So... you think that the only argument against slavery is cultural pressure?
I think the economic argument against slavery is the best argument, universally. Obviously there is a strong moral argument against slavery
today, but morality is not linear. It can veer off in all sorts of directions depending upon economic and social pressures.
You think being in the right had nothing to do with it?
No, absolutely nothing. What is right and wrong but values we as a society have decided upon? In many parts of the world, gay rights are not
right.
We often fool ourselves into think that because we are the most advanced civilization, everyone will follow our path. There is no reason to believe that is true and we're starting to see a strong reaction to that idea in places like Russia, Syria, China and so forth.
So the groups that supported slavery, race segregation and homophobia are necessary because it's more moral that way? Have you thought this through?
I didn't say it was more 'moral', nor would I. The fact you think I would say that suggests you've failed to grasp my point entirely.
What I
am saying is that traditionalism is a form of social scepticism that ensures that we don't slip into anarchy. Not every challenge to progress is correct, but not every progressive movement (consider PIE) about how society should change is correct either. We need both forces to maintain a moral compass in the absence of religious doctrine.
Zethor said:
They were right because it was the only correct conclusion based on a logical analysis of the issue that takes into account all facts. Certain people usually reach such a conclusion hundreds or thousands of years before it becomes morally acceptable on a large scale. I don't need to be taught slavery is bad, I'm quite capable of using reason to reach that conclusion, in the same way that I can reach the conclusion that abusing feeling, thinking animals and eating them is immoral. Most of the lessons I've seen regarding these animals have been related to how to make them taste better so no, I wasn't taught the opinion I've just expressed. I've reached it through cold, hard logic and, in time, humanity will change and adopt this idea or similar ones in its moral code.
The only
logical argument against slavery is an economical one, is that the root of your argument? You might have thought through the moral arguments, but that has nothing to do with logic.
Gay rights gained traction naturally, in time, just like women's rights or race rights and they had nothing to do with who it was that initially supported them. You just happened to live through the transition period, I'm sure you would have complained if you had lived through the race rights transitional period, just like the rest of the traditionalists.
What is
natural about gay rights or women's rights? Both only exist as a consequence of a range of Western phenomena; industrialisation, liberalism, democracy, Christianity and so forth.
Why do you link progressivism with minority groups?
Because social progressives adovcate the cause of minority interest groups: Homosexuals, Transgenders, Minority ethnic groups, Paedophiles etc.
