You can only tell what’s good or bad for you.
Without an universal definiton fo good and bad, there is no rule.
If there’s no rule, there is no law.
If there’s no law, there’s no right.
If there’s no right, there’s only force, power and violence
You better be the strongest amongst all the people who “can decide for themselves what’s good and what’s bad”.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
That I believe morality is relative means that I decide for myself what is right and what is wrong. We’ve been over this before [like so many things] but think of it as a black to white greyscale with a thin slice of black, a huge swath of different shades of grey, and a thin slice of white.
Child rape and horrors like the holocaust are black, and driving off a cliff to save a bus full of babies is white. Much, however, is in between.
[/quote]
Shades of the same things though. Why are these horrors so obviously black? If morality was so relative and fluid as you claim this would not be the case, there would be a scenario in which these things would be ok. Certainly the Nazi’s thought is was a great idea. Where they right at the time because they thought it was right?
Well it’s good vs. evil isn’t it? You yourself believe morality exists. You think it’s the result of cooperative society, but a brief observation of history clearly shows that man is anything but cooperative and natural, evolutionary instinct is to destroy one another.
Well it does. But I didn’t make that claim until right at this moment you were claiming that I made the claim, but I did not. Besides, it does not matter in that morality exists, independent of it’s source just like everything else that exists. You don’t necessarily need to know it’s source to know of it’s existence.
[quote]
I can’t prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. I admitted this right away. You, on the other hand, shy away from admitting you can’t prove that your absolute source exists.
Why?[/quote]
I have laid out my case many, many, many, many times regarding the proof of the existence of God. Your tying this in as a necessity and it’s simply not. It’s no more a necessity to prove God’s existence to prove morality’s existence then a need to prove God’s existence because a pencil exists.
Morality exists, evil is evil and good is good and that is true independent of it’s source, just like anything else that exists. God’s existence is not germane to this conversation.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Child rape and horrors like the holocaust are black, and driving off a cliff to save a bus full of babies is white.[/quote]
But, not really. Since, you know, moral truths don’t exist, even in the most cliched of scenarios.
[/quote]
Why do you need an outside source to tell you what’s good and what’s bad?
[/quote]
You don’t everybody has an intrinsic knowledge of right and wrong…
You can, but if you decide something is right but it results in the harm of somebody else, your wrong.
It’s really, really simple. An act of will that results in a positive benefit for yourself and others, it’s a moral act. If you will something that detriments yourself but benefits others, it’s a moral act. If you perform an act that benefits you but hurt others it’s an immoral act. This is not subjective, this is not fluid, this is not arbitrary. It is and always will be the same thing. If your actions have a victim, you acts are immoral.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Child rape and horrors like the holocaust are black, and driving off a cliff to save a bus full of babies is white.[/quote]
But, not really. Since, you know, moral truths don’t exist, even in the most cliched of scenarios.
[/quote]
Why do you need an outside source to tell you what’s good and what’s bad?
Why do you insist that I can’t decide for myself what’s good and what’s bad?
[/quote]
Because he is apparently so morally corrupt that he can’t do it without an outside source. It makes him feel inferior to think others could be good without fear of not getting into the metaphorical “after party” of life.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Why do you need an outside source to tell you what’s good and what’s bad?[/quote]
Because child molestation is evil independent of what you think? Do you disagree?
[quote]Why do you insist that I can’t decide for myself what’s good and what’s bad?
[/quote]
Obviously you don’t believe this or you’d allow murderers to decided to jail themselves, or not.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Because he is apparently so morally corrupt …[/quote]
This is an illogical path for you to go down. If morality is subjective, then being informed by moral truths outside oneself is as moral as the opposite. Unless, you’re claiming there is only one absolute moral way to arrive at moral truths (from within). See, you can never judge the morality of my positions, or the morality of how I arrive at them, without acknowledging that they can be no more morally corrupt than your own, in reality.
A coupla slam dunks for Sloth here.
[quote]ephrem wrote:<<< conclusive proof >>>[/quote]What would that be to you?
I ask, yet again: So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I say this: Rape was a different act before the coming of Christ. Women were once considered property. Far from the case in modern times.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Stoning unruly children was once “moral”. So was selling your daughter. Rape was once fine (as long as you paid the victims father). Morality is still yet to be properly defined, and until it is - it is at the mercy of society.[/quote]
[/quote]
“Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I get the last word”[/quote]
Apropos of the first pic
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I ask, yet again: So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I say this: Rape was a different act before the coming of Christ. Women were once considered property. Far from the case in modern times.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Stoning unruly children was once “moral”. So was selling your daughter. Rape was once fine (as long as you paid the victims father). Morality is still yet to be properly defined, and until it is - it is at the mercy of society.[/quote]
[/quote]
“Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I get the last word”[/quote]
[/quote]
Here’s a hint: The society that allowed rape with payment? It’s still around, mutilating children at birth for no good reason.
By the way, I really have no interest in getting into a discussion with someone who still doesn’t understand how to use the quote function properly.
Pro Life amendment fails in Mississippi
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57321126/mississippis-personhood-amendment-fails-at-polls/
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Pro Life amendment fails in Mississippi
It was a stupid amendment. It was designed to fail, unfortunately.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I ask, yet again: So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I say this: Rape was a different act before the coming of Christ. Women were once considered property. Far from the case in modern times.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Stoning unruly children was once “moral”. So was selling your daughter. Rape was once fine (as long as you paid the victims father). Morality is still yet to be properly defined, and until it is - it is at the mercy of society.[/quote]
[/quote]
“Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I get the last word”[/quote]
[/quote]
Here’s a hint: The society that allowed rape with payment? It’s still around, mutilating children at birth for no good reason.
By the way, I really have no interest in getting into a discussion with someone who still doesn’t understand how to use the quote function properly.[/quote]
Sure it’s still around…Nobody is ‘inventing’ any new crimes. The old ones are still in play, people still murder, torture, enslave, rape, steal, etc. Just because people do it, doesn’t mean we can educate them out of it, or that any of it should be legal or tolerated.
Because I would not wish them on anyone.
War between societies is indeed a problem. But a tribe, a village, a town, a city, a county, a province, a state, a confederation, a union, a continent and ultimately a planet of globally connected humans learned to work together.
Whether we’ll destroy eachother is something we’ll have to wait and see. In the end it comes down to maturity, reason and honesty.
It sure does.
Why do parents need to teach their children right from wrong?
No arguement there pat. I agree.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Why do you need an outside source to tell you what’s good and what’s bad?[/quote]
Because child molestation is evil independent of what you think? Do you disagree?
[quote]Why do you insist that I can’t decide for myself what’s good and what’s bad?
[/quote]
Obviously you don’t believe this or you’d allow murderers to decided to jail themselves, or not.[/quote]
I’m sorry sloth, what are you getting at?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Conclusive proof of the source of absolute morality? Revelation.
As this discussion shifts towards issues of morality, how do you feel about this?
A woman in the Netherlands has been euthanized after a battle with advanced dementia.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Why do you need an outside source to tell you what’s good and what’s bad?[/quote]
Because child molestation is evil independent of what you think? Do you disagree?
[quote]Why do you insist that I can’t decide for myself what’s good and what’s bad?
[/quote]
Obviously you don’t believe this or you’d allow murderers to decided to jail themselves, or not.[/quote]
I’m sorry sloth, what are you getting at?
[/quote]
If you can’t tell, it wouldn’t do any good to explain.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
I ask, yet again: So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So of the activities you claim were once “moral,” which of those societies lasted the longest and which one society is currently around today? Please provide evidence to support your claim mak.
Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I say this: Rape was a different act before the coming of Christ. Women were once considered property. Far from the case in modern times.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Stoning unruly children was once “moral”. So was selling your daughter. Rape was once fine (as long as you paid the victims father). Morality is still yet to be properly defined, and until it is - it is at the mercy of society.[/quote]
[/quote]
“Not trying to bring religion into the thread, in fact we can let it die after I get the last word”[/quote]
[/quote]
Here’s a hint: The society that allowed rape with payment? It’s still around, mutilating children at birth for no good reason.
By the way, I really have no interest in getting into a discussion with someone who still doesn’t understand how to use the quote function properly.[/quote]
Sure it’s still around…Nobody is ‘inventing’ any new crimes. The old ones are still in play, people still murder, torture, enslave, rape, steal, etc. Just because people do it, doesn’t mean we can educate them out of it, or that any of it should be legal or tolerated.[/quote]
While murder requires some level of malice, not every murder is motivated by malice.