[Platt] > That's about as "really concern for man" as you can get, certainly not > "anti-human." If you find it less than satisfactory, you are > probably of a mind that considers the average individual too stupid to know > what's good, or at least that you know better what's good than she does. > > Regards,
In ZMM Pirsing describes stopping under a tree to change the oil in his cycle. From what I gather he let the used oil seep into the ground. ( i could be wrong here, from that's what I gather from his description) At that time, such a practice was not uncommon, and no body thought twice about doing such an act. Yes it was quality for him to be self sufficient in maintaining the cycle, but it is a higher quality no to contaminate the water table. Population grew, and we've come to realize that such practices are not good any more. Not because they are bad for the environment, but because they are bad for US. One of the reason DQ is undefined, is because every element in the equation is a variable. Each evaluation of the DQ is made for the moment and place. It has to stay fluid. That's why religious Dogmas have a hard time. Laws that are a few thousands years old from halfway around the world do not apply to today's society as they did back then. Applying changes to these religious laws send you a slippery slope of no return. Khaled Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
