(07-08-2019, 06:58 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote:(07-08-2019, 02:37 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: LGBT rights are a moral choice in the same sense that the dignity of dark-skinned people is a moral choice. Such is no more scientific than is establishing some optimum in the level of taxation.
Exactly. There is no scientific politics, science is just a tool which can be used to further "good" or "evil" aims. China uses science to establish an unshakable tyranny. So did the Nazis and Bolsheviks, who grounded their ideologies in supposed scientific concepts.
For me this is what scientism means - using science to make value judgements, rather than merely factual statements. Science can tell us whether homosexuality is innate or not, but a value judgement doesn't follow. Value judgements have to come from religion or philosophy.Quote:It is safe to say that where life, property, family stability, the integrity of utterances by writing or speech, or sanctity of other people's reproductive organs is not safe, life is precarious and miserable. I became fully for LGBT rights after I was gay-based and recognized that gay-bashing was inconsistent with the needful law and order at a minimum necessary for a livable society.
Quote:[quote]
Note well that the GOP has been appealing to people who hold science in contempt -- including religious fundamentalists who consider science a tool of the Devil for exploitation and abuse of people who think themselves innocent due to their ignorance. (Never mind that ignorance is not innocence, as one can know about horrific crimes while holding such crimes and their perpetrators in deep contempt.
I'm loving it! I asked a question about democrats and you answer about republicans.
Implicit in that statement is that people who put reason above gut feelings are increasingly likely to become Democrats because they find themselves with no room in the GOP.
Quote:Among academics have been some decided conservatives such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman in economics, people who recognized the idea that unfettered markets are far more effective than is central planning in achieving prosperity and equity. Then there are arch-conservatives who teach at colleges (often academically-suspect "bible schools") that push arch-conservative ideology as the supposed will of God.
Yeah, I also wanted to reply along these lines.
Equity and extreme equality are incompatible. Good reason exists for differences in pay between unskilled labor and skilled labor. Competence deserves reward, and incompetence that one be obliged to seek other employment. On the other side, extreme inequality that seems to have a basis in a tradition of oppression and exploitation is usually suspect.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.