Originally posted by @fmf Didn't you agree with the imposition of same morally-based laws as me [pertaining to the behaviours I listed]?
What would your supposedly "objective" morals have empowered you to actually do about the Nazis?
Simply condemn their actions while wittering on childishly about how the condemnation from others, who don't happen to share your superstitions, was "incoherent"?
If the Nazis had viewed the Bible as an objective standard for right and wrong rather than having had the opinion that everyone establishes their own 'right and wrong' would they have done what they did? I don't think so. The same can be said for any of the mass murderers of the past few centuries.
Originally posted by @dj2becker If the Nazis had viewed the Bible as an objective standard for right and wrong rather than having had the opinion that everyone establishes their own 'right and wrong' would they have done what they did? I don't think so. The same can be said for any of the mass murderers of the past few centuries.
You have simply sidestepped all three of my questions.
Originally posted by @dj2becker We have already discussed what I view to be my objective moral standard. My stance hasn't changed. I refer you to those previous discussions.
The three questions were about how your morality might translate into law, how your morality might translate into action in the face of "evil", and whether mere supposedly "coherent" condemnation is enough as a manifestation of a moral stance.
Our conversation had in fact reached a point it has not visited before.
Originally posted by @fmf to djbecker Take for example your own personal stance that homosexual sex is immoral. How does that affect anyone other than yourself?
Originally posted by @fmf How does you unilaterally declaring your own personal moral standards to be "objective" affect any other person in any real or practical way?
As far as I can tell it's just some sort of internal self-righteousness or validation routine/process that has no consequence that's external to you.
Take for example your own personal stance that homosexual sex is immoral. How does that affect anyone other than yourself?
If the Bible really is God's revelation of how He wants us to live then it will affect them in the end whether they accept it or not.
Originally posted by @dj2becker If the Bible really is God's revelation of how He wants us to live then it will affect them in the end whether they accept it or not.
This 'answer' has sidestepped the two very specific questions I have asked you.
Originally posted by @fmf How does you unilaterally declaring your own personal moral standards to be "objective" affect any other person in any real or practical way?
dj2becker, do you believe that framing/labelling your own personal opinion/stance ~ that homosexual sex is immoral ~ as an "objective" idea, gives it more credibility or traction with other people? ~ Homosexuals, for example.
Originally posted by @fmf The three questions were about how your morality might translate into law, how your morality might translate into action in the face of "evil", and whether mere supposedly "coherent" condemnation is enough as a manifestation of a moral stance.
Our conversation had in fact reached a point it has not visited before.
My stance hasn't changed. I refer you to those previous discussions.
Originally posted by @fmf dj2becker, do you believe that framing/labelling your own personal opinion/stance ~ that homosexual sex is immoral ~ as an "objective" idea, gives it more credibility or traction with other people? ~ Homosexuals, for example.
I can only talk for myself. My stance on the issue hasn't changed. I refer you to those previous discussions.
Originally posted by @fmf So you concede that you are talking subjectively then.
I cannot speak for other people with regards to whether or not the objective morals that I believe exist have traction with them. Im sure there are many objective truths that have existed that are/were rejected by quite a few people.
Atheist morals
31 Oct '17 06:46
Back to Top