H-Bond, You have covered a lot of ground in your opening post and I shall not attempt to address everything you have said. There do appear to be some contradictions, implicit or explicit, in some of what you have said. I'd like to ramble on about those for a moment or two.
You state:
Quote:
|
One can not do good and break the law at the same time, with only one set of actions.
|
This appears to be untrue. A couple of years ago a colleague wife began to bleed heavily shortly after returning home after giving birth. Rather than wait for an ambulance my friend drove her to the emergency room. She eventually received eight pints of blood before the bleeding was halted. On the way to the hospital he drove in excess of the speedlimit, and at times on the opposite side of the road. He most certainly broke several laws, yet his action saved his wife's life. Even given the risks he placed other road users in, would you not agree that his actions were good? Laurie makes this same point in her opening paragraph.
In a similar vein I am a little confused as whether your example of the speed limit is meant to be an example, or simply an analogy. I would not necessarily agree that breaking the speed limit is evil!
Finally, you say a religious person is often plagued with irrational temptation. I am not at all clear why you say this is true only of religious people. I am also not clear as to what consitutes irrational, rather than rational temptation. Could you expand on these?
