Classic

[John V]

No I don't.

Good person = Someone that avoids intentionally causing mental, physical, or financial harm to another person for no other reason than to cause mental, physical, or financial harm but tries to alleviate such harm if it occurs.

I didn't put "tries to alleviate ALL harm wherever it exists".

That would mean practically no human that ever existed, if any, was ever a good person.

Yep. More realistically, should one be expected to try to alleviate all harm within one's means? For instance suppose someone writes a $30 check to charity once a month, but spends $50 every weekend at the bars? Good or evil?

There's also a problem in the opposite direction. Is anyone who ever tried to alleviate any harm a good person? In that case, practically everyone is a good person.

Moreso, in the case of equal rights for homosexuals, my mother would not identify restricting their right to be married as a harm.

My mother is of the belief that Jesus/God loves us, and anything he tells us is wrong, like homosexuality, is him trying to prevent us from causing our own harm and misery.

Based on this belief, since God is against us being in homosexual relationships, homosexual relationships must be harmful to the participants. To publically condone homosexual marriage would be the same as encouraging someone to do something that is harmful to themselves and society for a whole.

In her eyes, doing everything in her power to dissuade homosexuals from being homosexuals would actually be a good act.

Like telling your kid not to touch the hot stovetop.

Yep, that's another problem I was going to get to. A doctor who prescribes chemotherapy is causing harm, but in the hope of an ultimately beneficial outcome. Is this the same as your mother? If not, why not?