03 Oct '15 23:30>4 edits
This post is unavailable.
Please refer to our posting guidelines.
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
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
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.
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.
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