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.
There aren't laws definining right and wrong. There are laws definining what is allowed in our society, for precisely the reason you state - to prevent chaos (or, to put it another way, to allow our society to function).Lilly of the Valley said:Okay...since in your opinion there isn't any rt. or wrong, then why are there laws defining rt. and wrong apart from preventing chaos?
But it does work. That's how we all function.Lilly of the Valley said:Okay, but just going by what feels rt. or wrong when there really isn't that just doesn't work.
Who knows if they did? What we feel regarding morality is a result of our environment and our genetics, like anything else. You tend to have similar moral views to your parents, influenced by your environment.Lilly of the Valley said:If there is no rt. or wrong then how do you 'feel' if something is rt. or wrong...like the first human...how did they feel rt. and wrong?
The same way they determine a great many other things - by dictating how your brain is built.Lilly of the Valley said:How does genetics determine feelings toward morality?
Desires, needs.Lilly of the Valley said:Okay, but just going by what feels rt. or wrong when there really isn't that just doesn't work. If there is no rt. or wrong then how do you 'feel' if something is rt. or wrong...like the first human...how did they feel rt. and wrong?
Electric Skeptic said:The same way they determine a great many other things - by dictating how your brain is built.
Not really. Try some facts next time, okay?Jet_A_Jockey said:SBE eats the young and the helpless, so in that type of society there would'nt be a need for hospitals and nursing homes.
Yes, they are mutually and interdependently relative, among some other things that both of them are mutually relative to.The_Horses_Boy said:So, morality is relative to society??? Ever think that society is relative to morality?
Cre8 said:That's why Christians don't sell and own slaves anymore. That's why Christians don't stone homosexuals to death anymore, etc. The Bible condones those things, however.
[/quote]
First of all, when you view Biblical slavery through the lens of our experience here in North America from the 17-19th century, you're comparing two different things.
Typically, there were three types of slavery: cultural slavery, which the Bible does not condone, but simply acknowledges did exist, slavery as a means of God's judgement on a people, and the most common kind of Biblical slavery, which was much closer to what we know as indenture.
If you're going to try to paint the Bible in a bad light by saying that it condones slavery, then you need to be honest and also acknowledge that the Bible lays out very strict groundrules for those who own slaves, including harsh penalties for those who mistreat slaves, as well as an order to release slaves and cancel debts after a given period of time.
Second, how can you say that Christians don't stone homosexuals anymore, when the Bible never says that Christians stoned homosexuals?
That's a bit like asking, "so, do you still beat your wife?"
Just not true. Killing the Jews was immoral and it matters not what Hitler and the killers thought about it.quatona said:Yes, they are mutually and interdependently relative, among some other things that both of them are mutually relative to.
Are you absolutely sure about this?Cre8 said:That's why Christians don't sell and own slaves anymore. That's why Christians don't stone homosexuals to death anymore, etc. The Bible condones those things, however.
If a biblical "ideal morality" was observed in the Church, what would it look like? No one can decide! No one can decide because it is relative to the person during the time they read it. The "ideal" or "perfect" biblical morality doesn't exist. On the contrary, biblical "morality" is often savage, cruel, and abusive: (Joshua 6:21, 8:24-26, 10:28-29, 10:32-33, 10:35, 10:37, 10:38, 10:40, 11:8, 11:11, 11:12, 11:14, 11:21)
Morality was, is, and WILL ALWAYS be relative to the individual or group. Change is contant. More: http://realityspoken.com/evil
Oh yah. And where I am from it is considered a virtue to kill relativists. But you can't condemn me, because morality is relative, at least in your belief. I don't believe it's relative, but that doesn't matter.Jan87676 said:Morality is relative.
That is why I'm going to slowly cook my cat in boiling water. In China, it is a delight to torture cats for their flesh-I shall do the same.
I interpret the Chinese view of relative morality as my view. I have been thinking of the Watu-Watu view of morality(i.e. cannibalism), so I may eat my brother.
This is my interpretation of morality.
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?