andrewducker: (Default)
andrewducker ([personal profile] andrewducker) wrote2003-08-04 02:50 pm

Morals

Following on from Allorin's post here, I'm intrigued as to whether peopel think that morals are principles that can be applied to situations or are situational (but you can generalise into principles) or something else...

[Poll #164321]
ext_52479: (Default)

[identity profile] nickys.livejournal.com 2003-08-04 07:46 am (UTC)(link)
It's all very complicated, because there are conflicting rights in almost all cases. One person's right to do something conflicts with another person's right to be left in peace.

Freedom of speech is often in conflict with the right for people to avoid things that upset them (as we discussed earlier with the example of gruesome anti-vivisection posters being placed where my seven year old can see them as we walk along the street).

[identity profile] allorin.livejournal.com 2003-08-04 08:01 am (UTC)(link)
Disagree.

The message can be the same, without the offensive image. The animals rights aren't protected any more by an offensive message than they would be without one.
ext_52479: (Default)

[identity profile] nickys.livejournal.com 2003-08-04 10:24 am (UTC)(link)
Not really. I have no objection to those posters being shown to anyone over voting age, because they have a moral responsibility to know what's going on in the country even if they'd rather not.

But my kids can't vote yet, so there is no purpose in upsetting them over a situation which they have no power to change.