It's May 16, 2024, 09:40:06 AM
the question is, does it matter? Maybe all we need to do is 'go far', that is, be objective to an attainable utilitarian extent
Infringing on minorities is what order and utilitarianism is all about: the law is utilitarian in that it upholds the interests of the majority at the expense of the minority. In short, thats the meaning of utilitarian. We have objective laws (and the the law is an objective standard as I already said) and it impedes on the subjective minority views of pedophiles, rapists, robbers, murderers, radical Islamists, etc. Now using the law as an exmaple of an objective standard, the law knows it infringes on the rights of a minority and it is fine with that as long as it is a minority that warrants it. Today the universality of objective human rights is borne out by the fact that the majority of nations, covering the full spectrum of cultural, religious and political traditions, have adopted and ratified the main international human rights instruments. Now unless you are arguing for a North African Imam's right to snip off the clitoris of a Muslim girl because prejudice laden objective Western notions of woman's rights are impeding on the Imam's subjective beliefs of female hygeine then I don't see why you keep pushing your 'Western objectivism is oppressive' line
Oh so ur in league with that moron too now are you...a league of morons
Quote from: Illuminati Clique on August 27, 2009, 02:45:09 AMOh so ur in league with that moron too now are you...a league of moronshuh???
yo illuminati... i got no beef you man... u win... im not into sophistry man... and thats wat this is