Hans Blaster
Beardo
- Mar 11, 2017
- 22,627
- 16,937
- 55
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
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.
Not what I claimed. Not even close.Of course not. However, claiming that nothing is true unless one believes it so is extreme skepticism. In itself, the claim is a truth claim that allows no argument.
Well, lots of things can help. But if absolute morality exists and we have no way of determining it, other than making the decision ourselves (which makes it relative morality) then the concept is nonsensical.So, you ask, how do I know which is which? My opinion and experience is > the Bible can help.
Is that what you would tell the judge in the courtroom? That labeling someone a "hostile witness" is ad hominem? What happens when the poster is the problem? When a person is consistently dishonest in their posts? In that case addressing the posts and not the dishonesty will do no good.Respectfully, you are resorting to adhominem attacks.
Based on the definition you have accepted, is someone who thinks rape is always intrinsically wrong a moral absolutist? Yes or no?
If we are using that definition, then is someone who thinks rape is always intrinsically wrong a moral absolutist? Yes or no?Absolute morality is the ethical belief that certain actions are intrinsically right or wrong, regardless of context, culture, or circumstances. It asserts the existence of universal moral principles that apply to all people at all times without exceptions. This means that some moral rules or laws are unchanging and must be followed universally, no matter the situation or outcome.
The problem with the idea of absolute morality is that even if we agree it exists (which I don't), we're still left with trying to interpret it. If I ask a Catholic and a Mormon if God approves of us using birth control or drinking alcohol, I'll get two different answers.
Why don't you begin by telling us what you mean when you use the term "absolute morality."
Revealed by a deity.
If we are using that definition, then is someone who thinks rape is always intrinsically wrong a moral absolutist? Yes or no?
You have two options, report and ignore.Is that what you would tell the judge in the courtroom? That labeling someone a "hostile witness" is ad hominem? What happens when the poster is the problem? When a person is consistently dishonest in their posts? In that case addressing the posts and not the dishonesty will do no good.
I would answer yes.How would you answer the question, given that you provided the original definition?
Presumably Catholics and Mormons believe in the same deity, and believe this deity has revealed True Morality via the written word. But they disagree on a great many things, which shouldn't happen if the Truth is all written down.On that definition of 'absolute morality', isn't it clear that the problem you outline simply arises because two different deities are at stake? If someone agrees that absolute morality exists then they must know which deity morality is revealed by, no? If someone does not know which deity morality is revealed by, then why would they commit to absolute morality as you have defined it?
I think it’s about as close to a moral absolute as I can imagine but in my country there was no crime of rape between a husband and wife for quite some time. It only changed in 1991.What do our other atheists say? @Hans Blaster, @NxNW, @Larniavc?
Consider this definition:
If we are using that definition, then is someone who thinks rape is always intrinsically wrong a moral absolutist? Yes or no?
(Feel free to elaborate, but please give a clear answer to the question. It seems to me that a straightforward 'yes' is in order given the definition we are using.)
Ahh, there's the rub. What you mean based on your posts is, "I'm still left with trying to interpret it". Even in the act of rape, you need interpretation!... even if we agree it [absolute morality] exists (which I don't), we're still left with trying to interpret it.
Is an apology forthcoming?If the definition [of rape] includes sexual assault of all types, then I can think of a certain President who thinks it's OK if he does it.
I ask again, are atheists who claim that even the morality of rape is in need of interpretation think that no absolute "rules exist at all". If so then by your insight that makes them closet sociopaths.And sociopaths in general may not think the rules exist at all.
You confuse morality as being equivalent to legality.I think it’s about as close to a moral absolute as I can imagine but in my country there was no crime of rape between a husband and wife for quite some time. It only changed in 1991.
So it’s still relative and not absolute.
Not to mention that in some cultures, marital rape is a justified consequence for a wife who refuses to have sex with her husband. So it is not only legal, but encouraged as a means to discipline a wife who is failing in what they consider to be her marital duty.I think it’s about as close to a moral absolute as I can imagine but in my country there was no crime of rape between a husband and wife for quite some time. It only changed in 1991.
So it’s still relative and not absolute.
Laws exist, but those are certainly created by people. Not all law codes are equal or similar. The law on marital rape didn't exist in some places for extended periods because some people in those societies didn't think it was wrong enough to make it a crime. If there was no variance in moral opinion on marital rape versus other forms (based only on the nature of the rapist) then why have legal distinctions?I ask again, are atheists who claim that even the morality of rape is in need of interpretation think that no absolute "rules exist at all".
You mean like slavery?The law on marital rape didn't exist in some places for extended periods because some people in those societies didn't think it was wrong enough to make it a crime.
That would be another example. (Not sure you want to stand on that quicksand.)You mean like slavery?
And the definition of absolute morality we are using in this thread says it's without 'regard to...culture'. Plainly it is in regard to culture.The law on marital rape didn't exist in some places for extended periods because some people in those societies didn't think it was wrong enough to make it a crime.
. . . with God using things to help us. He is the reliable One who knows.Well, lots of things can help.
We have God, and Jesus is our way to God and to His benefits of His morality.But if absolute morality exists and we have no way of determining it,
And I did not say we make decisions "ourselves" . . . if I remember correctly. If it were up to us, then it would be relative.other than making the decision ourselves (which makes it relative morality) then the concept is nonsensical.
If that works for you, great. It doesn't for the rest of us who are, let's say, less impressed by his claims and morality.. . . with God using things to help us. He is the reliable One who knows.
We have God, and Jesus is our way to God and to His benefits of His morality.
And I did not say we make decisions "ourselves" . . . if I remember correctly. If it were up to us, then it would be relative.
But if there is a crime of rape between husband and wife then it would be absolute? Isn't that what you are saying?I think it’s about as close to a moral absolute as I can imagine but in my country there was no crime of rape between a husband and wife for quite some time. It only changed in 1991.
So it’s still relative and not absolute.
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?