Four questions for Christians

[Consilius]

I have no idea what the hell you're responding to anymore.

First you asked why killing innocent people is wrong. Then I said that moral evolved. Then you said it didn't, and say that my examples aren't of premeditated murders, and then later you said you only mean premeditated murders that are unprovoked. These shifts are blatantly dishonest, you have lost your original position. And with psychopaths in the picture, you lost the last one too, since they are part of everyone and it's not clear to them that unprovoked murder is wrong.

The shifts I made were for the reason that killing in general was too broad and I needed a clear-cut point for this argument. Sorry.

The rest of your arguments have no bearing on the above. Most of it you're responding to things I have not said. Some of it you're repeating what I've said in a different tone. I see no reason to respond to any of them. You refuse to admit that a lot of people changed their moral values with the slave trade and gay rights examples but admit that there's a change. Elaborating how the change came about doesn't negate the fact that there was a change. With the slave trade you basically went against your own position that everyone knows all men should be treated equal, unless you add the qualification that "except when there's profit to be made". Your argument basically is that everyone knows all men are equal,

Morals don't go away, no matter how many people ignore them. Just because the Africans were abused, doesn't mean it became right. It just became socially acceptable. There's a difference. Because what we accept to be right can change, we need moral constants (e.g. religious texts) to keep us as close to what moral is as possible.

and when i point out the gay movement, you say oooh but no no no no, they didn't know they were men, otherwise they'd have treated them equally. I think the fact that they look like us and have the same fucking DNA as we do is a big fucking clue, isn't it? Men should be treated equal is something inherent in us? you might as well not say that if we suck so much at detecting what's human and what's not, then only what we like is considered human, and what we don't we say they're not human. Well great job, if that's the morality you're willing to concede to, I think we've arrived at an agreement.

We thought the gays were gay on purpose, and were just messing around with us. Their persecution became socially acceptable, and still is in many parts of the world. Generally, those who have been informed of science confirming that gays are born gay, accepted them and apologized. If their not doing it on purpose, people who are different can be accepted as equal, and that is moral.