Don Pearce wrote:

You are confusing health with morals.
No I'm not. Having VD reduced the efficiency of the man to function as a
soldier. That was immoral.


So a broken leg is immoral.

No, because that would be the result of an accident. Morality only
applies to deliberate actions or omissions of action. It something
happens and it's no-one's responsibility then the issue of morality
doesn't arise.

So don't be daft.

Bill

Don Pearce wrote:

Purpose of morality? What on earth are you talking about? Morality
isn't a thing with a purpose. It is a set of crystallized prejudices.
So presumably you don't believe in any morality whatsoever? How would
you feel if someone raped a member of your family, or drunkenly crashed
their car into yours and killed your nearest and dearest?

Your position here is absurd; quite untenable.

As for your list. You are certainly guilty of No. 1.
Most of us are, in truth.

Possibly No. 7
too.
Definitely. Very much so.

Bill

Ah, the good old fallacy of the excluded middle. Always the first
resort of the extremist.

You obviously don't understand that rule of logic. And you are wriggling.

Bill

J G Miller wrote:
On Saturday, February 11th, 2012, at 14:53:06h +0000,
David Looser propagated this red herring:

If J G Miller thinks that giving women more independence equates
to "morals deteriorating badly" then maybe he has a point!

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Your attempt at linking two totally unrelated issues is nothing
less than disingenuous and ill-considered.

Not only that, it was ********.

Bill

David Looser wrote:

There are *far* from being unrelated! A sexual act takes two

Are you denying something here?

Bill

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
So presumably you don't believe in any morality whatsoever? How would
you feel if someone raped a member of your family, or drunkenly crashed
their car into yours and killed your nearest and dearest?

Those are crimes. Morals are different.

They are crimes, but they are also immoral acts.

But to avoid your red herring, suppose a bloke seduced your daughter
whilst having no genuine feelings for her himself. The girl had learning
difficulties but was just old enough to consent. The man got her
pregnant, then dumped her. Can you see anything wrong with this man's
actions, or do you think they were perfectly acceptable?

Bill

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:01:59 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

You are confusing health with morals.
No I'm not. Having VD reduced the efficiency of the man to function as a
soldier. That was immoral.


So a broken leg is immoral.

No, because that would be the result of an accident. Morality only
applies to deliberate actions or omissions of action. It something
happens and it's no-one's responsibility then the issue of morality
doesn't arise.

So don't be daft.

Bill

Nobody gets VD deliberately. It happens as the result of an accidental
coming together. Just the same as a broken leg.

d

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
J G Miller wrote:
On Saturday, February 11th, 2012, at 14:53:06h +0000,
David Looser propagated this red herring:

If J G Miller thinks that giving women more independence equates
to "morals deteriorating badly" then maybe he has a point!

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Your attempt at linking two totally unrelated issues is nothing
less than disingenuous and ill-considered.

Not only that, it was ********.

On the contrary it was common sense. Women got more freedom during the war
as a result of which they were able to engage in more of what some here wish
to call "immorality" than they would have able to do before the war. Its not
my fault if you and Mr Miller cannot see the bleedin' obvious!

David.

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:14:43 -0000, "David Looser"
wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
J G Miller wrote:
On Saturday, February 11th, 2012, at 14:53:06h +0000,
David Looser propagated this red herring:

If J G Miller thinks that giving women more independence equates
to "morals deteriorating badly" then maybe he has a point!

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Your attempt at linking two totally unrelated issues is nothing
less than disingenuous and ill-considered.

Not only that, it was ********.

On the contrary it was common sense. Women got more freedom during the war
as a result of which they were able to engage in more of what some here wish
to call "immorality" than they would have able to do before the war. Its not
my fault if you and Mr Miller cannot see the bleedin' obvious!

David.

Bill's problem is that he is a puritan - well described as someone who
lives in terror that somebody, somewhere, is enjoying himself.

d

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:04:00 +0000, Don Pearce wrote:


Bill's problem is that he is a puritan

Problem? If the definition of (2) below does apply, why would
it be a problem except for those who wish to promote immorality?


well described as someone who lives in terror that somebody,
somewhere, is enjoying himself.

Not well described but a completely wrong description.


Definition of PURITAN

1 capitalized : a member of a 16th and 17th century Protestant group in
England and New England opposing as unscriptural the ceremonial worship
and the prelacy of the Church of England

2 one who practices or preaches a more rigorous or professedly purer
moral code than that which prevails

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:15:32 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:04:00 +0000, Don Pearce wrote:


Bill's problem is that he is a puritan

Problem? If the definition of (2) below does apply, why would
it be a problem except for those who wish to promote immorality?


well described as someone who lives in terror that somebody,
somewhere, is enjoying himself.

Not well described but a completely wrong description.


Definition of PURITAN

1 capitalized : a member of a 16th and 17th century Protestant group in
England and New England opposing as unscriptural the ceremonial worship
and the prelacy of the Church of England

2 one who practices or preaches a more rigorous or professedly purer
moral code than that which prevails

Oh dear, he doesn't get it at all.

d