Morals and the law

Originally posted by checkbaiter
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.


26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with ...[text shortened]... ndecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

So in summary, if you don't worship God, he'll make you gay?
Not sure I see the relevance to the thread.

Originally posted by twhitehead
So in summary, if you don't worship God, he'll make you gay?
Not sure I see the relevance to the thread.

I figured you would critique that section but not the last part which is man at his base nature....
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Someone on youtube did an experiment with tortoises by the side of the road. A number of drivers will deliberately drive over a tortoise. Some drivers stop and move them off the road. I think this is also a situation where we feel there are no consequences and we either resort to our own morals, or behave badly just because we can.

Of course, the crucial difference is that I'm killing bits and bytes whereas those people thought they were killing real animals. In real life I'm a big pussy when it comes to hurting/killing animals. If I have a fly in my house I often catch it with my hands (if it's not too fast) and let if fly away outside.

Spiders, on the other hand, I kill without remorse...

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I figured you would critique that section but not the last part which is man at his base nature....

I didn't comment because there was nothing much to comment on.
I still fail to see the relevance. Could you enlighten us?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
In real life I'm a big pussy when it comes to hurting/killing animals.

Do you mean you are cowardly, or that it takes courage to be immoral? Or do you mean you are a 'softie'? I am just not sure in what sense you used that phrase.

Softie. Though that and "pussy" sounds like a much worse trait than it actually is. I suppose it comes from a surplus of empathy. I don't mind having that. I could never work at an animal testing facility though. Unless the only thing that's being tested is how cute various types of puppies are.

You know what else is weird?

When I see animal suffering on tv I find that much harder to look at than human suffering.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I didn't comment because there was nothing much to comment on.
I still fail to see the relevance. Could you enlighten us?

Sure, your op was on what would drive some people to do evil if there were no law for 24 hours. Did I get that right?
This verse I quoted reveals what is potentially IN man that would cause this kind of behavior.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Yes, I am sure that is true. I am curious though if anyone here says they would be seriously immoral in a war zone. As I noted, in the OP, some people are willing to publicly state they would be serial rapists given the opportunity.
I don't think I would. I do think that I might loot a shop or rob a bank if given the opportunity to do so without conseque ...[text shortened]... thout harming anyone.
I don't think I would steal from an individual even without consequences.

...without harming anyone...

Do you mean only physically harming someone here, or also other ways of harming people? Because I don't think it's actually possible to rob a bank without harming anyone.

If you see a wallet lying on the street with money in it, do you take it to the police or do you keep it?

If you're in a store with only the owner present and he leaves you alone for a moment, would you easily steal something (assume there aren't any cameras watching you)?

Or were you only talking about a warzone situation?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
This verse I quoted reveals what is potentially IN man that would cause this kind of behavior.

Its not clear to me that that is the case. Does it say that those things are in man and God just let them do them, or did God cause them to do them?
And I still don't get the relevance. I think we all know perfectly well that some men are capable of nasty things, the question is are all people like that, and if not what percentage, and who here is like that?
If you forgot about God would you have a depraved mind and act as described in those verses?

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Do you mean only physically harming someone here, or also other ways of harming people?

Yes, I meant physically harming someone.

Because I don't think it's actually possible to rob a bank without harming anyone.
True, but I am OK with some sorts of harm to some people.

If you see a wallet lying on the street with money in it, do you take it to the police or do you keep it?
Doesn't happen very often so I can't be sure. But I think if I knew who the owner was I would return it. If I didn't I would keep it rather than let the police have it.

If you're in a store with only the owner present and he leaves you alone for a moment, would you easily steal something (assume there aren't any cameras watching you)?
I don't think I would steal something, but I am not sure if this is because I think there is a remote possibility of being caught.

I am perfectly happy pirating movies, although I probably would pay for them if they were made available at a reasonable price and reasonable format instead of the current system.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
[b]...without harming anyone...

Do you mean only physically harming someone here, or also other ways of harming people? Because I don't think it's actually possible to rob a bank without harming anyone.

If you see a wallet lying on the street with money in it, do you take it to the police or do you keep it?

If you're in a store wit ...[text shortened]... e there aren't any cameras watching you)?

Or were you only talking about a warzone situation?[/b]

"If you see a wallet lying on the street with money in it, do you take it to the police or do you keep it?"

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-boston-homeless-man-reward-20130919,0,4947392.story

quote:

Homeless Boston man turns in backpack with $42,000; charity rolls in

...James was honored by Boston police this week for turning in a backpack containing about $42,000. The bag was eventually returned to its owner. For his act of honesty, James was given a nice plaque and lots of applause.

After seeing a story about James online, Whittington wanted to do something more. His first idea was to raise a few hundred dollars by reaching out directly to friends. But as James’ story took off, so did Whittington’s fundraising campaign.

By week's end, more than $100,000 had been donated.

“I never ever in my wildest dreams imagined this,” Whittington said.

unquote

Of course if people didn't have reason to think that this was unusual or unexpected exemplary behavior, the money wouldn't have rolled in.

It's important to note that the guy was homeless. I'd say that contrast is the main reason why the campaign was started and why so much money came rolling in. Coupled of course with the power of the internet and groupthink.

If average Joe had found the money I'm not sure a campaign would've been started in the first place.

I mean, if you find a bag with $42000 you don't keep it, do you? Or am I that naive??

Originally posted by Great King Rat
Softie. Though that and "pussy" sounds like a much worse trait than it actually is. I suppose it comes from a surplus of empathy. I don't mind having that. I could never work at an animal testing facility though. Unless the only thing that's being tested is how cute various types of puppies are.

You know what else is weird?

When I see animal suffering on tv I find that much harder to look at than human suffering.

Not weird. It's probably because you are a King Rat. 😀

The Instructor

Originally posted by twhitehead
I saw a question on Facebook. It asked what you would do if there were no laws for 24 hours. One of the responses was someone who said he would go out and rape a whole lot of girls. It struck me as odd. This suggests the only thing holding him back from being a serial rapist is fear of punishment.
How many here would completely throw away their morals if ...[text shortened]... ties (or think they can) and atrocities happen. What percentage of people behave in this manner?

There are lots of trolls on Facebook. Don't let it keep you up nights.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
There are lots of trolls on Facebook. Don't let it keep you up nights.

I don't think it matters whether he was trolling, joking, exaggerating, talking without thinking, or telling the truth. I still think its interesting to ask what people would do without consequences. How much of our behaviour is governed by our morality and how much by consequences.
I have always felt that theists tend to feel that morality is governed by consequences and one of their fears of atheists is that they think there are no consequences without God. I think atheists tend to think deeper about morality because we have to justify our actions to ourselves rather than following a rule book.
I must also note that here in South Africa, rape is very common and would probably be a lot more common if there were fewer consequences.