Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: the invisib1e hand

The “social conservatives” set themselves up to lose this one by trying to polarize the debate and make it a “moral absolute”, all-or-nothing proposition.


17 posted on 06/30/2010 8:36:03 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic
set themselves up to lose this one by trying to polarize the debate and make it a “moral absolute”, all-or-nothing proposition.

how can a proposition of "moral absolutes" be anything but all or nothing?

Buried in your objection is a defense of moral relativism, which is THE problem, and I might add, that which excludes one from the class of "conservative" -- as that class is by definition those acknowledging Natural Law (as absolute as it gets) either explicitly or implicitly by acknowledgment of the founding principles and documents as a Supreme Law.

19 posted on 06/30/2010 2:05:50 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (I don't speak starbucks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson