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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (77460)	10/13/2003 12:47:11 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"It is hardly pervasive in the massage community, is it?" I was not refering to one scenario, I was refering to the "freedom of conscience" issue. In order for us to even consider a conscientious objector to war we have to have a pervasive ethic about violence in our society. The conscientious objector says 'no' not even when you say it is justified militarily. During Viet Nam it was pretty important to have a long standing association with a religious group that objected, for your claim of "conscientious objector" to carry water. In modern times we are even more opposed to some forms of violence than we were 50 years ago. Spanking for example is abhored by mainsteam psychologists. Don't you think some of the young psychologists who provide 'domestic abuse' services to families, might also be opposed to violence justified militarily ... with or without religious grounds. So the ethic of non-violence is understood pervasively by society and a "humanistic" psychologist might have a more conservative measure of that ethic, that he holds for himself, than mainstream society holds for themselves. We can consider this because we all have an understanding of anti-violence ethics. Likewise, we can all relate to an ethic about sexuality. We all agree that sexual abuse is harmful and that sexual exploitation is harmful with or without religious grounds for saying so. Therefore, it is not unimaginable that persons can have a more conservative ethic regarding the level at which to begin measuring that harm. ... with or without establishing religious grounds for saying so.