someone wrote:
>>> I know many cyclists don't think about the implications of riding
>>> a bike, but there's really a moral stand in these Last Days of
>>> Global Warming, Globalization and SUVs. Yeah, of late all it
>>> seems to matter is that you've got enough money to burn and buy an
>>> SUV. But you say, "no!" and do the right thing. Well, perhaps
>>> you only do it for s****ts or sightseeing, but still you better
>>> know you're not evil --that's if you don't own an SUV.
>>> "Evil is a broad term used to indicate a negative moral or ethical
>>> judgment, often used to describe intentional acts that are cruel,
>>> unjust, or SELFISH. Evil is usually contrasted with good, which
>>> describes intentional acts that are kind, just, or unselfish."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil
>>> (SUVs here mean Supersized Unnecessary Vehicles, the necessary
>>> ones or the smaller ones are OK)
>>> There's been some controversy whether SUVs are evil or not, so
>>> it's a good thing we put it to vote. Nobody can deny the SELFISH
>>> element in them, but some may be reluctant to use a strong word
>>> such as evil (used for slavery or terrorism, for example), but
>>> then they want to feel "good" about riding a bike. Bikes are
>>> friendly to the environment and people, and get you in shape.
>>> Well, in order for something to be good, something else must be
>>> evil. It's like yin and yang. And how about cars? Well, they are
>>> OK. They are simply necessary when distances get longer.
>>> How about if you deny all this and say that there's no good and
>>> evil in whatever you choose to drive/ride? Well, then many would
>>> ask, "Why ride a bike!?" Oh well, for exercise. I may use my
>>> stationary bike as well --with none of the risks. And also for
>>> sightseeing. A bike lets enjoy the scenery like no car can.
>>> So I can say that today I will do something that's OK, and then
>>> something real good. Meaning I will drive a car and later ride
>>> some bike. With these and similar thoughts I leave you with the
>>> poll.
=20
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=3D432477
>> No, you nutcase, SUVs are not evil and bikes are not good. =C2=A0They =
are
>> inanimate objects with no moral properties whatsoever.
>> You really need to learn something im****tant here: =C2=A0being anti-ca=
r !=3D
>> being pro-bike. =C2=A0Bring pro-bike !=3D being anti-car.
>> Being a repetitive sock puppet troll =3D idiot, however. =C2=A0You're =
giving
>> those of us who *are* pro-bike a bad name in the newsgroups where you
>> cross-post this blather. =C2=A0Cut it out, you pathetic attention-seek=
ing
>> whiner.
>> Does that clear things up for you?
> No, you can't please God and the Devil at the same time. If there's
> no evil in SUVs, then who's evil, the driver? Well, there has to be
> a hope for him, some incentive, right?
> It's better you drop the SUV, but some are just "elitist" riders. ;)
I see you are religiously attached to your superiority citing "God and
the Devil". I'm certain that drivers of passing cars sense your
smugness and have no friendly feelings toward your presence. As I
wrote earlier, this superior attitude is not invisible and makes
bicycling more hazardous.
Jobst Brandt
|
