Difference between revisions of "Talk:Day of silence"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Morality is not for individuals to decide) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:"The ''[fact]'' that LGBT is immoral...". You can dispute whether or not the claim is true, but it ''can'' be factual, as you implicitly acknowledge by referring to it as a fact. Why do you consider it to be ''only'' opinion and not factual? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:32, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | :"The ''[fact]'' that LGBT is immoral...". You can dispute whether or not the claim is true, but it ''can'' be factual, as you implicitly acknowledge by referring to it as a fact. Why do you consider it to be ''only'' opinion and not factual? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:32, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
::Morality is for each individual (and in US obscenity laws, each community :)) to decide. While there are some basic concept of morals such as kindness, charity, compassion, tolerance etc. Whether certain relationships are immoral is between you and your God, it is not the place of a encyclopedia to dictate morality [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 06:07, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | ::Morality is for each individual (and in US obscenity laws, each community :)) to decide. While there are some basic concept of morals such as kindness, charity, compassion, tolerance etc. Whether certain relationships are immoral is between you and your God, it is not the place of a encyclopedia to dictate morality [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 06:07, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | ::: Who says morality is for each individual to decide? The Bible declares some things to be moral and/or immoral; it doesn't leave it up to the individual. And morality is about what is right and wrong, and that is ''precisely'' the basis on which most laws are made. That is, we pass laws against robbery, for example, because it is ''wrong'' to take someone else's property. So I see no reason to claim that it is not the place of an encyclopedia to say so. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 07:00, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 11:00, March 11, 2008
The face that LGBT is immoral is a opinion not something for a encyclopedia. BTW, the first version of this page looked like the language Fred Phelps uses DLerner 01:28, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
- "The [fact] that LGBT is immoral...". You can dispute whether or not the claim is true, but it can be factual, as you implicitly acknowledge by referring to it as a fact. Why do you consider it to be only opinion and not factual? Philip J. Rayment 01:32, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
- Morality is for each individual (and in US obscenity laws, each community :)) to decide. While there are some basic concept of morals such as kindness, charity, compassion, tolerance etc. Whether certain relationships are immoral is between you and your God, it is not the place of a encyclopedia to dictate morality DLerner 06:07, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
- Who says morality is for each individual to decide? The Bible declares some things to be moral and/or immoral; it doesn't leave it up to the individual. And morality is about what is right and wrong, and that is precisely the basis on which most laws are made. That is, we pass laws against robbery, for example, because it is wrong to take someone else's property. So I see no reason to claim that it is not the place of an encyclopedia to say so. Philip J. Rayment 07:00, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
- Morality is for each individual (and in US obscenity laws, each community :)) to decide. While there are some basic concept of morals such as kindness, charity, compassion, tolerance etc. Whether certain relationships are immoral is between you and your God, it is not the place of a encyclopedia to dictate morality DLerner 06:07, 11 March 2008 (EDT)