>If it implies lust, then it MUST imply moral accountability. And if the
>maker was morally accountable, then regardless of whether he personally
>had a religion or not, he needed one.
The appropriate definition of lust, I believe, from Webster's ninth
collegiate dictionary is "intense or unbridled sexual desire." Based on
that definition my neighbor's Malamute Husky can experience lust, but I
don't believe he (the dog, not his owner) is morally accountable. I
certainly agree that art is an indication of the level of mental activity
that we might expect of morally accountable beings, but I think you need
more than art to establish it. Perhaps a legal code...
Bill Hamilton | Chassis & Vehicle Systems
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
firstname.lastname@example.org (office) | email@example.com (home)