RE: Objective Standards

["David Douglas" <ddarrel_douglas@hotmail.com>]

Joan,

These two statements seem contradictory:


" One of the happy consequences of the separation of church and state is 
that we don't have to "wing it."  We're governed by a secular document and 
not by anyone's particular choice/interpretation of a sacred text. "


" We have laws, which must pass constitutional muster, that
address murder, rape, theft, etc.  As for ethical codes, yours, mine, and 
the CEO of Enron's are not and will not be one and the same.  I'm afraid 
we'll have to determine our ethics individually within the boundaries 
constructed by an ever-changing body of law.  Not especially comforting (and 
far from certain), but there is no monolithic culture of ethics. "



If anything, the constitution lets us "wing it" on a slower time scale, 
which puts the winging it back to the initial and any subsequent 
constitutional convention, the ammendment process, and the judicial process. 
  And even then, the legislative and administrative branches can make laws 
(for a short time or a life time depending on whether there is a 
challenge--and it is sucessful).  How does this solution keep us from 
"winging it"?

David Douglas



_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx