>===== Original Message From moq_discuss@moq.org =====
RICK
>> >Pirsig says it is generally immoral for society to kill a criminal
>because
>> >he still a potential source of ideas.
RASHEED
Maybe it all depends upon whether or not hundreds of years
> later people will look back and say that Ted Bundy would have strengthened
> our society if he would have been allowed to live
Okay I completely understand that it is immoral to kill another because their
ideas could be realized as valuable. So in a sense the MOQ doesn't allow you
to "judge" the sources of ideas as valuable or not, time will tell. But if one
of those ideas is that " allowing assisted suicide for terminally ill
patients is more moral then keeping them alive unwillfuly for any potential
ideas." it doesn't seem like it gets a chance for the "time will tell" test.
I guess I am having a hard time figuring out the difference whether we are
protecting the ideas or the sources of ideas. Our intellect is always judging
ideas so why is looking at the morality of death penalty, assisted suicide,
abortion from the intellectual level not allowing the this?
Erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:58 BST