We don't really disagree, Don, you'd just like to think we do. ;-) You are again thoroughly misunderstanding what I mean when I speak of not judging another human being.

For instance, I do not agree with the propositions you suggested I would that:

•       "Everyone is entitled to their own truth."
•       "There's no such thing as good and evil."

Nope. I don't agree with those in the least. People are not entitled to a truth, for example, that makes them think they can wantonly harm others, for instance. They may think they are entitled to it, but they're not.

And there is such a thing as good or evil. And I am not even slightly afraid of "taking sides".

I know it would be convenient for you, Don, if I believed all the silly things you would like to think I believe in order for me to make a good target for your argument, but I don't.

I said...judge the action, not the person. That is what the law does, if it's a sensible law. It judges the action, not the person. It does not sentence a robber to jail because he's an unpleasant fellow, a jerk, etc., it sentences him to jail because he has committed robbery. That's a judgement on the action, and that's what I mean by judging the action. The robber pays the penalty of his crime...he does not go to jail because he's Black, gay, Muslim, atheist, mean or just plain unfriendly and generally not nice. He does not go to jail because he's "evil". He goes to jail because he committed robbery. He didn't control an evil tendency.

That's a judgement upon his actions, and that's the kind of judgement I'm in favor of....the normal course of enforcing the law. I am no moral agnostic whatsoever. I know what is right and what is wrong. I'm simply not the person you imagine me to be at all.

I'd waste more of my time here trying to prove that I'm not the silly unrealistic moral agnostic prat you wish I was, but why bother? It gets boring and after all, it is my time. Why should I spend it that way when there are better ways? Why allow YOU to make ME waste my own time defending what needs no defence?