 | | Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is —Christopher L. Weeks
| | | | (...) There are no moral implications in the issue -- except for the immorality of behaving in a hostile manner toward a harmless minority, of course. (...) Out of curiosity, would it be more or less hostile to your particular religion if Todd (...) (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | (...) Under your morality, perhaps. I recognise that different people hold different moralities, and under other moral systems, there may well be moral implications here. However I also hold the (somewhat unpopular and somewhat hard to prove (...) (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is —Christopher L. Weeks
| | | | | (...) Well, sure. I think that compared to at least some of the implications of "life affirming," I this that satisfaction of preference is a better metric of morality. What generates more satisfaction/happiness, rather than what generates more (...) (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: False premise in this message needs to be identified as what it is —Larry Pieniazek
| | | | | (...) I guess it depends on the definition of "life affirming", as I don't see more life as necessarily better life. Being happy is very life affirming. But ya. (20 years ago, 21-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | | |
