thesweetcheat wrote: juamei wrote: GLADMAN wrote: So, by all means, climbing Silbury, sitting upon a crumbling capstone... granted.. out of order. But applying blanket moral condemnation of those who venture far and wide to put obscure sites - many at risk - betrays a lack of understanding of the true scale of what is going on out there.
I couldn't agree more... If you perceived that from my post rather than answering other peoples issues, then I clearly didn't speak clearly!
Well, to be fair, what you said was "ITS WRONG.
Don't tell me it causes no damage, I don't give a fuck if its minor I really don't, its wrong. Simple as. "
That sounds like blanket moral condemnation to me. As I said yesterday, we will have to disagree. I shall be out in the hills tomorrow, doing what I think is right.
Meh. Moral condemnation of climbing stones sure. Moral condemnation of those who venture far and wide to obscure sites? I think I am being tarred and feathered for something no-one said.
Like you this thread saddens me... How so many people who love monuments cannot see the obvious in front of their eyes... I am a moral absolutist, we all are ultimately, perhaps my ideals are just that much more, well ideal.
|