(March 4, 2016 at 10:22 am)abaris Wrote:(March 4, 2016 at 10:02 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I think it is immoral for certain people to do those things in certain situations, but I don't think it's universally, objectively immoral.... such as things like murder and rape. Which are always immoral even if the people/culture doing those things don't believe they are.
Even in that you are wrong. Rape was something that could be easily remedied by paying off the father of the rape victim or marrying her after the violation took place. That's in the OT, which you take to be allegorical. But it's one of the few instances the OT really gets concrete and even names the sum that has to be paid. Which shows us that violating women was a commodity rather than a crime for these people.
As for murder, you may not be aware of that, but all through the Middle Ages there have been certain codices offering the so called Wergeld. Again, a murderer could get away by paying a certain sum. And they weren't shy about fleshing out what to pay for any given victim. An indentured servant was worth much less than a free man. A woman was generally of less worth than a man.
Last, let me repeat what I already said. Not murdering someone belonging to the own group is as basic as it ever can get. I don't need any form of society for that. It's in the interest of preserving the species.
What if we get to the point where the world is so over populated, that "preserving our species" is no longer in a person's best interest? I don't believe this would make genocide, for example, moral.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
