United States of Entropy

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are your values in sync with all the different sects of Christianity as well as with Judaism?

Can we talk about the Christeo-Islamic values Saudi Arabia was founded on?
 
I guess I don't see what it matters in regards to what religion our founding fathers had? Those of us who aren't christian just get tired of hearing how we are a christian nation, or that we SHOULD be because some dead guys many years ago may or may not have had some affliation with christianity (again, most did believe in a higher power, but would not even be considered remotely xtian by todays standards), but WHAT DOES IT MATTER?

These men were obviously pretty smart, had a wonderful vision for the future of the country (though they also owned slaves, so you can't say there were extremely high in morals), but there is no way they could have predicted things like the Internet, or the advancements in technology in regards to transportation, war, communication.

We see how much of a disconnect there is in regards to something like the 2nd admendment. Or some of the issues presented with the 1st.

It's a living breathing document (constitution), and I believe should be admended as the times change.
 
i wonder how the "founding fathers" would view the reality of low tax, low spending, small government Florida these days. seems anything but Judeo-Christian to me, unless of course you are a healthy, safely employed person who lives at a higher elevation and can afford private water filters, roads, and private schools.

What's It Like to Wake Up From a Tea Party Binge? Just Ask Florida! | Mother Jones


some highlights:


But the people at this clinic may not see many of these benefits, because Gov. Rick Scott and a tea-party-dominated state government have been at the forefront of the revolt against the law—and virtually every other form of government spending.

Even before he was elected in 2010, Scott spent $5 million of his own money—earned leading a health care company that derives much of its revenue from government payments—to fight Obamacare. Florida was the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court case challenging Obamacare, and even after the court upheld the law, Scott refused to take steps to implement it. His fellow tea partiers are urging lawmakers to do the same: At a hearing in December, activist John Knapp told state legislators, "The American Constitution which you just swore an oath to uphold and defend has been contorted, hijacked, and reduced."

Obamacare is a particular target of tea party wrath in Florida, but it's hardly the only one in a state where the movement's ideology has permeated every layer of government. In just one year, Scott and his conservative allies slashed state spending by $4 billion even as they cut corporate taxes. They've rejected billions in federal funds in one of the states hardest hit by the recession. They've axed everything from health care and public transportation initiatives to mosquito control and water supply programs. "Florida is where the rhetoric becomes the reality. It's kind of the tea party on steroids," says state Rep. Mark Pafford, a Democrat. "We've lost all navigation in terms of finding that middle ground."


The "jobs budget," as Scott dubbed it, called for $4.6 billion in spending cuts, with education taking the biggest hit ($3 billion). It included a 17 percent cut to the agency that serves the disabled and proposed dropping virtually everyone but children and pregnant women from a state health program for the medically needy. The savings would be used to slash the corporate income tax from 5.5 to 3 percent, with the goal of eliminating it entirely by 2018. The budget also called for reducing property taxes by $1.4 billion, and cutting unemployment insurance taxes by $300 million, even though Florida's unemployment trust fund was bankrupt. US News columnist Peter Roff dubbed Scott's budget a "tea party dream" and speculated, somewhat prematurely, that it "almost assuredly gets him on the short list for vice president in 2012 or, depending on the outcome of that election, for president in 2016."

Scott didn't get everything he wanted, but the final budget approved by the Legislature was $4.6 billion smaller than it had been in 2006, even though the state's population had grown by more than 700,000. And Scott vetoed a record $615 million worth of spending for, among other things: homeless veterans, meals for seniors, whooping-cough vaccines for low-income mothers, an independent living center for the developmentally disabled, and, of course, public radio.


WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE
From high-speed trains to care for terminally ill kids: a few of the federal grants Florida has turned down
$2.4 billion: High-speed rail
$37.5 million: Support for people moving out of nursing homes
$31.5 million: Home visits for new mothers
$11.1 million: Teen pregnancy and STD prevention
$8.3 million: Three county health centers
$2.1 million: Helping Floridians navigate the health insurance industry
$2 million: Hospice care for children
$2 million: Aid for seniors to pay for Medicare premiums and buy prescription drugs
$1 million: Strengthening state review of insurance premium increases
$1 million: Insurance exchange to help consumers compare plans and buy subsidized coverage
$875,000: Cancer prevention


Meanwhile, the state increased the reimbursement rates for kids in nursing homes and said parents were free to send their children there—even though the Miami Herald recently found that 130 children have died in geriatric nursing homes since 2006, a higher rate than among children cared for at home.

Between July 2011 and June 2012, the "utilization review" contractor reported saving the state nearly $45 million by cutting home health services. That's one reason why Abdel is now part of a class-action lawsuit alleging that Florida has systematically discriminated against disabled children by refusing to provide them with needed services at home. Lawyers for the plaintiffs estimate that Abdel is one of about 250 kids, many of them foster children, who don't belong in geriatric nursing homes but are stuck there, and that there are as many as 5,000 kids in Florida at high risk of ending up institutionalized because the state refuses to pay for home care.

The US Department of Justice has also taken notice. Threatening to sue, the Justice Department warned the state last September that it had "planned, structured, and administered a system of care that has led to the unnecessary segregation and isolation of children, often for many years, in nursing facilities."

"They are not given any toys or games in their room. It's horrible. There's no other word for it. It keeps me up at night."
The DOJ said that by placing medically fragile kids, including infants, in nursing homes, Florida was depriving them of education, socialization, and stimulation they desperately needed. "They're not given any toys or games in their room," Dietz, who accompanied DOJ investigators on one of their visits to Florida nursing homes, told me. "All they do is watch TV day in and day out. It's horrible. There's no other word for it. It keeps me up at night."

GOD'S GIFT TO WOMEN
What Rick Scott's budget means for a single mother with two kids
Lost your job? To apply for unemployment benefits, you'll have to spend 45 minutes taking a math and reading test.
Congrats, you passed! Your check will be no more than $275 a week.
But don't get sick—you won't qualify for Florida Medicaid if your income is more than $3,200 a year.
And don't come looking for a postpartum whooping-cough vaccine or meningitis shots for your baby: Scott vetoed $2.7 million to pay for those, along with $100,000 for a fetal alcohol program and $100,000 for a special-needs charter school. Have a nice day.

The state has long proposed a high-speed rail line for the 84-mile stretch—the project, for which land had already been purchased and construction permits issued, was considered the most shovel-ready in the country when the US Department of Transportation awarded Florida $2.4 billion in stimulus funding in 2010. The state transportation department estimated that the rail line, envisioned as the first major segment of a high-speed corridor between Orlando and Miami, would have created nearly 50,000 new jobs at a time when the state's unemployment rate was hovering around 12 percent.

Tea party groups, however, saw a Trojan horse for creeping socialism, and with the help of the conservative Reason and Heritage foundations, they set to work killing it. Conservative activists had already beaten back an unrelated Tampa-area ballot initiative that would have raised a penny-per-dollar sales tax for light rail, saying it was laying the groundwork for Agenda 21, a United Nations sustainable-development plan that they believed would "transfer American sovereignty to various tentacles" of the UN.

Tea partiers have also risen up to oppose the tyranny of septic-tank inspections. In 2011, activists persuaded the Legislature to overturn a 2010 law that required old and potentially leaky septic systems to get inspected every five years to prevent human waste from seeping into the water supply. "They don't realize the damage done when you remove revenue from the budget," says Pafford, the Democratic legislator from Palm Beach, whose district has seen record flooding in the past year. "We defecate in the water we drink because we don't want government control. At the same time we offer 18 bills on whether a woman can have an abortion. There are a lot of people who miss Gov. [Jeb] Bush—that's where we are."

The state Legislature has also done its part to liberate mosquitoes from the shackles of big government. In 2011, the Republican-dominated Legislature slashed the state's contribution to mosquito control by 40 percent. Florida A&M University closed one of two major mosquito research labs in the state after the Legislature axed $500,000 in research funds. Public health officials succeeded in restoring money to keep the lab open, only to see Scott kill it with a stroke of his veto pen. Along with other budget cuts, the closure halved the number of Florida scientists working on mosquito control.

"There's maybe a perfect storm of sorts," says Joseph Conlon, a technical adviser to the American Mosquito Control Association in Florida. "You've got the government rightfully trying to cut budgets across the board, but down here in Florida, the place would be uninhabitable without mosquito control."


praise the Lord, indeed.
 
could this be a matter of perspective
how one identifies, as a maker or a taker?

That's exactly what it is.

Although many of those who identify as "makers" should come to realize that the real makers see them as takers. Big difference between making $50K/year, $500K/year and $5M/year...
 
$11.1 million: Teen pregnancy and STD prevention

So help me, if I hear even ONE conservative who supported cutting this start in on a "pro-lifer" type of rant or campaign for anti-abortion legislation, I swear...

$2 million: Hospice care for children

Meanwhile, the state increased the reimbursement rates for kids in nursing homes and said parents were free to send their children there—even though the Miami Herald recently found that 130 children have died in geriatric nursing homes since 2006, a higher rate than among children cared for at home.

Between July 2011 and June 2012, the "utilization review" contractor reported saving the state nearly $45 million by cutting home health services. That's one reason why Abdel is now part of a class-action lawsuit alleging that Florida has systematically discriminated against disabled children by refusing to provide them with needed services at home. Lawyers for the plaintiffs estimate that Abdel is one of about 250 kids, many of them foster children, who don't belong in geriatric nursing homes but are stuck there, and that there are as many as 5,000 kids in Florida at high risk of ending up institutionalized because the state refuses to pay for home care.

The US Department of Justice has also taken notice. Threatening to sue, the Justice Department warned the state last September that it had "planned, structured, and administered a system of care that has led to the unnecessary segregation and isolation of children, often for many years, in nursing facilities."

Keep it classy, Tea Partiers :up:. That is beyond infuriating and anyone with any sembelance of compassion and humanity should be ashamed and embarrassed by that and demanding answers.

What Rick Scott's budget means for a single mother with two kids
Lost your job? To apply for unemployment benefits, you'll have to spend 45 minutes taking a math and reading test.
Congrats, you passed! Your check will be no more than $275 a week.
But don't get sick—you won't qualify for Florida Medicaid if your income is more than $3,200 a year.

A reading and math test? REALLY?

Yeah, I think I'm just going to be staying the hell away from Florida for the forseeable future. Good god.
 
On an entirely separate note, I am still completely baffled by how much stock some Americans put into the founding fathers or their intentions. These were men of their time, who operated within the confines of their time. That is it.

Who cares what their intentions were centuries later? Who cares whether they envisioned America to be religious or not, Christian or Judeo-Christian or wiccan or whatever?

Not to drop names but Bono and I both believe America is unique in that its founding was not based on soil or blood but on an idea. Shouldn't we remember this idea, the American creed, this idea that so set us apart from the rest of the world and history in its description of a new relationship between government and the individual?

What bearing does that have on the here and now?

Is the struggle between liberty and tyranny over? Who won?
 
It's a living breathing document (constitution), and I believe should be admended as the times change.

Of course we dindn't hear about a "living, breathin document" when GWB was expanding ececutive powers and discovering new legal rationals for interrogating enemy combatants after 9/11. He was shreading the Constitution.

Amending the Constitution yes but a living, breathing document is a Wilsonian idea and he despised the Constitution's checks and balances.
 
Oh, Bono said that? Well discussion over then I guess. Well played Indy. Well played

(no blood in America's founding, people.)
 
Do you think this country has a bad values system? Is it changing? Is it improving or deteriorating?

This is his non answer for saying yes, he thinks you have bad values. This xenophobic, homophobic, ignorance monger thinks you have bad values. do you care?
 
Do you think this country has a bad values system? Is it changing? Is it improving or deteriorating?
How does one even go about answering a question like this? If your goal is to move the national political discussion into the realm of empty platitudes and sweeping generalizations, this thread should be the model.

The United States is extremely difficult to define because it's so diverse. You and I are both middle class white males, but you are from the midwest and I am from the northeast. That alone has a massive impact on how we have gotten to our respective places in life. We are of different age groups. That too has a massive impact. Now compare both of us to a woman from Oregon or a minority from Florida or a gay guy in Arizona.

So when you make statements about the entropy of this country, you're not actually saying anything. Such a diverse nation is always in a state of flux. Things are going to get better for some while they get worse for others. How that is balanced is also going to be in a state of flux, because that's just the natural order of things.

As a white, conservative and religious middle-aged man, you probably think things are getting worse because things are shifting to the liberal end of the spectrum socially. Gay marriage is being legalized, abortion is solidly legal and simply a political football at this point and more and more people are trying to do a better job taking care of the poor. Independently, these things have very little to do with you (gay marriage has literally no practical impact on you), but you dislike the culture shift these things all represent. I'm not sure why. I don't know why it's such a threat to you. Maybe it's because you associate them with economic policies you don't agree with. It is something I cannot wrap my head around because you can never explain it to me. All you do is jump behind everything in this thread, speaking in empty platitudes and sweeping generalizations.

Society is not getting better or worse because it can't. It's going to get better for some and worse for others because everyone values things differently.
 
I don't have anything to add except this to the above post:

01a9a671aeef66b5e48c1bde50c5d932_400x1000.gif
 
I don't have anything to add except this to the above post:

01a9a671aeef66b5e48c1bde50c5d932_400x1000.gif

Having several times seen this posted as support for a "stinging" rebuttal to one of my posts I would like to point out that Charles Foster Kane is in fact applauding inaptitude and failure.

dorothy-comingore-movie-3bb6f.jpg


Apropos to my whole point I guess as the inaptitude and failure of President Obama (and those that applaud him) to deal with the debt or provide the conditions and incentives for real economic growth only insures our national entropy.
 
This is his non answer for saying yes, he thinks you have bad values. This xenophobic, homophobic, ignorance monger thinks you have bad values. do you care?

JT, this crosses a line from disagreeing with the line of argument to insulting the one you're arguing with. Let's stick to the argument.
 
INDY, if your concern is with debt and budgets, I am not sure why you are fixated on President Obama and not the Congress (both Republican and Democratic), President Bush (talk about egregious spending), deregulation under both Clinton and Saint Reagan and so on. Your view of the US is so grim - surely to anyone who is intelligent, it would be obvious that if so, that was a long time in the making.

But many of your posts don't in fact have to do with economic matters, but social/cultural opinions and judgments. PhilsFan made some very good points in this thread. You seem unwilling to consider that many of us don't want to go back to what you think was ideal America because it sucked for us. Do you think that I am better off today than I would have been 40 or 50 years ago when your "values" ran supreme? Yeah, right. Irvine is right - the world has never been a better place to live than today, especially in the west. Where education is open to all, where race is still an issue but not the sole determinant of potential, where women can vote, work and have the right not to be beaten, raped or otherwise subjugated, where we recognize minority rights, where we recognize or are on the way to recognizing full gay rights, where employers can't force us to go down a mine shaft without safety equipment, where you don't die of smallpox, where medical care allows us to live longer, healthier lives, where scientific advancement is at its peak, where we can refrigerate our food, and on and on and on.
 
JT, this crosses a line from disagreeing with the line of argument to insulting the one you're arguing with. Let's stick to the argument.

What if I hide my insulting nature behind religion? Is it allowed then? Because Indy's 'values' are some of the most hateful and ignorant things in this part of the forum.

But because you're a good guy and I don't want to cause you any headaches, I'll lay off :)
 
Apropos to my whole point I guess as the inaptitude and failure of President Obama (and those that applaud him) to deal with the debt or provide the conditions and incentives for real economic growth only insures our national entropy.

I really can't imagine that a President McCain or President Romney would have acted so much differently, other than that under them there would be no ACA (which is a piss-poor piece of legislation by the way. . .yeah, keep saying how we worship Obama and all he does, that'll make it true. . . :rolleyes: ). But Obamacare alone can't account for the entire increase in the deficit.

The problem is that actions that would have made a real difference in the deficit would definitely have been deeply unpopular with the public and likely would have been even more harmful to the economy.
 
We did deal with the debt, a dozen years ago.
We were paying it down with a surplus.
Then the Bush years happened.

Nothing about Obama can be fairly assessed without looking at the nightmare he inherited. Not that he's made all the right steps since then...but still. It has been tough.

If growth were up, revenues would be up, the deficit would shrink.
Not disappear but shrink. And lots of austerity will kill growth.
We're in quite a fix. No great solutions and a bullshit congress left to right the ship.
 
Having several times seen this posted as support for a "stinging" rebuttal to one of my posts I would like to point out that Charles Foster Kane is in fact applauding inaptitude and failure.

Apropos to my whole point I guess as the inaptitude and failure of President Obama (and those that applaud him) to deal with the debt or provide the conditions and incentives for real economic growth only insures our national entropy.

Obama cannot deal with debt as long as neo-cons insist on a massive defense budget. No president can operate fiscally responsibly under the weight of that budget.
 
How does one even go about answering a question like this? If your goal is to move the national political discussion into the realm of empty platitudes and sweeping generalizations, this thread should be the model.

What's wrong with generalizations if you can give examples to support them? Doesn't mean there aren't exceptions but what's wrong with "this is generally true"?
The United States is extremely difficult to define because it's so diverse. You and I are both middle class white males, but you are from the midwest and I am from the northeast. That alone has a massive impact on how we have gotten to our respective places in life. We are of different age groups. That too has a massive impact. Now compare both of us to a woman from Oregon or a minority from Florida or a gay guy in Arizona.
You certainly know how to play to an audience. Dragging race and gender into any discussion will always garner enthusiast applause (literally) from any group of warm-blooded liberals. Smart move on your part but it has no bearing on this discussion.
So when you make statements about the entropy of this country, you're not actually saying anything. Such a diverse nation is always in a state of flux. Things are going to get better for some while they get worse for others. How that is balanced is also going to be in a state of flux, because that's just the natural order of things.
You can't actually believe that? Yes "things are going to get better for some while they get worse for others" but in equal proportion or number? Then what's a recession, a recovery? It's not baseball where there is a loser for every winner.
and more people are trying to do a better job taking care of the poor.
I assume you mean more and more people are expecting the government to do a better job at making the 1% "pay their fair share" because this country has a tremendous history that predates our Constitution of churches, civil groups, individual donations of time and money and private philanthropy taking care of those in true need. Which is not to say the isn't a role for government but please...

All you do is jump behind everything in this thread, speaking in empty platitudes and sweeping generalizations.
And your post wasn't. In fact, in all your time here who else have you critiqued for using "sweeping generalizations" in an internet posting?
Society is not getting better or worse because it can't. It's going to get better for some and worse for others because everyone values things differently.
Again, that's absurd. In fact Irving claims in this thread that life has never been better (true by some measures) and that the world only spins forward (a sweeping generalization if there ever was one).

And here's an example of society going backwards. I thought we discussed this in a thread but I can't find it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/opinion/if-it-feels-right.html?_r=1&

By DAVID BROOKSPublished: September 12, 2011

Smith and company asked about the young people’s moral lives, and the results are depressing.

The interviewers asked open-ended questions about right and wrong, moral dilemmas and the meaning of life. In the rambling answers, which Smith and company recount in a new book, “Lost in Transition,” you see the young people groping to say anything sensible on these matters. But they just don’t have the categories or vocabulary to do so.

The default position, which most of them came back to again and again, is that moral choices are just a matter of individual taste. “It’s personal,” the respondents typically said. “It’s up to the individual. Who am I to say?”

Smith and company found an atmosphere of extreme moral individualism — of relativism and nonjudgmentalism. Again, this doesn’t mean that America’s young people are immoral. Far from it. But, Smith and company emphasize, they have not been given the resources — by schools, institutions and families — to cultivate their moral intuitions, to think more broadly about moral obligations, to check behaviors that may be degrading. In this way, the study says more about adult America than youthful America.

In most times and in most places, the group was seen to be the essential moral unit. A shared religion defined rules and practices. Cultures structured people’s imaginations and imposed moral disciplines. But now more people are led to assume that the free-floating individual is the essential moral unit. Morality was once revealed, inherited and shared, but now it’s thought of as something that emerges in the privacy of your own heart.

Again, a failure of my generation but you don't see a problem?
 
"Smith has been the recipient of numerous awards and honors. Most recently, he was awarded the Lilly Fellows Program Distinguished Book Award in 2011 for his 2009 book, co-authored with Patricia Snell, Souls in Transition: the Religious and Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults. He was also awarded Christianity Today’s 2010 Distinguished Book Award for the same book, Souls in Transition: the Religious and Spiritual Lives of Emerging Adults.[4] He previously won Christianity Today’s 2005 Distinguished Book Award for his 2005 book, co-authored with Melinda Lundquist Denton, Soul Searching: the Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers. Michael Emerson and Smith’s Divided by Faith was the winner of the “2001 Outstanding Book Award" from the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion. Smith is also the winner of the 2001-2002 Excellence in Mentoring Award, from the Graduate Student Association of the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and winner of the 1995-96 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Department of Sociology Graduate Student Association Award for Excellence in Teaching and Mentoring. He was co-author on 1999 “Outstanding Article Award,” granted by the American Sociological Association Section on the Sociology of Religion, for Mark Regnerus and Christian Smith, “Selective Deprivatization Among American Religious Traditions: the Reversal of the Great Reversal,” in Social Forces, in 1998."

yep, no bias there
 
INDY, if your concern is with debt and budgets, I am not sure why you are fixated on President Obama and not the Congress (both Republican and Democratic), President Bush (talk about egregious spending), deregulation under both Clinton and Saint Reagan and so on. Your view of the US is so grim - surely to anyone who is intelligent, it would be obvious that if so, that was a long time in the making.[/quote]

I did as much in my opening post, first paragraph but I'll say it again, the world had never witnessed a greater or more irresponsible spender of money than George W Bush and the GOP congress until... 2009 when Barack Obama and the Dems took it to all new levels, and don't see a problem!!

But many of your posts don't in fact have to do with economic matters, but social/cultural opinions and judgments. PhilsFan made some very good points in this thread. You seem unwilling to consider that many of us don't want to go back to what you think was ideal America because it sucked for us. Do you think that I am better off today than I would have been 40 or 50 years ago when your "values" ran supreme?
What value was that? We have not always lived up to our values if that's what you mean but conservatism isn't a rigid defense of the status quo. We seek reform that will preserve and improve the civil society and individual liberty. It's not about going back but about having reform goals (as opposed to just "change" as a goal) and knowing when we're headed in the wrong direction.
Yeah, right. Irvine is right - the world has never been a better place to live than today, especially in the west. Where education is open to all, where race is still an issue but not the sole determinant of potential, where women can vote, work and have the right not to be beaten, raped or otherwise subjugated, where we recognize minority rights, where we recognize or are on the way to recognizing full gay rights, where employers can't force us to go down a mine shaft without safety equipment, where you don't die of smallpox, where medical care allows us to live longer, healthier lives, where scientific advancement is at its peak, where we can refrigerate our food, and on and on and on.

Many things are better but Western Civ wil soon find out if the Cut-flower thesis on values is true.
The Theistic Ethics and the cut-flower thesis | Your Online ACADEMIC & Entertainment Magazine

Believing generally that morality is based on the Supernatural, religious ethicists maintain that religion is necessary for the continued survival of morality as an integral part of human life. Glenn C. Graber calls this apologetic claim the “cut-flowers thesis” (1972, pp. 1-5) which consists of a hypothetical judgment that, “Morality cannot survive, in the long run, if its ties to religion are cut.” This proposition is a prediction of what would happen to morality if it were severed from religion. Leo Tolstoy in 1894 made the following early statement of this thesis:

“The attempts to found a morality apart from religion are like the attempts of children who, wishing to transplant a flower that pleases them, pluck it from the roots that seem to them unpleasing and superfluous, and stick it rootless into the ground. Without religion there can be no real, sincere morality, just as without roots there can be no real flower” (1964, pp. 31-32).
 
You certainly know how to play to an audience. Dragging race and gender into any discussion will always garner enthusiast applause (literally) from any group of warm-blooded liberals. Smart move on your part but it has no bearing on this discussion.

You're the one who did that by mentioning the countries and cultures who are not prosperous. And when it was pointed out how xenophobic it was, you backpedaled and said it was all about capitalism and democracy, not race or religion.



And here's an example of society going backwards. I thought we discussed this in a thread but I can't find it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/opinion/if-it-feels-right.html?_r=1&



Again, a failure of my generation but you don't see a problem?

This comment is from the same NYTimes article. It was the most rated and sums up what I'd like to say:

A basic principle of good social science is that there be some basis for comparison between the group being studied and other groups which might possess the same qualities if such a study was done of them. I teach these kids as a college professor and they are no worse at moral dilemmas than the generations that raised them (I am a member of one of those generations--boomers). My parents generation had many fine qualities but was accustomed to all sorts of moral assumptions--about people from other racial groups, cultures, and in the case of men, about women--that are no longer considered moral.
It sounds like yet another groups of elders trashing the "younguns" because it makes them feel more virtuous. Same as it ever was. I find Brooks latching on to this pseudo science far more depressing than the so called finding.


America is not descending into anarchy. Young people are not going to murder or steal and not care. Whatever problems we've had have been around for a long time, and they're nothing new.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom