RE: Human Rights Are Not Subjective
I really like the way you've expanded on this subject. It gets difficult to discuss a topic when every single concept within it has been obfuscated. Depending who you are speaking with the terms law, morality, right/wrong, energy, positive/negative, consequence, cause/effect, all mean different things. If a person is not familiar with a word, it may not be perceived at all.
Most people in our society do not believe right/wrong and truth even exists, some believe we can't "know" anything. Combine this with a fearful, child-like, instant gratification based mentality and it gets pretty hard to communicate even the simplest of ideas to many. I get it - I was in that mindset in the not too distant past.
Unfortunately true knowledge can not be "taught" into someone, it must be "learned" into the individual. Until the student is seeking knowledge of their own volition, no true understanding will be attained. We need to lose our vested interest in the outcome of our research and be willing to prove ourselves wrong. If you are only looking to verify your belief system, this promotes a bias in your research. All Truths are evidenced in Nature.
As more people come to realign themselves with reality these concepts will be expressed from different perspectives and hopefully exponentially reach more people at a level that resonates with them.
It is irresponsible, although convenient, to accept a perspective simply because it relieves us of all accountability. Once you conquer fear you can realize that this accountability is actually the source of our creative power.
But how do you communicate this when we all speak our own version of any given language? Its necessary to define nearly every single word before you begin to communicate your idea, even then people will hear what they have conditioned themselves to hear.
"morality is rather tautological, and thus self-evident and irrefutable..."
I think subconsciously we all know this and on some levels act accordingly to get desired effects in our lives. People choose to maintain a state of cognitive dissonance, allowing them to pick and choose when and where the laws of Nature apply. This results in chaotic uncontrolled physical manifestation, which is quite apparent, and used as evidence by some to prove that morality does not exist because "bad" things happen to "good" people.
You've brought up so many important points here. This "bad things happen to good people" thing is a problem in discerning the cause-and-effect of morality.
This is where the principle of mentalism, and "spiritual" knowledge of the interconnectivity of mankind (and everything, really) becomes relevant. Good people may still be helping to create bad outcomes by way of their thought process. I'm guilty of this, as I have a tendency to feed the problem undue attention due to my flaming indignation at encountering the evil of deception everywhere I turn.
We must acknowledge the problem, of course (this is part of the solution), but I've yet to find a way to stay solution-oriented without pointing at the problem continually. Really, if the teacher knows the problem, the student really doesn't have to be made to understand. The only reason why a child needs to know that a hot stove hurts is because he is unlikely to refrain from touching it otherwise. But if he would refrain without that knowledge, the end is achieved.
I point out all truth as a reflex, but it would likely be more prudent to focus upon certain truths in dealing with others. The truth of their inherent freedom and self-ownership. The truth of their power to create in this world. The truth of our ever-expanding potential. This would likely go further than trying to convince people that baby-drinking dark occultists are pulling their strings; and they really wouldn't need to know that if they could be made to enact the solution without that knowledge.
You and I think the same Hahaha. This seems ridiculously thorough, but it's so true and is a problem that often troubles me. I'm perfectly willing to have a 10 minute conversation expand to 2 hours in order to establish our definitions , and secure a clear chain of logic. But many are not so eager to embrace this endeavor. Probably because they don't see the desperate need for the answers this process would yield. After all, how's this help them get money and have fun?
For example, my wife is not political at all. She thinks this obviates any need for understanding in regard to the world power structure. She's not voting, so she's not part of the problem, right? Of course, this is entirely incorrect, as evidenced by her culturally-indoctrinated opinions on nearly everything. Not knowing the problem is a roadblock to her enacting the solution.
There's no absolute need to know the problem, as stated above, but it's very rare that one comes upon the solution by any other means. She's still chasing the "American Dream" and doesn't understand that the power structure she gives no thought to is at the root of that motivation.
I'm afraid I'll have to leave much unsaid here, as I could comment for days on what you've said, but our medium makes this cumbersome and I would not impose upon your patience. Always great to hear from you, Jay!
Yeah we could go on for ever. It's always great talking with you as well.