Jazz for aficionados

Alex, as you know by now, I also consider you to be a thoughtful and intelligent person. Obviously, these are very complicated and personal topics and I would welcome an opportunity to have a few drinks with you and exchange thoughts about this with perhaps some Chet Baker in the background. Not enough time now to expound too much on what has been previously expressed; but, I would like to point to something that "jumped out" at me in the comments already made. I mention this because I believe it is important (to me) in its relevance to this issue and because in some ways it says more to me than the remainder of your comments. I also mention this with the full understanding that it is difficult to accurately express our and understand others’ thoughts on a forum like this and I don’t mean to disrespect nor to provoke gratuitously.

This is not the first time that you have responded to me this way when discussing/debating a non-music topic. I refer to a comment from you that suggests that because you consider me to be intelligent you are then surprised that I would hold the views that I do. In the current example it is around the issue of secularism vs. (as in my example) the idea that there are benefits with the presence of religion or spirituality in government (and particularly in education) and the ensuing problems when it is removed. The implication seems to be that it is unlikely that a person who holds these views can be intelligent; along with the assumed superiority of secularism and "logic". In my experience many of the most thoughtful and intelligent individuals that I have met are also religious, sometimes deeply so, and share these views. From my vantage point this is a perfect example of what I referred to earlier: the importance of being able to recognize our own biases. Obviously, there is much more that is tied to this and would very interesting to discuss. I prefer single-malt Scotch myself. Regards.

Frogman, hopefully you know by know that I have no intention to offend you, or anyone else by that matter.
But, it seems to me that nobody has read that quote from Kant.Please, if you dont mind me saying that again, read that post above carefully.

To cut long story short, I have no objections toward any of your statements, or personal beliefs, but we should agree that they are 'personal'.

In that regard, looking at diversity of people (in some state) and diversity of their values and beliefs, we must agree that we can use only one universal rule as principle.
 That rule (untill we come up with something better) is law.
It has to be univerasal and to provide equal and just treatment to all its citizens.
To acomplish that, we must put a side any particularity that might give 'better treatment' to some group over another, meaning, there are no 'priviliges' over race,religion, sex or political orientation. Even more those 'particularitys' cant be presented as 'higher ground' in goverment. Period.

You can be deeply religious or you can prefer this over that, but those views can not be implemented toward everyone as law or rule, because we are all different. It is very simple notion.

Of course, you might see my views as biased. I would call them ethical.
In any case I am ready to disscus it

Single malt is  an excellent choice. I prefer at least three brands, Lagavulin, Laphroag and Ardbeg.

Louis Armstrong

Alex, thank you for your response.  As I said, it is unlikely that we can do this topic justice here; especially right now since, as before, I have very little time.  Of course I know that your intention is not to offend and to say so seems redundant at this point.  I don't disagree with what you wrote about the principles involved.  The problem is that these principles (diversity, fairness, political orientation, etc.) are not always easily defined as they relate to every day life.  I don't consider your commitment to these ideals as a bias at all and that was not the bias that I referred to and that you did not address: the idea that someone who believes in the importance of spirituality and religion in these matters cannot also be highly intelligent.  THAT is the bias.  I don't adhere to that kind of absolutism about these matters and would never present my views and end the expression of those with "Period".  Truth, in my opinion, is often more fluid than that and to have some fluidity in one's views is a better path to a viable "truth".  Btw I prefer the Highland malts and some of the Speysides.   Regards. 

I ask you in all honesty aficionados, was the Frogman's last post on, or off track? Was it "Kosure" according to his latest, for lack of a better word, "rantings"? Before I go into a long diatribe, I will wait for your response.