Quote:
Originally Posted by spdrun
Big difference between killing people/raping Gaia and taking advantage of a free and clean source of energy.
If you don't get that some technologies ARE in fact better than others,
you're stupider than I imagined and/or a troll.
|
I'm not concerned with the results. I am concerned about the PRINCIPLE and the slippery slope it puts us on. What if it isn't about that one case and a less "evil" issue?
So what you are saying is that the govt should keep their hands off unless it is a good project. Fair enough. Everyone with a pet project will tell you that their item will produce more good than harm. If one project was to be kept, they too would tell you that it should be their project, much like you. So what is the PRINCIPLE behind it then? As long as it supports a good technology? How to decide on this "good"? Most of these "sacred cows" have a good side. Like you, the champions of that project, whatever it is, will tell us that their project benefits mankind, yada, yada, yada. Now what? Your guiding principle seems to be "support a good technology". Who decides on "good"? More important, how has this committee been doing on decision making in recent history?
Fortunately for me, unless you are writing my paycheck or speaking into my microphone, I'm not worried about what you think of me.