tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6406430766424642773.post6845489558841540409..comments2023-09-28T12:28:57.598+03:00Comments on Grahnlaw: Ethics and law of Swiss minaret banRalf Grahn http://www.blogger.com/profile/02156293782163802007noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6406430766424642773.post-53821201562920236752009-11-30T19:29:16.827+02:002009-11-30T19:29:16.827+02:00Michael D.,
As the starting point was about 180 ...Michael D., <br /><br />As the starting point was about 180 degrees off, I thought that three concepts roughly in the same ball park would do nicely in the same sentence (including one familiar to those who purport to defend Christian values and Western culture, but seem to possess the least of either). <br /><br />These issues won't go away, and finding acceptable solutions isn't going to be an easy task.Ralf Grahn https://www.blogger.com/profile/02156293782163802007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6406430766424642773.post-26182132755778406682009-11-30T16:37:44.576+02:002009-11-30T16:37:44.576+02:00Ehhh, Golden Rule and Kant's categorical/moral...Ehhh, Golden Rule and Kant's categorical/moral imperative are rather different... Kant's analysis concludes/starts in its first formulation on the lines of:<br /><br />'Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law'<br /><br />or, more to the point given the circumstances, in its third formulation:<br /><br />"Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends."<br /><br />Be that as it may, I do agree with you that this is indeed an interesting moral and legal dilemma... although admittedly much less legal than moral.Michael D.noreply@blogger.com