 | | More on Moral Relativism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) More Hanson: (URL) article continues showing why moral relativism (and a host of other things like aristocratic guilt reflexes and general politeness) lead to quagmire thinking. I especially considered the bit about how "UN" sanctions morphed (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —David Eaton
|
| | | | | Rest assured I'll defend moral relativism. :) (...) Honestly, I think it's because most people don't understand (or "really believe in") but still subscribe to moral relativism. Do I think bin Ladin is evil? No. Do I think he should be stopped? Yes. (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | (...) From the article: "Yes, we knew all that, and so are now told that our intelligence agencies are inept, naïve, and worse, for not spotting the hijackers in advance. But we also surely suspect that, had any government watchdog agency swept down (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | (...) Heck, I can answer that one... What if there were no terrorist threat? Should we expel and disallow Nazism and KKK-ism in the US? How about Communists? What about anti-abortionists? What about Fox, they're often anti-government. At what point (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I believe that's exactly the point he's trying to make. I posted this even though I do not 100% agree with everything it says and this is one of the areas where I'm a bit spongier. I am not too keen on wiretapping for the sake of "seeing what (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) thousand (...) Probably. I just didn't really see the relevance of it to the topic at hand, given most people, including moral relativists would probably take that view. (...) Yep, I definitely agree here. But back to the topic... Q: If the (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) The US has a history of letting things slide until greatly (and sometimes, repeatedly) provoked. You can argue that's not "morally right" (and I'd tend to agree), but it nevertheless is reality. Further, I am not in any way shape or form going (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | (...) How does your system of morals feel about your actually assisting evil because to not do so would be painful? Chris (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Under duress? Not great. Voluntarily? Really bad. (insofar as a system of morals can have feelings... :-) ) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | (...) to (...) Sure, that'd be pretty impossible, I think. However some rather large evils have been left un-righted, due to political pressure. I just think the assertion that the US is "good" doesn't hold water. They're good when it suits them. (...) (23 years ago, 10-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: More on Moral Relativism —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Those who don't get their news from entertainment channels know better. You said this not all that long ago: "My beef with them [sanctions] is that they're not impoverishing the *right things* (...) *enough*, and that they give foamers like (...) (23 years ago, 11-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
