DISCUSSION: Does morality evolve or . . .

[HypnoToad]

Enemy - still vague; no mention of any underlying principle. "The morals behind sexuality" is not a specific underlying principle. Something like "molesting children is wrong" is a specific principle.

Kopilo - no mention of an underlying moral principle.

RealSorc - vague.

 

[RealSorceror]

Ah, my bad. Is there any specific moral you'd like to discuss?
Examples of evolving morals are racial equality, gender equality, slavery, etc. These have gone through radical changes throughout history, and not always for the better.
Examples of moral consistancy are murder and theft. These have been very consistantly wrong through history, although how the victem is defined has changed over time.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Enemy - still vague; no mention of any underlying principle. "The morals behind sexuality" is not a specific underlying principle. Something like "molesting children is wrong" is a specific principle.

Pre marital sex... was once considered "wrong" because it made the chance of unsecured pregnancy, devaluation of property (women) and mixing of bloodlines possible, all of which were not conducive to the effective running of ancient societies.

Modern, effective birth control does away with virtually all of these concerns, therefore, the morality of pre-marital sex is worthy of re-evaluation... now what needs to be avoided is needlessly hurting other people or engaging in harmful relationships, but the driving reason behind the pre-marital sex ban, i.e. unwanted pregnancy, is now a non starter...

so, literalistic interpretations of the Bible aside... the underlying morality of sex and marriage has changed...

in short, you once had to get married to have sex, because the prospect of children outside of marriage was a truly awful consequence. This is no longer the case, so the moral imperative has shifted

 

[christalee4]

Again - is that the underlying moral principle that changed, or the expression of an underlying principle that's changed?

What's the underlying moral principle of executing adults and children by stoning to death, burning, hanging, and the sword, for witchcraft, heresy, adultery and being willfully disobedient to one's parents?

 

[HypnoToad]

What's the underlying moral principle of executing adults and children by stoning to death, burning, hanging, and the sword, for witchcraft, heresy, adultery and being willfully disobedient to one's parents?

What's the principle? God is sovereign.

 

[christalee4]

What's the principle? God is sovereign.

Okay - but must the belief that God is sovereign result in propagating the old practice that God's laws must be enforced against alleged heretics, witches, homosexuals, adulteressess and children who are disobedient, by stoning, hanging, burning, and the sword? Are we not living a more modern, civilized age of enlightenment, science, compassion and understanding, in which these kinds of executions are barbaric, resulting in horrible suffering and oppression? God can still be sovereign and worshipped, without having to oppress and kill others barbarically as an expression of obedience to Him.

 

[HannahBanana]

Morals change, as is evidenced by the fact that slavery, rape, and incest are no longer considered to be moral.

 

[billwald]

YES! Civilized society . . . becomes more civilized. Judaism, for example. The origional death penalties in the Mosiac Covenant morphed into maximum penalties, not minimum <G> penalties. By the time of Jesus, the physical punishments had been replaced by monetary equivalents, fines and restitution. The last Sanhedron before the Destruction is historically known as the Bloody Sanhedron because it condemned one person to death.

As (crazy) Michael Savage says, the problem with Islam is that it has never evolved as Judaism has.

On the other hand, the (Christian) Reconstructionists, mostly OPC, want to take over the world and reimpose the origional Mosiac Covenant including the punishments. See www.freebooks.com Gary North's commentary on Lev. can be down loaded.

The push for public display of the 10 Commandments is the first step to this take-over. How many of wish they could be incorporated into our laws?

 

[Exhausted]

Morality is constant and utterly unchanging in every way. The morals of today are the morals of yesterday and tomorrow.

Sorry, that was sarcasm, but jeez, so many people saying the same thing, someone has to change the pace, you know?

 

[HypnoToad]

Pre marital sex... was once considered "wrong" because it made the chance of unsecured pregnancy, devaluation of property (women) and mixing of bloodlines possible, all of which were not conducive to the effective running of ancient societies.

Modern, effective birth control does away with virtually all of these concerns, therefore, the morality of pre-marital sex is worthy of re-evaluation... now what needs to be avoided is needlessly hurting other people or engaging in harmful relationships, but the driving reason behind the pre-marital sex ban, i.e. unwanted pregnancy, is now a non starter...

so, literalistic interpretations of the Bible aside... the underlying morality of sex and marriage has changed...

in short, you once had to get married to have sex, because the prospect of children outside of marriage was a truly awful consequence. This is no longer the case, so the moral imperative has shifted

Those are all just various expressions of the same principle - people should be sexually responsible.

 

[HypnoToad]

Okay - but must the belief that God is sovereign result in propagating the old practice that God's laws must be enforced against alleged heretics, witches, homosexuals, adulteressess and children who are disobedient, by stoning, hanging, burning, and the sword? Are we not living a more modern, civilized age of enlightenment, science, compassion and understanding, in which these kinds of executions are barbaric, resulting in horrible suffering and oppression? God can still be sovereign and worshipped, without having to oppress and kill others barbarically as an expression of obedience to Him.

This supports my point - the expressions change, but the underlying principle does not.

 

[kopilo]

Kopilo - no mention of an underlying moral principle.

If you followed the source link you would have found the Etymology.

Anyway, here it is for you spelt out as it was written.

I'm a person just like you
But I've got better things to do
Than sit around and [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] my head
Hang out with the living dead
Snort white [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] up my nose
Pass out at the shows
I don't even think about speed
That's something I just don't need

The chorus is the phrase "I've got the straight edge" repeated several times.
MacKaye says that he meant that by abstaining from drugs and alcohol, he had an advantage, or an "edge", when compared to those who indulged too heavily.

There are various reasons why people may choose to be straight edge, and there are various interpretations of the practice and various applications of the precepts. Some use the lifestyle as a stepping stone because they believe it will allow them to be more involved with their own mental and physical health.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_edge

 

[HypnoToad]

If you followed the source link you would have found the Etymology.

Anyway, here it is for you spelt out as it was written.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_edge

I still don't get your point.

 

[christalee4]

This supports my point - the expressions change, but the underlying principle does not.

However, some feel that the underlying principle is only true and good if interpreted and expressed in the original way, and literally. Otherwise, they feel the meaning is lost, milked down, or worse (!) evolved away from its purity of intent.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Morality is a social construct. It doesn't evolve, because it does not exist. It is a socially convenient name we give to actions, nothing more.

 

[Paulos23]

Morality is the way we want the world to work. Doesn't mean it works that way.

 

[kopilo]

I still don't get your point.

If the moral principle of straight edge was constantly the same then those who choose it would choose it for smiliar reasons, as in to get an edge over others but that is not the case, let alone the religious principles for some of the people who identify as straight edge.

 

[HypnoToad]

If the moral principle of straight edge was constantly the same then those who choose it would choose it for smiliar reasons, as in to get an edge over others but that is not the case, let alone the religious principles for some of the people who identify as straight edge.

Yeah, but what IS the principle? Define it.