4 ms·
I don't disagree with you, and in fact I never said my position was an argument. Most of us use assertions when it comes to human rights. For example, most of u
by chroma 13y ago
I don't disagree with you, and in fact I never said my position was an argument. Most of us use assertions when it comes to human rights. For example, most of us would agree that the state doesn't (or shouldn't) have the power to enslave or torture, no matter what crime one may have committed. There may be very good arguments for doing these things (deterrence, saves more lives than it destroys, punishment proportional to the crime, etc), but we outright reject any system that would allow, let alone engage in, these horrific practices.
- mikeash 13y agoWe can still talk about why those things are worth rejecting. You don't seem to want that.
- chroma 13y agoI don't mind the discussion, but I think the arguments on both sides are typically rationalizations. People have quick, visceral responses in which they form conclusions on these matters, then they think of reasons why those conclusions must be true. That process seems to happen in a lot of areas, but none more so than discussion of politics and morality. By the way: Thank you for your responses. I like how you've managed to be concise, civil, and probing.