03 Oct 09
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesGood topic. It actually makes me have to think - 😉.. Um.... I really don't think I can think of a truly 'sinful' lifestyle. I think some would say homosexuality as being 'sinful', but I tend to think that everything--prostitution, drug abuse, etc., as much as I might or might not disagree with that choice of career--is somehow justified in the end. Nobody ever does what they think is not 'the best thing to do' for them at that time which they do it, so I don't know if there is really a TRULY sinful lifestyle. I'm interested to see what everyone else thinks about this.
List the sinful lifestyles.
(A second thought: Those who use others for their own selfish/personal gain while knowing exactly what they are doing--e.g., Jim Jones and the notorious 'Jonestown Massacre'... that is what I would come closest to naming sinful. Anyone twisted enough to basically use people for their own gain - and killing them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.)
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by fatalinsomniaAnyone twisted enough to basically use people for their own gain - and killing them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.
Good topic. It actually makes me have to think - 😉.. Um.... I really don't think I can think of a truly 'sinful' lifestyle. I think some would say homosexuality as being 'sinful', but I tend to think that everything--prostitution, drug abuse, etc., as much as I might or might not disagree with that choice of career--is somehow justified in the end. No ...[text shortened]... them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.)
George W and the invasion of Iraq came to mind. Does this fit your criteria?
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI get your point but I don't really follow politics.
[b]Anyone twisted enough to basically use people for their own gain - and killing them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.
George W and the invasion of Iraq came to mind. Does this fit your criteria?[/b]
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by fatalinsomniaYou have a point here. No one does what they think is not the best thing to do. So the question then becomes, at what point do our views of what is good for us become skewed? For example, I think perhaps it becomes skewed when our sole goal in life is our own benefit. We often convince ourselves that the best thing for us to do is to try and pleasure or please ourselves at the expense of others, however, where is the fulfillement in that? At the end of the day, what you wind up with often is a lonely existence in which we beome morally bankrupt and spiriuatally empty.
Nobody ever does what they think is not 'the best thing to do' for them at that time which they do it, so I don't know if there is really a TRULY sinful lifestyle. I'm interested to see what everyone else thinks about this.
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWoops, for a minute there I thought you were taliking about the Palastinian suicide bombers, but that is not a favorite target of yours is it?
[b]Anyone twisted enough to basically use people for their own gain - and killing them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.
George W and the invasion of Iraq came to mind. Does this fit your criteria?[/b]
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by whodeyI tend to agree. I would then go further to ask what is it that people base their morality (or moral decisions) on? Perhaps this has been discussed here before, but I am curious to know what--in absence of religion--do others base their moral decisions on...
You have a point here. No one does what they think is not the best thing to do. So the question then becomes, at what point do our views of what is good for us become skewed? For example, I think perhaps it becomes skewed when our sole goal in life is our own benefit. We often convince ourselves that the best thing for us to do is to try and pleasure or p ...[text shortened]... d up with often is a lonely existence in which we beome morally bankrupt and spiriuatally empty.
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by fatalinsomniaIYO,how aware do you think someone like Jones was of his 'sinful' ways? What I'm trying to get at here is how much of a part does ignorance play? Did Hitler think he was doing the right thing with his limited wisdom and therefore negate some of the responsibility for his actions? I honestly dont know. What do you think?
Good topic. It actually makes me have to think - 😉.. Um.... I really don't think I can think of a truly 'sinful' lifestyle. I think some would say homosexuality as being 'sinful', but I tend to think that everything--prostitution, drug abuse, etc., as much as I might or might not disagree with that choice of career--is somehow justified in the end. No ...[text shortened]... them in the process doesn't help - is sick and might qualify as sinful in my book.)
04 Oct 09
4 edits
Originally posted by fatalinsomniaI've talked about this at length here before. It is my opinion that our morality is formed by authority figures in our lives. This includes the state, the clergy, parents, teachers, and even peers etc.
I tend to agree. I would then go further to ask what is it that people base their morality (or moral decisions) on? Perhaps this has been discussed here before, but I am curious to know what--in absence of religion--do others base their moral decisions on...
Case in point is the issue of abortion. Before it was legalized the moral consensus was that it was immoral. However, after being legalized the general consensus is that it is "OK". Another example is slavery. Back in the day when it was legal, the moral consensus was that it was "OK". However, years after being made illegal the moral consensus is the reverse. In short, whether we like to admit to it or not, we are wired to submit to whom we percieve as moral authorities over us. In this regard, morality is relative.
Having said that, I don't believe that morality is relative overall. Deep down I think we all share the morality of the golden rule which is to do unto others as they would do to you as Jesus taught. So how could the above morality be relative if we all live by the golden rule? Well the first order of business is to dehumanize people in order evade the innate knowledge of the golden rule. For example, the unborn are parasitical lesions, not humans. The black slave is a monkey, not human. The Jew is vermon, not human or the infidel etc etc. Once this dehumanization has successfully been achieved, we no longer must treat others as we would like to be treated simply because they are not like us. In fact, they are beneath us.
04 Oct 09
Originally posted by karoly aczelI believe that Hitler bought into the notion of racial superiority. Once this had been achieved, he was free to violate them in any way imaginable. You know, it is like trying to remove a cancer from your body. Only through this type of rationalization could he justify to himself and the rest of the world what he was doing.
IYO,how aware do you think someone like Jones was of his 'sinful' ways? What I'm trying to get at here is how much of a part does ignorance play? Did Hitler think he was doing the right thing with his limited wisdom and therefore negate some of the responsibility for his actions? I honestly dont know. What do you think?
