I'd submit that the law-making process has evolved in making laws that are zero for three laws.

Folks who claim 'rule of laws' as what we have and what other countries should have probably are a tad 'confused'. That being said, there are many other countries that are far worse in this regard.

There are three criteria to a law as far as I'm concerned.

1) Universally known

2) Consistantly applied

3) Non-selectively enforced.

If you create a law that does not meet any one of the above criteria, all you do is annoy people.

Our laws have evolved into not meeting any of these criteria.

Example: The US Tax code.

My goodness -- common ground indeed. (This is a good thing).

I'd submit that the law-making process has evolved in making laws that are zero for three laws.

Folks who claim 'rule of laws' as what we have and what other countries should have probably are a tad 'confused'. That being said, there are many other countries that are far worse in this regard.

There are three criteria to a law as far as I'm concerned.

1) Universally known

2) Consistantly applied

3) Non-selectively enforced.

If you create a law that does not meet any one of the above criteria, all you do is annoy people.

Our laws have evolved into not meeting any of these criteria.

Example: The US Tax code.

I agree 100%

To all,

What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth? Gravity works at 32 feet per second/per second ect, ect ,ect, is that not an Universal Truth? By the way, I accept that gravity is not a pulling force for all you physics geeks, and yes, 32.2 feet per/per/per.

Is there no such thing as right or wrong? If we don't believe in some sort of Absolute Truth what is the standard? Everything is not just perceptions and opinions. Situational Ethics=Human Secularism, and this over time has given us
postmodernism, creating a society that regards all values, beliefs, lifestyles, and truth claims as equally valid. Chaos ensues, ergo 99% v 1%.

The connotation--there are Absolute Truths, morals have intrinsic value. Point in fact, 95% of the people of the Earth believe in some type of God. In most cases if they follow correctly they live in peace with each other. Now at this point someone will say..."But them people of Islam..." or "But them Christians..." or any combination there in, they did not follow as they should have. It's alot more easy to preach then it is to follow the Word/standard. Nevertheless this is where morals come from.

If I asked any of you if there is such a thing [and I have] as an Absolute Truth and you said..."No" then you have told me that you Absloutely believe that there is no such thing, you have implied the existence of an absolute.

As my name implies I don't believe in chance.

To all,

What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth? Gravity works at 32 feet per second/per second ect, ect ,ect, is that not an Universal Truth? By the way, I accept that gravity is not a pulling force for all you physics geeks, and yes, 32.2 feet per/per/per.

I wrote a paper during my junior year of undergrad on truths with a capital t versus lowercase. I stated then I did believe there are some absolute truths. But not all are. In any case ... .

We have a pretty sharp crowd here (and, yes, I include people I have disagreements with in that group if there is no evidence to the contrary besides differences of opinion and interpretation), and when something is flat out wrong, we call people out on it. (Sometimes the words are sharp, too.) So, when you want to make a point, consider carefully what you are using to back it up.

32.2 feet per square second (or 9.81 meters per square second) is NOT an absolute truth. Those numbers refer to acceleration due to gravity in an ideal situation (consider one of Guy's recent posts) near Earth's surface. It decreases, for example, at higher elevations.

On Mars, I find it to be around 3.7 meters per second squared.

Hence, we have strong evidence acceleration due to gravity is not universal.
Now, if you meant to discuss whether gravity itself is universal ... ?

To all,

What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth? Gravity works at 32 feet per second/per second ect, ect ,ect, is that not an Universal Truth? By the way, I accept that gravity is not a pulling force for all you physics geeks, and yes, 32.2 feet per/per/per.

I wrote a paper during my junior year of undergrad on truths with a capital t versus lowercase. I stated then I did believe there are some absolute truths. But not all are. In any case ... .

We have a pretty sharp crowd here (and, yes, I include people I have disagreements with in that group if there is no evidence to the contrary besides differences of opinion and interpretation), and when something is flat out wrong, we call people out on it. (Sometimes the words are sharp, too.) So, when you want to make a point, consider carefully what you are using to back it up.

32.2 feet per square second (or 9.81 meters per square second) is NOT an absolute truth. Those numbers refer to acceleration due to gravity in an ideal situation (consider one of Guy's recent posts) near Earth's surface. It decreases, for example, at higher elevations.

On Mars, I find it to be around 3.7 meters per second squared.

Hence, we have strong evidence acceleration due to gravity is not universal.
Now, if you meant to discuss whether gravity itself is universal ... ?

You are dealing with a real deep thinker with very unusual assumptions about the world.

---

...So you want someone from the government watching your every move to make sure you don't break any rules.

No, I'll be more clear. I want someone from the government watching every one of THEIR moves. I'm not the criminal, THEY are. THEY need lots of government supervision.
(and by "they" I don't mean everyone else, I mean the people in control and the top 1%ers, the people RUNNING this country [into the ground])

As if the housing market bust didn't prove that already.

So let me ask you this. How are you going to react when you see those watching you breaking rules and realizing since they have power over you, you can't do anything about it?

I don't do anything dishonest, or anything to take advantage of others, or anything illegal much at all. So I have no reason to be in fear. I don't want people invading my privacy either, but that's done to all of us on a daily basis already.

Why do you think the former soviet union caved in? Do you think it was because Ronald Reagan out spent them by balooning the deficit during the cold war? Do you think that was the only reason?

I'm not a communist and therefore don't know/care why it collapsed. (I was 8-9 when it collapsed...) I prefer capitalism, with regulations to ensure better division of wealth. If you are rich, good for you, but you should then be responsible for your share. Give back some of what you take...

Why do you think Cuba just privatized a bunch of farmland a couple years ago? Do you think it was a gift from the generous government of Cuba to its loyal citizens?

Sure, we'll go with that. It's the feel-good answer of the year.

I fear you (and a growing crowd of others) do not really know what you're asking for.

You seem to be mistaken on what I'm asking for.

It's just like the right to assume I'm a communist because I feel universal healthcare is needed, overdue, and as an industrialized nation on post 2000 Earth: its people are entitled to.

It's just like the right to assume I'm a communist because I'm asking for the rich to be taxed heavier, and the poor to be taxed lighter.

It's just like the right to say I'm a communist because I feel someone making over billions of dollars a year should be capped off and forced to put the rest of the money after that point back into their employees or buying goods/services/etc... (for me it's not all about spreading it around equally, I just want to see it keep moving along... To support capitalism instead of selfish-ism)

---

#resist

Speed limit of 55 -- you go 58 -- that's fine. When you get down to it, in at least some cases, laws are for public safety. Going 58 is not seen (by nearly everyone) to endanger public safety, but going 90 is. A line is set (for various reasons) and people fudge the line. States respond differently as well. Here in Arizona on the open roads, the limit isn't 55 -- it is 70 -- and of course only gets enforced at about 80 or so (provided you get observed and law enforcement doesn't have a higher priority at the time).

If nature is an absolute, we don't need a constitution, heck, we don't need language -- there we go, back to Rousseau's essay again.

Thanks Barry. At least you get it.

---

#resist

(kinda like people in power do in their everyday dealings...) I'm sure you see where I'm going here.

Maybe I don't know where he's going with this. Where do you think he's going with this?

I'm saying the people in control of this country (and its corporations) bend laws and take advantage, and the rest of us pay for it in many ways. You included.

---

#resist

...What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth?

....ummm I though that was the very definition of science. Maybe I'm mistaken.

Politics is not "science" (it's more about discussion and decision), we have science forums here however this one is "politics".

---

#resist

Surely isn't, Politics about compromise, Religion about belief without a need for proof and Science about conjecture and theories which when proven become the truth.

On this rock it's 32.2 feet per/per.

We draw our law from truths that we have found over time from our Faith.

On this rock it's 32.2 feet per/per.

We draw our law from truths that we have found over time from our Faith.

BS, it varies. And if your GPS didn't account for it, you would get bad positions.

---

On this rock it's 32.2 feet per/per.

We draw our law from truths that we have found over time from our Faith.

Try reading Getting the Lowdown on Gravity
The map looks like this

On this rock it's 32.2 feet per/per.

We draw our law from truths that we have found over time from our Faith.

I have faith that at my elevation, I can jog longer, jump higher, and sing as nearly as low as Johnny Cash and nearly as high as Michael Jackson, so, thank you, gravity, for varying. :)

Ah, the effort of deflection. Never ceases to amaze me.

I respectfully refuse.

I also dectect a tone.

Nevertheless, then lets assume that the speed of light is an absolute. Are we fine with that?

Lets also assume that murder is also an absolute that we can do without. Are we fine with this also?

Do we have consensus?

There is absolutely no deflection.
SO, let us ask, based on the evidence you've heard so far, what you think about the actions of George Zimmerman?

...What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth?

....ummm I though that was the very definition of science. Maybe I'm mistaken.

Politics is not "science" (it's more about discussion and decision), we have science forums here however this one is "politics".

Politics is a Social Science, and like the other Social Sciences, can employ some of the methods developed to assist the Natural Sciences, that is it can be more than discussion and decision making. Personally I believe evidence based policy making is likely to have a greater chance of success for desirable outcomes than opinion based decision making.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

...What is an Absolute Truth? Is there not a thing called Universal Truth? Does science look for such things as Absloute Truth?

....ummm I though that was the very definition of science. Maybe I'm mistaken.

Politics is not "science" (it's more about discussion and decision), we have science forums here however this one is "politics".

Politics is a Social Science, and like the other Social Sciences, can employ some of the methods developed to assist the Natural Sciences, that is it can be more than discussion and decision making. Personally I believe evidence based policy making is likely to have a greater chance of success for desirable outcomes than opinion based decision making.

There is also research into decision making.