best helmet...

[license2ill]

I've been away for a bit.  I'll try to keep my response relatively light, friendly and brief.  This is an interesting topic for a separate thread.  Maybe something titled "Metaethics & Epistemology".  That ought to either draw the curious or chase away the riff raff ;)

The premise that I have drawn from your statement is that moral/ethical lines can never be drawn out of concern that others may have their own ethical/moral lines that may be used against you (not you literally).  I reject that idea.  Under the law of identity, there are absolutes.  While not everything is black and white, there are some areas of clear right and wrong, good and bad.  Ethically speaking that is.

Ethical/moral beliefs have to stand on their own.  The decision to follow/act on one's ethical/moral beliefs should (hopefully) not be based on a fear of retribution.  When that is the case, that person has no true moral compass.  That person is behaving illogically because he/she is subordinating a lower value for a higher value.  I am here presuming the ethical/moral belief to have the higher value because it is an ethical/moral belief.  Otherwise, it's just another fact or opinion in one's mind.

While I joke around in my recent disdain for the French and the choice to boycott their products (Michelin & BF Goodrich tires; Hennessy cognac; Maybelline & L'Oreal cosmetics; Nissan automobiles; Dannon yogurt, blah, blah, blah), it is fair and proper to use the instruments that give support to a government or a policy to express opposition to that government or policy.  Hence the boycott of businesses that conducted business in South Africa (in the past) or the boycotting of Japanese companies because of the Japanese government's policy on whaling.

Nope, you missed my point again. The point was that your own "ethical dilemma" can be said about just about any culture or political entity of your choosing depending on how far back in history you want to go and who is associated with your issue. If you begin to look within your own political borders or identity you will find those same ethical questions, and so will others, in the same way you have done.

[H-man]

Wrong again, eh?  Well, I've been known to be wrong a lot.  Ask my ex-.

What you write is partly true.  First, there is no true dilemna.  That word gets used incorrectly a lot.  It isn't a matter of A is bad, B is bad and a choice must be made between A or B.

As far as the ethical questions existing within one's own political borders or at nearly any point in history, that is correct.  One, that doesn't preclude making a stand at any time.  Two, failure to take a stance in the past does not halt one from forever taking one in the future.  Lastly, I'm not too sure you recognize the ethical tenent that I have taken.  Possibly you do and it's a bit of arrogance on my part to think you haven't.  But in any case, I'm not sure that you do.