KC (11-07-2012)
I think I'm within Natural law theory, whereby we have natural rights. With regard to morals, natural law theory leaves the question of God open because as Grotius said "Just as even God cannot cause that two times two should not make four, so He cannot cause that which is intrinsically evil be not evil." (De Iure Belli ac Pacis (1625), cf The Ethics of Liberty).
Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.
~Alain de Benoist
I think natural law theory is strengthened when it is combined with faith. After all, if he exists, would God want a bunch of Chatty Cathy dolls, who's strings he could pull at any time and hear "I love you"? No, God would have given us free will, so that we choose to make the right moral choices, choose to love and treat one another with respect, and ultimately choose to love Him. Why would he want man to take away what He has given?
Kabuki Joe (11-07-2012)
Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.
~Alain de Benoist
Sure it is. The idea that "children" (what does that mean? under 18?) cannot consent is not a biological law but a legal custom. It can change. A gay marriage, for example, would have been a bizarre idea to an early 20th century American. They drew the line at same sex marriage (assuming such a thing would even have crossed their minds) but that changed...abruptly.
Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.
~Alain de Benoist
Kabuki Joe (11-07-2012)