(June 25, 2018 at 9:19 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Now for those who think that morality is subjective, it is difficult to rationalize or provide a foundation for any rights, not already provisioned by the government. I would think that saying that they don't "deserve these rights" would be more in line with this view. However; I find that most who say that morality is subjective are inconsistent with there views.
Bullshit. Slavery was moral at one point. The part you are not getting is we are NOT being inconsistent in saying it is still wrong. Times change and the goal should be to do the least harm, not go with a majority.
Point of view is what what we are pointing out. Moral to one may not be moral to another, but that does not mean just because you think something is moral means the one being harmed by it thinks it is.
WE are not being hypocrites or inconsistent. Our species ability to be cruel or compassionate has always existed, it is still up to us what we choose.
Just because history has, or just because we can, does not mean we always should.
Morality IS subjective, and I am damned glad there have been those in the past who have challenged social norms so that we ended slavery and segregation and that women could vote, and that LGBT have more rights today.
Your problem, and I see this with every religion worldwide, bar none, is that humans far to often attach their local religions, traditions and social norms as being that source of morality.
I think MOST HUMANS are very capable of empathy and compassion, and that is where more of the world needs to be. Where I disagree is where they think morality is coming from. It is not coming from above, or from a holy person or a holy writing, but has always been in us. <---None of that is saying to value dictators or lawlessness.
Morality comes from the same place these elephants did what they did.
And why this cat did what it did.
