On Jun 11, 2013, at 3:41 PM, Josh Smift <[email protected]> wrote: > Yep, and sometimes it isn't. It depends how much you value truth-telling > and oath-keeping relative to how much you value not doing whatever your > oath is requiring you to do. > > (As it turns out, I think that telling the truth is really, really, really > important; and in particular, it's often very easy to think that it's > better to lie about something, because it seems that way from a narrow or > short-term point of view. If you find yourself tempted to lie (or break an > oath), I think it's really important to think very carefully about the > consequences, and not do it just because it makes things easier.)
You're equating "lying" and "breaking an oath". Now, I don't in any way myself equate those two, but since you seem to, let me ask this followup: What if what comes of your oath is a demand to tell a lie (even if it might be a lie of omission)? What if your oath would compel you to keep quiet and not speak of completely immoral acts, EVEN IF you were directly asked about them (as would be the case in an inquiry into FISA proceedings, say)? D _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
