Originally posted by @dj2becker Why would you fight to the death to protect my kids from abuse if you don't believe that the abuse of kids is objectively wrong?
You are not right in the head if you cannot answer this yourself.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59 You are not right in the head if you cannot answer this yourself.
We all know that abuse of kids is wrong, to deny this means that you are not right in the head. Yet by saying morality is subjective you would have to agree that for there are certain conditions whereby abuse of kids is ok.
Originally posted by @dj2becker We all know that abuse of kids is wrong, to deny this means that you are not right in the head. Yet by saying morality is subjective you would have to agree that for there are certain conditions whereby abuse of kids is ok.
You pick all these emotive examples, like torturing babies for fun etc, as you know most people wont want to play devil's advocate in such a scenario, to explain how morality is subjective. - I find this a very cowardly tactic.
Let us just take an example where it isn't so emotive to play devil's advocate. Let's consider, in general terms, if murder is always wrong. (Without focusing on babies or cute little kittens). Is murder always morally wrong?.....Yes,........You absolutely sure about that?
What if the murder of one individual was the only way to save the lives of millions of people? Is your morality on this issue just as absolute?
Originally posted by @dj2becker We all know that abuse of kids is wrong, to deny this means that you are not right in the head. Yet by saying morality is subjective you would have to agree that for there are certain conditions whereby abuse of kids is ok.
Lay off the booze or brush up on grammar and/or logic
because you are sounding more and more idiotic.
Why is asserting "morality is subjective" and agreeing
"abuse of kids is ok" mutually exclusive?
And are there not may abuses of kids in the bible?
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke You pick all these emotive examples, like torturing babies for fun etc, as you know most people wont want to play devil's advocate in such a scenario, to explain how morality is subjective. - I find this a very cowardly tactic.
Let us just take an example where it isn't so emotive to play devil's advocate. Let's consider, in general terms, if mur ...[text shortened]... ly way to save the lives of millions of people? Is your morality on this issue just as absolute?
I think a case can be made for it from a Biblical perspective, Jesus died to save millions.
Originally posted by @wolfgang59 Lay off the booze or brush up on grammar and/or logic
because you are sounding more and more idiotic.
Why is asserting "morality is subjective" and agreeing
"abuse of kids is ok" mutually exclusive?
And are there not may abuses of kids in the bible?
Objective moral standards mean that some actions are always immoral no matter the circumstances. If morality is subjective it means there are circumstances where abuse of kids is ok, else it would always be immoral to abuse kids regardless of the circumstances. Where does the Bible say that the abuse of kids is good?
Originally posted by @dj2becker You feel impulse. Cool. So what makes your impulse right and someone else's contradictory impulse wrong?
It is all about boundaries. We have to breathe, and if you choke our air out, expect resistance. This is not rocket surgery. You care about yourself? your family? your friends? your neighbors? your country your world your galaxy? And now you know what makes your impulse right. You do.
Originally posted by @dj2becker Objective moral standards mean that some actions are always immoral no matter the circumstances. If morality is subjective it means there are circumstances where abuse of kids is ok, else it would always be immoral to abuse kids regardless of the circumstances. Where does the Bible say that the abuse of kids is good?
Originally posted by @apathist It is all about boundaries. We have to breathe, and if you choke our air out, expect resistance. This is not rocket surgery. You care about yourself? your family? your friends? your neighbors? your country your world your galaxy? And now you know what makes your impulse right. You do.
Originally posted by @dj2becker Objective moral standards mean that some actions are always immoral no matter the circumstances. If morality is subjective it means there are circumstances where abuse of kids is ok, else it would always be immoral to abuse kids regardless of the circumstances. Where does the Bible say that the abuse of kids is good?
Ramblings.
Post your position then defend it.
Instead of these stupid sermons.
btw: Where does the bible say that the abuse of kids is bad?
Originally posted by @dj2becker Objective moral standards mean that some actions are always immoral no matter the circumstances. If morality is subjective it means there are circumstances where abuse of kids is ok, else it would always be immoral to abuse kids regardless of the circumstances. Where does the Bible say that the abuse of kids is good?
"Where does the Bible say that the abuse of kids is good"
That bit where he says they should be smashed against the rocks.
"Proof of God"
19 Oct '17 09:43
Back to Top