04 Oct 15
The post that was quoted here has been removedseriously? a human turd rapes someone, is acquitted through a failure of the system, rapes someone immmediately after, another human turd in charge of punishing human turds finds excuses for him and you are concerned with the location in which the rape happened
05 Oct 15
The post that was quoted here has been removedThe real point would be that they would know it is wrong, the moral restraint would be
the knowledge it should never happen. The fear of doing wrong would be either from man
who can be fooled, paid off, or look the other way, or God who will hold them accountable
regardless. If our restraints are just what we think we can get away with, than we really
don't have restraints just opportunities.
05 Oct 15
Originally posted by KellyJayIn the first example, the man or woman makes a moral judgement based on their own thinking but the second one does not require actual thinking, just fear the wrath of some alleged deity.
The real point would be that they would know it is wrong, the moral restraint would be
the knowledge it should never happen. The fear of doing wrong would be either from man
who can be fooled, paid off, or look the other way, or God who will hold them accountable
regardless. If our restraints are just what we think we can get away with, than we really
don't have restraints just opportunities.
To me, the first example is a person higher on the spiritual scale than the second one. The second one cannot grow morally, only stay in the same mental place.
05 Oct 15
Originally posted by sonhouseThe first example we agree is an acknowledgement of what is right and wrong. The 2nd
In the first example, the man or woman makes a moral judgement based on their own thinking but the second one does not require actual thinking, just fear the wrath of some alleged deity.
To me, the first example is a person higher on the spiritual scale than the second one. The second one cannot grow morally, only stay in the same mental place.
being what could/would happen if I did what I knew was morally wrong wouldn't hinder
or promote anything just because, it would only harm or help depending on if God is real
or not. If real, than all justification which God rejects will be for nothing, if God isn't real it
doesn't matter one way or another.
The first is just an acknowledgement, the 2nd is a fear of what would happen with and
without God. Without God it is just a matter of can I get away with it, that would again
mean it isn't a matter of restraint, only what I want and can get away with. With God it
doesn't matter if I can get away with it here in this life, I know I'm guilty and will pay for it
either here in this life, but without a doubt in what is to come.
05 Oct 15
4 edits
The post that was quoted here has been removedI do believe I understand you, if you actually cared for the other person and have a chance
to do evil to them, you would not harm them because you care. Love is the best protection
against all wrong doing, but not everyone loves as they should so what then?