GentileDomNY
Posts: 13
Joined: 11/20/2005 Status: offline
|
This is a far more complex question then it appears or then many of the answers suggest; the only simple answer would be that "it depends." I agree with the people who have said that sub should have almost absolute freedom to raise questions and make their thoughts known. I also agree that there is a point at which things have been fully aired and D can cut off the continuing discussion. Its simply wrong, and unacceptable, for a D to demand of an s something that s truely finds morally repugnant; that is simply doing a form of intentional permanent injury, mentally and emotionally rather than physically, and no D has license to willfully and intentionally do permanent injury to any s. There are also all kinds of things that may be considered morally repugnant. A strict vegitarian may consider it morally repugnant to eat eggs or drink milk, and a D may recognize a potential or developing nutrition risk and direct the consumption of eggs and skim milk for a while. That is a whole different thing then, for example, asking a mother to neglect or abandon her child. That said, its also the role of the D to expand the horizons and push the limits of s. Often, in doing that, D knows things that s doesn't, on purpose, and it has to stay that way to have the desired effect. If s knew the reality they would have no problem with it, but if they knew the reality it also wouldn't be a growth experience. After the desired effect has set in, D may fill in the missing pieces if they think that will grant some piece of mind, but sometimes its OK to never fill in the missing pieces. I can think of countless examples of that. In part it comes down to how much responsibility for s is D taking on. I believe that it should be almost total and absolute, but I know that it is commonly none at all, and that's really where the problem comes about. Someone must take responsibility for s, it should be D, but if it isn't, then it must be s, and only the particular people involved and the particular circumstances can determine what is right in a particular case.
|