The Only Rules Left: no harm or steal

[SUNSTONE]

Maddog where are you getting the 1 out of 5 number. Even with your source, the worst city is still 1 out of 12, which is staggering to look at.

I see your new to these forums, or atleast a new name, so welcome to the forums.

 

[SUNSTONE]

Well yes there needs to be some time that was an ideal, otherwise how do you measure the amount of moral decay everyone is talking about? There has to be sometime that was moral, otherwise all this about moral decay, is a big load of caca.

Moral decay is based on ones opinion. Alot of people go by the bible, or there interpretation of the bible, atleast on these forums it is common.

I don't like to look at it as a good time, I think now is the perfect time, because it is the present. So no matter where you are in time, just make the best out of it. If you see something you feel is wrong, then consider saying something about it. If the past helps your case, then use the past.

 

[Maddog]

Maddog where are you getting the 1 out of 5 number. Even with your source, the worst city is still 1 out of 12, which is staggering to look at.

I see your new to these forums, or at least a new name, so welcome to the forums.

Yeah as I said in the post after Dr Zoiberg picked it up, I made a mistake in rewriting the info:

What it should of said was:

1 in 5 people are still going to be murdered by someone they know.

Meaning that in 1950 as in 2003, your chances of being murdered by someone you know was 1 in 5, so given that the odds are the same, how can there be more of a moral decay now. If society was crumbling, then the chances of being murdered by someone you know would decrease (ie: it would be a 1 in 10 or 20 chance). The number of people murdered have increased due to the population increasing, not because more people are murdered by strangers (as would be the case if society was crumbling, people would just blow you away because they felt like it more often, rather than mostly coming from domestic disputes) hope that makes sense.



And thanks for the welcome, I am new, not an old poster with a new name.

 

[SUNSTONE]

Your saying that "if" you were murdered, there is a 20% chance it is going to be by somebody you know?

Because I can tell you this for a fact, 20% of all deaths, are not done by murder.

What difference does it make if your murdered by a stranger, or by someone you know?

What about other things, like rape, stealing, and things like that? Wouldn't you consider these things into the situation?

 

[Inspired]

Moral decay is based on ones opinion. Alot of people go by the bible, or there interpretation of the bible, atleast on these forums it is common.

I don't like to look at it as a good time, I think now is the perfect time, because it is the present. So no matter where you are in time, just make the best out of it. If you see something you feel is wrong, then consider saying something about it. If the past helps your case, then use the past.

That's not what I'm saying. Look if there is no better time, then there is no comparison to say that there is moral decay. I don't remeber the bible speaking of any perfect time on Earth either.

 

[SUNSTONE]

That's not what I'm saying. Look if there is no better time, then there is no comparison to say that there is moral decay. I don't remeber the bible speaking of any perfect time on Earth either.

If "moral decay" was a set pattern, and it couldn't get any better, you would be right.
But it comes and it goes. I'm sure history is loaded with good and bad times (we really shouldn't be using "time", we should have "peoples actions" in there, because "time" has nothing to do with it.)

But like I said before it is an opinion, and it is common on these forums, that the bible is the standard, not "time".

Plus moral decay can be associated, with the world, or a country, or even so much as one person. Example Mr. Smith was good this decade, but the last he was bad.(this thread has the attitude of America, but I don't think it was said officially, but people seem to be using American examples)

 

[seeker4Christ]

I am surprised about some of the people posting here - I thought this was a Christian site - I think now it is a socially liberal Christian site - I gather here the consensus is that we should have less moral laws, not more. (I would rather like to keep the same moral laws, not have less). Some people here seem to believe that don't harm and don't steal are not moral laws - I accept that you believe that - it is significant that you believe they are not moral laws, even if they are. However for me I do not get my idea of rights from human writings such as the constitution - these are but writings of men. I thought as Christian's you would all go to the Bible for your notion of truth and rights. That is okay I am just surprised. For me the rights of a person are based on the Bible: the 6th commandment: Thou Shalt not kill. (also not harming is implied and stated in some old testament laws). and the 8th commandment: Thou Shalt not steal. These two key laws from the 10 commandments are still respected today, but not as moral laws from God and the Bible, but rather just as human rights. I suspect since the "sexual revolution", people have been obeying "Thou Shalt not commit adultery" and the related laws against fornication and homosexuality, less and less. Forget whether these laws are being enforced as human laws - regardless of the enforcement - they are being obeyed less and less. To me that is moral decay. I think TV has successfully taught people that "real love" is a quick act of passion, a one night stand, and that waiting for marriage for sex is cold and lifeless - TV has taught the opposite of the truth. I do not watch TV anymore - I haven't for years - I only catch small bits of it at other people's houses or when they put one in a office or waiting room. I often turn off waiting room TVs - I think it really improves the waiting room to have the tv off.

 

[praying]

I am surprised about some of the people posting here - I thought this was a Christian site - I think now it is a socially liberal Christian site - I gather here the consensus is that we should have less moral laws, not more. (I would rather like to keep the same moral laws, not have less). Some people here seem to believe that don't harm and don't steal are not moral laws - I accept that you believe that - it is significant that you believe they are not moral laws, even if they are. However for me I do not get my idea of rights from human writings such as the constitution - these are but writings of men. I thought as Christian's you would all go to the Bible for your notion of truth and rights. That is okay I am just surprised. For me the rights of a person are based on the Bible: the 6th commandment: Thou Shalt not kill. (also not harming is implied and stated in some old testament laws). and the 8th commandment: Thou Shalt not steal. These two key laws from the 10 commandments are still respected today, but not as moral laws from God and the Bible, but rather just as human rights. I suspect since the "sexual revolution", people have been obeying "Thou Shalt not commit adultery" and the related laws against fornication and homosexuality, less and less. Forget whether these laws are being enforced as human laws - regardless of the enforcement - they are being obeyed less and less. To me that is moral decay. I think TV has successfully taught people that "real love" is a quick act of passion, a one night stand, and that waiting for marriage for sex is cold and lifeless - TV has taught the opposite of the truth. I do not watch TV anymore - I haven't for years - I only catch small bits of it at other people's houses or when they put one in a office or waiting room. I often turn off waiting room TVs - I think it really improves the waiting room to have the tv off.

I don't think the question is whether there are less moral laws, I don't think there are, but rather is the perception correct that we are in a great state of moral decay as compared to other times. I think that mostly society is more open and therefore the perception is greater moral decay. I would say that since the dawn of time we have always lived in moral decay, as evidenced in the Bible with Noah and the flood and Sodom and Gommrah.

 

[crystalpc]

Wait, what's the problem again? Last time I checked, the US was all about personal liberty, except when it infringes on the rights of others. Legislating morality has always been a pointless exercise, anyway.

By this standard then it is ok to victimize children including infantacide as long as they don't have a voice (abortion) It is ok to live in incest if you wait until the family member is a consenting adult. It is ok to have prostitutes trolling our streets as long as they don't rob the johns.
It is ok to have pornography as long as you didn't exploit children. It is ok to live in bygamy, polygamy as long as it is all consenting adults. Where does it stop. Yes we are in moral decay. Such decay brings a country into non-existence, none have survived with this type of debauchery condoned.

 

[Philosoft]

Such decay brings a country into non-existence, none have survived with this type of debauchery condoned.

I don't understand this. Countries continuously have been born and fallen for a variety of reasons. Failure to adhere to Protestant morality is certainly among the least of them.

 

[Maddog]

Your saying that "if" you were murdered, there is a 20% chance it is going to be by somebody you know?

Because I can tell you this for a fact, 20% of all deaths, are not done by murder.

What difference does it make if your murdered by a stranger, or by someone you know?

What about other things, like rape, stealing, and things like that? Wouldn't you consider these things into the situation?

Yes correct 20% of all deaths are not done by murder, so statistics when looking at murder only reflect murder.

Unfortunately the law does not count robbing a 7-11 Clerk as murder if they die from a shooting, they say it's a Robbery related death. Personally if you take a gun (or any weapon) to rob someone, then you have intention to murder in my opinion, by the fact of taking it with you, you intend to use it to get away with the job. Same happened years ago, the figures count it as death by Robbery, not intentionally going out to murder someone.

However, on the same note the Murders that Capone and Co did do not fall into the stats of those times either. They are considered Gangland Murders, so if you died in the cross fire, it was due to an accident of being caught in the crossfire, not Murdered. Same as now, if it is Gang related it is not counted as out and out murder, it is a Gang Related Murder, and figures show that is falling (again numbers of people in percentage terms to the population).

Out and out murder, as is what I was referring to, the intentional taking odf someone's life because of a dispute or other reason, is the 1 in 5 figure. You plan, you plot to kill someone in that murder state then it is the same as it has been for years. If we have crumbled so far, I think it would of increased not stayed the same.

Rape is more than likely to happen from someone you know as well, are there more Rapes now than before, that's debatable. Before Woman were scared to come forward as they were not believed, if a husband raped a wife, it was not considered as a crime, where it is now. So going back there was possibly a lot going on we do not know about.

African Americans, Other Races, and Woman could not vote as they where seen as second class citizens, and not capable of reasonable thought, to make a valued opinion of who could be a political leader.

In percentage terms to population less people die in Motorised Vehicle Accidents today, less die in Industrial Accidents today, less die in falling out of high storey building windows (because of laws of bars on windows), less people die in house fires (because of Smoke Alarms) than they did years ago.

People in Mental Hospitals, Aged Care Homes, Orphanages etc get treated better today than they ever did in the past. Abuse from that sort of thing is counted in stats now, it was never considered in the past.

People in positions of Authority in the Community (Teachers etc), where not being arrested for molesting children, as it was considered that they never would of done that. Now some are being charged and imprisoned for thaose crimes, some as far back as the 1950's and 60's, who have done it continually for years. No wonder Parents today are scared to put trust in those people, history shows that it has been going on for years unchecked, they have a right to be afraid.

Serial Killers:

Dr Harold Shipman, killed at least 215 people over a 23-year period, he started in 1970, not now.

David Berkowitz (Son of Sam): Operated in 1975/76.

Ted Bundy: In the 1970's.

The list goes on, we have less too fear of these people than before, Forensic Science catches them quicker. If we had the same years ago, some of these people would of been caught sooner (especially ones like Dr Harold Shipman).

Sure the World is not perfect, however conditions in most things are better now, we have in general a better standard of living, more disposable income. Ask your Parents, to buy a record, or go to the Cinema was not something you did on a last minute thing. You saved your money then went and bought that record, or went and seen that film, life now has many other benefits we take for granted.

 

[SUNSTONE]

You have some interesting points Maddog, and who really knows what went on before mass media. Alot of things you mentioned have to do with the law, and stats, which I agree, they should be considered into the equation.

But what about things that aren't agianst the law, like abortion, sex, tv, to name a few. I feel those play a part in the equation, I understand others may not, but thats why I think it comes down to ones opinion.

 

[SUNSTONE]

I am surprised about some of the people posting here - I thought this was a Christian site - I think now it is a socially liberal Christian site - I gather here the consensus is that we should have less moral laws, not more. (I would rather like to keep the same moral laws, not have less). Some people here seem to believe that don't harm and don't steal are not moral laws - I accept that you believe that - it is significant that you believe they are not moral laws, even if they are. However for me I do not get my idea of rights from human writings such as the constitution - these are but writings of men. I thought as Christian's you would all go to the Bible for your notion of truth and rights. That is okay I am just surprised. For me the rights of a person are based on the Bible: the 6th commandment: Thou Shalt not kill. (also not harming is implied and stated in some old testament laws). and the 8th commandment: Thou Shalt not steal. These two key laws from the 10 commandments are still respected today, but not as moral laws from God and the Bible, but rather just as human rights. I suspect since the "sexual revolution", people have been obeying "Thou Shalt not commit adultery" and the related laws against fornication and homosexuality, less and less. Forget whether these laws are being enforced as human laws - regardless of the enforcement - they are being obeyed less and less. To me that is moral decay. I think TV has successfully taught people that "real love" is a quick act of passion, a one night stand, and that waiting for marriage for sex is cold and lifeless - TV has taught the opposite of the truth. I do not watch TV anymore - I haven't for years - I only catch small bits of it at other people's houses or when they put one in a office or waiting room. I often turn off waiting room TVs - I think it really improves the waiting room to have the tv off.

Not all people on this site are Christian, so watch out.

I agree with you on tv, I too have gotten rid of it, except for a good movie, or some sports. I don't want to flood myself day in and day out, with the tv programs they have out today. Alot of programs are anti bible teachings, wether they do it on purpose or not.

I think porn has effected the country in a bad way, probably worst than any of us realize.

 

[Edge]

crystalpc: Children aren't old enough to give consent to anything. Porn is already legal and should remain so. Prostitution should be legal, but solicitation would remain illegal. Polygamy should also be legal, and is hardly moral corrupt by Christian standards anway.

Moral decay is independant of laws. Basing laws on consent and maximizing personal freedom while protecting everyone's rights is intellectually honest and internally consistent. Once you allow the majority to violate the rights of the minority, you accept that your rights are similarly subject to the whims of the people. Obviously, if you're really concerned that your moral majority is slipping, it would be in your interest to establish a clear, consistent limitation on what laws can be made before church is outlawed as morally decadent.

 

[Maddog]

But what about things that aren't against the law, like abortion, sex, tv, to name a few. I feel those play a part in the equation, I understand others may not, but thats why I think it comes down to ones opinion.

Yes well that does come down to the individual, however in relation to TV, Film and other Media, there are rules in place, now I live in Australia so if this does not match, then that is why:

G: General Exhibition, suitable for all ages.

PG: Parental Guidance Recommended for Persons under 15 years.

M: Recommended for mature audiences 15 years and over.

MA: Persons under the age of 15 must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian.

AV: For Mature Audiences Only, contains Adult themes, Violence and Strong Language. (Note: Covers films and shows that fall between MA and R, on Free To Air TV, like Dirty Harry etc; we don't cut language in films here shown after 9:30pm, so this is used for those).

R: Restricted to adults 18 years and over.

X: Restricted to adults 18 years and over
Children may be disturbed by exposure to this film.
It is a crime to allow this film to be seen by a person under 18 years.
X films cannot be publicly exhibited.

So it is up to each and every one of us to police these things within our own families, the Government cannot police everything, If they did we'd be complaining now about living in a police state right now. So if you as parent feel say "Friends" is not suitable for your children then do not let them watch it, it does have a PG rating here, and some episodes carry an M. So there is something being done to try and give people an idea of what is suitable, making people follow is the hard part.

Sex is another difficult one, however if you are monitoring your children’s TV and Film Viewing, then you are part of the way there to explaining stuff to them. Lets not assume this a problem of today, how many times have you heard of a Woman giving up her child because she was single in the 40's and 50's. Or even going away on "Holidays" and having it so no-one ever knew she was pregnant, giving the child up to a married sister etc.

Abortion is another tough issue, do you outlaw it completely or have it based on a case-by-case basis. How do you tell the 13 year old girl raped by her father or Uncle, she has to live with it, already in an emotional fragile state, that she has to live with it. Again, this is not a problem of these times, there are many cases from the past where it was hidden and the birth happened, where the Mother of the child covered it up, as did doctors, and a new sister/brother was assumed to be born into the family. How many of those cases ended up in disturbed Teenagers, possibly leading to suicide, we don't know, it wasn't reported.

I wish there were answers to all this, and I wish I had them, however I am also aware enough to realise that it is not just in these times that these problems have existed, they where just hidden in the past. At least now we have support groups for this sort of thing, if a father beats his wife, or rapes his daughter at least it is not hidden any more. There are consequences to all this now, not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, however at least it is there. The fact we are posting about it now, is another great leap forward, imagine years ago when you could not talk about it at all. Police wouldn't even listen, confession was probably about it, yet all you got was a few hail Mary's, it was all confidential, let alone like this.

I think we have moved forward, not backwards, it will take a lot to make it better still, but lets not give up and throw our hands in the air and say it's got out of hand, society is finished. Talking about this, like here is, as I said a great leap forward, and heartening as well, at least some people are aware enough to take control of what should be seen and what should not.

Follow the classifications, and filter your childrens viewing, talk to them honestly when they ask a question and we will get somewhere. No use hiding sex education from them, they will learn it somehow, they did in the past and they will now. At least if you explain it to them, then you know they are learning the truth, how many times have you heard a Teen say: "I didn't think I could get Pregnant the first time." Hopefully being open and honest with them, will have them talking to you, maybe they will talk to you about thinking about having sex for the first time, you never know.

The Government, The Church, The Whatever can not solve things alone, it all starts at home ............... with us and our attitudes. If we do the best we can with our children and teach them well, hopefully they will do the same with their children and the World will continue to get better.

The Bible also teaches there are temptations out in the world, it is up to each of us to not fall into temptation, no matter how tough that may be, that is what is asked.

Sorry, I know that sounded like I was getting on a Soap Box, but it's my honest thoughts, so I'll get off it (for now).

 

[seeker4Christ]

I saw a film made in the 80s recently, rated R - restricted for adults only. The only problem with it was language - today in 2004 it would have earned a PG rating - suitable for young children with parental guidance. I also saw a sequel to it rated PG-13 - if it had been rated in the 80s it would have gotten an R rating. It was worse than the earlier movie, but rated less bad. In general the rating system keeps sliding in a way that encourages younger teens and children to watch worse and worse stuff.

It is getting so that if you want to avoid the stuff that would have been rated R in the 80s, you have to get PG or G rated movies - but they don't seem to make PG anymore, just PG-13. And there is a difference - PG-13 is deffinately worse.

 

[Lillithspeak]

By this standard then it is ok to victimize children including infantacide as long as they don't have a voice (abortion) It is ok to live in incest if you wait until the family member is a consenting adult. It is ok to have prostitutes trolling our streets as long as they don't rob the johns.
It is ok to have pornography as long as you didn't exploit children. It is ok to live in bygamy, polygamy as long as it is all consenting adults. Where does it stop. Yes we are in moral decay. Such decay brings a country into non-existence, none have survived with this type of debauchery condoned.

As usual, the hyperbole does you in. NO one thinks it's okay to victimize children. Street prostitution is legal in other countries, but only in bordellos in Nevada in this country.

Many countries survived just fine with all of the above. The crowned heads of Europe married brothers and sisters, incest was not a moral problem for them. Prostitition is called the oldest profession for a reason, I believe they even existed during Jesus' time? Pornography has existed as long as man could reproduce pictures of themselves, some cave paintings. Bigamy and polygamy have existed throughout the ages in every culture.

Perhaps if you studied a little cultural history you would find out some interesting facts about humankind.

 

[Lillithspeak]

Here is a little sarcasm back in your face.

You give me wife beaters, big familys, and diabetes. You can have bank robberys every 90 seconds(and thats just in LA alone), serial killers being produced at a much higher rate thanks to violent porn that suits there style, all of that free sex stuff in the 60's and 70's(i'm sure no diseases or unwanted pregnancys happened then), cocaine, crack, heroine, massive pot smoking, tv so filthy and shocking, gay highschools, aids,
How about a crack baby?
Up for a little school shootings, cause were stock pileing those as well.
Gang gun fights anyone?


Time is time, the situations aren't determined by time. Sure there was some stupid stuff then, I imagine all time has bad things every step of the way.
But the point is, you don't have to live in a bunch of different eras to know something wrong when you see it.

It wasn't me that said the 50's were better now. I pointed out what some of issues of the day were back then. If that upsets you to the point you have to be sarcastic, oh well.

You think serial killers are being produced at faster rate? Compared to what? Serial killers have always existed. One famous one was Jack the Ripper, but he wasn't the only one, there was Henry the 8th too, just to name two you might be familiar with. Serial killers were not documented in the centuries before because the patterns couldn't be seen as they are now with communications worldwide. And what's your problem with gay highschools, obviously you hate gays, this way they aren't around to sully the little christian darlings, I'd think you'd be thrilled to have them banished to their own highschool.

In any case, porn, tv and music don't create criminals, criminals decide to be criminals, whatever is available in the society of the day is used to fuel their criminal purposes.

 

[Philosoft]

I saw a film made in the 80s recently, rated R - restricted for adults only. The only problem with it was language - today in 2004 it would have earned a PG rating - suitable for young children with parental guidance. I also saw a sequel to it rated PG-13 - if it had been rated in the 80s it would have gotten an R rating. It was worse than the earlier movie, but rated less bad. In general the rating system keeps sliding in a way that encourages younger teens and children to watch worse and worse stuff.

How could you possibly know how older movies would be rated today?

You know, I'll go you one better - I saw an old PG-13 movie recently that would have an R rating if released today. Which of our anecdotes describes the actual state-of-affairs?

 

[ThePhoenix]

How could you possibly know how older movies would be rated today?

You know, I'll go you one better - I saw an old PG-13 movie recently that would have an R rating if released today. Which of our anecdotes describes the actual state-of-affairs?

Both. The rating system is utterly abitrary, and always has been.