From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka@lsil.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 14:05:57 +0800
To: Richard.Bragg@ssa.co.uk
Subject: Re: Democracy...
In-Reply-To: <80256681.0031C8CB.00@seunt002e.ssa.co.uk>
Message-ID: <36000B3E.780C@lsil.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> However, if you believe in something to be life changing and > beneficial to both the idividual and society you'll want or be
> compelled to "pass it on". 
>
Altruistic on the surface. Regarding religion though, why do I always
get the feeling that when implemented and empowered it is judgemental
and intolerant of those who do not fall properly in line?

> What I wanted to illustrate is that there are absolutes, to say there
> are no obsolutes is in itself an absolute and so is self defeating.
>
All right Mr. Logic, you're so sharp, give me ONE example of a *moral*
absolute.

> We must have absolutes.
>
We do: speed of light, mass of the electron, probably, but behavior? We
have behaviors that facilitate our persistance and propagation as a
species at ever increasing densities. Operating outside the boundaries
is neither right nor wrong, simply different. Not necessarily without
consequences, but simply different. Your yardstick is an hallucination
to which you cling to forlornly like a kitten clinging to a stick in a
raging river.

Mike

ps - is 'forlornly' really a word? I think so, but it looks odd today.