(May 28, 2012 at 12:27 am)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote:(May 28, 2012 at 12:18 am)ScienceLovesGod Wrote: I am assuming you don't believe in objective morality, correct?
I realize that you do you, and have made a positive claim regarding that matter, and yet have not offered evidence to support said claim.
I can't speak for genkaus (he's perfectly capable of doing so for himself), but the only claim I make regarding objective morality is that I see no reason to suppose that it exists.
You apparently feel otherwise. Feel feel to demonstrate it.
Relativism, cultural relativism, emotivism, utilitarianism, etc. These philosophical theories don't provide any authority of what a person should or shouldn't do morally. One person or a group of people do not have authority over each other to say what is right or wrong. There has to be a transcending authority above humanity to give a moral law. If there is such a thing as evil, then there is such a thing as good. If there is good and evil then there has to be a moral law to differentiate the difference between the two. If there is a moral law then there has to be a moral law giver. Personal opinion can't have authority for a moral code, but the transcendent moral law giver does. Our Lord who has revealed himself through the Bible has made us in his image and written that moral code on our hearts.
James Holmes acted consistent with what evolution teaches. He evolved from an animal, and when he murdered those people, He acted like one. You can't say he's wrong since evolution made him that way.
