> There's another approach that *does* aggravate
>me, however. It is the approach of the person
> who rejects moral demands not because they come
>from an apparently non-authoritative source, but
>because the person recognizes no authoritative
>source at all outside himself. When I get a
>hint of that sort of colossal arrogance, it
>disgusts me nearly to the point of rage, because
>*there is no talking to someone who does not
>acknowledge any authority other than himself.*

I'm not sure what to tell you about my feelings regarding this. There are many things for which I feel I am the ultimate authority *for myself only*. Reading material is definitely one of them. I believe this way because I *don't* believe in an almighty creator. If I *did* believe in a God, I'd probably submit to His will, recognizing that being omnipotent probably *does* give Him a better ability to see what I should read than I even have myself. But taking God out of the picture, I find myself as the only being in the Universe capable of making that kind of decision for me. And I resent anyone else trying to make it for me.

However, that doesn't mean I don't ever submit to a "higher" authority. I don't believe in any higher spiritual authority, but I definitely respect and submit to a higher secular authority, such as my government and my parents. But I also recognize that there are times when they, being not infallible, will *think* they know what is best for me, when in actuality they don't. I believe that for any social animal to have any sort of lasting society there has to be submission to authority. I also have *very* strong beliefs on how that authority is bestowed, how it can be exercised, and when it is right and just for me to *not* submit to it.

-- Dave