(January 28, 2016 at 12:01 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(January 28, 2016 at 11:28 am)Drich Wrote: So then if Empathy is controllable by the culture, it is not a force that will trancend the culture and help you define right and wrong because the culture will control who it is you will have empathy for. So again if the culture makes a hard left into evil then you can be sure your empathy will have been long switched off so you can march right over who the culture wants gone.

And if you happen to be born into the wrong religion, will your belief in the wrong 'objective' values help you to transcend your predicament?

That the exact question I'm asking isn't it? What do you have that will help you see through whatever you've been taught?

(January 28, 2016 at 12:11 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(January 28, 2016 at 12:05 pm)Drich Wrote: This is still performance based morality.. which means no matter how well intentioned it is still subject to self righteousness, and will eventually degrade and fail.

Every criticism you can come up with for a subjectivist morality plagues your subjectively selected 'objective' morality too.

That's the thing... I am not selling any type of morality. (Works based righteousness)

(January 28, 2016 at 12:15 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Jeus schrist man we get it, you're certain that people are terrible, shitty and craven things.  I'd suggest that you may be under this impression due to a small sample size.  Namely yourself.

My moral standard has nothing to do with my heart - which pumps blood.  You;re free to hold the opinion that any given morality is junk, as am I.  So, pop morality is out as per you, biblical morality is out as per me.  I guess that means I'm just going to have to drift into amoral cuntitude.


.....Or not.  

Hearts are not limited to just pumping blood. the term heart (according to the Oxford english dictionary) also refers to the
the centre of a person’s thoughts and emotions, especially love or compassion. So unless you have created your own language that mirrors the english language except in instances like this where you simply don't want it to, YOUR HEART does indeed reflect your/any moral standard.

Not only that if you were to actually open your little mind, you would quickly see I am not talking about replacing one set of morals with another. ALL MORALS are Crap! God is not Looking at Any version of morality, and neither should any of us to determine if one is righteous or not. Because ALL Morality no matter if it is christian or not allows for sin God is not willing to abide. That is why atonement is offered instead.

ASK A QUESTION If YOU STILL DONT GET IT, rather than go off on a self righteous rant.

This is a complex subject, because the 'church' has itself wrongfully pushed its own version of morality for so long. However this is not what the bible teaches.

To the OP, is it possible that conforming to a moral absolute often entails responding to specific circumstances including the times amd cultures in which people find themselves?

Sorry buddy, my heart is just a blood pump.  If you want to be a shitty poet go and do that, but not while you discuss what you purport to be facts of divine importance.  I'm not interested in atonement, and gods opinion of all morality is worth nothing to me, as are the teachings of the bible as related by yourself.  

A complex subject?  Doesn't seem like it, you just summed up your position in what, three sentences...summed up gods in one sentence.....none of which have any relevance to me.  To you and to god all morality is crap.  NP, you've recused yourselves from the discussion of morality.  Why then, do you persist? What questions do you think I would have for you -or- your god? There was nothing I needed either of you to explain to me -before- you'd excluded yourselves from the discussion, what could either of you possibly have to say now?

(January 28, 2016 at 12:45 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(January 28, 2016 at 12:33 pm)Drich Wrote: I am asking you and people like you, that without God's righteousness to anchor your ideas of right and wrong/your morality, and your morality simply hangs on what society tells you is right and wrong how will you know when and if society makes a hard left turn into evil Like Nazi Germany did? I pointed out that the Germans did not see themselves as evil, but being moral up right citizens, just like the Americans responsible for the whole sale slaughter of Indians and or the Aussie slaughter of its indigenous people.

God's righteousness is nothing but the pop morality of several thousand years ago.  First we had the Jews and their version of pop morality.  Then along comes Jesus, and he teaches a different sort of morality, based on blood sacrifice and atonement.  Then we have Mohammed's version which builds on that.   And eventually we get to Baha'ullah's version further on down the road.  You aren't defending a specific morality because they all share the same traits of 'pop morality' regardless of from when and where they come.  You're simply arguing a preference for dogmatic truths, ones that don't change, over those that do.  But your God's righteousness is just another link in a chain of relativistic morals.  It's no different, and no better.  Matter of fact, by its inability to accommodate changes in our knowledge about the world makes it worse in that it is a slave to past errors.  (And yes, Virginia, God's righteousness isn't immune to mistakes.)

But again I am not pushing for one morality over another...

Drich, you're right about pederasty. In Plato's Symposium, some of the participants rationalized the practice of older men taking young lovers by claiming that the youths benefited from the relationship. I predict that we will start to see attempts by some perverts to soon do the same. After all, aren't they helping the vulnerable boys to embrace their budding sexuality? They did it "for the children!"

(January 29, 2016 at 10:38 am)Drich Wrote:

(January 28, 2016 at 6:26 am)robvalue Wrote: Oh one more thing:

Apologists for the morality we see in the bible/Quran sound like they're writing an essay titled, "Why I deserve the daily beatings from my father".

I will never cease to be amazed that you all still can't get that the 'daily beatings' aren't for the Father's children... they are for those who arent.

Yeah because that makes it perfectly okay right?

So as long as he's not beating his own children it's perfectly okay?

Even your own analogy makes you look like a cunt.