Obedience vs Disobedience

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You explained before that rape is wrong on the basis that it violates the principle of trust. Are you now changing your stance?

Have you got a link to support your claim that I explained it this way?

Originally posted by @fmf
On the basis that I explained before when we discussed this topic in great depth. My analysis and stance have not changed in the meantime.

Are you denying that you said rape is wrong on the basis that it violates trust and does not exhibit empathy?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Are you denying that you said rape is wrong on the basis that it violates trust and does not exhibit empathy?

I am not interested in confirming or denying anything at your behest at this juncture because I have explained in full before ~ when we discussed the morality of rape in great detail, and my viewpoint and rationale for it have not changed since then.

You asking me about the same issues over and over and over again as if we had never discussed them previously may meet your criteria for a genuine conversation but it doesn't meet mine.

I popped my head on page 26 of this thread to remind you, yet again, that you are getting "sin" and morality mixed up. When you are talking to non-believers, you need to bear in mind that they don't have any reason to think in terms of what is or isn't 'disobeying a supernatural being', therefore mixing that notion up with morality, which for them has no supernatural connotations, is a hindrance to meaningful discussion.

Originally posted by @fmf
I am not interested in confirming or denying anything at your behest at this juncture because I have explained in full before ~ when we discussed the morality of rape in great detail, and my viewpoint and rationale for it have not changed since then.

You asking me about the same issues over and over and over again as if we had never discussed them previousl ...[text shortened]... ality, which for them has no supernatural connotations, is a hindrance to meaningful discussion.

So do you or don't you deny that you said something is wrong if it violates the principle of trust and empathy? This is a simple yes or no question.

I was discussing morality with Dive who believes in sin if I am not mistaken.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Are you denying that you said rape is wrong on the basis that it violates trust and does not exhibit empathy?

Feeling empathy for others is, in my view, a morally sound thing to do. So are things like compassion, mercy, generosity, patience. When immoral actions are egregiously sociopathic and gravely detrimental or damaging to others, and they stem from an abject lack or even absence of empathy and compassion, then I would characterize them as "evil".

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So do you or don't you deny that you said something is wrong if it violates the principle of trust and empathy?

You just asked me this and I gave you, not only my response, but also my reason for it.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I was discussing morality with Dive who believes in sin if I am not mistaken.

If that is so, then that is my mistake. I thought you were addressing avalanchethecat. Fair enough.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Surely what counts for one person, e,g rape is wrong, should count for all other people?

I believe rape is "evil".

Originally posted by @fmf
I believe rape is "evil".

Define what you mean by "evil".

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Define what you mean by "evil".

I did. In a post 12 days ago. In a post that was, in fact, addressed to you. You blanked it out. Why are you asking me to repeat it? Asking people to repeat things over and over and over again is a parody of discourse, not authentic discourse.

Originally posted by @fmf
I did. In a post 12 days ago. In a post that was, in fact, addressed to you. You blanked it out. Why are you asking me to repeat it? Asking people to repeat things over and over and over again is a parody of discourse, not authentic discourse.

Sorry I missed it in which thread was this?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Sorry I missed it in which thread was this?

I don't believe you "missed" it. I think you are just trying to troll me.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
God is not accountable to anyone as far as I can see so no there is only one and it is for humans.

So in your mind you hold yourself accountable to your god's universal objective morality, but your God doesn't hold himself accountable to the same standards, he has his own set of standards which allow him to contravene the standards he sets for you, is that right?

Originally posted by @divegeester
So in your mind you hold yourself accountable to your god's universal objective morality, but your God doesn't hold himself accountable to the same standards, he has his own set of standards which allow him to contravene the standards he sets for you, is that right?

God is not accountable to anyone that I am aware of. Would you say God will hold you accountable to a subjective standard? If you disagree whom do you think should hold God accountable?

Originally posted by @fmf
I don't believe you "missed" it. I think you are just trying to troll me.

I am not trolling you. Which thread did you post it on? If you can't even tell me that it might be you who is trolling.