Obama effectively clinches nomination

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

Just because you disagree with something doesn't make it irresponsible.

Abortions aren't wrong just because some slack jawed "pastor" says so.

Increasing the human population in the name of your "god" is irresponsible.

Thanks for the stunningly brilliant analysis.

Irresponsibility will always be subjective. I was responding to an assertion that freedom should sometimes yield when conduct becomes irresponsible, and presenting the possibility of a double standard.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Thanks for the stunningly brilliant analysis.

Irresponsibility will always be subjective.

that was point, thanks for playing along

So should laws be subjective?

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

that was point, thanks for playing along

So should laws be subjective?

All laws are subjective, and because I believe in a society with laws, my answer is yes.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

All laws are subjective, and because I believe in a society with laws, my answer is yes.

So, if the law were reversed, and abortions were required in 9 out of 10 cases, would you still believe that? Or only this time because you agree with the subjectivity of the subject law?

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

So, if the law were reversed, and abortions were required in 9 out of 10 cases, would you still believe that? Or only this time because you agree with the subjectivity of the subject law?

Would I still believe what?

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Would I still believe what?

I'm having a hard time following, but what I *think* he was posing was, if abortion were made illegal to the extent that it couldn't just "be birth control", as you said, and only allowed in situations it was deemed necessary, if in 9 out of 10 cases it was determined abortion was absolutely "necessary", would you then still believe in the law that allowed abortion in those cases?

I think, anyway, I actually just confused myself typing it a little... maybe he'll come back and clarify.

[RU OX Alum]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Would I still believe what?

Would you still think laws should be subjective, if the law was not in your favor, basically.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

Would you still think laws should be subjective, if the law was not in your favor, basically.

Laws ARE subjective, and no, I'm not in favor of them when they disagree with my interpretations. Perhaps I can think of laws which I dislike but still think are important, but then my favor has changed. Or perhaps some public referendum that I disagree with, but personally wouldn't overturn because the people have made that decision.