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

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 ]


To: the invisib1e hand
how can a proposition of "moral absolutes" be anything but all or nothing?

It can't. That means that unless you can make everyone agee to and abide by your moral code, you've failed. If you can't get it all, then by your account you have nothing, and you will never be able to have it all.

20 posted on 06/30/2010 2:15:13 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | 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