Subject:
|
Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:18:16 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
503 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > 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
> > imposition of restrictions on those that don't voluntarily subscribe to
> > christian mores.
>
> And applies equally for aethiests too, as I'm sure you meant to say.
Oh ya. And I see you just posted a good thought starter about where morality
comes from, etc.
I don't speak for all atheists. I don't speak for all libertarians.
(technically I'm not even atheist, actually... I'm atheist leaning agnostic)
But my world view has a small set of proscribed behaviours, all of which
revolve around not violating the rights of others, and lots of things that
it takes no position on
Nowhere in these proscribed behaviours is there anything about innies or
outies or where to put them, or who can or can't make contracts about
putting innies in other innies.
Christian morality is much more circumscribing. (I almost said circumsizing,
which would be wrong)
> As for
> the backstory, see "Plowed ground".
Oh ya. In spades! <grin>
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
