2. Subjective offensiveness is irrelevant. The prayers are objectively good, and pornography is objectively evil.
Now someone's gone and made a claim. The onus of proof is upon you for both prayers being objectively good and pornography being objectively evil.
Only if I'm trying to convince you.
Perhaps the words 'good' and 'evil' have a special meaning in the christian faith which makes these statements provable but then you suffer from a self-reference which renders your point moot.
If there is no objective truth about the value of prayers or pornography then I think that subjective offensiveness is very much worth considering.
"Good" is defined as supportive of God's Will, and "evil" is defined as opposed to God's will. No modern or atheistic redefinitions have any practical value. But no, this does not involve a self-reference, because Christianity is itself objective truth, no matter who believes or denies it.
If you are trying to open my mind to the idea that logic itself is not absolute then I'm afraid I'm a lost cause. My belief in logic is probably as strong as your belief in christianity.
Logic is what led me to Catholicism, but admittedly not a replacement for its (logic's) Creator.
If you reply to this with a solid logical argument then I'd love to continue this discussion but otherwise I think we'll simply have to go our separate ways.
Sorry, I generally don't try to convince people. You have created the requirement of logical proof for yourself, so you are the one responsible for resolving it. If you sincerely seek the truth regardless of your own biases, I'm sure you'll figure it out. If you have any questions about the conclusions I have come to, I'd be glad to answer them to the best of my ability (though this forum is not the proper place for that).
