home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!news.mr.med.ge.com!gorney
- From: gorney@picard.med.ge.com (Felix Gorney Mfg 4-6983)
- Subject: Re: Religious Right
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.102244.17193@mr.med.ge.com>
- Sender: news@mr.med.ge.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: guppie
- Organization: GE Medical Systems, Magnetic Resonance
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
- References: <1992Nov17.220829.15155@novell.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 10:22:44 GMT
- Lines: 18
-
- : > Tim Irvin apparently argues that people should be allowed to do
- : >whatever they want, provided they don't hurt others, (or presumably
- : >do not use fraud). This is precisely the position taken by Andre Marrou,
- : >and I can get a reference if you like. But you're forgetting something:
- : >to say that such and such "should" be allowed is to advance a moral
- : >position. It is just as moralistic as a morality that calls for
- : >prohibition of an action. Permissions and prohibitions differ in
- :
- Maybee we need a constitutional ammendment stating that the govt. shall
- neither promote, nor prohibit abortion. This could easily fit under
- seperation of church, and state. That way, the govt. could not make
- abortion illlegal. Of course, the liberals would argue that it prohibits
- the govt. from providing money to institutions that provide abortion.
- That is if they wanted to appear consistent.
-
- Felix Gorney
-
-
-