TMC, your rejoinder is silly, and I can't help but think that someone as thoughtful as you is unaware of the fallacies you included in it.

I gave an example of an act, which you realized I considered wrong ("that they should remain intact superior to the opinion ...").

I then proposed force be used to stop the wrong act.

Then, as if you had no idea that it was the judgment of wrongness of the act that justified force to prevent it, you insinuate that I hold the opposite opinion: that the *power* to enforce a standard of right and wrong somehow *defines* that standard.

If you can't see that you put the cart before the horse, then I'm going to have to emulate Larry: I'm just going to ignore your silly remarks, because you're not helping. P.S. Don't expect to be appointed a Moderator any time soon...

Ed Poor Rational Anarchist and all-around nice guy <--- who can only be pushed so far