Sfdebris.net

It's why I really look down on people trying to legislate their morality on others.

Admiral X wrote:It's why I really look down on people trying to legislate their morality on others.

So you look down on everyone that has ever had a political opinion ever? All legislation has a moral element to it, Plato and Aristotle figured that out forever ago.

Yeah, but there's a difference between legislation which has a basis in actual objectively measurable harms/benefits, and one that's based on something like "My 3,000 year-old book says so".

The Romulan Republic wrote:Yeah, but there's a difference between legislation which has a basis in actual objectively measurable harms/benefits, and one that's based on something like "My 3,000 year-old book says so".

It's more immediately based on the classical liberal notion that the state is obligated to protect innocent life, which most people would agree has some objective benefits, the real question is: what counts as life? Which sure as hell isn't going to be answered through internet bickering.

I'm not anti-abortion BTW, I'm just trying to break up the circlejerk.

Well, we wouldn't want any appearance of consensus and understanding around here; how else are we going to get Chuck to come in here to tell us all to behave afterall?

Robovski wrote:Well, we wouldn't want any appearance of consensus and understanding around here; how else are we going to get Chuck to come in here to tell us all to behave afterall?

Bit late to respond to this one but as long as everyone is not letting their passions getting the better of them and keeps the debate civil, everything is fine.

The purpose of discussion is not to arrive at a consensus though. It is to express, challenge and have your own ideas challenged. Sometimes another's point of view will change your own opinion, other times it will not but you may discover why someone else has to their own conclusion.

Fixer wrote:

Robovski wrote:Well, we wouldn't want any appearance of consensus and understanding around here; how else are we going to get Chuck to come in here to tell us all to behave afterall?

Bit late to respond to this one but as long as everyone is not letting their passions getting the better of them and keeps the debate civil, everything is fine.

The purpose of discussion is not to arrive at a consensus though. It is to express, challenge and have your own ideas challenged. Sometimes another's point of view will change your own opinion, other times it will not but you may discover why someone else has to their own conclusion.

Well, that was pure snark, to be fair. I know we don't have to agree; I don't expect us to agree, we are nerds on the internet after all, we fight over everything.

lets all have a viscous argument about what arguments are for!

J!! wrote:lets all have a viscous argument about what arguments are for!

What for? It's really simple. Everyone is allowed to keep his arguments and argue, because it doesn't change the fact that I am right and everyone else is wrong, unless they happen to agree with me. Also, your mom.

Rabble rabble rabble rabble!