pariah

the pastor seems to intentionally misunderstand stephen hawkings wave function theorum...

of course there is no such thing as absolute morality, morals are decided by society and that could mean anything

truth is reality, not some twisted BS.

what a dumbass.

Vylo

What is right in wrong is highly subjective, mores and taboos vary greatly person to person and culture to culture. There is nothing inherently right with Christians morals (which is a fairly ambiguous term), nor is there anything inherently correct about athesitic morals.

What becomes right and wrong is what society constructs for us and enforces. In the case of this nation, many christian morals tend to dominate. There is nothing wrong with this, so long as these morals do not unduely favor a minority.

Theli

So false.
If morality created (and enforced) by a society could not me measured and questioned then there would be no change in that society. Black people would still be considered a lesser race, and homosexuality would still be taboo.
As I said, aslo taboos can be questioned and put to test. If they are not working to better the society or the lives of the people living in it then breaking that taboo should not be considered immoral.
Although most people do accept the current moral laws in their society as axioms, wich is a big slice of mankinds stupidity-pie.

Theli

And what the HELL is wrong with this server!?!?

Spenser

...and just who the hell would buy one of those stupid shirts???

Howard

Our mindset and emotions are always involved in the decisions we make. We can't escape them. But the rightness or wrongness should not be based on such things. It should be based on the circumstances of the situation.

However, things are not always black and white… there are different degrees of wrongness. Again, it should depend on the situation, not on personal like or dislikes… theoretically. In reality, people have different value systems and often react to the same situation differently, so it often does come down to personal taste. What is right for me may not right for you. Who’s to decide?

Quote:

Would you argue that no judgement by the parents of the murdered children can be an immoral one?

Of course not. But I would say it's less wrong to kill someone who murdered your children than to kill someone for racial reasons.

Quote:

Not at any time. If killing Hitler would result in a decreased number of casualties during WW2 then yes it would be morally justifiable. If Hitler were to survive WW2 and was now a drooling vegetable with no power over anything, or in another condition where he couldn't cause any more death, then no. His death would serve no purpose and would just be another death.

Obviously, I was referring to the former situation.

Good going back and forth with you Theli, but I'm going out of town until next week. I'll be back though.

Inconnu

Morality? Isnt that the little patch of high ground people battle to occupy so they can cast judgement on others, and escape judgement themselves?

Clutch

Alex Trebek: No

Contestant: Morality? Isn't that the little patch of high ground people battle to occupy so they can cast judgement on others, and escape judgement themselves?

Vylo

Theli, I am interested in your view of what does construct right and wrong if not society?

There is deviance in society which attempts to disrupt the current moral order. Often desire for power drives people to do things, despite them being fully aware they are wrong. These small ripples in a culture are more then enough to spark change.

While not to the same degree as before, I have witnessed first hand that these views are still very much alive and well. At times I wonder if all we have done is swept the ideas like racism under the rug, while most of us still act upon these ideas nearly every day.

Vylo

I like that one