>
>The following two statements were just made by you, and they
>contradict eachother. This is what you just said...
>
>1)
>>Why would you want to compare moralities? Why not leave it
>>alone, why not allow people to live in thier own society
>>instead of feeling the need to compare it with your own?
>
>and then...
>
>2)
>>I sincerely hope that I am more "moral" than Hitler.
>
>
>You have just admitted that there is a guage of morality
>with which you are measuring yourself as compared to Hitler.
> Yet at the same time your argument DEPENDS on that not
>being the case.
>
At what point exactly did I deny the existence of a "Gauge of Morality". My arguement has nothing to do with the lack of a gauge. Personally I find no need to compare myself with Hitler, and I don't, although, if I were to compare I sincerely hope that I am more Moral than Hitler.

>I don't wish to antagonize you, but if you cannot see that,
>you need to do some more thinking on this subject before
>contending your stance, because it lack's sense.
>
Your not antagonizing me I appreciate the conversation, and yet I find nothing in my arguement for Morality that doesn't make sense. Its logically sound.

>Look again.
>
I did.
>
>I'd like to address all the points you just tried to make...
>but there is no reason to do so yet because all are
>dependent on the point you failed to make. Reconcile your
>contradicting statements before we go on, please.

There isn't anything contrtadictory in what I said. Take first and foremost that I said "if you insist on comparing" and then began my arguement. My arguement was pretty simple, there is morality, it has nothing to do with God, it has to do with the evolution of humanity. Gods own Humanity, if I may use that as something similar (though certainly not the same) to morality, has been awfully tough sometimes. Humanity has had rough going of it too, even more so with Morality. But, Humanities Morality has evolved, like I said.

>once again,
>peace.