Aloha Bodvar, Don R. and Lila Squad,
By my reckoning, it's still November in Hawaii so Morality is still
under discussion.
Furthermore, Diana has yet to officially declare the new topic.
(how about that for using reason to justify whatever one likes).
BODVAR
<<<
I agree all the way down through your [Jonathan's]
deliberations on eugenics, and I
wished that I had stopped at the "...eugenics as an idea should not be
contemplated". Not that the rest of the paragraph is wrong but a
little cryptic without qualifications...and who has the time to read
explanations at this twenty-letters-a-day pace? ;-)
>>>
Bodvar, it seems to me that you actually STARTED with the premise that
"...eugenics as an idea should not be
contemplated". Without you having to write a word, I already KNEW that
this would be your conclusion, because you are a decent reasonable human
being.
Don R. (drose):
<<<
The "ordinary sensibility", "basic human decency", gut instinct you guys
are discussing is all built on Social level "values" - Judeo-Christian
ethics here in the West.
>>>
I believe that these values transcend culture - certainly
Judeo-Christian ethics don't have a monopoly.
I would put the emphasis on the "instinct" aspect. We can argue whether
to call it biological or social (maybe both), but it is definitely part
of human nature.
>The idea of rejecting any God based on "basic human decency" is mildly
amusing.
Is it? Mankind has "known" many Gods who "demanded" immoral practices
such as child sacrifice. Most of these Gods have indeed been rejected.
Best wishes to all,
Jonathan
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:42 BST