If there's no God, nothing is right or wrong

[Kitan Etos]

So in a morality where rape is okay, then its fine since it's subjectively fine?

It's fine or not fine on a person by person basis. Most people agree that it's wrong, but because some people don't view it as wrong then it cannot be objective.

[Ravenshire]

It is wrong because in this time, place, and culture it is subjectively wrong.

Objective morality is moral behaviour that is viewed the same in all times and in all places (disclaimer: this is the practical definition, not the philosophical one).

Boru

So in a morality where rape is okay, then its fine since it's subjectively fine?

Why not? There have been moral standards that allowed for slavery after all. Hell, you're own holey book is down with warriors keeping the virgins of the people they defeat and the dashing of baby's heads on rocks. Subjective morality can be twisted to include damn near anything. That's why some moral codes are better than others and people frequently disagree on the minutia.

[Deesse23]

Looks like we need to make it clear to the children in the room: Everybody on this forum, every single one is raping as much as they want, day and night, 24/7 365.
What about you? How often do you need to go to church or read the Bible (lets say per week) to not go out and rape and kill babies?

Disclaimer: I already told you, boy, pay attention to which passages of the Bible you actually read. Its improtant. Trust me!

And now you're ignored. Don't bother

Oh really? Didnt you ignore 90% of what has been told you you already? Wheres the difference now supposed to be? Was it again not the answer you needed for your script? Its true, we rape as much as we want in here. Whats wrong with that statement? How much do you rape, per day, and why?

[Deesse23]

So in a morality where rape is okay, then its fine since it's subjectively fine?

Why not? There have been moral standards that allowed for slavery after all. Hell, you're own holey book is down with warriors keeping the virgins of the people they defeat and the dashing of baby's heads on rocks. Subjective morality can be twisted to include damn near anything. That's why some moral codes are better than others and people frequently disagree on the minutia.

Sssshh
He probably hasnt read this part yet....or probably has, and thats why he cant tell me what his issue is with the baby killing dilemma.

[Ravenshire]

Evil is a construct of the church. A tool to manipulate fools like you.

Of course all those things you listed are bad and wrong, subjectively.

Do you understand that subjective just mean to you? So it's wrong to you. But many things are wrong to some, while fine for others. For example, some people think capital punishment is immoral. Others think it's highly moral. Who's right?

No one is "right." The moral codes we all work under are typically agreed upon codes. It is generally agreed that rape, murder, slavery, stealing, etc... are wrong, and there is a minority that disagrees. It's still a subjective standard. That's why stealing for personal enrichment is typically reviled and stealing to feed your kids is typically understood and easily forgiven.

That you need these things spelled out makes me wonder if the only thing keeping you from a raping, murdering, stealing rampage is the fear that some imaginary figure from an ancient text will spank you in the "next life."

[AngelThMan]

Do you understand that subjective just mean to you? So it's wrong to you. But many things are wrong to some, while fine for others. For example, some people think capital punishment is immoral. Others think it's highly moral. Who's right?

No one is "right." The moral codes we all work under are typically agreed upon codes. It is generally agreed that rape, murder, slavery, stealing, etc... are wrong, and there is a minority that disagrees. It's still a subjective standard. That's why stealing for personal enrichment is typically reviled and stealing to feed your kids is typically understood and easily forgiven.

That you need these things spelled out makes me wonder if the only thing keeping you from a raping, murdering, stealing rampage is the fear that some imaginary figure from an ancient text will spank you in the "next life."

Why don't you stop with your stupid armchair psychology? We are having a philosophical discussion. Why ruin it with childish nonsense??

"The moral codes we all work under are typically agreed upon codes."

So then in societies where the majority approved of slavery, slavery was morally sound? Answer the question directly without derailing the conversation. Last change before I stop reading your replies. Stick to the topic

[awty]

How scary - If you keep saying things I don't like, I will stop listening to you. Everyone is surely shaking.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It is wrong because in this time, place, and culture it is subjectively wrong.

Objective morality is moral behaviour that is viewed the same in all times and in all places (disclaimer: this is the practical definition, not the philosophical one).

Boru

So in a morality where rape is okay, then it’fine since it's subjectively fine?

That’s kind of a redundant statement, but yes. Masters raping slaves, husbands raping wives, fathers raping their children, lords raping their subjects - ALL of these were, at one time or another, positive moral behaviours, justified (in some cases) by Holy Writ.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

No one is "right." The moral codes we all work under are typically agreed upon codes. It is generally agreed that rape, murder, slavery, stealing, etc... are wrong, and there is a minority that disagrees. It's still a subjective standard. That's why stealing for personal enrichment is typically reviled and stealing to feed your kids is typically understood and easily forgiven.

That you need these things spelled out makes me wonder if the only thing keeping you from a raping, murdering, stealing rampage is the fear that some imaginary figure from an ancient text will spank you in the "next life."

Why don't you stop with your stupid armchair psychology? We are having a philosophical discussion. Why ruin it with childish nonsense??

"The moral codes we all work under are typically agreed upon codes."

So then in societies where the majority approved of slavery, slavery was morally sound? Answer the question directly without derailing the conversation. Last change before I stop reading your replies. Stick to the topic

Yes. In fact, it is largely majority approval which is what makes a practice morally sound.

Boru

[AngelThMan]

So in a morality where rape is okay, then it’fine since it's subjectively fine?

That’s kind of a redundant statement, but yes. Masters raping slaves, husbands raping wives, fathers raping their children, lords raping their subjects - ALL of these were, at one time or another, positive moral behaviours, justified (in some cases) by Holy Writ.

Boru

Can you just give a straight answer without rhetoric? Was rape moral when it was accepted? Yes or no. No explanation is needed. I'm asking about your perspective. You and other said there's no objective morality, and that it's all about subjective morality. Stick to that topic