The argument here seems to be constructed to make the case as extremely binary as possible. If we've learned any lessons, it's that Good and Evil are not binary in the real world, and that belief systems that promulgate that kind of thinking are often destructive (even as quoted here with the Hell example). A middle way is usually the right way.
So, to that end, I see a point made about the regulation of nuclear weapons made in the comments, but not in the original post. Is it not a highly comparable case?
The argument here seems to be constructed to make the case as extremely binary as possible. If we've learned any lessons, it's that Good and Evil are not binary in the real world, and that belief systems that promulgate that kind of thinking are often destructive (even as quoted here with the Hell example). A middle way is usually the right way.
So, to that end, I see a point made about the regulation of nuclear weapons made in the comments, but not in the original post. Is it not a highly comparable case?