Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Short video about....humanity

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Short video about....humanity

    http://www.adnstream.tv/video/nilSqaMbo ... -OF-A-SIGN

    (Estoy siego=I am blind) (actually "ciego")

  • #2
    Thank you, DrJay. That was very good.

    Comment


    • #3
      I thought the man in the suite was going to take his share of the profits - like a good capitalist.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think that's what you were supposed to think. One of the points of the thing, I think, is that people aren't always what they appear to be. Not all guys in suits are heartless and greedy, even if they are capitalists, which he might have been. (From his appearance, one also might have guessed that he was a contract assassin.)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tandfman
          Thank you, DrJay. That was very good.
          what he said--very nice

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tandfman
            I think that's what you were supposed to think. One of the points of the thing, I think, is that people aren't always what they appear to be. Not all guys in suits are heartless and greedy, even if they are capitalists, which he might have been. (From his appearance, one also might have guessed that he was a contract assassin.)
            Exactly, and he was a good capitalist and assassin, he just got back from sniping a socialist.

            Did you notice that he did not give the man any money but just the means by which society would be more freely able to give him what he needs. Thereby making society better off all around. Like the founders of America they believed that a free society would not work if there was alack of moral restraint - not goverment restraint.

            Comment


            • #7
              The other possible message there is that charity is more likely to be motivated by guilt than by pity.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                Like the founders of America they believed that a free society would not work if there was alack of moral restraint - not goverment restraint.
                Oh, really? I must have missed that. :roll:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                  Did you notice that he did not give the man any money
                  That's exactly what I thought when it ended. It's not always spending/giving money. Sometimes it's just spending the time to help someone else. Tres cool!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Like teaching a man to fish.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tandfman
                      The other possible message there is that charity is more likely to be motivated by guilt than by pity.
                      That is true in alot of cases but I don't think the sign was meant to generate guilt. We could say that it focused on the peoples privelage of sight in contrast to his blindness - something we take for granted unless pointed out to us. That is not neccessarily guilt but the reality that should not be taken for granted. Guilt would seem to put more upon the givers than is warranted - somthing to with fault not pity which would appeal to his lack of said privelage. I just want to know what was in the brief case?

                      Money, Gun, ???

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tandfman
                        Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                        Like the founders of America they believed that a free society would not work if there was alack of moral restraint - not goverment restraint.
                        Oh, really? I must have missed that. :roll:
                        John Adams:

                        "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Or how about Ben Frank:

                          “ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787

                          All those liberals on CNN, MSNBC, ect. would be sh*** their pants if someone said that today. :lol:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                            Or how about Ben Frank:

                            “ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787

                            All those liberals on CNN, MSNBC, ect. would be sh*** their pants if someone said that today. :lol:


                            Speaking of stereotypes...

                            Good way to sully a nice thread.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Brian
                              Originally posted by proofs in the pudd'in
                              Or how about Ben Frank:

                              “ God governs in the affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this. I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel” –Constitutional Convention of 1787

                              All those liberals on CNN, MSNBC, ect. would be sh*** their pants if someone said that today. :lol:


                              Speaking of stereotypes...

                              Good way to sully a nice thread.
                              You right I will delete that if you want? Of course it was with a

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X