OK, they may not be called that but killing ppl for having sex with someone of same sex is wrong in every context.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Right—so in order to make your moral point, you had to make it more abstract. That's not surprising and is an example of what I'm saying.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fronxer
Are we at cross purposes? I'm not saying all cultures have the same moral values. I'm saying we shouldn't validate them all.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @fronxer
By cultural relativity, I mean saying things like 'Its wrong for a christian to discriminate against LGBTs but OK for a Muslim'
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @fronxer
Cultural relativity is when your own ethics shift depending on who is doing something, not noticing different cultural values exist
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Ok, *that* definition I can relate to more than the previous one.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fronxer
That's always what I meant. If I was unclear, that's why we're at cross purposes.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
"…ethics shift depending on" — I'm focusing on the "depending on" part, assuming consistent ethics, applied in a context-aware manner.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @fronxer
Well, I'm talking about inconsistent ethics. Culturally relative ones.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Are they inconsistent from an external perspective or are they explicitly considered inconsistent even by the person holding them?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Externally. The person may well be unaware of his own inconsistency & need to be shown they have double standards re culture.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.