Kevin Gowen wrote:
> John W. wrote:
> 
>> The issue I have is that what is/isn't moral is so narrowly defined, at
>> least politically, and I'm concerned people vote for a President based
>> on his perceived moral values, 
> 
> 
> Why is that a cause for concern?
> 
>> which are most likely learned not by a
>> study of the facts but by what they are told by a minister or other
>> person with a strict personal agenda. I think everyone should their
>> conscience and base their decision on moral values; but I'm not sure
>> they really know the facts before doing so.
> 
> 
> What do facts have to do with morals? Take any moral proposition, for 
> example, "Rape is wrong". What empirical method would you use to find 
> the data to conduct the necessary "study of the facts" to know whether 
> or not the proposition is correct?


You are going to have to improve your comprehension skills if you 
want
to work as a lawyer.

The facts John is talking about is the morals Bush actually 
holds, versus the morals Bush is perceived to hold.