tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post1068371168616262855..comments2024-03-22T18:43:00.710-04:00Comments on Unam Sanctam Catholicam: Guest Post: Critiquing the "Non-Negotiable" DistinctionBonifacehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10672810254075072214noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-22895288239372267392016-11-11T10:12:55.064-05:002016-11-11T10:12:55.064-05:00I'm sedevacantist and voted Trump.
Hillary is ...I'm sedevacantist and voted Trump.<br />Hillary is demonic and possibly suffers from perfect possession.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-89004874626497100322016-11-01T14:54:01.046-04:002016-11-01T14:54:01.046-04:00I think abortion is a super-issue, specifically in...I think abortion is a super-issue, specifically in light of the common good reasoning. If someone is denied the very right to live, that compromises the very "common-ness" of the common good. Not That Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14793694853324262365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-15902481354633906372016-11-01T12:56:24.317-04:002016-11-01T12:56:24.317-04:00I am referring specifically to his proposals in hi...I am referring specifically to his proposals in his document "Contract with the American Voter"Bonifacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10672810254075072214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-26517964319946054922016-11-01T12:26:16.724-04:002016-11-01T12:26:16.724-04:00Have you read Zippy's take on the subject (of ...Have you read Zippy's take on the subject (of voting, not the current election)? I found it pretty convincing: https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2012/11/02/the-bus-stops-here/<br /><br />Zippy also recently pointed out that Trump's character and platform are both in many ways, including immigration policy, astonishingly similar to Hillary's husband's in 1996:<br /><br />"We must not tolerate illegal immigration. Since 1992, we have increased our Border Patrol by over 35%; deployed underground sensors, infrared night scopes and encrypted radios; built miles of new fences; and installed massive amounts of new lighting. We have moved forcefully to protect American jobs by calling on Congress to enact increased civil and criminal sanctions against employers who hire illegal workers. Since 1993, we have removed 30,000 illegal workers from jobs across the country." – Between Hope and History, by Bill Clinton, p.134 , Jan 1, 1996<br /><br />In other words, while I more or less agree with the critique of the whole negotiable/non-negotiable framework, I think voting (certainly in presidential elections, and probably most others) under the current circumstances is a mistake and has been for at least many decades, probably longer. Furthermore, while I do mildly prefer Trump to Hillary, the claim "best platform of any candidate in my lifetime" is one I must view skeptically.Hrodgarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11052168727776803292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-82503030171704812652016-10-31T20:01:13.300-04:002016-10-31T20:01:13.300-04:00I'm the author of this. Thank you for your fe...I'm the author of this. Thank you for your feedback. In a later revision, i removed that example for precisely the reason that it appeared to raise more questions than it answered. But taking your question seriously, I think one can only be responsible for what one is capable of knowing. I originally found global warming such an interesting example because to reach an accurate conception of anthropogenic forcing is a very difficult thing, especially for a non-scientist. If someone took seriously the IPCC 5 report, he would conclude that anthropogenic forcing (ie man-made climate change) has a high probability of killing many millions of people and changing life as we know it, and he would think it's a big issue. If he listened to the voices that many American Conservatives seem to listen to, he would think the effects will be negligible. But if he has done his due diligence to investigate it, how much fault does bear if wrong? If it is as big an issue as the IPCC thinks it is, but he is in good conscience skeptical of that and believes it isn't, is he morally culpable for any preventable consequences? Or, alternatively, if he is convinced of the IPCC conclusions, is he morally culpable for over-weighing the importance of global warming if human forcing of the environment ends up having minimal impact? To me, this is an especially fascinating issue because people wildly disagree, in absolute confidence that their own conclusions are correct, and the consequences of getting it wrong are potentially so big, either way. I personally am a moderate skeptic, but far from certain about my skepticism, as some are.<br /><br />If i were convinced of the worst, in good faith, and I was convinced industrial efforts could make a big difference, I would think this was a huge issue.<br /><br />As far as culpability about being wrong, my inclination is that that would be dependent upon whether one had done his due diligence to reach the level of certainty that he held. If he had done all someone can be reasonably expected to do in the circumstances, i don't think he would be culpable.<br /><br />But you can see why I removed that example in my most recent iteration of this essay, which, sadly, was not available when this blog post was posted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6086833995941525990.post-63499697708366217322016-10-31T16:59:56.606-04:002016-10-31T16:59:56.606-04:00Bit confused wrt the abortion vs global warming ex...Bit confused wrt the abortion vs global warming example. It seems to downplay the need to make an objective and correct evaluation of the facts. Is it not objectively true that either abortion is a greater threat to the common good than climate change, or vice versa - both cannot be true. To what extent is one culpable for evaluating incorrectly?c mattnoreply@blogger.com