Juan,
You yourself recognized that people have an inner sense of morality. You dismiss it for being “not rational enough”, but you’ve acknowledged its existence. I have repeatedly expressed that I believe in such a sense, and that I believe it is extremely important. I’ve also repeatedly expressed my own deep moral revulsion against state aggression. So why do you insist on lying by, twice now, referring to me as an amoralist? Did your ethical syllogism spit out as a logical conclusion that there’s nothing wrong with lying? I guess that wouldn’t be too bad, considering that others have concluded from such syllogisms that it would be wrong to interfere with a father’s right to brutally torture his child.