Subject:
|
Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 15 Dec 2000 06:18:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
444 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ...
> is, and PROVE it, or else your argument is just a statement of preference.
> Is it one which you wish to impose on others, presumably by force once
> you've convinced a majority of the electorate to go along, or were you just
> letting us know what your preference was? Based on the christian track
> record I'd suggest the former is more likely.
He was responding to an invitation to expand on something. At least this
thread is on-topic for its subject!
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) Fair enough. But my point remains. Arguing against certain behaviours on the grounds that they are not allowed by the church (which is what Steve is doing) requires a great deal of backstory to be proven before there is any hope of justifying (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
| (...) This happens to turn out to not be actually true if one steps outside the human species. Further it's not true in principle for humans today, and as medical science continues to advance, soon it won't be true in actuality. (...) What does the (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 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
|
|
|
|
