Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Ethics of Bypassing Paywalls on News
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="partinobodycular" data-source="post: 77644469" data-attributes="member: 435281"><p>First off, love your response. It does however, provide me with a couple of salient points to address.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fundamentally you're correct. But it really has very little to do with the fact that things are now digitized. It has to do with the way that society has been structured from it's very earliest days... by a system of laws and punishments. A system that has served it's purpose well, even though it's rarely meant the equitable distribution of opportunities.</p><p></p><p>Our American forefathers said it beautifully in the 'Declaration of Independence':</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Inspirational words indeed, and on it's face it's a noble cause. Unfortunately, God may endow us with certain unalienable rights, but life doesn't distribute them equally to all, and we, at least up to this point have been incapable of changing this, with poverty, and social upheaval an inevitable consequence, not simply because people are evil, but because life is neither easy nor fair, and laws, as much as they may seek to, can't change the inequitable nature of life itself.</p><p></p><p>But digitization does give us one thing... it gives us the opportunity to begin to chip away at the barriers between the haves and the have nots. When the cost between providing something to the few becomes veritably the same as providing it to everyone, then I would think that it's in society's best interest to do the latter.</p><p></p><p>Currently, thanks to ACP I pay nothing for internet access. It may not seem like much, but it's a start. Our goal should be that it's only a start. Hopefully the day will come when our ability to provide for our unalienable rights will equal God's purpose in endowing us with those rights. To that end we should be looking for every opportunity to do so, and not looking to deny to the poorest of us access to things that should be available to all of us.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In this case I think that we can agree, that it's better to be a Christian in actions only, than to be a Christian in name only. I'll take the former over the latter every time. In fact, I'm a bit biased as to which group is actually worthy of the name.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="partinobodycular, post: 77644469, member: 435281"] First off, love your response. It does however, provide me with a couple of salient points to address. Fundamentally you're correct. But it really has very little to do with the fact that things are now digitized. It has to do with the way that society has been structured from it's very earliest days... by a system of laws and punishments. A system that has served it's purpose well, even though it's rarely meant the equitable distribution of opportunities. Our American forefathers said it beautifully in the 'Declaration of Independence': Inspirational words indeed, and on it's face it's a noble cause. Unfortunately, God may endow us with certain unalienable rights, but life doesn't distribute them equally to all, and we, at least up to this point have been incapable of changing this, with poverty, and social upheaval an inevitable consequence, not simply because people are evil, but because life is neither easy nor fair, and laws, as much as they may seek to, can't change the inequitable nature of life itself. But digitization does give us one thing... it gives us the opportunity to begin to chip away at the barriers between the haves and the have nots. When the cost between providing something to the few becomes veritably the same as providing it to everyone, then I would think that it's in society's best interest to do the latter. Currently, thanks to ACP I pay nothing for internet access. It may not seem like much, but it's a start. Our goal should be that it's only a start. Hopefully the day will come when our ability to provide for our unalienable rights will equal God's purpose in endowing us with those rights. To that end we should be looking for every opportunity to do so, and not looking to deny to the poorest of us access to things that should be available to all of us. In this case I think that we can agree, that it's better to be a Christian in actions only, than to be a Christian in name only. I'll take the former over the latter every time. In fact, I'm a bit biased as to which group is actually worthy of the name. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Ethics of Bypassing Paywalls on News
Top
Bottom