VICanucksfan5551 Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Let me ask you - is morality based on results? Is it result oriented? If a decision was made where the outcome would be delayed, does that make the moral standing delayed as well? If US tortured muslim extremists to save the lives of millions, does the moral hammer not get revealed until how many lives were saved? Morality is NOT dependent on results or the ends. Morality is the means to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 According to TBS's definition of morality from the video, torturing the extremists would cause unnecessary harm and suffering, and would therefore be immoral. We live in a reality where torturing people isn't the only means of saving people. Asking whether or not morality is determined pre or post facto is an interesting question that I don't know the answer to. Do you have a definition of morality that answers this? Anyways, the point of the video was not to say that his definition of morality was the right one or perfect, but that a concrete, non-circular definition used to promote general well-being is infinitely more useful than a circular definition based on the "nature of God". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Wait bud. By definition if torturing a few extremists with purpose to save a billion people, according to your statement on morality it is justified and righteous. Isn't it? I would disagree with the video's premise that Christian's explanation of morality is simply saying the "nature of God". It is much more complex than that. Asserting that God is omniscient and absolute truth is asserting that there is the opposite. Sin, false truths, lies.. etc. Asserting that God is righteous puts an identity on what those things are. What is righteous? Well we look at God's character. He is justice, mercy, gracious, loving.. all these things are what we consider moral. Then we look at the opposite which is immoral and sin. These things are brokenness, death, murder, war, etc etc. These things are depicted in Scripture. The video claims that Christianity's view on morality is flawed circular logic because the video itself does not see Christianity's measurement of morality itself. Scripture is what defines morality for us. It is the Word of God. The video makes this claim of "then God is just the messenger of this morality".... well isn't that interesting? God, as Christians see him as, he IS the Word. God is the law, the deliverer of the law and also the nature of law itself. If that is circular logic, then I am sorry, God cannot be fathomed by mere human minds. If you could put him into words, then that already defies the nature of a higher being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buttock Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 How do you know she isn't making policy or gov't decisions based on her faith? Not to mention that she's a complete bullS#%! artist who doesn't really care about BC's future as much as she does about her own short term success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Light Racicot Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I was wondering, would everyone (especially the Christians) feel the same way about this if Clark referred to the Quran rather then the Bible? Surely in this country it is equally worthy of consultation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobbes!!! Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Holy smokes, she went on and on just (barely) answering that first question. As for the bible thing... whatever. Lots of people are religious. She doesnt strike me as someone who is a hardcore bible thumper so I couldnt care less. She strikes me more and more as very manipulative and fake. Almost Carol James fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Being a Christian isn't the definition of a good person. This is where most Atheists get wrong (and most Christians too). The difference between a Christians and atheists, is that Christians have embraced that we are bad. Christians acknowledge that no matter how hard we try, we can't attain a label of "righteousness". We are sinful and rotten people inside. Christians acknowledge this and put our faith in Jesus Christ. We follow his teaching and lifestyle worship. An atheist, well I don't know what your particular beliefs are, but you think you're good? Good to according to what? Your friend? Your neighbour? What does good mean? I tell you one thing. No human being is righteous. Only God can make us righteous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 My opinion is that she's a politician who is full of crap. She doesn't use the bible any more than I use hair products however the for stage she was on that is the face she needed to put forward. Also whichever one of you got Dajusta started on morality you should give yourself 10 lashes. It's like listening to a 12 year old try to talk about physics. They have no god damn clue what they're talking about and they're too old for it to be cute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I'll tell YOU one thing...I don't know where you get your information on atheists...but we don't have any "particular set of beliefs", that would be religion's job. And second of all, God didn't make you and your christian ilk righteous...he made you incredibly self-righteous...for you to imply at all that we as atheists NEED approval or someone to tell us we are "good" is really insulting to me. You don't NEED to have to follow vague rules from a book teaching Bronze Age philosophies to be "Good" "Good" comes from your heart, your actions...the compassion you feel for your fellow man...and I know an organization FULL of atheists that qualify for "good" based on that definition. So, based on the sentence I have highlighted...you have contradicted your first sentence, and are implying because we don't have a "moral code" telling us we're "good" that we are not "righteous"? We fight for equality, true justice, and against things we consider to be infringing on our rights as humans, and if that includes taking your religion down, man...then so be it. We fight for what is "right" in our eyes...so actually that DOES make us "righteous". Have a nice day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 My opinion is that she's a politician who is full of crap. She doesn't use the bible any more than I use hair products however the for stage she was on that is the face she needed to put forward. Also whichever one of you got Dajusta started on morality you should give yourself 10 lashes. It's like listening to a 12 year old try to talk about physics. They have no god damn clue what they're talking about and they're too old for it to be cute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I'm not saying Christianity makes me righteous more than anyone else. If you got that vibe, I apologize. What I meant to say is, without a belief structure, how did you get to the conclusion that your actions are right? By what standard? You said you do right in your own eyes You know with that kind of reasoning everyone will do something different, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Using religious texts to decide on secular matters is very much pushing one's religious beliefs on the rest of society. If I, for example, was a devout Jewish Premier who had a decision to make about an issue surrounding swine flu management, and I decided to base a legislative decision to ban all pork products from B.C whether domestically grown or sourced from elsewhere, and I did so after consulting the Torah or whatever scripture that outlaws pork as an 'unclean' animal. Then I just made a secular decision based on religious inspiration that now will affect the non-Jewish constituents who raise pigs on their farms, as well as the bacon-loving constituency of B.C. You keep using the word 'ignorance' or 'ignorant', yet you still have been able to answer, how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Without a belief structure...hmm...I guess I just...I dunno...Used my BRAIN to figure it out on my own??? Do you need a set of beliefs to help you decide not to touch a burning stove? No...you do it once, you burn yourself, you make a mental note not to do that again...It's called deductive reasoning...and you don't need a belief system for that, you need to know how to observe situations and take note of the consequences for your own actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 But she isn't doing things like that! Nobody is saying things like that in your example don't happen, or couldn't happen, but as of now they are not happening. The fact is, she has not made any decisions that you can trace back to having been made because she consulted the Bible. If you can't tell which decisions she consulted the Bible for, then why does it matter? And like I said before, she probably doesn't even consult the Bible. She is probably just trying to pull in a few more votes from conservatives. I've said numerous times how you're displaying your ignorance. If you really can't see it still, then you are simply affirming my accusation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Sir, think about what you are saying. The book of Judges carefully examines the human heart in a world where everyone did right in their own eye exactly like what you said. The outcome is not pretty. I don't have to do much to refute your claims of personal righteousness as an ethical worldview because societal law is enough evidence for that. Do you abide by societal laws? Do you think they benefit society? If you do, then you've already conceded that humanity would be worse off without some sort of moral principle and structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 And here you are citing biblical references to make your point...that didn't take long...and no...I really don't think societal laws benefit society, any more than I think tired, antiquated morality clauses and religious beliefs benefit society...I think you're retarding any progress this society should be attempting to make, and you should step aside, stop obstructing the evolution of the human brain, and while you're at it, your "houses of worship" (nearly heaved when I typed that) need to start paying property taxes like everyone else in this "society" and THEN you can start lecturing me or anyone else on morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobble Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 When I find myself in crisis and need to make critical decisions that affect many other people, I always like to turn to Harry Potter for guidance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 So if God's word is the definition of morality, then committing genocide would be moral if he commanded it, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Okay, I really hope you know the gravity of your statement. Are you really saying that without societal laws humanity would be similar or better than it is today? Y/N Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 Asserting that God is righteous puts an identity on what those things are. What is righteous? Well we look at God's character. He is justice, mercy, gracious, loving.. all these things are what we consider moral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.