O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Lol...of course you are. Still, I’d be (genuinely) interested to learn how you equate the survival of the fittest ethos with Christianity.

---

Survival of the fittest is my PREDICTION, not my hope or aspiration. Its not consistent with Christian ethos

Human beings are programmed with basic survival instincts. Those instincts with intelligence, makes us a pretty nasty species for getting our own way.
I don't think God and religious teachings will solve anything when it gets that desperate.
in 100 years the population has rocketed from 1.7 billion to 7.9 billion. With an estimated 200 million dead from war alone, (though probably a lot higher)

It can't go on and unless we cut down the birth rate( which brings religion into it), its not going to be pretty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Who is arguing? But I must say that you have a tendency to close down debate with your "stick to the subject that I set" agenda rather than opening your mind, considering the wider picture and letting discussion flow. Do not take this the wrong way, but that is probably the teacher in you!!

---

I’m just not going down the teacher route that you’re so peculiarly obsessed with. We spent hours chipping away at that one two days ago and it’s nothing but a childish and futile waste of everyone’s time.
It’s a Covid thread which I didn’t start...on which we were discussing a Covid related post started by MA...so I have absolutely no idea how I’m setting the agenda.
You decided I was campaigning to ‘alleviate global poverty and inequality’...I’d not mentioned them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Survival of the fittest is my PREDICTION, not my hope or aspiration. Its not consistent with Christian ethos

---

But you allied yourself to GP’s ‘vision’ which as he’s said before, and implied again today, is ‘survival of the fittest’.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

But you allied yourself to GP’s ‘vision’ which as he’s said before, and implied again today, is ‘survival of the fittest’.

---

yes, most of what he wrote is either fact, obvious future outcome or his own prediction. I didn't sense any relish in what he wrote, but as in most discussions here, Geep falls on the side of realism rather than idealism. My area of disagreement is that the have's will eventually fight for what they have. China are already leading the way in the current logistics crisis

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

yes, most of what he wrote is either fact, obvious future outcome or his own prediction. I didn't sense any relish in what he wrote, but as in most discussions here, Geep falls on the side of realism rather than idealism. My area of disagreement is that the have's will eventually fight for what they have. China are already leading the way in the current logistics crisis

---

Fine lines, AF...between realism and cynicism in this case.
Still interested in how you reconcile your Christian beliefs with your inclination towards the survival of the fittest philosophy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Fine lines, AF...between realism and cynicism in this case.
Still interested in how you reconcile your Christian beliefs with your inclination towards the survival of the fittest philosophy.

---

Its EVERYBODY'S inclination rA, yours just as much as mine. There's an element of tempering of the animal instinct which humans alone possess IMO but ultimately Dave Gilmour had it right, albeit he was being ironic at the time, 'Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie'

Technically Roger Waters I think, as the lyricist...

So none of your goody good bull**** please rA!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Technically Roger Waters I think, as the lyricist...

So none of your goody good bull**** please rA!

---

‘Goody good bull****’. WTF? Is there any point in trying to debate anything with you Mr. Angry without you just resorting to nastiness?
I think not and give up. Let me know when you can manage it. Until then...sorry but debating with you is just another exercise in futility.
It seems to me that you and your mate are just hellbent on killing the forum...well done, you’re doing a fine job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Its EVERYBODY'S inclination rA, yours just as much as mine. There's an element of tempering of the animal instinct which humans alone possess IMO but ultimately Dave Gilmour had it right, albeit he was being ironic at the time, 'Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie'

---

Have to differ, AF. Of course there’s an element of ‘looking after #1’ I appreciate that completely, but if we just subscribe to the ‘survival of the fittest’ mentality then forget donations to charity, forget helping those less fortunate than ourselves, forget altruism (philosophically flawed that one I accept) and forget looking after the sick and the old.
Wouldn’t fit into your Christian philosophy terribly well and I don’t imagine that’s really what you believe...anymore than you agree with Roger Waters’ (the writer’s) words, ‘I’m alright Jack, keep your hands off my stack.’