A- There is nothing wrong with murder (focused solely on the subject)
Translates to
Murder is permissible.
B- Murder is not considered wrong (focused on the attitudes of specific regions towards the subject)
Translates to
Regions think that murder is permissible
I think it's great that there is still research being done but giving what we know I am concluding that there is no ethical detriment associated with homosexuality that makes it wrong
I understand but I am not concerned with whether homosexuality is considered unacceptable in regions I am concerned with whether homosexuality is acceptable or unacceptable in and of itself
The idea isn’t bad
They ultimately want to push for progress in the black community
I'm using "translates" in a colloquial manner to say "This really means"
Generally, if there is nothing ethically wrong with something then it follows that it is permissible and that is the similarity I am trying to draw
The concern does follow. For example:
A- There is nothing wrong with murder (focused solely on the subject)
Translates to
Murder is permissible.
B- Murder is not considered wrong (focused on the attitudes of specific regions towards the subject)
Translates to
Regions think that murder is permissible
I think it's great that there is still research being done but giving what we know I am concluding that there is no ethical detriment associated with homosexuality that makes it wrong
I understand but I am not concerned with whether homosexuality is considered unacceptable in regions I am concerned with whether homosexuality is acceptable or unacceptable in and of itself
Changed it. I kept the wording the same though. Both titles more or less entail the same concept
Messed up in the description. I will be using wrong interchangeably with "unacceptable"
Didn't realize there was only 2 hours in between arguments. Unfortunately, I had went to sleep but C'est la vie