you apparently cannot see, is that from my point of view, it is you driving over the cliff. It is you in denial.
So how should sensible minds deal with the problem of differing points of view? The answer is simple: rational discussion. But you chose not to go that path, and continue over the cliff.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I believe the risk of someone avoiding an eternal fate is worth it. Do you think it would be
the right thing to do, if you believed others were in danger not to warn them? Should I just
blow smoke up their butts and tell them all is okay nothing to see here instead?

If good people are in danger because they don't worship a particular god, then that god is evil. Should we worship that god anyway?

Until I was put on their do-not-call list, I'd invite the mormons in and listen to them, then tell them what I just said above. They had no answer.

But hey, Kelly, thx for trying to save our souls.

Originally posted by apathist
Until I was put on their do-not-call list, I'd invite the mormons in and listen to them, then tell them what I just said above. They had no answer.

Kelly has stuck many of us on his 'do-not-call' list for much the same reason.

Originally posted by KellyJay
The danger in driving towards a cliff isn't avoided by denying the cliff is
real, it is avoided by turning away from it. Denying and continuing down
that path will only send you over the edge, you must stop and turning away.

To save a life I presume ... to what end?

Sure this is not a metaphor ?? 😉