好心学友求救LSAT 15-2-15

Zachary: One would have to be blind to the reality of moral obligation to deny that people who believe a course of ation to be morally obligatory for them have boh the right and the duty to pursue that action, and that no one else has any right to stop for them from doing so.

Cynthia: But imagine an artist who feels morally obliged to do whatever she can to precent works of art from being destroyed confronting a morally committed antipornography demonstrator engaged in destroying principle that artist has simultaneously, both the right and the duty to stop the destruction and no right what soever to stop it.

哪位高人能帮我看看上面的对话是什么意思呀？

Z: if you follow the reality of moral obligation, then you cannot denny one thing, which is, people (who believe a course of action to be morally obligator for them ),have both the right and the duty to pursue that action and no one else has any right to stop them.

C points out a dilemma. what if both an artist and an anitpornography demonstrator both are the people as Z defines?

the scenario would be: the artist says i have the right and duty to do blah blah, and on one else should stop me; while the demonstrator will responds that i have to right to pursue my action, which is to stop you. that is, both's actions are justified by Z's theory and at the same time in conflict with the theory

Thanks. Where are you based?

I am based in Beijing. Want to join our study group if you decide to take LSAT?