apeman wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:16 am
Oh, nevermind, Kavanaugh was just some "bad shit happens", let's strike a handshake deal with the people who called him a gang rapist
The Democrats would have loved him if only he had been a rapist that resisted arrest and then got shot. Or if he had been a multiple time child rapist who chased after a minor with a Molotov and got shot. Those are heroes.
Martin Hash wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:14 am
I believe a man’s gotta have a code but you’re making principles sounds a lot like morals? The only principle is liberty, and all other decisions flow from there. If you want, I’ll make those decisions for you?
That's a good principle.
I am not sure what the moral/principle distinction is in your lexicon, though, since morality is typically defined as principles for determining right from wrong.
You haven't been listening to my podcasts again...
"Right" & "wrong" are subjective. Liberty is measurable.
Martin Hash wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 10:14 am
I believe a man’s gotta have a code but you’re making principles sounds a lot like morals? The only principle is liberty, and all other decisions flow from there. If you want, I’ll make those decisions for you?
That's a good principle.
I am not sure what the moral/principle distinction is in your lexicon, though, since morality is typically defined as principles for determining right from wrong.
You haven't been listening to my podcasts again...
"Right" & "wrong" are subjective. Liberty is measurable.
If you'll indulge me in an abstraction, it sounds like you are saying that a good principle has to be measurable for effective determinations of right and wrong. That doesn't nullify morality, it is just a boundary around which principles you think are valid for sorting right from wrong - or, in a word - morality.
HAIL!
Her needs America so they won't just take his shit away like in some pussy non gun totting countries can happen.
-Hwen
Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:46 am
Your insistence that your principles are amoral confuses me.
My understanding of Martin's thought is that he holds Liberty above anything else. He chooses not to ascribe morality to the concept of Liberty because morality is constricting, which is in opposition to Liberty.
I think that's what he believes. I don't want to misrepresent him.
Hanarchy Montanarchy wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:46 am
Your insistence that your principles are amoral confuses me.
My understanding of Martin's thought is that he holds Liberty above anything else. He chooses not to ascribe morality to the concept of Liberty because morality is constricting, which is in opposition to Liberty.
I think that's what he believes. I don't want to misrepresent him.
