Vorkosigan

And those rights you are talking about - it is based on what?

Beliefs, facts, values, opinions, perceptions...same as yours.

What makes you say that those must not be violated?

Agreements that we have with each other as members of a society.

Also, what if my rights contradict with others' rights? How then do we determine which right is supreme and must defeat all other rights opposed against it?

In most cases rights can easily co-exist, they complement rather than contradict. In a few cases where they cannot be reconciled, sensible people undertake compromise through negotiation. In the rare cases where both parties refuse to compromise, then we have courts underpinned by sovereign agreement among members of society. If one party continues to refuse to negotiate and continues to refuse to behave in a socially responsible way, probably force will be required.

In other words, VM, we do what humans usually do when they disagree. It's not difficult, really. Only some kind of authoritarian absolutist -- Christian, Muslim, Communist, Facist -- will take the position that one point of view is right and all others wrong. That inability to negotiate with others is the main reason those groups are so difficult for others to live with, and why their societies are filled with tension and strife.

Vorkosigan

DRFseven

Adam, you have said that morals are based on values. Morals ARE values. Your opinion on any given question regarding moral behavior is an evaluation of whether that behavior is good or bad, right or wrong. VM is asking what you base the values on.

For instance, freedom is valued highly (is valued as "good") because? Having friends is valued highly because? What is it that makes having friends and freedom seem positive to you instead of negative?

AdamWho

You are wrong to equate morals and values. Here are some examples:

Values - a list of important things
Money, respect, love, friendship, sex, freedom, safetly ect.

Ethics - process of rationally balancing values
I value freedom more than I value money therefore I should find a way to get money without compromising my freedom.

I value X more than I value Y therefore I should find a way to get X without compromising my Y.

Morals - code of conduct based on values
To get money I need to work (not steal)
To get respect I need to treat other people with respect (not use force and violence)
To have sex I need to be nice, well groomed (not a rapist)

Values are based on the individual; the values an individual chooses depends on the given circumstance, they can be good, bad or neutral. Morals are a code of conduct based on values.

There is no mystery with this process; everyone does something like this whenever they make a decision.
Making abstract arguments about "the standard of morality" are doomed to failure and confusion because they want to argue ideals instead and ignore how people actually operate.

Violent Messiah

AdamWho:

How'd you know all of your answers were not satisfactory to me?

I can see a lot of sense in your posts and in some atheists' answers - secular humanism, existentialism...etc....

Vorkosigan:

A very eloquent reply without any touch of sarcasm.

Secular:

I don't know why you are trying to change this topic into a debate of the validity of theists' and atheists' standard of morality....yes, i understand that it may somewhat imply that i had that underlying purpose in my post but it was not intended to be such.

I won't drop my case - because it's a simple question. And others have answered it.