Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsstat!laura
From: laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: whats natural
Message-ID: <1491@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Nov-83 00:38:17 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.1491
Posted: Mon Nov 28 00:38:17 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 28-Nov-83 00:40:37 EST
References: <2409@ncsu.UUCP>, <350@bbncca.ARPA>
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 17

From Martin Schoffstall:

	I assume then because a certain threshold (5% say) of humans
	do something it becomes "natural".  Does this include wife-beating,
	murder, etc....  One step further, if 5% of humans did murder,
	beat their wives, (you name your favorite), is this good?
	
Nope. Wrong question. X is natural does not imply X is good.
Earthquakes and plagues are natural as well.  However, once you
have decided that you will argue whether X is good then you should
not use the shabby argument "X is unnatural". The morality of an action
is much more fun to discuss anyway -- BUT NOT HERE. Let's try net.religon,
if you want to argue from a religious base, or net.philosophy if you
don't, huh?

laura creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laura