How would you make society more moral?

[CCGirl]

Personally I think the only way we will clean up the problem of so called gay marriage is with divorce reform. The reason why gay marriage is considered is because our current state of marriage and divorce is so horrible that we have no identity with good family values anymore. I could almost guarantee that if humans had a good hold on the importance and responsibility of good family structure and moral that we would not even be in the position we are today with gay marriage. But with a country and media that justifies the leaving of ones spouse for the most ludicrous reasons as well as the extreme easiness of getting re-married at the drop of a pin ,we reap what we sow

No-Fault divorce I believe is the number 1 thing that is killing our society today. A reform in family teaching and values(teaching at an early age) is the only way of draining this huge nasty boil we have caused in society. And only then can the issue of gay marriage be brought up. Otherwise we look like hypocrites.

Sometimes having too many choices in life is a bad thing. And it would force married couples to get along with each other and grow up. Once adults become more disciplined in they're responsibility's they will become more able to create successful and loving families.

What about abuse? You cant force an abuser to get along. What if the husband is molesting the kids? How do you get along with that?

Since the OP wasnt specific to which society, I think our society is fairly moral, except for troubles with some gangs, guns coming in from the USA and a little left over racism. Otherwise, we tend to "live and let live"

 

[Garyzenuf]

Personally I think the only way we will clean up the problem of so called gay marriage is with divorce reform.

Colbert talked about this the other night, he's fighting to keep divorce between a man and a woman, the way G-d intended.

The reason why gay marriage is considered is because our current state of marriage and divorce is so horrible that we have no identity with good family values anymore.

Actually I think it boils down to homosexuals want the right to marry the one they love. Or for money, like a lot of us Hetro's do.

I could almost guarantee that if humans had a good hold on the importance and responsibility of good family structure and moral that we would not even be in the position we are today with gay marriage.

Exactly (you don't have to get graphic) what position has Gays wanting to marry put you in?

But with a country and media that justifies the leaving of ones spouse for the most ludicrous reasons as well as the extreme easiness of getting re-married at the drop of a pin ,we reap what we sow

What, happiness, contentment, not being 'yoked' with a complete jerk/jerkess for the rest of our lives?

No-Fault divorce I believe is the number 1 thing that is killing our society today. A reform in family teaching and values(teaching at an early age) is the only way of draining this huge nasty boil we have caused in society.

Thanks, I was just going to have dinner.

And only then can the issue of gay marriage be brought up.

I have this funny feeling it's going to be brought up anyways.

Otherwise we look like hypocrites.

I may not be as smart as you CiC, but that's no reason to be lobbing me the soft ones.

Sometimes having too many choices in life is a bad thing.

Only if we're talking about children.

And it would force married couples to get along with each other and grow up.

Not all married couples who choose to divorce are immature and self-centered to the point of ending their marriage, my ex and I weren't for example.

Once adults become more disciplined in they're responsibility's they will become more able to create successful and loving families.

It depends on how you define "successful". Myself, my ex, and both my daughters are happily married, loving and very happy people(for the most part), I would view that as a "successful" family. Just because something may not last forever doesn't make it any less beautiful. To deny that opportunity to anyone I believe would be immoral for whatever reason. (legally speaking).

*

 

[QuakerOats]

Personally I think the only way we will clean up the problem of so called gay marriage is with divorce reform. The reason why gay marriage is considered is because our current state of marriage and divorce is so horrible that we have no identity with good family values anymore. I could almost guarantee that if humans had a good hold on the importance and responsibility of good family structure and moral that we would not even be in the position we are today with gay marriage. But with a country and media that justifies the leaving of ones spouse for the most ludicrous reasons as well as the extreme easiness of getting re-married at the drop of a pin ,we reap what we sow

No-Fault divorce I believe is the number 1 thing that is killing our society today. A reform in family teaching and values(teaching at an early age) is the only way of draining this huge nasty boil we have caused in society. And only then can the issue of gay marriage be brought up. Otherwise we look like hypocrites.

Sometimes having too many choices in life is a bad thing. And it would force married couples to get along with each other and grow up. Once adults become more disciplined in they're responsibility's they will become more able to create successful and loving families.

I don't believe that the availability or 'ease' of divorce is the prime culprit relating to people getting divorced. Yes, availability may have its role to play, but the actual culprit lies in the reasons why, not with divorce itself. You said it yourself, 'family values' have gone by the wayside, if they ever existed, and I agree with you on that point, although we no doubt diverge in just what we consider those values to be. Certainly I'm in favour of same-sex marriage, and am thankful to live in a country which offers such a freedom.

 

[tulc]

This sounds like moral relativism and I find that we shouldn't be afraid to tell people that there is an objective truth.

And you just happen to be one of those who know what's true and others don't?

Generally, to mind your own business is to turn apathetic and this isn't what I want America or the world to be.

And what you want/understand is what's most important?
tulc(needs another cup of coffee)

 

[Everlasting33]

And you just happen to be one of those who know what's true and others don't?


And what you want/understand is what's most important?
tulc(needs another cup of coffee)

What I am saying is that moral relativism cannot and will not work in our society.

I'll copy it again since its a great quote:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"If no set of moral ideas were better than another, there would be no sense in preferring civilised morality to Nazi morality. The moment you say one lot of morals is better than another, you are in fact measuring them by an ultimate standard." C.S. Lewis[/FONT]

 

[HighwayMan]

The answer lies in television.

Children will not be fed brain-dead garbage like the current cartoon line-up, pre-teens will not aspire to Hannah Montana or High School Musical, and the reality shows which the vast majority of adults seem to prefer over narrative programming will be eliminated.

 

[tulc]

What I am saying is that moral relativism cannot and will not work in our society.

In your opinion, right?

I'll copy it again since its a great quote:

That's ok, I read it the first time.
tulc(finishing the last cup for the day)

 

[lawtonfogle]

What I am saying is that moral relativism cannot and will not work in our society.

I'll copy it again since its a great quote:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"If no set of moral ideas were better than another, there would be no sense in preferring civilised morality to Nazi morality. The moment you say one lot of morals is better than another, you are in fact measuring them by an ultimate standard." C.S. Lewis[/FONT]

To the quote, this is actually a bit over simplified. When you measure any two things, you will rely on some scale. Such a scale should have a theoretical measurement which is the highest possible, or else approach infinity. In the case of there being a maximum, that is an ultimate standard, relative to the scaled formed. In the case of there not being a maximum, there is not ultimate standard.

For one example, consider a scale of which would give my genes a better chance to reproduce. On this scale, polygamy is far more favored than abstinence given some context (if one was killed for liking polygamy, but was the world's sperm donor for remaining abstinence, then this changes). In a given context (which is an inherent but unmentioned component of the scale, and in this example, arbitrary), there should be some ultimate standard which gives me the best chance to further my genes. Yet, this ultimate standard is not a universal absolute, it is only the absolute in my given scale. Another scale, even measuring the same moralities but with a different context, could have a vastly different result.

Given this, there are numerous meta-contexts which are favored over others due to their evolutionary advantages. These include such things as protecting the young and not slaying those in power (those not in power will sometimes be protected, but it is the evolutionary benefit of those in power which gives the advantage, so this will only uniformly apply to those in power). Exceptions can be found though, but these can be seen as genes whose phenotypes are highly mal-adaptive for a species, as they will most likely die out. Of course, in some cases these are able to become advantageous due to social pressures, much like a theoretical defect which reduced the chance of a human to have a successful period of gestation by 10% can become evolutionary advantagous if the society favors such individuals for reproduction to a degree which over compensates for the 10% reduction.

As I said, the quote was an over-simplification. In other news, I shouldn't be reading 40 page scientific papers and 20 page FBI briefings at midnight...

 

[LightHorseman]

What I am saying is that moral relativism cannot and will not work in our society.

I'll copy it again since its a great quote:

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]"If no set of moral ideas were better than another, there would be no sense in preferring civilised morality to Nazi morality. The moment you say one lot of morals is better than another, you are in fact measuring them by an ultimate standard." C.S. Lewis[/FONT]

Two sets of morals that are inherently contradictory can both be appropriate in different times or places. This is NOT to say that "no set of moral ideas is better than another". Multiple moral platforms can be valid, without suggesting that ALL moral platforms are valid.

 

[LightHorseman]

How would you make society more moral?

I would make the Golden rule the entirety of the law. Oh, we'd still have police and judges to investigate complaints and determine when someone is in breach of the Golden rule, but if everyone lived treating everyone else as they themselves wished to be treated... utopia.

 

[tulc]

I'd suggest our living more moral lives.
tulc(seems like a good idea to me)

 

[Ryal Kane]

I'd try to make sure we taught empathy to young kids (i.e. other people have feelings) and critical thinking when they get older. This gives them the tools to deal with learning and situations but the emotional compass to temper that logic. Education needs solid funding and support.

I'd also try to ensure that they were in safe households. As unpleasant as I am with having to say it, there are people that should not be raising kids.
(on a side note to this, a lot of the time IVF really bugs me. There are plenty of kids in need of a loving home but people are willing to spend hundreds of thousands to make sure that they spread their genes)

I think that the legal and penal systems should be much more focused on rehabilitation than punishment. This is not to say that there aren't prisoners who shouldn't be locked away in solitary but for the most part they aren't. We need to have prisoners come out better than they went in.

Those are off the top of my head.

 

[Andreusz]

No-Fault divorce I believe is the number 1 thing that is killing our society today. A reform in family teaching and values(teaching at an early age) is the only way of draining this huge nasty boil we have caused in society. And only then can the issue of gay marriage be brought up. Otherwise we look like hypocrites.

.

Thank you. I have been trying to put this point across for months, but it seems you are the first fundamentalist who admits that it's valid.

 

[Andreusz]

Personally I think the only way we will clean up the problem of so called gay marriage is with divorce reform.

If you introduce divorce reform, you'll probably reduce the incidence of straight marriage, too.

 

[andross77]

The Auca did not kill idniscriminantly, and killing was not always "good."

Killing an enemy was OK for them, just as it is for us now. Killing an aggressor was OK for them, just as it is for us now. Killing someone who kills your kin was OK for them just as it is for us now.

Aside from having a broader definition of what constitutes a killable offense, their killing was based on pretty much the same moral perspective as ours.

Wow, i don't know where you live but this is NOT acceptable in America.

And even your last paragraph PROVES my point. You say "their killing was based on pretty much the same moral perspective as ours" which means it is NOT the same. The whole point is that different cultures will be different, therefore you have no true standard of morals. It will shift with the culture. Sometimes killing will be ok in a certain circumstance and sometimes it won't be. Thanks for helping me out.

 

[andross77]

And? First off, Exodus is not a great guide. To much of it (the Books of Law, not Exodus in particular) is flawed under the teachings of Jesus (the two rules from which the rest are derived, such as slavery or allowing child molestations).

Secondly, did I ever say I didn't think it was wrong, or was I operating off of a segregated, AMERICA ISN'T A THEOCRACY, world view than my own personal view on morality.

The fact you think the books of the law is flawed speaks volumes of what you truly believe and hold dear. Thanks.

 

[Skaloop]

Wow, i don't know where you live but this is NOT acceptable in America.

Maybe not acceptable legally, but if some guy kills the person who killed his family, lots of people would be sympathetic and even approve of his actions.

And even your last paragraph PROVES my point. You say "their killing was based on pretty much the same moral perspective as ours" which means it is NOT the same. The whole point is that different cultures will be different, therefore you have no true standard of morals. It will shift with the culture. Sometimes killing will be ok in a certain circumstance and sometimes it won't be. Thanks for helping me out.

Well, yeah, I agree with that. I thought you were claiming something different.

You brought of the Auca as an example of a peoples who are wantonly violent and kill anyone. I was just pointing out that they don't do that, and also that, despite not having a biblical source for morality, their morals regarding killing others are awfully close to that of Christian-influenced Western culture. Of course there are differences, just as there are differences in morality between New York and, say, small-town Arkansas.

 

[andross77]

Maybe not acceptable legally, but if some guy kills the person who killed his family, lots of people would be sympathetic and even approve of his actions.



Well, yeah, I agree with that. I thought you were claiming something different.

You brought of the Auca as an example of a peoples who are wantonly violent and kill anyone. I was just pointing out that they don't do that, and also that, despite not having a biblical source for morality, their morals regarding killing others are awfully close to that of Christian-influenced Western culture. Of course there are differences, just as there are differences in morality between New York and, say, small-town Arkansas.

Right, but just admitting there are differences is all it takes. One day it will be a small difference and the next day it will be a large difference. There is nothing holding it in place that will necessary "keep it close." That is all. Thanks.

 

[suzybeezy]

MOD HAT ON

Thread closed for review and possible clean up

MOD HAT OFF

 

[tapero]

MOD HAT

Thread is now reopened!


​