Joined: April 2007
|Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 02 2008,21:49)|
and that morality is subjective, relative and certainly not absolute.
|Quote (Ftk @ Jan. 02 2008,20:26)|
|Quote (Assassinator @ Jan. 02 2008,14:18)|
|If the animal finds no trouble in it: what's the matter? Hell, dogs sometimes start humping people out of themselfs, they start.|
Why would I condemn such an act, if no one is getting hurt.
Exactly...why condemn it? That's the point. Sex in any fashion is okay just as long as the other person, animal, brother, sister, child, or adult is okay with it. In fact, there is really no need for marriage either. Kids don't need the influence of both a father and a mother. We already know they get along fine with 2 mother's or 2 father's or a single of each.
So, let's set up a huge orgy tonight and have a ball!! I can't imagine it would hurt any of us (unless Rich gets out the whips).
MORAL RELATIVISM.... yahoo!
|The point of this post being to highlight the assumed problems with moral relativism, I assume?|
Of course, this rather misses the point of moral relativism. There is no absolute morality, therefore THE MAJORITY MORALITY WE ARE BROUGHT UP IN HOLDS SWAY. There is, in our shared culture (by our I'm including the majority of the industrialised world) the opinion it's wrong to kill, steal or use child labour (although this is somehow overlooked if the labour takes place in non industrialised or industrialising areas).
Similarly, for whatever reason (and I can think of many), it is seen as "immoral" for people to have sex with animals. However, that does not preclude the central point that just because there are numerous reasons for not doing something, and that the vast majority of people in the world would condemn it, that does not make it an absolute pronouncement.
The universe as a whole (according to moral relativism) has no opinion of any act, right or wrong, because there is nothing in the universe TO have an opinion, so we are left with the fickle opinions of people. An arrangement I am happy with.
EDITS:God damn it. Repeated edits because I failed to get this post right first time, and it STILL isn't correct.
But you get the general impression.
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.
You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK
Roddenberry is my God.