(September 10, 2011 at 7:14 pm)StatCrux Wrote:(September 10, 2011 at 6:58 pm)Shell B Wrote: I wouldn't try to convince him of anything. I would report him to the authorities, lock my doors until he is arrested and move on with my life. Luckily, the cops tend to have the same morals as I do in regard to murder and theft.
That is simply referring the question of morality to accepted moral majority. The law isn't an arbiter of truth, simply the stronghand of the majority. I am questioning the basis upon which the majority "the law" functions. Where does the views of the majority have their basis? Many laws are at best questionable at worst immoral, depending upon where you derive your moral thinking. The Law and morality are most definately intertwined but to equate the two is false. This is why subjective morality is questonable, moral majority is not moral truth.
BTW, you've ignored my post #94, which adressed this question of subjective morality. I don't know if you are trolling, or simply not very good at engaging a discussion, but answering certain posts and ignoring others will not win you any kudos. And if people leave this discussion, it will be of your own doing. Here's my last attempt.
Let me rephrase that debate: every morality is subjective, including yours. Just because you are inserting your god into your morality scheme doesn't make any more "objective". Yours, whether it is Christian or any other region, is a subjective morality, to which any other religion would vociferously object to.