How is it consistent to criticize the left for hating America AND not having an objective morality ?

[Ken-1122]

Please actually read the OP it does apply to you , can you explain your inconsistent attitude.

He wasn't responding to the OP, he was responding to what I said.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Then it's option 2, I see.

Furthermore, I don't accept the use of certain conditionals where the Biblical theology is concerned. They're a waste of our time, especially if there are aspects of the results of one's Hermeneutics (like mine) which preclude them from having any relevance.

If you want to describe some aspects of your own thinking, then have at it, but don't insist to ME that we have to apply conditional type moral evaluations in our overall thinking at all times, especially not when they're artificially imposed conceptual contradictions contrived by atheists and agnostics.

 

[Hammster]

Please actually read the OP it does apply to you , can you explain your inconsistent attitude.

How do you see me being inconsistent? I’m not saying that I’m not. I’m just not seeing it.

EDIT, you are saying that humans that are not doing what Jesus wants them to do will randomly change their minds all the time

I’m not saying that at all.

 

[Hammster]

Yes.

Yes.

Hypothetically, then, you could see murdering your neighbor over dog poop to be okay in the future.

 

[perplexed]

He wasn't responding to the OP, he was responding to what I said.

Yes I know he was responding to you but he denied resembling the OP but he clearly does.
When you talk about objective morality he Hammster becomes obsessed with making the point that if a belief does not come from Jesus then that belief cannot be deeply held, not even a little bit, you will just change your mind about it for any trivial reason.

The thing is Hammster has to know that this has to be a gross oversimplification of what people are actually like

 

[perplexed]

I’m not saying that at all.

??? Then why are you talking about dog poop ? Aren't you saying that without Jesus it would not matter if you had made some rationalizations that murder was wrong you would not actually believe them , as soon as you got slightly annoyed at by a dog pooping on your lawn you would go into a murderous rage

 

[Hammster]

??? Then why are you talking about dog poop ? Aren't you saying that without Jesus it would not matter if you had made some rationalizations that murder was wrong you would not actually believe them , as soon as you got slightly annoyed at by a dog pooping on your lawn you would go into a murderous rage

No, I’m not saying that.

 

[perplexed]

No, I’m not saying that.

???
So you aren't saying that Hypothetically Ken would go into a murderous rage if he got mildly annoyed ?
I am quite surprised you are not saying that, can you please explain what you are actually saying?

 

[Hammster]

So you aren't saying that Hypothetically Ken would go into a murderous rage if he got mildly annoyed ?

No.

I am quite surprised you are not saying that,

Why?

can you please explain what you are actually saying?

His point has been that murdering his neighbor for dog poop is wrong because he doesn’t feel the punishment fits the crime. So I asked if he thought it would be right if he did

 

[Ken-1122]

Hypothetically, then, you could see murdering your neighbor over dog poop to be okay in the future.

No; I would have to be mentally deranged to do such an absurd thing. As long as I am in my right mind, I could never do something like that.

 

[perplexed]

His point has been that murdering his neighbor for dog poop is wrong because he doesn’t feel the punishment fits the crime. So I asked if he thought it would be right if he did

I cannot see where you actually asked that question and I cannot see why you would ask that question unless you wanted to make the point "Without Jesus it does not matter that you say that murdering someone for dog poop is excessive , sure you think murdering someone for dog poop is excessive now, but that belief that it is excessive could easily change"

 

[Ken-1122]

His point has been that murdering his neighbor for dog poop is wrong because he doesn’t feel the punishment fits the crime. So I asked if he thought it would be right if he did

So you ask; hypothetically speaking, if I thought the punishment would fit the crime, would I think it would be right if I did kill for this reason? Yes. But that doesn't mean I would do it; it just means I would think it was okay to kill for this reason.

 

[Hammster]

No; I would have to be mentally deranged to do such an absurd thing. As long as I am in my right mind, I could never do something like that.

I’m not saying that you would actually do it. This isn’t about what you would or wouldn’t actually do. This is about whether it would be okay for you to do it if your feelings changed, since you’ve tied the morality to your feelings.

 

[Hammster]

I cannot see where you actually asked that question and I cannot see why you would ask that question unless you wanted to make the point "Without Jesus it does not matter that you say that murdering someone for dog poop is excessive , sure you think murdering someone for dog poop is excessive now, but that belief that it is excessive could easily change"

You seem to be stuck on a loop where regardless of what I post, you see me posting something else.

 

[Hammster]

So you ask; hypothetically speaking, if I thought the punishment would fit the crime, would I think it would be right if I did kill for this reason? Yes. But that doesn't mean I would do it; it just means I would think it was okay to kill for this reason.

So you have no actual grounding for whether murdering your neighbor is right or wrong. It’s jus whatever you feel to be right or wrong.

 

[perplexed]

You seem to be stuck on a loop where regardless of what I post, you see me posting something else.

nope

 

[Ken-1122]

So you have no actual grounding for whether murdering your neighbor is right or wrong. It’s jus whatever you feel to be right or wrong.

The actual "grounding" is based on what I believe to be right or wrong. I find this superior to having my morals grounded in what somebody else says is right or wrong; at least I can defend my own beliefs.
Hypothetically speaking; if your God told you to do something that goes against everything you know concerning what is right, and you knew you could get away with it, would you do it?

 

[Hammster]

nope

Where did I say anything akin to “Without Jesus it does not matter that you say that murdering someone for dog poop is excessive , sure you think murdering someone for dog poop is excessive now, but that belief that it is excessive could easily change”?

 

[Hammster]

The actual "grounding" is based on what I believe to be right or wrong. I find this superior to having my morals grounded in what somebody else says is right or wrong; at least I can defend my own beliefs.
Hypothetically speaking; if your God told you to do something that goes against everything you know concerning what is right, and you knew you could get away with it, would you do it?

That’s not grounding since you’ve admitted that you determine right or wrong from feelings, and that those feelings can change.

 

[Hammster]

Hypothetically speaking; if your God told you to do something that goes against everything you know concerning what is right, and you knew you could get away with it, would you do it?

Can you give an example?