PubliusInfinitum
Rookie
- Aug 18, 2008
- 6,805
- 729
- Thread starter
- #261
PI, why doesn't freedom include the freedom to destroy one's self?
Good question Monty...
It falls to the immutable principle that one's life is an endowment form one's Creator; a gift, which is provided to you, without your having any say... you've been given that life from an authority which you've no means to contest; thus you've no authority to reject it; the life is rightfully yours; but that right comes with the responsibility to DEFEND IT... to the extent of one's means.
And by that, do you really mean kill one's self? I ask because depending on the standards and morals used to judge, people could be said to destroy themselves on plenty of occasions (spiritually, morally, financially, etc.).
Indeed... and in every instance, such is a result of errors in judgment. Wouldn't you agree?
I also didn't see matt say anything about improvement through the sexualization of children.
You're right, and I didn't say that Matt HAD 'said' so... I said that Matt's postion, wherein he touts that the culture has been improved; necessarily requires that where the culture has during the relevant period been sexualized; that the conclusion advanced by Matt, cannot escape that such is a function of that 'improvement'... and where such is the case, there is no means to conclude an improvement in the culture; as such establishes in indisputable terms, a DECLINE in the culture... and, as I pointed out, clultures in decline are not rising... thus not improving.