Culture at the heart

No, morality is framed in your upbringing. I'd venture an educated guess and say yours are framed in Judeo-Christian ethics. Which is fine, but a person from a different religious/cultural background will have a different set of morals. And each person has, justifies to themselves, and believes certain things. Each person has a personal moral compass, steeped in nuance and ever changing with experience.
And to say the world isn't anarchy, is naive. Your life or mine, cozily typing in our peaceful neighborhood, isn't so much so. But ask people in Aleppo if the world is anarchy and you'll get a very different viewpoint. Besides, even in the guise of morality, people lie(to themselves & others), cheat, decieve and are disingenuous to their true feelings, to appear to have more "socially acceptable" thoughts. There is nothing black & white about anything involving morality in this world. We just have to try and be nice to each other & hope for the best.
I believe knowledge of right and wrong is imprinted on everyone, regardless of where we grew up. I agree wholeheartedly that anarchy is rampant and your illustration is evidence that it appears to be greater in Aleppo than your neighborhood. Do you think there is a place you could grow up and not know murder is wrong? Do you think growing up in a culture being taught murder is ok makes murder ok? To me it seems perfectly black and white. With out that universal code: anarchy.
 

I didn't mean that as a dig, just that one person shouldn't be in charge. I see you get that. There is no simple answer. That's why it is complicated.
I've had some unequivocal digs thrown my way and glad you get that I didn't take it that way. My point from the beginning is that I am 100% confident in the black & white of right and wrong and that it isn't complicated. I also believe that trying to make it complicated usually is motivated by wanting to justify wrong.
 

Neither. I get the point and I'm not trolling.

However, the morality of certain sexual preferences and sexual acts is extremely fluid. It is one of the most fluid things in our entire society. I am sure most people on this board live in a way that would be seen as really immoral 50 years ago, and I'm sure our grandparents lived in a way that would have been seen as extremely immoral 50 years before them.

It's a fluid thing.

Everyone does get to make up their own mind about right and wrong. It's sort of what this country was founded on.
I totally agree about changing generational attitudes about morality, which was part of my initial point. I am not interested in turning back time to a period of perfect morality. I completely disagree that this country was founded on the premise that we all get to decide right and wrong. That's ludicrous. Murder is an easy example. Think it through and I will be curious if you get to the same conclusion I've come to.
 

I believe knowledge of right and wrong is imprinted on everyone, regardless of where we grew up. I agree wholeheartedly that anarchy is rampant and your illustration is evidence that it appears to be greater in Aleppo than your neighborhood. Do you think there is a place you could grow up and not know murder is wrong? Do you think growing up in a culture being taught murder is ok makes murder ok? To me it seems perfectly black and white. With out that universal code: anarchy.
Really? Yes, there are a large group of people that think it's OK to kill... The military... That's called nuance. The suicide bomber that is promised 72 virgins, to him, running into a building and blowing people up is the right​ thing(because we are infadels). But to me, it's wrong.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

completely agree-- the U does many great things and most of the 50k + students are not like this. Even if there is full consent which is not known by many people how can anyone not think this was completely despicable. How is being the 2nd, 5th or 10th plus person even fun. Go find your own girlfriend/boyfriend + there is no need to watch your friends do it. Shocked that none of the people in attendance put a stop to it and sent everyone home based on some basic right from wrong ideas.

What are your thoughts on anal sex between two men?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


I totally agree about changing generational attitudes about morality, which was part of my initial point. I am not interested in turning back time to a period of perfect morality. I completely disagree that this country was founded on the premise that we all get to decide right and wrong. That's ludicrous. Murder is an easy example. Think it through and I will be curious if you get to the same conclusion I've come to.

As a culture we have far more morals than we had 50 or 150 years ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I disagree with certain views and opinions (that I'm aware of) for everyone in both groups you mentioned. And, although I haven't specifically checked, it's likely I share some views with each of them. So? Do you really want to give Ben Franklin the right to decide right and wrong for you? I'm positive you'll find a conflict. Thus, that list is disqualified to decide right and wrong for me.

Sorry, while you think pretending to miss the point makes you smart, i think it confirms you to be the moron that we thought you were...so thank you.
 

Yes, we want to be fair with those involved on the fringe, who didn't have balls to prevent this mess. Surely you would have gave it a wink and a nod also. Let's focus on the fringe, not the incident, that's your take on this?

Those on the Fringe...Hmmm. Care to explain that to me? Before you do, maybe grab the smallest shovel you can find.
 




My long-winded post was intended to illustrate visible and open decline, not say "let's go back to the old days" or endorse or condemn a political party. I think mostly what I was trying to express is, IMHO, there is right and wrong and we all know the difference. If your wife and her friends went to a male strip club, ended up having sex with a stripper, and her friends celebrated -- perhaps even encouraged her, how would you feel about her association with them going forward? How about her friend that didn’t go, but sent encouraging texts?

Our society – our world – is in decline and I feel compelled to specifically express my views that oppose the decline to those I interact with, friends, family, my children, and anyone else who will listen.

Character is the public manifestation of our private thoughts and feelings about issues. Teaching the general population or the student body about values and social interaction isn’t the primary responsibility of a university. But we, as individuals, as a community, and especially our football coaches do bear the responsibility for the development of the culture, character and ethics of the team as a whole.

“We need to change the culture” is a common phrase from coaches taking over an unsuccessful program, including Minnesota a few years ago. Showing up on time, working hard, respecting your coaches, teammates, opponents, fans, administration, going to class – all of those things are connected to “doing the right thing” (character & values). Once established, the veterans help train the new recruits, but certainly the values of our program need to be expressed in the recruiting process. Young men going through the maturing process, who may not have been taught about character before they became Gophers, should be during their time in the program.

While promiscuous, perhaps even questionable, behavior has likely existed, something tells me the leadership of this program has lost touch with the importance of character. That falls on the staff and the veteran players. It shouldn’t be an option. How we treat other humans should be paramount.

Decline? How we treat humans should be paramount? Decline from like before the civil right movement? Please, enlighten me...
 

Examples?

Well, other "humans" as you put it, aren't considered property. Women can vote. Just a few little examples. Oh, then there's that whole segregation thing...remember the guys in the pointy white hoods who were taking the "moral high ground"?
 

Sorry, while you think pretending to miss the point makes you smart, i think it confirms you to be the moron that we thought you were...so thank you.

Pretending to miss what point? I guess in your opinion I'm a moron because I don't understand what it was. I'd rather be accused of doing what is right instead of what was "smart." I thought you were implying from your two lists that I support the group you put me in and you support the "founding fathers." Since you didn't answer my "yes or no" question, I assume you'd rather not decide.
 

Well, other "humans" as you put it, aren't considered property. Women can vote. Just a few little examples. Oh, then there's that whole segregation thing...remember the guys in the pointy white hoods who were taking the "moral high ground"?

You make an excellent point, one that has been expressed in similar fashion in this thread: claiming "morality" is different that demonstrating it. Plenty of evil has been done under the flag of some false narrative. You and I probably agree what was right and what was wrong with the KKK activities.

I'm not sure we agree on the definition of morals. What definition are you using. Regardless, whether women vote is not a morality issue. I did a couple of searches on "slavery" and if you're interested, there are millions enslaved, including here in the USA.
 



Are you really missing the point or just trolling? Do you really want everyone making up their own definition of right and wrong? I don't.

Got it. We should agree with your definition because it is right. Wow...I did recommend you try to find a small shovel.
 


Whatever happened to giving someone your fraternity pin or your letterman sweater when you were going steady?
 

I've had some unequivocal digs thrown my way and glad you get that I didn't take it that way. My point from the beginning is that I am 100% confident in the black & white of right and wrong and that it isn't complicated. I also believe that trying to make it complicated usually is motivated by wanting to justify wrong.

OK...is killing people wrong?
 

Got it. We should agree with your definition because it is right. Wow...I did recommend you try to find a small shovel.
Let's not go in circles. You, me, founding fathers, any other human you suggest, the constitution, student code of conduct...all are flawed. Only right and wrong are constant and perfect.
It's called liberty.
Have you been following this thread? You don't want everyone to have liberty to decide what is right and wrong. It won't work that way because we all won't agree. We will merely choose what's best for us, even if it is the worst thing for someone else.
 

I totally agree about changing generational attitudes about morality, which was part of my initial point. I am not interested in turning back time to a period of perfect morality. I completely disagree that this country was founded on the premise that we all get to decide right and wrong. That's ludicrous. Murder is an easy example. Think it through and I will be curious if you get to the same conclusion I've come to.

Did you mean to show your bias saying turning back time to a period of "perfect morality". Dude, seriously, please grab a smaller shovel. The country was founded on liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is by definition an individual thing.
 

Did you mean to show your bias saying turning back time to a period of "perfect morality". Dude, seriously, please grab a smaller shovel. The country was founded on liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That is by definition an individual thing.

Ok, last attempt...do you know when the world had perfect morality? Do you really believe in giving me total liberty to pursue my own definition of happiness? What if killing and torturing your family makes me happy? There is no way anyone would agree to total liberty, which is why we try to create laws, which are imperfect in their inability to legislate morality. I'm suggesting we know it is wrong to harm someone, thus we all know right from wrong. And none of us does the right thing all the time.
 

Ok, last attempt...do you know when the world had perfect morality? Do you really believe in giving me total liberty to pursue my own definition of happiness? What if killing and torturing your family makes me happy? There is no way anyone would agree to total liberty, which is why we try to create laws, which are imperfect in their inability to legislate morality. I'm suggesting we know it is wrong to harm someone, thus we all know right from wrong. And none of us does the right thing all the time.

Predictable side-step. Is killing people right or wrong? Go ahead, answer.
 

Predictable side-step. Is killing people right or wrong? Go ahead, answer.
The answer is in the quote you replied to, claiming I side-stepped something (you can go ahead and insert "kill" instead of "harm"). What is your motive for not answering my questions and ignoring my clear answer?
 

I feel like you guys are really starting to make progress with this argument......
 

I'm kind of going off the rails and using reckless language in my posts, so this is going to be my last on this particular fracas. I'm a Gopher fan until the end and I hope this is resolved shortly. I am not under the impression that the end result will be to everyone's satisfaction.

That said, killme, you and I wrangled a bit a couple of years back during Kill's health problems and the coverage of them by the StarTribune, but I find a lot to agree with in your initial post. I think you have stretched the parameters of the argument to its widest application, but there's no doubt the world has changed a lot over the past few decades and one of the areas that has seen the greatest change is that of sexual expression and behavior. I generally think a lot of that is healthy. As some as said, going back to the days of Ward and June Cleaver sleeping in separate twin beds on national television would be as disingenuous as it actually was in that time period. A lot of crap happened in the 1950s and 1960s that was pretty deplorable in terms of human freedom and I don't think we want to go back there.

But with greater freedom comes greater responsibility (moral and otherwise). I am tempted to work extremely blue here, but I don't know the age range of the audience and raunchy humor wouldn't serve anyone's purpose. There's no question that a drunken woman was part of the equation here and what I find troubling is that these guys took advantage of a drunken woman and I don't give a hoot about her consent. I used to bartend (at a bar on the site of the current Triple Rock Social Club a couple of iterations ago) and I could have had my way with more than a few drunken women, but what kind of man would that have made me? I'm no angel and I spent most of my 20s in a booze-and-weed induced fog (driving drunk more times than I care to admit and I was WRONG to do that), but I at least seemed to keep my bearings when it came to matters like these. If I'm one of the drunken boxcars on this supposed train, my guess is I would have thought "this is a really lousy idea" and would't have dived in. I likely wouldn't have stopped the other participants however, which would have made me less of a man in my own estimation.

There are polarities of right and wrong, but there's about six light years of gray between those poles. That's where learning how to act responsibly comes into play and I don't think we're doing a very good job at that right now.
 

Herd is a well known NDSU troller. I'd think their fan board should be enough to keep him busy today.

Just expressing an opinion about the incident at the school that my daughter attends, and where I go to games annually. Yes my primary team wears green and yellow, but that doesn't mean I don't have an option about gopher football, who I also root for and live near. I haven't said a word about anything other than this situation, not sure how that makes me a troll. My opinion is no different than many here, so go ahead and attack them all.
 

Originally Posted by killme said:
Sexual exploitation is rampant around the globe as we dance the fine line of titillation and glorification. I’m old enough to have seen married couples portrayed on TV in separate beds. Sexuality has increasingly in my lifetime gone from a taboo topic to permeating news, music, entertainment, advertising, politics – you name it. Sex outside of marriage is glorified.

I think you are cherry picking values, sex inside of marriage was only tolerated if it was between two of the same race, IE: "Loving". Who would ever want to go back to that place in time.

I am widowed, I doubt I'll ever marry again, and yes I glorify sex outside of marriage, I think the point is that there should be a level of trust and intimacy prior to having sex, certainly not marriage as a requirement. I doubt these players even know the difference though.
 

I will say it--these guys have no game at all. One picks up a girl who has been drinking, and then takes her to a sausage party--guys don't have dates, so they hit the one girl who is already naked.

This is the best case this can be looked at here.
 

That said, killme, you and I wrangled a bit a couple of years back...

Yes, I was a wrangler, but I've been working on many things in the last couple of years, deliberately trying to delve the depths of what it really means to "love my neighbor." So, please forgive me if I treated you unfairly or inappropriately.

Thanks for your thoughtful post. My life story includes plenty of situations you described about yours, plenty of reactive decisions, not enough forethought. Blindsided by situations I had not even considered, I made some regrettable choices that adversely affected plenty of people I claimed to care about. Taking life as it comes often doesn't play out well.

I’ve spent the last 8 years – as objectively as possible, with a life-long “devil’s advocate” approach – attempting to deliberately try to figure out the meaning of life and in the process removed the confusing gray between right and wrong. You’re entitled to your opinion, but I think gray is a lie.

How people treat each other quickly became a focal point and ultimately is the answer I arrived at. I was introduced to the Golden Rule as a youth and have lived in its universal truth my whole life. In retrospect, I’ve broken it as much as anyone. Sigh.

Every single human I’ve ever met has broken it, too. It’s not just a good idea. Our pursuit of it defines who we are. Like the law of gravity, changing my attitude or beliefs about it won’t allow me to float away.

My issue is with the culture. A football team has a unique opportunity, because of it’s “fraternity,” to establish a common set of values and character. I can’t blame any single one of the 10 or 20 people involved – it’s hard to stand up against a mob. Not sure what I would have done at 18, which makes my gut churn.

But, I believe it’s why we name captains, establish leaders, point towards standards we will not deviate from or tolerate. From simple things like “be on time” to more subtle ones like “don’t take PEDs” and others like "treat your opponent with respect." We must lead by example, but vocal leadership is imperative.
 

Yes, I was a wrangler, but I've been working on many things in the last couple of years, deliberately trying to delve the depths of what it really means to "love my neighbor." So, please forgive me if I treated you unfairly or inappropriately.

Thanks for your thoughtful post. My life story includes plenty of situations you described about yours, plenty of reactive decisions, not enough forethought. Blindsided by situations I had not even considered, I made some regrettable choices that adversely affected plenty of people I claimed to care about. Taking life as it comes often doesn't play out well.

I’ve spent the last 8 years – as objectively as possible, with a life-long “devil’s advocate” approach – attempting to deliberately try to figure out the meaning of life and in the process removed the confusing gray between right and wrong. You’re entitled to your opinion, but I think gray is a lie.

How people treat each other quickly became a focal point and ultimately is the answer I arrived at. I was introduced to the Golden Rule as a youth and have lived in its universal truth my whole life. In retrospect, I’ve broken it as much as anyone. Sigh.

Every single human I’ve ever met has broken it, too. It’s not just a good idea. Our pursuit of it defines who we are. Like the law of gravity, changing my attitude or beliefs about it won’t allow me to float away.

My issue is with the culture. A football team has a unique opportunity, because of it’s “fraternity,” to establish a common set of values and character. I can’t blame any single one of the 10 or 20 people involved – it’s hard to stand up against a mob. Not sure what I would have done at 18, which makes my gut churn.

But, I believe it’s why we name captains, establish leaders, point towards standards we will not deviate from or tolerate. From simple things like “be on time” to more subtle ones like “don’t take PEDs” and others like "treat your opponent with respect." We must lead by example, but vocal leadership is imperative.

I don't think we are that far apart in our thinking. My "gray" comment is more geared toward our human existence. There is a right and a wrong, but I think we live our existence largely in the gray because we simply are not capable of moral perfection. We simply do the best we can and hope that works and that does require a fair amount of contemplation before we act. I'm both a Christian and a Platonist and I don't find the two incompatible.

But thanks for chiming in. I think you've hit some very good notes here. I especially agree with you about team leadership. I don't think anyone is expecting 110 angels lining up for practice every day, but one would think that good leadership (from both the more experienced players and the coaching staff) would tighten up the boundaries of the misbehavior.
 




Top Bottom