Subject:
|
Re: More on Moral Relativism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Nov 2001 23:03:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
313 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson102901.shtml
> > >
> > > I forgot how ferocious the battle for Okinawa actually was... but the real
> > > point of this article lies elsewhere. Moral relativism is a bankrupt idea.
> >
> > More Hanson:
> >
> > http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson110901.shtml
> >
> > This article continues showing why moral relativism (and a host of other
> > things like aristocratic guilt reflexes and general politeness) lead to
> > quagmire thinking.
>
> 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 on America's
> universities, mosques, Islamic leagues, and Muslim charities - to expel
> agitators hostile to the U.S., to infiltrate such groups, or to wiretap - they
> would have met with a storm of protest. The Islamic-American community would
> have quickly mobilized the considerable arsenal of our politically correct
> media; universities; the legal professions; and local, state, and national
> government to allege ethnic stereotyping, racial profiling, religious
> intolerance, Islamophobia, and all the usual -isms and -ologies we have become
> acquainted with."
>
> Please, Mr Hanson, explain to me why that would be worse than several thousand
> innocent Americans (and others) dying in a terrorist attack, followed by a
> protracted war against enemies unknown?
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 people are up to" with no concrete reason for
suspicion, for example.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: More on Moral Relativism
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: More on Moral Relativism
|
| (...) 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)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
