Originally posted by @secondsonDo you understand that "sin" and "immorality", despite some overlap, are not one in the same?
Do you even understand what morality means?
Originally posted by @secondsonI don't believe homosexual sex is wrong. Like heterosexual sex, it can be part of morally unsound acts of course. Heterosexual and homosexual rape are both wrong. Deceiving a heterosexual and homosexual partner are both wrong. But neither heterosexual or homosexual sex are, in and of themselves, wrong.
Merriam-Webster : beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior.
Originally posted by @secondsonYour Christian God figure is not relevant to me. Asserting over and over again that your God condemns homosexual sex is an 'argument' that doesn't work on people who are not religious. If you think homosexual sex is wrong, for whatever reason, just don't engage in it.
Homosexual sex is a behavior in case you never noticed, and such behavior is condemned by God in the Bible.
Originally posted by @secondsonThe strength of your certainty and sincerity do not create any "authority" for me. The same goes for Hindus, Jews, Muslims etc.
You can redefine and believe as you will, but you would be doing so based on your own predispositions and not by any inherent authority.
Originally posted by @secondsonI am using exactly the same definition of morality as you: 'beliefs about what is right behaviour and what is wrong behaviour'.
You can redefine and believe as you will....
Originally posted by @fmfSo, ultimately, there is no such thing as morality in an objective sense of the word.
The "rules of morality", as you put it, are the various moral maps that each of us have to help us relate to others and navigate our way through life's interactions and dilemmas. They are a guide. Your "rules of morality" are not the same as mine.
How is it that morality are just various maps that each of us have to help us relate to others, etc, and mine are not the same as yours, etc., but some people are immoral?
If there is not an objective standard for what is moral and what is immoral, how could anyone be immoral?
They'd simply have a different roadmap.
And if someone has a different raodmap... How can you say that yours would take priority over it in some logical way? For instance, what is to say that the Indonesian Muslims do not have a right to institute a hyperocnservative Islamist theocracy -- it's just their moral map, and the opinion of other people who are in the minority, or especially of those like you who are foreigners, is meaningless.
Originally posted by @fmf... I thought you would say that sin doesn't exist.
Do you understand that "sin" and "immorality", despite some overlap, are not one in the same?
Yet, now you have some real idea about sin as not being involved in what is immoral, so you really must have an idea of what sin is.
Originally posted by @philokaliaMorality is inherently subjective and contextual.
So, ultimately, there is no such thing as morality in an objective sense of the word.
Originally posted by @philokalia"Sin" exists in the minds of people who believe in supernatural "law givers". It's not controversial to state this.
... I thought you would say that sin doesn't exist.
Yet, now you have some real idea about sin as not being involved in what is immoral, so you really must have an idea of what sin is.
Originally posted by @philokaliaMorality is simply a prism through which each of us perceive our own actions and the actions of others.
If there is not an objective standard for what is moral and what is immoral, how could anyone be immoral?
Originally posted by @philokaliaWhy would my moral standards need to "take priority" over those of Indonesian theocrats?
And if someone has a different raodmap... How can you say that yours would take priority over it in some logical way? For instance, what is to say that the Indonesian Muslims do not have a right to institute a hyperocnservative Islamist theocracy -- it's just their moral map, and the opinion of other people who are in the minority, or especially of those like you who are foreigners, is meaningless.
Originally posted by @philokaliaPerhaps you are thinking about laws rather than morals. Although they do sometimes correspond to each other, I don't see them as one in the same. I doubt you do either.
So, ultimately, there is no such thing as morality in an objective sense of the word.
How is it that morality are just various maps that each of us have to help us relate to others, etc, and mine are not the same as yours, etc., but some people are immoral?
If there is not an objective standard for what is moral and what is im ...[text shortened]... are in the minority, or especially of those like you who are foreigners, is meaningless.