Moral Relativism

[Aobaru]

Moral relativism is the view that ethical standards, morality, and positions of right or wrong are culturally based and therefore subject to a person's individual choice.

To me, moral relativism always exists on some level. If you take two people and compare their morals, they will most likely differ. For example, a lot of people think homosexuality is an absolute wrong. As a bisexual, I obviously disagree. So in this scenario either (a) moral absolutism exists and homosexuality is an absolute wrong (or right), or (b) moral relativism exists and homosexuality is neither "right" nor "wrong".

Then comes along the classic counterargument: Was Hitler justified in his killing of the Jews? After all, it was is set of morals that led him to it, and no one's morals are superior. Is murder absolutely wrong? If not, why do we condemn those who murder? And so on...

What do you guys think?

 

[Pwnemon]

some degree of moral relativism exists but mostly, no. Anything that violates equal rights for all is absolutely morally wrong.

EDIT: before someone goes "whaddabout gays" or something, i didn't want to say it but the bible is also morally absolute.

 

[Espeon]

i didn't want to say it but the bible is also morally absolute.

Then don't say it, because the bible's morals are pretty screwy at best.

I don't mean to say that every moral it attempts to teach absolutely wrong within itself but, there is a lot of flawed logic and bad morals being taught within there at the same time. Heck, there are probably things in the bible even YOU disagree with.

 

[Pwnemon]

the bible's morals are pretty screwy at best.

exactly why i didn't want to say it. people would respond with that

 

[opaltiger]

exactly why i didn't want to say it. people would respond with that

So... Biblical morality is absolute, but anything that violates equal rites is absolutely wrong. How on Earth do you reconcile that?

 

[Pwnemon]

Pretty easily - consider the first and second laws of robotics, and you get a model.

 

[Butterfree]

But the Bible violates equal rights for all! According to your logic, the Bible is both absolutely right and absolutely wrong. ?_?

Unless you're proposing that "anything that violates equal rights for all is absolutely wrong, unless it's the Bible, in which case it is absolutely right". Which doesn't quite make sense anyway since if there are exceptions it isn't absolute.

Out of curiosity, do you feel it is absolutely morally right to, say, stone adulterers?

 

[Pwnemon]

i assume you're using the Israelis' law system from the old testament, in which case it gets old explaining to atheists that the new testament obsoletes it.

EDIT: oh yeah and that /is/ basically what I mean. Morally absolute except when it violates the bible.

 

[Adriane]

i assume you're using the Israelis' law system from the old testament, in which case it gets old explaining to atheists that the new testament obsoletes it.

EDIT: oh yeah and that /is/ basically what I mean. Morally absolute except when it violates the bible.

I don't accept the "new testament obsoletes the old testament" deal. Why is it even in the Bible still? Is this some official decree by the Pope? I'm all for annulling everything in Leviticus but the rest of Christianity doesn't seem to want to.

 

[opaltiger]

i assume you're using the Israelis' law system from the old testament, in which case it gets old explaining to atheists that the new testament obsoletes it.

EDIT: oh yeah and that /is/ basically what I mean. Morally absolute except when it violates the bible.

Was the Old Testament morally absolute before the New Testament was written?

 

[Aobaru]

The problem, to me, with moral absolutism is the source of the absolute morals.

Like, I believe in the non-aggression principle and the golden rule and all that, which basically means that I personally consider any action that violates the life, liberty, or property of another person to be morally wrong. And I think *most* people would agree with me on this. But is violating this ideal an absolute wrong, or a wrong generally agreed upon for the maximum benefit to humanity? :\

 

[Phantom]

Ok, so the Bible's morals are absolute... let's see.

Human Sacrifice!!!

"Do not hold back offerings from your granaries or your vats. You must give me the firstborn of your sons. Do the same with your cattle and your sheep. Let them stay with their mothers for seven days, but give them to me on the eighth day."

On the seventh day he goes bowling with St. Peter.

Rules for rape!

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

Cause of course I want to marry the man that caused me emotional trauma!


How hard can I beat my slave?

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

So what if they die after three days, what does that that fall under?


Cause you know, my kid made me do it.

"So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds."

Note to self, always blame the kids.

Marrying a divorced woman is adultery.

Oops

Don't have sexual urges.

Haha, funny joke.



And don't give me the whole, "it's old and doesn't apply anymore", if the entire Bible was absolute, it would always apply. Ancient or not.

Don't get me wrong, there are some nice happy things in there, let me file through the slavery, rape, incest, butchery, murder, slander, and demoralizing women bits first.

 

[Harlequin]

If morals are relative, is FGM totally okay?

 

[Pwnemon]

Ok, so the Bible's morals are absolute... let's see.

Human Sacrifice!!!



On the seventh day he goes bowling with St. Peter.

Rules for rape!



Cause of course I want to marry the man that caused me emotional trauma!


How hard can I beat my slave?





So what if they die after three days, what does that that fall under?


Cause you know, my kid made me do it.



Note to self, always blame the kids.




Oops




Haha, funny joke.



And don't give me the whole, "it's old and doesn't apply anymore", if the entire Bible was absolute, it would always apply. Ancient or not.

Don't get me wrong, there are some nice happy things in there, let me file through the slavery, rape, incest, butchery, murder, slander, and demoralizing women bits first.

OH BOY THE ONLY THING MORE FUN THAN PEOPLE WHO ACCIDENTALLY MISQUOTE THE BIBLE IS DOUCHEBAGS WHO INTENTIONALLY MISQUOTE THE BIBLE.

That first quote- i read all of exodus 29-30 and i don't know where you misquoted it from but it ain't there.

The second, the one about marrying the woman you raped? That's because normally, a raped woman would be not outcast in the true sense, but most definitely cut off from society and her chances of marrying are about one in say, a very large number, and that law was to ensure that she could continue her bloodline.

I noticed you used like five different translations in your quotes. Was that so that the one that made it sound worst would always be presented? Have a look at this one:

Exodus 21: 20-21, NIV
“Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.

that revelation 2: 22-23 passage, i'm not even sure I need context, you're just blatantly misinterpreting it. nevertheless, if it helps:

Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.

See this woman was whoring around and got her children via extramarital sex and clearly, they weren't the pinnacle of Christian living either. In no way is God blaming the kids for the acts of the mother.

I have to admit I don't fully understand the motives behind the adultery quote, but if I had to take a stab, it would be because the woman's had sex with multiple men, then. Also, it could be to discourage things such as divorcing one woman so you can marry another.

I see you were just tired and started paraphrasing on that last one, when you said,

Don't have sexual urges.

Clearly what you meant was,

But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

which means that you don't have to do it to be guilty of /wanting/ to do it.

 

[shy ♡]

Woah woah woah.

So women aren't allowed to sleep with whoever they want ('whoring around', very lovely of you to call it that), according to the bible, and if a man rapes a women she's forced to marry him? How the hell is that fair? She has to live with the man who raped her?

 

[Phantom]

That first quote- i read all of exodus 29-30 and i don't know where you misquoted it from but it ain't there.

*Cough*

But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

which means that you don't have to do it to be guilty of /wanting/ to do it.

I rape you with my miiiiiiind~

Totally didn't know I could go to hell for that.

 

[opaltiger]

Pwnemon! Answer my question, please?

 

[Tailsy]

The awkward moment when Pwnemon can't answer your question because he's banned.

 

[Vladimir Putin's LJ]

The awkward moment when Pwnemon can't answer your question because he's banned.

How come?

 

[Teh Ebil Snorlax]

DOUCHEBAGS

^That would be my guess.

EDIT: Also, this probably didn't help;

this woman was whoring around