One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
The Left and Its Moral Paradox
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
Dec 13, 2014 22:36:38   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
1. (And most important): So when you believe, pafret, that the moral person generally accepts that it is better to suffer evil to be done to him than to do evil to others, are you saying in effect that others have more of a right to life and to live than you yourself?

2. Then, what the majority of humans believe to be moral is actually what is moral?
Sorta like what Lily Tomlin said about reality: Reality is what 95% of people believe it is?
Reminds of the world famous ethologist (and atheist), R Dawkins, who with others studied primitive peoples in order to discover common threads of morality in human behaviour. (Apparently, they have trouble with morality and ethics)
But then Dawkins decided a populace learns its moral zeitgeist in the public houses of England. I guess he gave up on moralizing, per se.
1. (And most important): So when you believe, pafr... (show quote)


If I may add a thought: Morals describe what people do. Ethic describe what people ought to do. In a real sense our beliefs dictate our behavior. Nothing manifests our value systems more sharply than our actions.

Reply
Dec 20, 2014 12:32:15   #
CarolSeer2016
 
pafret wrote:
Wrong again. Churches and religions are cults, morality is based on the inherent good or evil of any particular action. While churches teach morality, they do not define it. And no, morality is not relative, situational or any other waffle term. Actions are either morally good, morally neutral, or morally evil.


Ok, finally getting back to you.

You say morality is based on the inherent good or evil of any particular action. How, then, do you determine that any action is inherently good or evil? What is your yardstick, so to speak?

Reply
Dec 20, 2014 12:48:43   #
CarolSeer2016
 
Dummy Boy wrote:
...let's try to do something with YOUR words:

Morals are relative to the church because what ever Christ wishes to do, and where ever the church wishes to do what is right for the church, is right and honorable for all. The greater good is to be determined by a select few (the pope?) who wishes the rest of the population to become their subjects. It is the basis of the church and therefore the moral code of ALL "CHRISTIANS"


I think, DB, that originally a command morality was needed as mankind was, and probably still is unfortunately, in various stages of childhood. I would like to see morals become internalized---once an understanding of the true reason for a command morality becomes evident, perhaps this can occur.

Reply
 
 
Dec 20, 2014 14:05:53   #
Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
I think, DB, that originally a command morality was needed as mankind was, and probably still is unfortunately, in various stages of childhood. I would like to see morals become internalized---once an understanding of the true reason for a command morality becomes evident, perhaps this can occur.


Hey Carol,
I sent this to no propaganda please. Could you post some pictures of yourself.

Reply
Dec 20, 2014 14:40:34   #
CarolSeer2016
 
Dummy Boy wrote:
Hey Carol,
I sent this to no propaganda please. Could you post some pictures of yourself.


1. I thought, DB, you could use some more sorting out, as far as your understanding of morals. But excuse me for butting in.

2. As I told one of my high school students (when I was tutoring math) when he asked me to marry him: "You really need, John, to get a few more years under your belt before I can seriously consider you for a mate."
Meaning: I'm too mature for you, DB.

Reply
Dec 20, 2014 14:49:43   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
Dummy Boy wrote:
...let's try to do something with YOUR words:

Morals are relative to the church because what ever Christ wishes to do, and where ever the church wishes to do what is right for the church, is right and honorable for all. The greater good is to be determined by a select few (the pope?) who wishes the rest of the population to become their subjects. It is the basis of the church and therefore the moral code of ALL "CHRISTIANS"



The church is a man made construction, and the church has varied from time to time, often not being the word of God at all, but the desires of man. The Progressives wish to have the population be the subjects o0f the elite, not because they choose to do so, but because they are forced often at the point of a gun to do so, for example the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and North Korea. God wants us to follow his word, which is the ten commandments, but does not force us to do so. You, for instance, have the ability to have as many sex partners as you wish, God's commandments say no, but man's laws say, do it if you wish to. You can be lazy and demand that others feed and clothe you, man's law says fine we will do so, God's law says be responsible for your own well being, that is part of loving thyself, and says to other people, help this man if he is unable to care for himselfnot just because he is lazy.
Moral relativism says that if some culture sometime in the history of the planet did it, it must be all right to do, whether it is sacrificing children to the great gods of the harvest, capturing members of other groups and making s***es of them, beheading non believers. It goes so far for many people as to contend that if some other species does a behavior it is right, natural and noble for humans to do so as well, whether it is rape, child murder, homosexual behavior,or stealing another animals food when he isn't looking. Frankly I do not care what behavior is appropriate for monkeys, sheep or duck billed platypus except for the survival of their species. It shouldn't change what is wrong or right for humans.

Reply
Dec 20, 2014 15:00:50   #
CarolSeer2016
 
Armageddun wrote:
If I may add a thought: Morals describe what people do. Ethic describe what people ought to do. In a real sense our beliefs dictate our behavior. Nothing manifests our value systems more sharply than our actions.


I agree with you, Armageddun: Nothing manifests our value systems more sharply than our actions.

By observing another's actions, we acquire a degree of knowledge of his morals, or value system, and thus are better able to respond to what we believe may be any future actions on his part.

I think that is why assimilation or integration of people from two different cultures takes time and even effort.

If people from one culture could honestly and without fear feel that they will be allowed the freedom of their beliefs, then they will allow the same freedom to others.

A partial solution to the age-old me/thou boundary value problem.

Reply
 
 
Dec 21, 2014 00:29:07   #
Armageddun Loc: The show me state
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
I agree with you, Armageddun: Nothing manifests our value systems more sharply than our actions.

By observing another's actions, we acquire a degree of knowledge of his morals, or value system, and thus are better able to respond to what we believe may be any future actions on his part.

I think that is why assimilation or integration of people from two different cultures takes time and even effort.

If people from one culture could honestly and without fear feel that they will be allowed the freedom of their beliefs, then they will allow the same freedom to others.

A partial solution to the age-old me/thou boundary value problem.
I agree with you, Armageddun: Nothing manifests o... (show quote)


:thumbup: :thumbup: Someone once wrote, "As a man thinketh, so he is."

Reply
Dec 21, 2014 05:03:36   #
Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
1. I thought, DB, you could use some more sorting out, as far as your understanding of morals. But excuse me for butting in.

2. As I told one of my high school students (when I was tutoring math) when he asked me to marry him: "You really need, John, to get a few more years under your belt before I can seriously consider you for a mate."
Meaning: I'm too mature for you, DB.


I wasn't offended you answered....I hope it didn't sound that way.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 15:56:46   #
CarolSeer2016
 
Dummy Boy wrote:
I wasn't offended you answered....I hope it didn't sound that way.


Actually, I didn't take it that way. I thought you would like to know I cared enough to make sure you were "sorted out", as they say in G.B.!

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 16:01:04   #
CarolSeer2016
 
no propaganda please wrote:
The church is a man made construction, and the church has varied from time to time, often not being the word of God at all, but the desires of man. The Progressives wish to have the population be the subjects o0f the elite, not because they choose to do so, but because they are forced often at the point of a gun to do so, for example the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and North Korea. God wants us to follow his word, which is the ten commandments, but does not force us to do so. You, for instance, have the ability to have as many sex partners as you wish, God's commandments say no, but man's laws say, do it if you wish to. You can be lazy and demand that others feed and clothe you, man's law says fine we will do so, God's law says be responsible for your own well being, that is part of loving thyself, and says to other people, help this man if he is unable to care for himselfnot just because he is lazy.
Moral relativism says that if some culture sometime in the history of the planet did it, it must be all right to do, whether it is sacrificing children to the great gods of the harvest, capturing members of other groups and making s***es of them, beheading non believers. It goes so far for many people as to contend that if some other species does a behavior it is right, natural and noble for humans to do so as well, whether it is rape, child murder, homosexual behavior,or stealing another animals food when he isn't looking. Frankly I do not care what behavior is appropriate for monkeys, sheep or duck billed platypus except for the survival of their species. It shouldn't change what is wrong or right for humans.
The church is a man made construction, and the chu... (show quote)


As far as your last paragraph, NPP, I absolutely agree with you. It is perhaps the most dangerous and fallacious premise of science in the 20th century to liken human behavior to that of the "lower" animals.

It even appears as if some, if not all scientists, especially those in the social so-called sciences, dislike being human. They have effectively denied, even trampled on, those very qualities that define humanity.

I find that d********g.

Reply
 
 
Dec 27, 2014 16:07:11   #
Rifleman
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
I was going to give the example of how the Mommy Liberal judges believe that if it's good for gays, it's good for EVERYONE! The photographer and the baker who were forced to participate in a couple's gay wedding is apparently for the greater good, if not for their own individual good.


No that's just an excuse. They simply LIE! Rights are only for them and no one else. Laws are for everyone else but not them. Morals are what they determine them to be and theirs are superior because they have determined them to be. They h**e people besides themselves having guns, so they compare self defense to murder, except when they have to do it. They dehumanize people when they want them dead, like unborn babies, or soon with elderly people who become sick. They only use the greater good as an excuse.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 16:08:58   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
Dummy Boy wrote:
Hey Carol,
I sent this to no propaganda please. Could you post some pictures of yourself.


If you want a photograph of NPP go to Prayer Group and look at Even Us Old Goats Like Christmas. Apparently you have been unable to separate the church is all its various incarnations from God. that is a problem many people have God is constant, mans' invention "the church" is not.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 16:17:15   #
Nickolai
 
CarolSeer2016 wrote:
I was going to give the example of how the Mommy Liberal judges believe that if it's good for gays, it's good for EVERYONE! The photographer and the baker who were forced to participate in a couple's gay wedding is apparently for the greater good, if not for their own individual good.





If the baker and photographer want to be In a business that deals with the public and don't like dealing with certain segments of the population then perhaps they are In the wrong business and should get in a business that doesn't. If your going to be open to the public then they should serve all or get out.

Reply
Dec 27, 2014 16:19:59   #
CarolSeer2016
 
Rifleman wrote:
No that's just an excuse. They simply LIE! Rights are only for them and no one else. Laws are for everyone else but not them. Morals are what they determine them to be and theirs are superior because they have determined them to be. They h**e people besides themselves having guns, so they compare self defense to murder, except when they have to do it. They dehumanize people when they want them dead, like unborn babies, or soon with elderly people who become sick. They only use the greater good as an excuse.
No that's just an excuse. They simply LIE! Rights ... (show quote)


It would be risible, except for their use of sophistry in persuading the marching morons to believe them.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.