[quote]therajraj wrote:
The rest of your post that I didn’t quote, I’ve already answered and we’re just running in circles.[/quote]
You haven’t answered. You said morality wasn’t timeless. That a society determines rights. The European/US slave trade didn’t grant those rights, so no immorality.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
All you’ve done is say it isn’t. You’ve yet to prove it.[/quote]
I have proved it.
Ok Slavery.
Advantages and negatives for slave owner - Some benefits
Advantage and disadvantages for slaves - Huge negatives quality of life is very poor.
Therefore slavery is immoral.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
All you’ve done is say it isn’t. You’ve yet to prove it.[/quote]
I have proved it.
Ok Slavery.
Advantages and negatives for slave owner - Some benefits
Advantage and disadvantages for slaves - Huge negatives quality of life is very poor.
Therefore slavery is immoral.
[/quote]
Unchecked premises.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
All you’ve done is say it isn’t. You’ve yet to prove it.[/quote]
I have proved it.
Ok Slavery.
Advantages and negatives for slave owner - Some benefits
Advantage and disadvantages for slaves - Huge negatives quality of life is very poor.
Therefore slavery is immoral.
[/quote]
You’re acting as if the slaves condition has any bearing, in the first place.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Armed robbery with a gun is reasonable.
[/quote]
By everything we consider moral no it’s not. We can reasonably see it is not moral.
[/quote]
No we can’t. [/quote]
We do it all the time.
The Bible is the source of your morals correct?
What if someone breaks into your home and attacks you? Is killing in self-defense wrong?
If you believe the Bible the source of your morality and the Bible says thou shalt not kill, how did you come to the conclusion killing in self defense is okay?
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Okay, this argument isn’t going anywhere, I’m uninterested in repeating myself.
Yes Sloth, armed robbery is “reasonable” and we can’t figure out without god that it isn’t.
You got me.[/quote]
We can figure out without God that it will fuck up a society when we dont act against it.
Does not change that a few hundred bucks for 4 minutes work is quite beneficial to the robber.
You argue as if there was only one ethical system, you closet Christian and yet you do not even dare to define it.
On top of it you seem to have a problem with people who give a clear definition of what their values are and where they come from.
I dont know man…
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Armed robbery with a gun is reasonable.
[/quote]
By everything we consider moral no it’s not. We can reasonably see it is not moral.
[/quote]
No we can’t. [/quote]
We do it all the time.
The Bible is the source of your morals correct?
What if someone breaks into your home and attacks you? Is killing in self-defense wrong?
If you believe the Bible the source of your morality and the Bible says thou shalt not kill, how did you come to the conclusion killing in self defense is okay?[/quote]
Because the Bible says no such thing.
Perhaps I wouldn’t want to be a slave. And I have the means to not be one. Weapons. A society for protection. Etc.
Though, perhaps I’m willing to own some myself. And, being of sound mind, I understand the dangers involved in obtaining/keeping slaves, and willingly take on the risk. Risk vs. Reward. Not morality vs. immorality.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Okay, this argument isn’t going anywhere, I’m uninterested in repeating myself.
Yes Sloth, armed robbery is “reasonable” and we can’t figure out without god that it isn’t.
You got me.[/quote]
We can figure out without God that it will fuck up a society when we dont act against it.
Does not change that a few hundred bucks for 4 minutes work is quite beneficial to the robber.
You argue as if their was only one ethical system, you closet Christian and yet you do not even dare to define it.
On top of it you seem to have a problem with people who give a clear definition of what their values are and where they come from.
I dont know man…[/quote]
I am okay with moral absolutes in a limited context. Within the context of the situation and primarily we’re dealing with human beings and thinking minds.
Theraj, you’re attempting say we have no inalienable (I can understand how tricky it is for an atheist). Yet, you claim the enslaving a people to be immoral…You’re assigning a timeless and inherent value(s) to human life. Inalienable Rights.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I am okay with moral absolutes in a limited context. Within the context of the situation and primarily we’re dealing with human beings and thinking minds. [/quote]
Thinking minds have no inherent value.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Okay, this argument isn’t going anywhere, I’m uninterested in repeating myself.
Yes Sloth, armed robbery is “reasonable” and we can’t figure out without god that it isn’t.
You got me.[/quote]
We can figure out without God that it will fuck up a society when we dont act against it.
Does not change that a few hundred bucks for 4 minutes work is quite beneficial to the robber.
You argue as if their was only one ethical system, you closet Christian and yet you do not even dare to define it.
On top of it you seem to have a problem with people who give a clear definition of what their values are and where they come from.
I dont know man…[/quote]
I am okay with moral absolutes in a limited context. Within the context of the situation and primarily we’re dealing with human beings and thinking minds. [/quote]
In these cases we really dont.
Depending on where you start from you can come to all kind of conclusions regarding ethical matters and those starting points need to come from somewhere.
You do not float above the waters and determine ethical principles rationally, you have a starting point as anyone else does.
Christians know theirs, do you know yours?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I am okay with moral absolutes in a limited context. Within the context of the situation and primarily we’re dealing with human beings and thinking minds. [/quote]
Thinking minds have no inherent value.[/quote]
None whatsoever.
Published academic reason.
Reasoned their way to infanticide.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
Okay, this argument isn’t going anywhere, I’m uninterested in repeating myself.
Yes Sloth, armed robbery is “reasonable” and we can’t figure out without god that it isn’t.
You got me.[/quote]
We can figure out without God that it will fuck up a society when we dont act against it.
Does not change that a few hundred bucks for 4 minutes work is quite beneficial to the robber.
You argue as if their was only one ethical system, you closet Christian and yet you do not even dare to define it.
On top of it you seem to have a problem with people who give a clear definition of what their values are and where they come from.
I dont know man…[/quote]
I am okay with moral absolutes in a limited context. Within the context of the situation and primarily we’re dealing with human beings and thinking minds. [/quote]
In these cases we really dont.
Depending on where you start from you can come to all kind of conclusions regarding ethical matters and those starting points need to come from somewhere.
You do not float above the waters and determine ethical principles rationally, you have a starting point as anyone else does.
Christians know theirs, do you know yours?[/quote]
You only need very simple beginnings.
Life is preferable to death, pleasure is preferable to pain etc.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Published academic reason.
Reasoned their way to infanticide. [/quote]
Great and there’s a lot of science telling us that red meat is bad for us.
Posting junk science doesn’t mean anything.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
You only need very simple beginnings.
Life is preferable to death, pleasure is preferable to pain etc.
[/quote]
But a life with no risks, and not one worth living. Sorry, we aren’t Vulcans.
I’ve been trying to stay away from this forum because it eats up so much of my damn time… I’m out for now.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]therajraj wrote:
You only need very simple beginnings.
Life is preferable to death, pleasure is preferable to pain etc.
[/quote]
But a life with no risks, and not one worth living. Sorry, we aren’t Vulcans.
[/quote]
You build upon these very simple beginnings.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Published academic reason.
Reasoned their way to infanticide. [/quote]
Great and there’s a lot of science telling us that red meat is bad for us.
Posting junk science doesn’t mean anything.
[/quote]
Ah, ‘junk science.’ Just like that, one man’s reason is swept away by another.