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.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (1447)	10/6/2000 8:26:11 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

Well, I'm glad you you're one of the few practitioners of such a belief.. Otherwise, everyone would have the right to create their own "relative" concept of right and wrong and all kinds of chaos would result. The ultimate destination for moral relativism is moral anarchy.

To: epicure who wrote (1447)	10/7/2000 5:39:49 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

It's called relativism. It doesn't preclude personal morality- it just precludes establishing a morality and forcing others to obey it. Would you also apply this relativism to those who might try to kill you or those you care about or steal your property? If its the personal connection that is important and it is wrong to kill or steal from people you care about then would you be against the governement trying to stop someone from kill me if he or she felt killing was ok. If its the practical consequences that are important then would it become ok for someone to kill me if I was unproductive, leaching off others and I was an obnoxious jerk, would it then be ok to kill me? Tim