Viewing Single Post From: Morality

Viewing Single Post From: Morality
+Reaver	Nov 21 2008, 07:56 PM
Troll Posts: 8,615 Group: Advisor Member #47 Joined: June 9, 2005	Wind Sword That's a good theory. But ultimately, it's people pulling the trigger even though they know it's wrong. Because the woman who steals bread to feed her family is ultimately taking the food even though she know it's wrong. Wind Sword I don't think using drugs is inherently immoral. Breaking the law is. Cocaine rate during legalization could be 100%, I wouldn't care all that much. The law. According to a study run by Dr. Lawrenece Kohlberg, most people think of ethics in terms of law and order. They say this, yet see things like discrimination (Plessy v. Ferguson) made into law, things like violation of privacy as the law (Alien and Sedition Acts), things that are clearly wrong. Granted this is much less present today - although I would argue statues like Proposition 8 and those banning abortions accomplish the same thing - but the law isn't always the indicator of morality. As a matter of fact, Henry David Thoreau's theory of Civil Disobedience stresses the inherent morality of the law, stressing that "an unjust law is no law at all". Furthermore, consider practicioners of such logic: Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., Eugene V. Debs, a soldier fighting for Contientious Objector status, and Henry David Thoreau himself. Wind Sword There's a difference between laws and morals. God laid down the laws of Israel. Because it was the law, it became moral to follow them. The Commandments, for example, are clearly moral. No one was stoned for coveting thy neighbor's possessions. The law however, was arbitrary. If God decided that instead of 20 shekels, someone had to pay 25, that doesn't change the underlying moral of the law. So if God says you can't eat pork the fundamental message that you have to obey God, even if you eat pork and violate God's rules, is what matters? Wind Sword More importantly, even if God had changed morality, how's that to say that we could? The fact that we, in the last few hundred years, have made the word "nigger" taboo and have demonized the ideas of racism as immoral suggests that we've changed morals. Racism was one accepted, even supported by people such as Nathaniel Bedford Forrest, but now we've thought about it and now find it horridly immoral. Wind Sword The rules of morality didn't say "Slavery is moral". Mankind said "Slavery is moral". The rules of morality are subject to our own changes and whims. After all, if the word of God isn't absolute moral law and often skewed or ignored as people please (See: double standards in Old Testament Law with Eating Pork and Sodom and Gormorrah), then the moral rules don't quite explain to us what is clearly "moral" or "immoral". Wind Sword This isn't a response to anyone, but let's bring the discussion back to the original topic. Can't it be agreed upon that thing like love and altruism are universally good, and that the United States has turned away largely from that towards greed and individuality? The discussion regards morality in general. Edited by Reaver, Nov 21 2008, 07:59 PM.
	Neon,June 8 2005 07:34 PM @Reaver: Me grammer is better than ur post count newbie. HJ, December 30 2008 06:20 PM You gave Inui his first (and last?) sexual experience, didn't you? That's historic. Favorite Staffer Summer 2008 -- Send me a Personal Message

Morality · Debate Forum