Premise: Objective morals do not exist

Originally posted by @dj2becker
FMF you cannot even tell me that rape is objectively wrong, that says a lot about where your moral compass is pointing.

The fact you resort to such emotive subjects says much more about your own moral compass. For instance, when the first example that pops in to your mind is torturing babies for fun, something much darker and morally bankrupt is going on there.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
The fact you resort to such emotive subjects says much more about your own moral compass. For instance, when the first example that pops in to your mind is torturing babies for fun, something much darker and morally bankrupt is going on there.

At least I can say that torturing babies for fun is objectively wrong. There must be something much darker and morally bankrupt going on in your head when you start thinking of justification for it to support your notion of moral subjectivity.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
At least I can say that torturing babies for fun is objectively wrong. There must be something much darker and morally bankrupt going on in your head when you start thinking of justification for it to support your notion of moral subjectivity.

The gist of all that is there may be objective morality but it does not depend on the judgement of a god to spell them out. It takes compassion, intelligence, empathy to make objective judgements. No god needed.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
The gist of all that is there may be objective morality but it does not depend on the judgement of a god to spell them out. It takes compassion, intelligence, empathy to make objective judgements. No god needed.

You are making progress by recognizing there has to be an objective moral standard. Now think about what standard can only be truly objective.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I see you have once again dodged the question. Is rape objectively wrong? Yes or No?

We've already discussed the morality of rape in detail. Why are you asking me the same question again?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You are making progress by recognizing there has to be an objective moral standard. Now think about what standard can only be truly objective.

I already did. I said it was intelligence, compassion and empathy that makes for objective standards. You want to force objectivity to ONLY be the territory of a god but humans can do it just as well if not better.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
At least I can say that torturing babies for fun is objectively wrong. There must be something much darker and morally bankrupt going on in your head when you start thinking of justification for it to support your notion of moral subjectivity.

Normal people don't put forward such examples as 'babies being tortured for fun' as a topic of conversation, when one could simply ask 'is torture always wrong?'

I worry greatly that if you lost God in your life you would suddenly find it morally acceptable to behave in such manner.

Originally posted by @sonhouse
I already did. I said it was intelligence, compassion and empathy that makes for objective standards. You want to force objectivity to ONLY be the territory of a god but humans can do it just as well if not better.

People with intelligence, compassion and empathy all disagree on moral issues.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Normal people don't put forward such examples as 'babies being tortured for fun' as a topic of conversation, when one could simply ask 'is torture always wrong?'

I worry greatly that if you lost God in your life you would suddenly find it morally acceptable to behave in such manner.

I fully understand why it upsets you that you have to admit that torturing a baby for fun is always wrong.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I fully understand why it upsets you that you have to admit that torturing a baby for fun is always wrong.

What disturbs me is that your morality is hooked up to God, and that should you become disconnected from this moral law giver, you would suddenly deem it okay to torture babies for fun. (Apparently? )

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I fully understand why it upsets you that you have to admit that torturing a baby for fun is always wrong.

And in the thousands of years since the bible was written, things have changed and mores have changed yet there is no new word from your god about morality as if morality from 2000 years ago should be identical to morality of today.

The sad part is the morality as written in the bible was written in fact by men and there was no god involved. Yet people treat that as if it were written by the hand of a god in spite of the absolute fact no god has shown up around us in these times and was never there in ancient times either. The evidence for that is overwhelming since there are literally thousands of religions totally different from one another. A god wanting a world wide religion would not have set up a system like that.

And of course you are free to pull the 'so now you know the mind of god card'.

Just try proving me wrong without pulling out bible verses, or Quran or any other religious text. The reason you can't is because there was no god involved in ANY human religion. They were ALL 100% man made.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
People with intelligence, compassion and empathy all disagree on moral issues.

Actually, they agree on the basics. Such as not torturing kids for fun.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
People with intelligence, compassion and empathy all disagree on moral issues.

How many people of intelligence and compassion would agree torturing babies for fun is morally acceptable?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
What disturbs me is that your morality is hooked up to God, and that should you become disconnected from this moral law giver, you would suddenly deem it okay to torture babies for fun. (Apparently? )

Not at all God has written his laws even upon the hearts of the unbelievers so even you know it’s always wrong.

Ghost of a Duke: What disturbs me is that your morality is hooked up to God, and that should you become disconnected from this moral law giver, you would suddenly deem it okay to torture babies for fun.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Not at all God has written his laws even upon the hearts of the unbelievers so even you know it’s always wrong.

Here's one of your style of 'thought exercises': Assuming your god figure told you to torture babies for fun, would you then torture babies for fun ~ and would it be "objectively" morally sound for you to do so?