tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post110937045719234545..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: Values-Based DebateDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-65092816991591603022011-01-19T08:02:57.723-08:002011-01-19T08:02:57.723-08:00This modern society has been changing the morals i...This modern society has been changing the morals issues. I think we need to understand the real philosophy, we need more philosophers and sociological views, we need to study the problem. Generally the bloggers never write about it, but in this case you're the exception. I really appreciate it, and we can notice that.Viagra Onlinehttp://www.iservepharmacy.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-45292634268108644332008-01-16T07:26:00.000-08:002008-01-16T07:26:00.000-08:00all normative arguments actually revolve around a ...all normative arguments actually revolve around a consequentialist framework....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1109448129558599522005-02-26T12:02:00.000-08:002005-02-26T12:02:00.000-08:00Okay, #1 the slippery slope argument takes out 1, ...Okay, #1 the slippery slope argument takes out 1, maybe 1.5 of the arguments I made here. I still have liberty, pro-family, and anti-subordination entirely intact. So to label the entire argument incoherent just tells me you didn't read most of the argument.<br /><br />Second, you're misunderstanding the analysis behind slippery slope. The X (incest, bestiality) is bad independent of gay marriage, so the slippery slope offered makes no sense. In the "inverted slippery slope" I gave, however, I proved above that there was NO difference between the cases offered (inter-racial marriage, single parent homes) and the issue of gay marriage. So under the principles of equal protection, something has to go somewhere: either we treat gays like interracial couples (and allow them to marry), or interracial couples like gays (and prohibit them from marrying).<br /><br />Third, on polygamy. A lot of feminist scholars have argued that polygamy is inherently degrading to women. I'm not sure. So you tell me: why is polygamy wrong? What makes polygamy bad, besides loads of people saying so?David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1109403901369885802005-02-25T23:45:00.000-08:002005-02-25T23:45:00.000-08:00This argument is incoherent. First it uses a slipp...This argument is incoherent. First it uses a slippery slope to counter the opponents' points, then it says that slippery slope arguments are wrong.<br /><br />That's poor reasoning.<br /><br />Also, on what basis is polygamy wrong if homosexual conduct is not? Many people would like to live with multiple spouses. On what basis would you deny them that? And how would would you do so without resorting to anti-same-sex marriage arguments?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-1109371234496887482005-02-25T14:40:00.000-08:002005-02-25T14:40:00.000-08:00re slippery slope, you forgot polygamy.
Unconsuma...re slippery slope, you forgot polygamy.<br /><br />Unconsumated polygamy by that seems to me the way to get around inheritance tax, marry your heirs. :)Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10837999838469082203noreply@blogger.com