[FoRK] At the risk of inflaming JB and others ...

[il-young son]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:22 PM, il-young son <il.young.son at gmail.com> wrote:
> i generally agree with this sentiment.  one thing that struck me while
>  hearing hedge's interview was his misunderstanding what folks like
>  dawkins are arguing with respect to moral systems.  or maybe he's
>  drawing a straw man intentionally.  it's merely the skepticism of the
>  idea that the development of a moral system requires something like a
>  religious institute to codify.  this idea is rather poorly supported,
>  and does nothing to explain certain fairly invariant subset of moral
>  codes shared by practically all religions - and for that matter most
>  people whether religious or not (unless they are truly sociopathic).
>
>  as for hitchens, perhaps labeling him a "neo-con" was hyperbolic, but
>  have you read the articles he wrote leading up to iraq war??  (or even
>  before then with bosnian war).  at the least, his foreign policy views
>  are in alignment with those of "neoconservatives".  i think he admits
>  this himself.  maybe you agree or disagree with his foreign policy
>  views (he's strongly an interventionist - which is a very prominent
>  attribute of those who are labeled "neoconservative") - however, his
>  foreign policy views are for the most part in alignment with the
>  so-called "neocons".   being a prominent atheist mouthpiece doesn't
>  exclude one having such views.  personally, i suppose i dislike that
>  foreign policy position but that's me.  perhaps you think otherwise,
>  but that has nothing to do with one being an atheist or not.
>
>

fuck, i must be drunk, sorry for the grammatical mess.