XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.atheism, alt.fun   
   XPost: alt.politics.democrats.d, talk.politics.guns   
   From: f00@0f0.00f   
      
   Clave wrote:   
   > If a storm breaks off a tree limb, and the limb hits the corner   
   > of your roof and takes off some of the eave and gutter, that's   
   > bad. If the limb crashes entirely through your roof and lands in   
   > the living room, that's worse. Goodness and badness – as   
   > practical consequences, not morality — occur along a spectrum. If   
   > you get an estimate for an automotive repair of $500, and it only   
   > ends up costing you $400, that's good. If it only ends up costing   
   > you $200, that's better, i.e. "more good."   
   >   
   > Morality is not like that. If you steal one tool (rake, shovel)   
   > from the side of your neighbor's house, that's wrong. If you   
   > steal all the tools, that's wrong, and it is not "more wrong"   
   > than stealing only one. Stealing all of them is a worse   
   > *practical* outcome for the neighbor, but either action is just   
   > wrong.   
      
   so you're saying mortality is independent of goodness or badness?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)