Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: nihil who wrote (74749)	2/21/2000 7:59:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Yes, he has a moral right to kill to obtain his freedom, although not wantonly, as you suggest, but economically, and only when unavoidable..... Yes, one has a moral right to kill the guard on death row in self-defense supposing wrongful conviction, but one should attempt to avoid it...... If God told one to do something, certainly one has the obligation to do it. However, one may very well be subject to the skepticism of the law, and fail to win acquittal on that ground..... No, it is not right to burn heretics, and I am glad the practice was retired. But it is understandable...... In any event, it would not matter if the cases were harder (for example, I suppose that if you insist the slave cannot obtain his freedom without slaughtering the family, I would be uncertain), since I did not say that the application of moral principle was easy and without substantial controversy. Your examples prove nothing, and your taunts are misplaced. I did not claim to be infallible. I did not even say that there was no possibility of refining the fundamental notions underlying moral judgment. I just said that it is worth striving to "get it right"......