I wasn't planing on posting in this thread, especially not when my motivation for the post resides in the realm of the tangential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage0070
Suppose a man falls out of a boat in the ocean and finds himself completely submerged. A fellow boater suggests that the man hold his breath. Kant disagrees, saying that if we universalize the axiom we would all asphyxiate. Kant is also a moron.
|
In a little defense of Kant, I think that the axiom there would rather be, "when it is needed in oder for my own survival, I shall hold my breath, until there becomes such a time when holding my breath is not required for my survival, or such a time that I need oxygen to stay alive"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage0070
Do the rich somehow have a greater supply or access to their own sexual organs? It could be argued that they have access to more *other* sexual organs I suppose, or that they have more free time, but I don't see anything about being poor that prevents being gay.
|
Here I was drawing an example from ancient Greece, where it was not uncommon for rich men to have same sex relationships, and as a common theme it was more a preserve of the rich, wholly because the lives of the poor are not recorded in isolation.
So it was a rather poor example, but my main focus behind the whole "what do you think" line was purely to stimulate some intellectual debate, albeit rather poorly.
And here was my motivation for the post,
I found this at the bottom of the page as I was posting and I found it rather appropriate to the topic In hand.
"A-C-L-U We defend your right to screw!
--American Civil Liberties Union slogan chanted at Chicago's 25th Annual Gay and Lesbian Pride parade"