Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Who gets to decide whic morals are the correct ones, that we're going to impose on everybody?As I said in the other thread, I have no problem with imposing morals on others so long as the morals that are being imposed are correct morals. Morality is absolute and is not relative and therefore it would not be a problem to impose correct morals on another person.
I assume you mean this with some exceptions, like actions with victims?Who gets to decide whic morals are the correct ones, that we're going to impose on everybody?
And this, of course, is where this idea completely collapses. Morality may be absolute, but if it is, we have no reliable way of knowing which morals are correct. As certain as you are that yours are correct, there are other groups which are certain that theirs (which contradict yours) are correct. Who gets to decide?
THIS is why laws based on morals are not only a bad idea, but a terrible idea.
No, I don't mean it with any exceptions - but I'm not sure what you mean by 'actions with victims'.I assume you mean this with some exceptions, like actions with victims?
Rachel
I mean actions like murder, child molestation, spousal/child abuse, battery, theft, and the like.No, I don't mean it with any exceptions - but I'm not sure what you mean by 'actions with victims'.
You have a right to live life your way and I have a right to live life mine. I can only know what is best for myself, so why should I impose my morals onto anyone else and visa versa.For those of you who feel that it's wrong to force others to conform to your morality outside of free will, how would you justify laws against things like gambling, prostitution, abortion, and pornography, which do not have a direct society-disabling effect on those who do not participate?
No, no exceptions. ANY law made purely on moral grounds is a bad law. There are ample reasons outside moral ones for the above to be illegal.I mean actions like murder, child molestation, spousal/child abuse, battery, theft, and the like.
I'm not sure what you mean by "moral", then, I suppose. I always supposed "moral" to mean this is always right, and this is always wrong . . . and no one questions it because it is just fact. Sorry, just my mistake!No, no exceptions. ANY law made purely on moral grounds is a bad law. There are ample reasons outside moral ones for the above to be illegal.
I'm sorry, you've completely lost me here. I don't think the statement that 'this is always right and this is always wrong' is even meaningful - 'right' and 'wrong' always only mean 'approved of (or not) by the speaker'.I'm not sure what you mean by "moral", then, I suppose. I always supposed "moral" to mean this is always right, and this is always wrong . . . and no one questions it because it is just fact. Sorry, just my mistake!
Rachel
There is a little problem, though: All persons who try to impose their various morals upon others are convinced that these morals are the "correct" ones. It´s where holy wars come from.
I would agree, but how, then, do they inflict their morality on others, practically speaking?Those who inflict their morality that war is immoral and that being unloving is wrong would not be the source of the holy wars would they?
I would agree, but how, then, do they inflict their morality on others, practically speaking?
I wouldn´t call that "inflicting their morality upon others".I would say by proclaiming their opinions and supporting people in positions of power that agree with them and by refusing to join in with unloving and violent actions.
I wouldn´t call that "inflicting their morality upon others".
You don´t think it is, and I don´t think it is - so what´s the point in referring to "some people" when discussing our ideas?Some people do. They don't want anyone telling them what is loving or unloving or judging them in any way or even telling them about God and what God might expect from them.
You don´t think it is, and I don´t think it is - so what´s the point in referring to "some people" when discussing our ideas?
Indeed, I myself find "God wants you to..." sermons boring and annoying at times (and I think it is respectless to bring them to people who have told you they don´t want to hear them), but that doesn´t mean that persons who do so "are inflicting their morality upon me." They just give me their opinion.
I mean, that would almost be like complaining about being persecuted whilst in fact merely being criticized.
Does that mean I can (in a valid fashion) be offended by mention of the tooth fairy? Will people stop speaking of the tooth fairy for me?I agree but ours is not the only atitude on this and I have heard many people offended by any mention of God.
Does that mean I can (in a valid fashion) be offended by mention of the tooth fairy? Will people stop speaking of the tooth fairy for me?
Rachel
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?