[tirsales]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

Yes you did, repeatedly.

Accusing others of being psychopaths? Yes. Accusing others of being terrorists? No.
You repeatedly asked me to re-read your posts. I did. Please do the same (for your and my posts).

Yes I did clarify the point, repeatedly so.

Not really, no. You are still repeating that there are rights any "normal human being will agree on" or that people not sharing some conviction about moral codes are not "normal human beings". THIS is the fundamental problem I do see. Its not about the wrongness or rightfulness of murder or file sharing / copying / transportation.
And you always stated that the error was on my side for "misunderstanding" it.

But I'm sure you already understand both those points and are simply trying to be argumentative again.

Oh, you did have a look at ad hominem.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

I believe where the confusion lies is that people believe I am arguing murder is an absolute wrong and any moral code that says it isn't is not a moral code.

At least not in my case, no.

I have never argued that murder is an absolute wrong. I have used murder as an example and stated that "if" no justification could be found for it "then" it would constitute a moral absolute. I have used this example in an attempt to show that a moral code of "I can do whatever I like and it is good because I say it is good" does not constitute a moral code by any accepted defintion. That includes moral egotism as your linked page clearly shows.

Well - state your "accepted definition".

Perhaps some unalienable rights in a rights based moral system are absolute rights that all normal human beings can agree upon? The two need not necessarily be mutually exclusive.

That all normal human beings can agree upon .. up to this point in history there is not a single human right that all human beings agreed upon - neither is there any moral code that all human beings agreed upon nor has their ever been one.

Originally Posted by PKFFW

So in a nut shell you(and I imagine the others arguing that "file sharing" is not wrong but who refuse to respond to my question) are admitting that fundamentally, at it's core,"file sharing" is indeed wrong.

So - as I said: You are constructing a far-fetched example, assume (under this example) a given position is shared, and then apply this position to the normal world.