Comment: I am saying your philosophical point is flawed

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Sure. (see in situ)

I am saying your philosophical point is flawed

at best. More appropriately it is a creative, selective sense of right and wrong, good and evil that is conveniently self-serving.

Without much guidance a typical four year old knows that they are not supposed to do things like sneaking cookies from the cookie jar. Yet there are few four year olds that have not given in to actions like that. They know it is wrong yet they still do it.

Four year olds ignoring what they know to be "wrong" to get what they want is easily understood and rightly not taken too seriously.

Adults rationalizing adults doing the same, doing wrong because they were tempted, because they "wanted it", because they "meant no harm" is a dangerous philosophy to promote. We already know a large percentage of "adults" cannot control their impulses, cannot confine them to actions that cause no harm to others. Providing philosophic cover to those that will satisfy any selfish whim regardless of known (or should be known) consequences to others is in polar conflict with the purposes of our movement. The recklessly selfish do not need additional aid. It is the thoughtful that could use a break from the onslaught of the willfully thoughtless w/ insatiable appetites and insufficient or unwilling means.

What sadly but naturally occurs in high percentages has also been given mass conditioning encouragement for a long time. Please consider not adding further encouragement.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in