Re: Universals
- From: " KRP" <web2457k@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 14:11:28 GMT
"Hal (Nomen Nescio)" <fritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message
news:ec3dcaa53b14c15580b1ebef6c1590e9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I have to make a somewhat philosophical post here, so if anyone wishes to
>add other newsgroups to this thread, please do so.
> I am sorry to have to begin this with another mention of underage sex,
> which may give the impression of me being obsessed with the topic. I am no
> more than any other perceived injustice.
> I realise that the idea of statutory rape is a very modern one - while
> traditional cultures may have had many restrictions on sexual activity, I
> am not aware of any that used age itself as a judgement until the later
> 19th century.
What age is this "magic" under age? Is it the same for males and
females? I think we can agree that 12 and under is inappropriate
universally. But what of a 16 or 17 year old girl and a 25 year old man?
I'm not as sure as you. I think it is more complex.
> Many immoral things have been accepted traditionally, of course, but the
> key difference is this: for certain things, such as cruelty and
> corruption, there has always been some people (at least) who thought them
> wrong in all societies. For 'statutory rape' I do not believe that there
> was anyone who would support such an idea very long ago. So I can
> distinguish by that test behavior that is truly wrong from that that is
> merely 'taboo' in our present society.
It would be better if nobody had sex before age 18. BUT...............
> I consider myself to be a 'universal man', and believe in a universal
> morality. So, I do not find underage sex (nor incest) to be inherently
> wrong. I do not find eating dog, cat, horse, etc. to be inherently wrong.
> I do not find 'improper' disposal of dead corpses to be inherently wrong.
> And I do not find misogyny to be inherently wrong.
I find incest intrincicly wrong 100% of the time. I find misogyny,
misandry and racism inherantly wrong.
> I believe that the most worthwhile thing a man can do is to attempt to
> build a better society. One way to do that is through the common things:
> technology, politics, and living morally oneself. The other way, the
> really important way, is to change people's beliefs. It may not always be
> the most important, but ultimately abandoning such 'taboos' is necessary,
> not only are they unjust in themselves, they are an obstacle to clear
> thinking. And, as anyone who agrees on statutory rape knows, they present
> real trouble for our common cause.
> This is the greatest crime of Andre Lieven. Certainly not just that he
> disagreed, not even that he is stupid, offensive, and vulgar, but that he
> hates. He is driven by hatred, and that can't be tolerated.
As I mentioned in another newsgroup earlier. John Lennon went on a
journey that took him to, among other places, the Himalayas to "find the
true meaning of life." On that quest he penned his classic song "Imagine."
The ramblings of a confused little boy. Imagine no governments, no language
differences, no racial differences, no religion, no family, no possessions
(socialism) and nothing to live or die for. In short a TOTALLY EMPTY life.
One completely devoid of meaning or joy! Imagine being a tree slug. No
nobility, no courage, no striving to learn and be more than you are. Imagine
being STUPID!
Yes there are universal wrongs............... Striving to be better and
build positive things is the meaning of life. To enjoy life and be as kind
to others as you can be. To stand for the right and against the wrong.. And
with those close to you - to love as hard as you can - to give as much of
your heart and soul as you can.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Universals
- From: Nomen Nescio
- Re: Universals
- References:
- Universals
- From: Nomen Nescio
- Universals
- Prev by Date: Re: Don't vote Tory
- Next by Date: Asian tit quiz
- Previous by thread: Re: Universals
- Next by thread: Re: Universals
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
