<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
>

<channel>
	<title>Say Hello to my Little Friend &#187; Ethics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/category/ethics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress</link>
	<description>The New Zealand blog and podcast of Dr Glenn Peoples that discusses philosophy, theology, politics and social issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 01:42:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<copyright>Copyright © Say Hello to my Little Friend 2011 </copyright>
	<managingEditor>glenn@orcon.net.nz (Dr Glenn Peoples)</managingEditor>
	<webMaster>glenn@orcon.net.nz (Dr Glenn Peoples)</webMaster>
	<ttl>1440</ttl>
	
	<itunes:subtitle>The New Zealand blog and podcast of Dr Glenn Peoples that discusses philosophy, theology, politics and social issues.</itunes:subtitle>
	<itunes:summary>The New Zealand blog and podcast of Dr Glenn Peoples that discusses philosophy, philosophy, theology, politics and social issues</itunes:summary>
	<itunes:keywords>philosophy, theology, religion, Christianity, philosophy, of, religion</itunes:keywords>
	<itunes:category text="Society &#38; Culture">
		<itunes:category text="Philosophy" />
	</itunes:category>
	<itunes:category text="Religion &#38; Spirituality">
		<itunes:category text="Christianity" />
	</itunes:category>
	<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
	<itunes:owner>
		<itunes:name>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:name>
		<itunes:email>glenn@orcon.net.nz</itunes:email>
	</itunes:owner>
	<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://www.beretta-online.com/pics/itunespic.jpg" />
		<item>
		<title>Do babies know right from wrong?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/do-babies-know-right-from-wrong/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/do-babies-know-right-from-wrong/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:25:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[psychology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=3208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Do babies come into this world with a natural tendency to tell right from wrong, or is their stance entirely informed by social conditioning? Or is it both? I’ve blogged in the past on ethical intuitionism, and I had some favourable things to say about it. Properly functioning people under the right sorts of conditions, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/do-babies-know-right-from-wrong/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawrence Krauss on God and Morality</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/lawrence-krauss-on-god-and-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/lawrence-krauss-on-god-and-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2012 03:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[angry atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad arguments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lawrence Krauss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=3205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“Ah, those silly creationists are at it again. Every real scientist knows that evolution is fact, and then these people with no real experience in science come along and bumble through the issues without understanding them at all. And as for those geographers! I have no real time for geography myself, but pah! Everyone knows [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/lawrence-krauss-on-god-and-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Occam&#8217;s Razor and the Moral Argument for Theism</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/occams-razor-and-the-moral-argument-for-theism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/occams-razor-and-the-moral-argument-for-theism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:15:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=3130</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In spite of what some say, appealing to God as the basis of morality (or the explanation for anything else) does not automatically violate Occam’s Razor. Often something that catches my eye and on which I want to comment are themselves comments on other comments, which are in turn follow-up comments on previous discussions. I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/occams-razor-and-the-moral-argument-for-theism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The fall and rise of the moral argument</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/the-fall-and-rise-of-the-moral-argument/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/the-fall-and-rise-of-the-moral-argument/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2012 01:08:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[realism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=3030</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In light of the millennia of the history of philosophy that we have behind us, it was only recently – setting the last few decades aside – that the moral argument slipped out of the mainstream. In the first half of the twentieth century C. S. Lewis could refer to the moral argument with some [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2012/the-fall-and-rise-of-the-moral-argument/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>51</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The conditional premise of the moral argument</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/the-conditional-premise-of-the-moral-argument/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/the-conditional-premise-of-the-moral-argument/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 11:07:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2981</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The title of this blog entry is a little misleading, since I’m actually talking about a conditional premise of one formulation of the moral argument. It’s not the five-step formulation of the moral argument that I prefer to use, but it’s a common one nonetheless, and one that I do think is sound. The common [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/the-conditional-premise-of-the-moral-argument/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>97</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On the evolution of moral beliefs</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/on-the-evolution-of-moral-beliefs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/on-the-evolution-of-moral-beliefs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 11:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alvin Plantinga]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary argument against naturalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stephen law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m a moral realist. That means that I think there really are some moral facts. It is wrong to do some things, and it is right to do some things, and this isn’t just a vent of emotion or an expression of my will, it’s really true. Stephen Law is also a moral realist, but [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/on-the-evolution-of-moral-beliefs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brief thoughts about God’s freedom to command</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/brief-thoughts-about-god%e2%80%99s-freedom-to-command/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/brief-thoughts-about-god%e2%80%99s-freedom-to-command/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2011 09:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2955</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was wrong about divine command ethics. A divine command theory of ethics sees a close connection between God’s will or commands and facts about ethical rightness and wrongness. One of the old objections to a divine command theory was that it allegedly resulted in the view that ethical facts are just arbitrary. God could [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/brief-thoughts-about-god%e2%80%99s-freedom-to-command/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>85</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divine Command Ethics: Ontology versus epistemology</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/divine-command-ethics-ontology-versus-epistemology/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/divine-command-ethics-ontology-versus-epistemology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 09:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2936</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As readers will know, I think the moral argument for God’s existence is a good argument. As those same readers will also probably know, I’m very sympathetic to a divine command theory of ethics. One thing that I’ve said from time to time, at the blog, in the podcast and elsewhere, is that sometimes critics [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/divine-command-ethics-ontology-versus-epistemology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apologetics 315 interviews Glenn Peoples on God and Morality</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn-peoples-on-god-and-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn-peoples-on-god-and-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:35:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speaking engagements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2804</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I mentioned at the blog a while back, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Brian Auten over at Apologetics 315 on the topic of God and Morality. Brian has been uploading his recorded interviews to Youtube, so for those who haven&#8217;t heard that interview yet, here it is: Head on over to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn-peoples-on-god-and-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Auckland Anglicanism, Same Sex Unions and Ordination</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/auckland-anglicanism-same-sex-unions-and-ordination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/auckland-anglicanism-same-sex-unions-and-ordination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2011 08:03:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ecclesiology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anglicanism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christianity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homosexuality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday on Saturday the 3rd of September 2011, the Auckland Synod of the Anglican Church in New Zealand passed a motion that people involved in sexual relationships outside of marriage but within committed same-sex relationships would not be impeded from being ordained into ministry. The mover of the motion was Glynn Cardy, notorious for his [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/auckland-anglicanism-same-sex-unions-and-ordination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kant: There is no such thing as coincidental righteousness</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/kant-there-is-no-such-thing-as-coincidental-righteousness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/kant-there-is-no-such-thing-as-coincidental-righteousness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 07:58:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2684</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A short, sweet lesson: Being a morally good person involves doing your moral duty. If you don&#8217;t at least accept that, then I think you&#8217;re basically mistaken about morality in theory (I say &#8220;in theory&#8221; because I&#8217;m comforted by the fact that you probably live as though I&#8217;m right). But how does being morally good [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/kant-there-is-no-such-thing-as-coincidental-righteousness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 041: The Epistemological Objection to Divine Command Ethics</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-041-the-epistemological-objection-to-divine-command-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-041-the-epistemological-objection-to-divine-command-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 13:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Episode 41, I address a common objection to divine command ethics: Does the fact that non-believers can still know moral truths and live moral lives somehow show that morality is not in any way grounded in God&#8217;s will or commands? Here I survey some crude versions of this argument and then offer some comments [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-041-the-epistemological-objection-to-divine-command-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_041.mp3" length="40595422" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:40:41</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>In Episode 41, I address a common objection to divine command ethics: Does the fact that non-believers can still know moral truths and live moral lives somehow show that morality is not in any way grounded in God&#8217;s will or commands? Here I sur[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>In Episode 41, I address a common objection to divine command ethics: Does the fact that non-believers can still know moral truths and live moral lives somehow show that morality is not in any way grounded in God&#8217;s will or commands? Here I survey some crude versions of this argument and then offer some comments on a more recent presentation of the objection by Wes Morriston.
&#160;
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apologetics 3:15 Interviews Glenn Peoples</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 08:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speaking engagements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2537</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Brain Auten of Apologetics 315. The main theme of the discussion was the relationship between God (or a lack thereof) and ethics. Check it out over at Apologetics 315. Today&#8217;s interview is with Dr. Glenn Peoples. Glenn is a New Zealand based Christian philosopher, podcaster, and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/apologetics-315-interviews-glenn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 040: God and the Social Nature of Morality</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-040-god-and-the-social-nature-of-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-040-god-and-the-social-nature-of-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Apr 2011 12:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We&#8217;ve reached a milestone &#8211; 40 Episodes! Episode 40 is an explanation of Robert Adams&#8217; argument that the social nature of moral obligation supports the claim that morality is ultimately grounded in God. &#160; &#160; If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-040-god-and-the-social-nature-of-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_040.mp3" length="36502774" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:38:00</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>We&#8217;ve reached a milestone &#8211; 40 Episodes!
Episode 40 is an explanation of Robert Adams&#8217; argument that the social nature of moral obligation supports the claim that morality is ultimately grounded in God.
&#160;
&#160;

If you liked [...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>We&#8217;ve reached a milestone &#8211; 40 Episodes!
Episode 40 is an explanation of Robert Adams&#8217; argument that the social nature of moral obligation supports the claim that morality is ultimately grounded in God.
&#160;
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debate Review: William Lane Craig and Sam Harris</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/debate-review-william-lane-craig-and-sam-harris/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/debate-review-william-lane-craig-and-sam-harris/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[angry atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sam Harris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Lane Craig]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On the evening of the 7th of April 2011 (the 8th of April here in New Zealand), Christian philosopher William Lane Craig debated Atheist author and speaker Sam Harris on the question Is Good from God? Brian Auten has made the mp3 audio of this debate available over at Apologetics 315. What follows is my [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/debate-review-william-lane-craig-and-sam-harris/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>50</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Abortion Healthcare?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/is-abortion-healthcare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/is-abortion-healthcare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 13:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bioethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and Social stuff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2478</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“Access to abortion services is an essential part of women’s health!” “Abortion is healthcare, not a crime!” “You should not use your personal values as a way of interfering with women’s healthcare services.” I’ve heard slogans like these used more times than I care to remember. These slogans are now being trotted out by the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/is-abortion-healthcare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 039: Divine Command Ethics</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-039-divine-command-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-039-divine-command-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 13:19:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2444</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[NOTE: In this episode I call it episode 40. It&#8217;s not. It&#8217;s episode 39. The podcast is back. Actually, episode 39 was going to be on another topic, but then someone suggested this one to me, so as I already had a document called &#8220;episode 039&#8243; I called this &#8220;document 040.&#8221; And then when I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/episode-039-divine-command-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_039.mp3" length="36452665" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:43:22</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>NOTE: In this episode I call it episode 40. It&#8217;s not. It&#8217;s episode 39.
The podcast is back. Actually, episode 39 was going to be on another topic, but then someone suggested this one to me, so as I already had a document called &#8220;ep[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>NOTE: In this episode I call it episode 40. It&#8217;s not. It&#8217;s episode 39.
The podcast is back. Actually, episode 39 was going to be on another topic, but then someone suggested this one to me, so as I already had a document called &#8220;episode 039&#8243; I called this &#8220;document 040.&#8221; And then when I started recording it I thought &#8211; &#8220;Hey, this is the 40th episode. Cool!&#8221; and I made a big deal of it in the recording. And then after I uploaded it I realised that since I skipped over the episode 39 that I&#8217;m writing, this isn&#8217;t really 40 at all, it&#8217;s episode 39! So that was an epic fail.
So no sooner do I release another podcast episode, I am making excuses for it! This episode is based on a lecture on divine command ethics that I gave a few years ago. Enjoy!
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, Philosophy, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nuts and Bolts 011: Ethical Intuitionism</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/nuts-and-bolts-011-ethical-intuitionism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/nuts-and-bolts-011-ethical-intuitionism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 08:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuts and bolts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intuitionism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2439</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the “nuts and bolts” series, I explain and discuss some of the fundamental ideas in philosophy (and theology sometimes) that are taken for granted within the discipline, but which might not be very well known to ordinary human beings. This time the subject is ethical intuitionism (or moral intuitionism). Firstly, and this cannot be [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/nuts-and-bolts-011-ethical-intuitionism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Viva La Bieber! Justin Bieber on Abortion</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/viva-la-bieber/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/viva-la-bieber/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 00:33:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and Social stuff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2374</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Justin Bieber is now a blip on the radar when it comes to the abortion issue. In a recent interview with Rolling Stone he made some fairly casual and yet politically inflammatory comments, setting himself apart from the popular liberal celebrity milieu: “I really don’t believe in abortion,” Bieber says. “It’s like killing a baby?” How [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/viva-la-bieber/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can a Catholic Support Live Action’s Pro-Life Activism?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/can-a-catholic-support-live-action%e2%80%99s-pro-life-activism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/can-a-catholic-support-live-action%e2%80%99s-pro-life-activism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:24:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lying]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2366</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In my recent post showing how Live Action has exposed Planned Parenthood clinics abetting child prostitution, we observed people working for Live Action acting undercover. That is, they were acting as though they were people that they weren’t really. A man posed as a pimp when he wasn’t actually a pimp, and a woman posed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/can-a-catholic-support-live-action%e2%80%99s-pro-life-activism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>64</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>John Locke on Voluntary Dictatorship</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/john-locke-on-voluntary-dictatorship/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/john-locke-on-voluntary-dictatorship/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 09:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[classical liberalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Locke]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2358</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In chapter eight of book two of his Two Treatise of Government, John Locke sets out that famous principle that all democratic societies now take for granted: A just society can only be governed with the consent of the people: Men being, as has been said, by nature all free, equal, and independent, no one [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2011/john-locke-on-voluntary-dictatorship/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does self sacrifice make a greater difference in godless universe?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-self-sacrifice-make-a-greater-difference-in-godless-universe/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-self-sacrifice-make-a-greater-difference-in-godless-universe/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Dec 2010 13:13:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I recently finished reading Erik Wielenberg’s book Value and Virtue in a Godless Universe. I’ve already commented a couple of times on crucial junctures in that book where the author’s argument against theologically grounded ethics depends heavily on conceptual confusion and misrepresentation. It would get a bit tedious to write a blog entry every time [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-self-sacrifice-make-a-greater-difference-in-godless-universe/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Every Day is Pike River</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/every-day-is-pike-river/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/every-day-is-pike-river/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 06:37:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On the afternoon of Friday the 19th of November 2010 there was an explosion in Pike River coal mine, 50km north-east of Greymouth, on the west coast of New Zealand’s South Island. Initially I heard mixed reports about how many men were trapped inside. Two managed to crawl out, and eventually it became clear that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/every-day-is-pike-river/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>72</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does Christian faith make people more moral?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-christian-faith-make-people-more-moral/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-christian-faith-make-people-more-moral/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2010 04:47:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christianity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2141</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems that statistical findings (and the way they are interpreted and reported) have occupied my attention lately. A little while ago I looked at some unpopular stats: There aren’t as many homosexuals out there as some want us to think (who knows why), and more young Muslims condone suicide bombing than they’d like us [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-christian-faith-make-people-more-moral/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>48</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Arif Ahmed, morality and empiricism</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/arif-ahmed-morality-and-empiricism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/arif-ahmed-morality-and-empiricism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:58:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[empiricism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The latest episode of the Unbelievable? radio show is out this weekend. This time it features a discussion between me and Arif Ahmed, an atheist from the University of Cambridge. We were discussing the moral argument for theism. The discussion was certainly interesting enough, although it was divided up so as to fit into the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/arif-ahmed-morality-and-empiricism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>31</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 037: Classical Liberalism and Natural Law</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-037-classical-liberalism-and-natural-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-037-classical-liberalism-and-natural-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Sep 2010 11:44:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[classical liberalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is the first time I have ever actually apologised for an episode. It&#8217;s long. It&#8217;s dry. You might fall asleep. I&#8217;m sorry. &#160; If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-037-classical-liberalism-and-natural-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_037.mp3" length="55538736" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:57:50</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>This is the first time I have ever actually apologised for an episode. It&#8217;s long. It&#8217;s dry. You might fall asleep. I&#8217;m sorry.
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>This is the first time I have ever actually apologised for an episode. It&#8217;s long. It&#8217;s dry. You might fall asleep. I&#8217;m sorry.
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Confusing the Good and the Right</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/confusing-the-good-and-the-right/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/confusing-the-good-and-the-right/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:05:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today Erik Wielenberg’s book Value and Virtue in a Godless Universe arrived in the mail. Wielenberg is a proponent of the claim that moral facts exist without God. They are just brute facts. They are there, and that is that, with no deeper explanation to be offered. Because of my keen interest in the moral [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/confusing-the-good-and-the-right/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do moral facts not require an explanation?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/do-moral-facts-not-require-an-explanation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/do-moral-facts-not-require-an-explanation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 12:52:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical naturalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Perhaps the central bone of contention in the moral argument for the existence of God is the claim that philosophical naturalism cannot provide a basis for moral facts, while theism can. To say that one outlook cannot give an account of moral facts while another can is to assume that moral facts need an “account” [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/do-moral-facts-not-require-an-explanation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does different behaviour indicate different moral beliefs?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-different-behaviour-indicate-different-moral-beliefs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-different-behaviour-indicate-different-moral-beliefs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 00:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relativism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent blog on the moral argument, I noted (in the comments) that in the real world we all find ourselves faced with certain moral facts, like the fact that we shouldn’t do unnecessary harm to others. Somebody objected to this, thinking that it was clearly not true. For example, the inquisitors harmed people [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/does-different-behaviour-indicate-different-moral-beliefs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The New Atheism, Science and Morality &#8211; University of Auckland</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-new-atheism-science-and-morality-university-of-auckland/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-new-atheism-science-and-morality-university-of-auckland/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 09:03:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[angry atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public lectures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Monday the 6th of September I spoke at the University of Auckland on The New Atheists, Science and Morality. The talk is like a live presentation version of a podcast on Sam Harris and morality that I did a while back, with some updates and variations. Jachin over at the Explaining the Bible website [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-new-atheism-science-and-morality-university-of-auckland/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Public Lecture: The New Atheism, Science and Morality</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/public-lecture-the-new-atheism-science-and-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/public-lecture-the-new-atheism-science-and-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 09:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public lectures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=2000</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Public Lecture: The New Atheism, Science and Morality As you know (and a number of you have very kindly supported me in the endeavour), shortly I&#8217;ll be flying off to Oxford for a conference at which I&#8217;ll be speaking (more on that another time). When I get back I have a couple of speaking engagements [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/public-lecture-the-new-atheism-science-and-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divine Command Ethics and the Epistemological Objection</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-and-the-epistemological-objection/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-and-the-epistemological-objection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:12:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1942</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m putting together an article on this subject at the moment, so I thought I’d share some of my thoughts on Divine Command Ethics and the epistemological objection (that’s what I’ve decided to call the objection). Divine command ethics is a cluster of views on ethics, and they all have in common a very close [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-and-the-epistemological-objection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How the queerness argument (possibly) backfires</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/how-the-queerness-argument-backfires/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/how-the-queerness-argument-backfires/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 10:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nihilism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[queerness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[J. L. Mackie was famous for defending two claims. Firstly, God doesn’t exist (a claim defended in his book, The Miracle of Theism). Secondly, there are no moral facts (a position called moral nihilism or an error theory of morality, defended in his book, Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong). According to Christian thinkers over the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/how-the-queerness-argument-backfires/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Education and Morality: Are smarter people more virtuous?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/education-and-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/education-and-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 May 2010 00:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1761</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This blog entry was prompted by a recent Facebook conversation. A friend of mine was remarking that she had just watched the movie The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, which is set amidst Hitler’s notorious “final solution” in Nazi Germany. Understandably, she found the movie upsetting, and she wondered (out loud) how people could bring [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/education-and-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;A New Euthyphro&#8221; is published</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/a-new-euthyphro-is-published/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/a-new-euthyphro-is-published/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 02:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Euthyphro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My paper &#8220;A New Euthyphro&#8221; has been published by the journal Think: Philosophy for Everyone (a journal of the Royal Institute of Philosophy) volume 9, issue 25. Think is an enjoyable  journal featuring presentations of complex philosophical issues in a stripped-down digestable way for a wider audience than just those with graduate degrees in philosophy. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/a-new-euthyphro-is-published/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 035: Sam Harris, Science and Morality</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-035-sam-harris-science-and-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-035-sam-harris-science-and-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 12:19:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scepticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1709</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Episode 35 is an analysis of a recent talk given by Sam Harris on science and human values. The talk was part of a TED conference, and you can see part 1 here. Harris thinks that he has argued that moral facts are actually scientific facts. I think he has failed, and here I offer [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/episode-035-sam-harris-science-and-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_035.mp3" length="44639214" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:46:28</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>Episode 35 is an analysis of a recent talk given by Sam Harris on science and human values. The talk was part of a TED conference, and you can see part 1 here. Harris thinks that he has argued that moral facts are actually scientific facts. I think [...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>Episode 35 is an analysis of a recent talk given by Sam Harris on science and human values. The talk was part of a TED conference, and you can see part 1 here. Harris thinks that he has argued that moral facts are actually scientific facts. I think he has failed, and here I offer an explanation of how I think he has failed. In brief, I think his entire presentation is an exercise in circular reasoning.
Harris has a new book on the subject, The Moral Landscape, which is to be released later this year. If you&#8217;d like to order a copy, please use this link and the Book Depository will look kindly on me.
&#160;
&#160;

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>atheism, Ethics, Philosophy, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ethics is like a painting</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/ethics-is-like-a-painting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/ethics-is-like-a-painting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:09:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1432</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Imagine if you will a painting hanging in a large and popular art gallery. Before considering the painting as an artwork, think of its underlying structure as a physical object. The type of basic physical object we start with determines the type of artwork that this will be. It could be a lump of clay [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/ethics-is-like-a-painting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divine Command Ethics: When will sceptics update their arguments?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-when-will-sceptics-update-their-arguments/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-when-will-sceptics-update-their-arguments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:48:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[angry atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad arguments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scepticism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems that some online unbelievers have trouble staying up to date with the fields in which they take themselves to be experts. Take Keith Augustine over at the Internet Infidels for example. He believes that he has the divine command theory of ethics (DCT) all sewn up. For some reason, divine command ethics is [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/divine-command-ethics-when-will-sceptics-update-their-arguments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Woman Taken in Adultery</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-woman-taken-in-adultery/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-woman-taken-in-adultery/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology / Biblical Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death penalty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gospel of John]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Testament Studies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[NOTE: In order for this blog entry to display correctly, you will need the Greek and Hebrew fonts that it uses, Greek.ttf and Hebrew.ttf. You can download them here if you do not have them. You will need to ensure that your browser can display these.] The so-called pericope adulterae of John 7:53-8:11 has frequently [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/the-woman-taken-in-adultery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wolterstorff on Divine Command Ethics – Part One</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/wolterstorff-on-divine-command-ethics-part-one/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/wolterstorff-on-divine-command-ethics-part-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 11:34:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad arguments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nicholas Wolterstorff]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=1011</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since I entertain a divine command theory of ethics (although I admit to being somewhat open minded about exactly what type is the correct one), I find myself sensitive to when that theory is dismissed in ways that seem to me to be unfair. In reading Nicholas Woltersorff’s recent masterful work Justice: Rights and Wrongs [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2010/wolterstorff-on-divine-command-ethics-part-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ethical (super)naturalism</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/ethical-supernaturalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/ethical-supernaturalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 07:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=974</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently I posted a blog entry on the difference between ethical naturalism and ethical non-naturalism (explaining that the former of which is not the same thing as metaphysical naturalism). I also indicated there that not everyone shares the same understanding of what “naturalism” really refers to, and I explained what I think. In brief, I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/ethical-supernaturalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Nuts and Bolts 005: Ethical Naturalism</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/nuts-and-bolts-005-ethical-naturalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/nuts-and-bolts-005-ethical-naturalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 13:57:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nuts and bolts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical naturalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethical non-naturalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=962</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Every now and then (and I’m assuming that this is true of most people who specialise in subject areas), I feel the urge to raise a complaint or point of clarification about a common phenomenon in a field of study (in this case, meta-ethics), and to explain why I think that something should be explained [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/nuts-and-bolts-005-ethical-naturalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Relativism or human rights?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/relativism-or-human-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/relativism-or-human-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 05:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[absolutism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relativism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m going to start by painting pictures of two viewpoints. It might not be clear at first why I’m doing it, but just stay with me, all will be explained shortly. Moral Relativism On the one hand imagine a group of people who are moral relativists. Moral relativism is the view that there are no [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/relativism-or-human-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>38</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Otago study links abortion with mental illness</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/otago-study-links-abortion-with-mental-illness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/otago-study-links-abortion-with-mental-illness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=702</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent study conducted by researchers at the University of Otago has found that there exists a demonstrable connection between having an abortion and later suffering some sort of mental illness. The report concluded: &#8220;This evidence raises important questions about the practice of justifying termination of pregnancy on the grounds that this procedure will reduce [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/otago-study-links-abortion-with-mental-illness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Bible, abortion, and extra-biblical knowledge</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/the-bible-abortion-and-extra-biblical-knowledge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/the-bible-abortion-and-extra-biblical-knowledge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 06:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology / Biblical Studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[biblical studies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exegesis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=597</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Over at the blog, &#8220;the Christ Seminar,&#8221; a common but plainly fallacious argument about the Bible and abortion has reared its head. At the time of writing this post, wordpress.com is having technical problems and I can&#8217;t post a comment in reply just now, so I&#8217;ll make the point here instead. The claim made in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/the-bible-abortion-and-extra-biblical-knowledge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama, potential, and abortion</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/obama-potential-and-abortion/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/obama-potential-and-abortion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 23:01:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=591</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just added this as my Facebook status, but it&#8217;s worth mentioning here too:  How is it that a black President can get a Nobel for no reason other than potential for future events, yet that same potential doesn&#8217;t even count when considering whether or not an unborn child should be allowed to continue LIVING?* [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/obama-potential-and-abortion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 029: Is Abortion Immoral, and Should it be Illegal?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/episode-029-is-abortion-immoral-and-should-it-be-illegal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/episode-029-is-abortion-immoral-and-should-it-be-illegal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 11:34:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bioethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics and Social stuff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public lectures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=426</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This episode is a recording of a talk I gave last week at the University of Canterbury on abortion. As promised in the episode, here&#8217;s a summary of some questions and answers that followed. Q: What would you say about cases like rape or incest, where the women is going to give birth to a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/episode-029-is-abortion-immoral-and-should-it-be-illegal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_029.mp3" length="48549086" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:50:33</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>This episode is a recording of a talk I gave last week at the University of Canterbury on abortion.
As promised in the episode, here&#8217;s a summary of some questions and answers that followed.
Q: What would you say about cases like rape or incest[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>This episode is a recording of a talk I gave last week at the University of Canterbury on abortion.
As promised in the episode, here&#8217;s a summary of some questions and answers that followed.
Q: What would you say about cases like rape or incest, where the women is going to give birth to a reminder of what was done to her?
A: That&#8217;s the hardest type of scenario I think. There are a few kinds of answers I&#8217;d give. Firstly, one thing to bear in mind is that even if I said that I thought that rape was a good enough ground for an abortion, that still only allows a very small number of abortions. The proportion of all abortions in New Zealand where the pregnancy is alleged to have resulted from rape is very small.
Secondly, what would we say to a woman with a two year old son who was born because she was raped, if she said that she was going to kill her son because he reminded her of the rape? Although we might feel sorry for her and want to help her in some way, we wouldn&#8217;t think it was alright to kill the child. So it seems to me that the idea that it&#8217;s alright to kill the unborn child in these cases is trading on the fact that we have a tendency not to be as aware of the status of the unborn child, or the moral factors that I&#8217;ve discussed when I gave reasons for deeming abortion immoral. Because the unborn child is , so to speak &#8220;out of sight, out of mind,&#8221; on a psychological and emotional level we don&#8217;t form the same attachment to it, so it&#8217;s easy for us to see why killing the two year old is wrong but to at least partly overlook or not notice that wrongness in the case of abortion.
Sometimes when wrong things are done to a person (like rape), there&#8217;s no defensible way out of it, even when that involves suffering. That may sound a little harsh, but let me put it this way: Let&#8217;s not punish the son for the sins committed by the father. The fact that something terrible was done to you doesn&#8217;t give you right to do absolutely whatever it takes to get out of that situation, like by deflecting that harm so that someone else bears the brunt of it, which is what happens when we kill the unborn to alleviate the emotional pain inflicted on the woman.
Q: In your talk you refer to a fetus. Would you go further? Would your argument also apply to an embryo?
It would, yes. there&#8217;s no logical reason for it not to. I am numerically identical with an embryo that once lived. The only reason that I refer to a fetus in this talk is that most abortions in New Zealand take place from 8 to 12 weeks&#8217; gestation, which just happens to be in the fetal stage.
Q:You say that abortion should be illegal. Do you think people who carry out abortion should be punished for murder, in the same way a murderer would be?
I don&#8217;t know. Saying that it should be illegal is not, of course, to say that it should be murder. The law already treats, for example, infanticide as a distinct crime, not because we think it&#8217;s not wrong, but I guess it&#8217;s out of recognition of the psychological factors that might come into play. I think that&#8217;s really a technical legal question. You have to look at all the relevant way one act might compare to another, there are epistemological questions involved of what the people involved could be expected to know and so forth. So I don&#8217;t make any firm claim there. For now I leave that to the lawyers.
ADDENDUM: Although to be clear, I want to say that I lean on the firm rather than lenient side of how serious the repercussions should be.
Q: Some have said that prior to legalisation there were a number of police officers who were willing to accept bribes to look the other way and ignore illegal abortion. So if we make abortion illegal it will increase corruption in the police force. What would you say to that?
A: I think that corruption in the police for is wrong in its own right and needs to be addressed in its own right. This is[...]</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>No embryos were harmed in the development of this stem cell therapy</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/no-embryos-were-harmed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/no-embryos-were-harmed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 06:01:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bioethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stem cells]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2-year-old Dunedin boy Caleb Turner is heading overseas for stem cell therapy. He has cerebral palsy. Some defenders of the destruction of embryos for stem cell research and therapy use examples like this to bash opponents of the use of embryonic stem cells. Wrong. Yet again in a productive use of stem cells, no embryos [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/no-embryos-were-harmed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Religion a Barrier to “Clear Thinking” on Morality?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/is-religion-a-barrier-to-clear-thinking-on-morality/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/is-religion-a-barrier-to-clear-thinking-on-morality/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 14:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Euthyphro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to Simon Clarke, religion is &#8220;the biggest obstacle to thinking clearly about social and political issues.&#8221; Yes, the biggest. [UPDATE 6th August 2010: that link no longer works. Here is a link to a different presentation of what looks like the same article.] The main reason that he gives is roughly like this: Some [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/is-religion-a-barrier-to-clear-thinking-on-morality/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bradley on the alleged contradiction of Christian ethics</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/bradley-on-the-alleged-contradiction-of-christian-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/bradley-on-the-alleged-contradiction-of-christian-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:06:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=314</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m a bit of a fan of the moral argument for the existence of God.  I think that theism provides a foundation for moral truth. There are a few ways that Christians have made this argument, but the model that I have settled on is a divine command theory of ethics, where moral right and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/bradley-on-the-alleged-contradiction-of-christian-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don Marquis on Embryonic Stem Cell Research</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/don-marquis-on-embryonic-stem-cell-research/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/don-marquis-on-embryonic-stem-cell-research/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=286</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the strongest features (if not the strongest feature) of Marquis&#8217;s argument for the immorality of abortion is that it does not drag the debate into the territory of arguments over the status of an embryo or a fetus in terms of whether or not they count, at that stage, as human beings in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/don-marquis-on-embryonic-stem-cell-research/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Engaging with critics of religiously grounded ethics: A depressingly bleak scholarly landscape</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/engaging-with-critics-of-religiously-grounded-ethics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/engaging-with-critics-of-religiously-grounded-ethics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 10:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[atheism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent podcast episode, “Stop Being a Christian and Start Being a Person,” one of the things I talked about is that we Christians should not assume that because a scholarly endeavour is overtly Christian, it will be good. I also stressed that we should be prepared to recognise the gifts and goodness manifested [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/engaging-with-critics-of-religiously-grounded-ethics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Yay for stem cell research. But why bring Embryos into it?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/yay-for-stem-cell-research-but-why-bring-embryos-into-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/yay-for-stem-cell-research-but-why-bring-embryos-into-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 03:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It has been all over news sites for a little while now (e.g. see here). President Barack Hussein Obama has – according to the headlines at least – lifted a ban on stem cell research. (Incidentally, Obama made some political mileage lying about political opponents by saying that they opposed federal funding for embryonic stem [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2009/yay-for-stem-cell-research-but-why-bring-embryos-into-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Athens and and Jerusalem (or “regardless of who wins the election&#8230;”)</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/athens-and-and-jerusalem-or-%e2%80%9cregardless-of-who-wins-the-election%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/athens-and-and-jerusalem-or-%e2%80%9cregardless-of-who-wins-the-election%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 07:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theology / Biblical Studies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tomorrow on November 8th New Zealand voters will decide who will govern this country for the next three years. In the last few blog entries I&#8217;ve given a fairly good idea of where I stand and the kind of government I would like to emerge from that election. Today I will not say anything at [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/athens-and-and-jerusalem-or-%e2%80%9cregardless-of-who-wins-the-election%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Singer&#039;s philosophy, where it belongs</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/singers-philosophy-where-it-belongs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/singers-philosophy-where-it-belongs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Humour]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Readers may or may not be familiar with Peter Singer, the Australian born philosopher (I use that term very loosely here) who teaches at Princeton, and who thinks that baby cows either do, could or should have more moral rights than baby humans. I think he&#8217;s finally found the perfect avenue (not that it ended [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/singers-philosophy-where-it-belongs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 010: The Moral Argument, Part 2</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-010-the-moral-argument-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-010-the-moral-argument-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=158</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here it is, the second installment of my two part series on the moral argument. Oh, and before anyone gets offended and writes to me about the parody in the blog roundup &#8211; stop and ask yourself: Are you a Windows user by choice? If so, then which of us is really worse, hmm? If [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-010-the-moral-argument-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_010.mp3" length="27317321" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:56:52</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>Here it is, the second installment of my two part series on the moral argument.
Oh, and before anyone gets offended and writes to me about the parody in the blog roundup &#8211; stop and ask yourself: Are you a Windows user by choice? If so, then wh[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>Here it is, the second installment of my two part series on the moral argument.
Oh, and before anyone gets offended and writes to me about the parody in the blog roundup &#8211; stop and ask yourself: Are you a Windows user by choice? If so, then which of us is really worse, hmm?

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>apologetics, Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 009: The Moral Argument, Part 1</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-009-the-moral-argument-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-009-the-moral-argument-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 00:43:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the moral argument]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s part 1 of a 2 part series on the moral argument for theism. The argument is largely about meta-ethics, so the bulk of this presentation is devoted to explaining the meta-ethical issues: What are moral facts at all? And could there be any such things in a purely naturalistic worldview? If you liked this [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-009-the-moral-argument-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_009.mp3" length="24026887" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:50:01</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>Here&#8217;s part 1 of a 2 part series on the moral argument for theism. The argument is largely about meta-ethics, so the bulk of this presentation is devoted to explaining the meta-ethical issues: What are moral facts at all? And could there be an[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>Here&#8217;s part 1 of a 2 part series on the moral argument for theism. The argument is largely about meta-ethics, so the bulk of this presentation is devoted to explaining the meta-ethical issues: What are moral facts at all? And could there be any such things in a purely naturalistic worldview?

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>apologetics, Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Episode 004: Parodying Plato</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-004-parodying-plato/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-004-parodying-plato/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Euthyphro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plato]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=143</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Episode 4 already. One more episode and I&#8217;m halfway to 10! The main feature of this show is an audio dialogue, &#8220;A New Euthyphro.&#8221; This dialogue is a re-make of part of Plato&#8217;s Euthyphro dialogue, with a twist: This time Socrates&#8217; is armed with a little more philosophical acuity than the bumbling Euthyphro that Socrates [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2008/episode-004-parodying-plato/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
			<enclosure url="http://www.beretta-online.com/podcast/audio/berettacast_004.mp3" length="32175124" type="audio/mpeg" />
		<itunes:duration>0:44:41</itunes:duration>
		<itunes:subtitle>Episode 4 already. One more episode and I&#8217;m halfway to 10!
The main feature of this show is an audio dialogue, &#8220;A New Euthyphro.&#8221; This dialogue is a re-make of part of Plato&#8217;s Euthyphro dialogue, with a twist: This time Socra[...]</itunes:subtitle>
		<itunes:summary>Episode 4 already. One more episode and I&#8217;m halfway to 10!
The main feature of this show is an audio dialogue, &#8220;A New Euthyphro.&#8221; This dialogue is a re-make of part of Plato&#8217;s Euthyphro dialogue, with a twist: This time Socrates&#8217; is armed with a little more philosophical acuity than the bumbling Euthyphro that Socrates gave us. This time, the so-called &#8220;Euthyphro Dilemma&#8221; fails abysmally as an attack on divine command ethics.

If you liked this post, feel free to help support this project.</itunes:summary>
		<itunes:keywords>Ethics, podcast</itunes:keywords>
		<itunes:author>Dr Glenn Peoples</itunes:author>
		<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
		<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Embryonic Stem Cells no more?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/embryonic-stem-cells-no-more/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/embryonic-stem-cells-no-more/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 08:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=95</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This was on the news tonight, so I looked it up and found this news story. Apparently scientists have developed the technology to create stem cells from skin cells. On the plus side, this means there&#8217;s no longer any reason to use human embryos, destroying them to get stem cells. But a key developer of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/embryonic-stem-cells-no-more/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Divine Commands and Reasons</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/divine-commands-and-reasons/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/divine-commands-and-reasons/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=65</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From something I was writing today (well, not word for word, but the idea is the same). One version of a divine command theory of ethics is the causal version, where God&#8217;s will or command causes acts to be right or wrong. One objection to this is that this makes morality arbitrary, since God has [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/divine-commands-and-reasons/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is there an echo in here?</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/is-there-an-echo-in-here/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/is-there-an-echo-in-here/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 23:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meta-ethics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=57</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, it&#8217;s been a while but I&#8217;m back. I&#8217;ve just uploaded a new article in the philosophy section. &#8220;Is There an Echo in Here? Critiques of God based Ethics.&#8221; It&#8217;s about the weak point in modern moral philosophy. Open any mainstream textbook on ethical theory, whether it&#8217;s by Singer, Timmons, Rachels, or Pojman (and many [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2007/is-there-an-echo-in-here/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>One more for the C.V.</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/one-more-for-the-cv/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/one-more-for-the-cv/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Dec 2006 02:52:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[announcements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[publications]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=52</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been neglecting this blog lately. I&#8217;m trying to get pieces prepared for publication while I&#8217;m on the Publication Award from University, as well as applying for as many jobs as I can, and preparing for Christmas and all that. But I thought I&#8217;d just pop back in briefly to let anyone who is interested [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/one-more-for-the-cv/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Article: &quot;A New Euthyphro&quot;</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/new-article-a-new-euthyphro/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/new-article-a-new-euthyphro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 11:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[apologetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy of Religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divine command theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Euthyphro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plato]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=39</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve posted a new article in the philosophy section, &#8220;A New Euthyphro.&#8221; It&#8217;s not a particularly technical read, but then, neither was the original Euthyphro by Plato. Here&#8217;s the blurb: &#8220;Plato&#8217;s Euthyphro is widely thought to contain a knock down argument against theologically grounded ethics &#8211; widely thought, that is, outside of the field of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/new-article-a-new-euthyphro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Was Rawls a Relativist? I think so.</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/is-rawls-a-relativist-i-think-so/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/is-rawls-a-relativist-i-think-so/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Sep 2006 10:32:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Rawls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relativism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The first suggestion I ever read that John Rawls was a relativist was in the book Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, by Francis Beckwith and Greg Koukl. It was a fairly brief comment, and at the time I had never read anything by John Rawls, so I never thought about it for a while. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/is-rawls-a-relativist-i-think-so/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Peter Singer. He&#8217;s not just wrong, he tells fibs, apparently.</title>
		<link>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/peter-singer-hes-not-just-wrong-he-tells-fibs-apparently/</link>
		<comments>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/peter-singer-hes-not-just-wrong-he-tells-fibs-apparently/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jun 2006 09:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Glenn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Peter Singer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/?p=16</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Read about it here. Peter Singer is a writer I&#8217;ve had some interest in over the last few years as I&#8217;ve written on ethics. He&#8217;s a fairly notorious ethicist at Princeton University who advocates feticide for the purpose of organ harvesting or on the grounds of mental handicap or more minor problems, necrophilia, bestiality and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.beretta-online.com/wordpress/2006/peter-singer-hes-not-just-wrong-he-tells-fibs-apparently/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

