so, is the conscience god's direct line to someone's brain? i wonder how it is different people's consciences can lead them to opposite actions... also, why not prevent evil in the first place instead of just giving advice? what if someone makes their decisions with a careful, rational evaluation of the situation & its consequences instead of listening to their conscience? frankly, i find your definition of morality as "god's law delivered via conscience" inconsistent. it is contradicted in the case of two people's consciences prompting them to do opposite actions. there's also the fact that such a definition is making an unjustified assumption on the existence of a god, but that's an entirely different subject altogether. returning to the original topic, my opinion is that information & discussion should be as free as possible, with a minimum number of topics censored. I think that any topic should be up for discussion, provided the discussion itself won't directly harm someone physically or financially (yes, ignoring emotionally). obviously however, things are a bit stricter here in the interest of not having binrev taken down by DHS/ICE/whoever, which is regrettable but understandable to keep the community alive. there's still debate to do with the grey areas of free speech, but there's ways to indulge in such discussions away from prying eyes.