On the other hand (was Re: Disliked Uncle Vernon)

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 93174

Siriusly Snapey Susan said :
> > Playing devil's advocate a bit here....  You have no right to 
> > force moral standards on the Dursleys?  Why not?  Are there no 
> > universal moral standards for treatment of others?  I find that 
> > unpalatable.  Civilization depends upon certain mores and 
> > legalized moralities, does it not?  
> 
Del answers :
> Which civilization ? Every society has its own moral standards, 
> upon which every member of this society doesn't even necessarily 
> agree. Your society and my society have different standards (I'm 
> French, you must be American or British, right ? So there's at 
> least one BIG recent example when our national moral codes 
> clashed...), and maybe we don't even agree with all of them.
> So WHICH standards should we enforce on others, and based on 
> what ? 
> Usually, it's simply the stronger that enforces its morals on the 
> weaker. 

Susan again now:

Del, I actually addressed this a bit back in post 93051, when I said 
this:

<<<A universal entire moral codebook?
You're right, of course. We could look at typical treatment of
children, the roles of women, the importance of/rights of animals,
etc., and they would vary from culture to culture. But I do think
subsumed w/in those various codebooks there are *some* fairly
universal morals [mores and/or laws against murder and theft are
typically ones, are they not?].>>>

I *do* believe there are *some* elements which, if not absolutely 
universal, come pretty damn close.  Murder, abuse of children, 
slavery, protection of private property--these are things upon which 
most societies agree.  We don't have to agree on the nitty-gritty of 
every moral standard to agree that some reasonable degree of care 
for a child is expected, as well as that abuse should NOT happen.  
Do you really disagree with that??

Siriusly Snapey Susan