The Killing Joke

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
941

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

I’m not saying it’s “good”. But perhaps consider alternatives. Surely you’d have to agree African-Americans are better off today and have had better living conditions and lifestyle in general are far better than they would have been and are for tribes living on the edge of existence in the Congo. [/quote]

You assume I’m being entirely sarcastic. Slavery did work out well for the West Africans. The descendants of African slaves in Britain and the Americas are, in the aggregate, the most prosperous, well-educated, healthiest and longest-lived black people in the world.

Too late. You can’t unring that bell.

Nobody could ever provide evidence that God is immoral.

They would have to first provide evidence that God exists, and that He is the source of all morality, and nobody has ever done that.

But…

ASSUMING that God exists, AND
ASSUMING that God is Good, AND
ASSUMING that all morality comes from God
THEN whatever God condemns is immoral, i.e. “BAD”
CONVERSELY, what God does NOT condemn is NOT immoral, i.e. “GOOD”

IF the word of God is immutable, AND
IF the Bible is the complete word of God, AND
IF the Bible contains no clear condemnation of slavery
THEN God does not condemn slavery
THEN slavery is not immoral
THEREFORE slavery is “GOOD”

IF slavery is immoral, then EITHER:

The word of God is NOT immutable, OR
The Bible is NOT the complete word of God, OR
All morality does NOT come from God, OR
God is not Good, OR
God does not exist

Which would you say is the most likely?

942

[quote]smh_23 wrote:
“Worse things can happen to you than slavery, so slavery is not necessarily immoral.”

Let’s see how well the axiom holds up:

Worse things can happen to you than my crushing one of your testicles with a 2-pound hammer (I could crush both, after all), so my crushing one of your testicles with a 2-pound hammer is not necessarily immoral.

Yes?

(There is no emotion here: this is basic stuff. You are pushing set of moral principles that were torn to shreds – by cold, hard logic – a long time ago. And I’m not trying to take the moral high ground; I have it.)

Edited.[/quote]

That’s a flawed comparison. Slavery isn’t something maliciously inflicted for no reason. In the ancient world slaves were just a part of the social structure and hierarchy and as humans intrinsically form hierarchical social structures anyway and none of us are completely “free” then it all comes down to degree, type and circumstance as I said before. And in reply to your next comment, no it is most certainly not moral relativism. It’s a question of environmental factors - ie, are we talking about the Bronze Age? 1980’s? It depends on circumstance. Are we talking about sparing prisoners of war from execution in a society where slavery is part of the social structure and constant warfare and hardship is the norm? That’s not “moral relativism”. One’s ability to act morally is constrained by circumstance, environment etc.

943

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

You assume I’m being entirely sarcastic.

[/quote]

Not sure what you mean.

Yes I know. That’s what I’m saying.

No, because as I keep saying it depends on the circumstances and other alternatives and so on.

Maybe they will soon.

I don’t agree with your logic here at all. Not condemning something that is neutral(can be good or bad depending on circumstances) does not constitute proclaiming it “good”. Even if it was universally bad, there is no requirement for the bible to decree so. It’s bad not to clean your teeth but the bible doesn’t tell us that anywhere.

[quote]

IF slavery is immoral, then EITHER:

The word of God is NOT immutable, OR
The Bible is NOT the complete word of God, OR
All morality does NOT come from God, OR
God is not Good, OR
God does not exist

Which would you say is the most likely?[/quote]

See above. Your logic is flawed.

944

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

You assume I’m being entirely sarcastic.

[/quote]

Not sure what you mean.

Yes I know. That’s what I’m saying.

No, because as I keep saying it depends on the circumstances and other alternatives and so on.

Maybe they will soon.

I don’t agree with your logic here at all. Not condemning something that is neutral(can be good or bad depending on circumstances) does not constitute proclaiming it “good”. Even if it was universally bad, there is no requirement for the bible to decree so. It’s bad not to clean your teeth but the bible doesn’t tell us that anywhere.

[quote]

IF slavery is immoral, then EITHER:

The word of God is NOT immutable, OR
The Bible is NOT the complete word of God, OR
All morality does NOT come from God, OR
God is not Good, OR
God does not exist

Which would you say is the most likely?[/quote]

See above. Your logic is flawed.[/quote]

Minor changes to account for your criticism, and the argument is perfect.

I’ll respond to your other post later, I’m on my way out.

945

The way I look at it we all suffer and endure hardship. It’s a normal state of affairs. That doesn’t mean we can deliberately inflict hardship on anyone but it means that things like slavery are just a reality of existence. God is not under any obligation to make all our lives hardship free. And He is not obligated to specifically outlaw in all circumstances something that causes hardship and suffering.

946

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

I don’t agree with your logic here at all. [/quote]

I’m crushed, as I wrote this half-assed proof to prove your earlier point, that slavery is good. :frowning:

Tell you what: just for you, I’ll take out the last line and end with

THEREFORE slavery is not immoral.

Better?

Is light “good”, “bad” or “neutral”?

Depending on circumstances, it can be be beneficial, or it can be harmful. The people of Hiroshima who were incinerated in a millisecond by the intense light of the atom bomb got to experience the… shall we say… dark side of light.

And yet, when God saw the first light that he had made, which was the light of all the energy in the universe (incomprehensibly brighter than the pitiful little flash at Hiroshima) expanding outward from a single point, he proclaimed that it was “good” (Genesis 1:4). So light can cause unspeakable pain, suffering and death, while still being “good”.

No? Name something undeniably evil that is NOT condemned in the Bible.

If it is not condemned by the Bible, then how do you know that it is undeniably evil, if all morality comes from God, and the Bible is the Word of God?

You cannot seriously be comparing the institution of slavery to negligent oral hygiene.

Yes it’s harmful to neglect your teeth, and it’s stupid to do so, but it’s not immoral, unless you consider that if one’s body is a temple (Corinthians 6:19), then the teeth are its “pearly gates”, and to neglect them is to dishonour the temple. Yeah, I’m reaching here, but you provided me with an absurd comparison.

But while we’re on the subject of hygiene, God evidently thought that the way in which one washes one’s hands, and before which activities, and after which activities, important enough to devote a multitude of verses in Levitical law.

Keeping one’s hands clean is so important, in fact, that the phrase “to keep one’s hands clean” actually means “to be uninvolved and blameless with regard to an immoral act”. And as they say, cleanliness is next to Godliness.

And yeah, nothing SPECIFICALLY about cleaning your teeth in the Hebrew Bible, but there are lots and lots and LOTS of references to oral hygiene in the Talmud.

947

In the absence of public property, where would those who can’t afford property go? Even with public property, if there are rules governing that property and prohibiting the homeless from living on it, where should those without property go? I can tell you where most go in the modern-day United States of America: Jail. Do you know what the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution says? “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

Slavery(by entities other than the state) is demonized here in the U.S. for one reason: to justify the U.S. invasion of the Confederate States. *Second Edit: SexMachine, I know that comment will drive you nuts, so I’ll add to it now. “Ending” slavery in America is a feel-good story. It is always pushed in schools, however, because “The United States didn’t want to lose taxpayers” is a harder sell when indoctrinating children. “The Confederate States did not have a legal right to leave the United States, so we forced them to stay” would also be harder to sell. Regardless of whether one believes that the Confederate States had a legal right to secede, people would have a much harder time accepting the United States’ response without the feel-good ending.

*Edit: In other words, slavery is just a fact of life. “The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.”(Proverbs 22:7)

948

I’ll get back to this tomorrow. Gotta go.

951

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Sorry, Varq, you are a friend and a brother but this is weak sauce.[/quote]

All right. Then I offer you the same challenge I gave SexMachine.

Name for me one undeniably evil action that is NOT prohibited or condemned in the Bible.

If you can do that, then explain to me how you know it is immoral, if God is the source of all morality, and the Bible is his comprehensive Word.

And then tell me whether you think slavery is moral, immoral, or (as SexMachine puts it) neutral.

952

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Name for me one undeniably evil action that is NOT prohibited or condemned in the Bible. [/quote]

Does it mention anything about vacuuming out babies?

Seems pretty self explanatory to me.

953

Sweet Satan, this thread has exploded.
Is anybody still talking about France or is it gay sex again?

954

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Sweet Satan, this thread has exploded.
Is anybody still talking about France or is it gay sex again?[/quote]

France has long sailed out of the window.

It’s now about Christianity.

955

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Name for me one undeniably evil action that is NOT prohibited or condemned in the Bible. [/quote]

Does it mention anything about vacuuming out babies?[/quote]

Depends. Are they Hebrew babies?

Kidding, kidding.

No, I think that was covered in Exodus 20:13.

956

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
It is immoral to steal my hat. Period, full stop.[/quote]

You mean it’s immoral to steal. Why?

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
It is moral for me to react to that theft, as I was wronged. HOWEVER the situation’s details dictate WHICH of my possible reactions are moral, or excessive and therefore turn myself into the aggressor. [/quote]

And I am saying that turns your claim of morality into an opinion. The moment you need to place different levels into a moral judgment, it can no longer be moral. Why? One simple reason is that people can disagree on the necessary punishment for committing a certain immoral act. Like how people disagree on the concept of capital punishment.

If an objective absolute moral states that stealing is wrong, then in all reality you should be responding to all forms of stealing in the same manner. Because stealing is objectively wrong. The higher being who told us that stealing is an objectively immoral thing will also tell us the objectively correct manner to respond to it.

You see, there is a deliberate reason why I wrote “immoral to steal” above. “Immoral to steal my hat” is very concise and specific. “Immoral to steal my hat” is absolutely different from “immoral to steal my life-savings”. As both are different from “Immoral to steal”.

Now, of course said higher being could tell us how to respond differently to every single object stolen, but I don’t think that’s how people respond to this issue. They just say “it’s immoral to steal” and leave it at that.

But that’s just an opinion.

959

[quote]magick wrote:

You mean it’s immoral to steal. Why?[/quote]

Because it creates a victim. It’s my hat, I earned it or made it, and someone is stealing what is mine.

960

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I don’t agree with your logic here at all. Not condemning something that is neutral(can be good or bad depending on circumstances) does not constitute proclaiming it “good”.
[/quote]

It’s GOD. He’s supposed to know everything and anything. As such, it makes no sense to me that God will not definitively proclaim a certain thing right or wrong.

Neutral cannot exist with God. It can with men, because men do not know everything.

Stop pussyfooting around. It’s not like you.