akuma587 said:
appolose said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Alright, then let me add a fine distinction of terms, that social freedom is different from morality. Akuma isn't contradicting anything by imposing social freedom. Because in the case of imposing social freedom, nothing is being imposed. Nothing is being taken away, nothing is being forced. Morality can be imposed because it forces somebody to do something. Social freedom cannot be imposed because it doesn't force a person to do anything. So his saying "Let people do this if they choose" is very different from saying "Do not ever do this". One imposes the other allows.
He isn't saying "under no circumstances ever think to yourself that gays will go to hell" that would be imposing morality and would be hypocritical. What he's saying is "let them do as they please". Which isn't a restriction, which is what the ban imposes. One is a negative the other a neutral. Social freedom =/= morality
|
While I would agree with that, he is imposing that no one should murder (for example).
|
Because it takes away other people's freedoms. And yes, that is a contradiction, but can a Judeo-Christian ethos claim that are no contradictions within that ethos?
|
So, you would agree, then, that to impose a restricition upon murder is no less a forcing of morality as is restricting homosexual marriage (that is, both are imposing something (which is soley the issue, here))?
In any event, I'll have to say... yes, I do not think the Judeo-Christian morality is contradictory; that is, my imposing of my morality does not contradict my morality.
