[general_re]

You don't consider this unproven at all, yet you just posted 3 very long paragraphs without saying anything on-topic.

Sure I do. The fact that you can't prove it only confirms my suspicions - you have no objective basis for saying that one set of personal preferences is "better" than another. You're just assuming that your values are the "rational" values and judging everyone else by your own personal, subjective yardstick. Not very objective of you, I must say...

[Alamo-Girl]

The way you entice an adverse party to argue against himself, I'd wager you'd not lose very many arguments at trial, general_re! Kudos and hugs!

[Dominic Harr]

Sure I do.

:-|

Now you resort to claiming you aren't even capable of understanding why 'good' health is objectively better than 'bad' health?

Dude, watching this much rationalization is *not* a pretty sight.

Simply disagreeing with what the other person says is *not* profound, and in fact not even an argument.

Didn't you see that episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus?