A Singaporean man was executed for importing over 1kg of cannabis, highlighting the nation's strict drug laws and capital punishment policy. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.
If objective morality isn’t real, the only reason you’ll have to condemn this is that it goes against your culture. Which is cultural supremacy to some degree
Objective morality isn’t real. If it were, you’d be able to prove it.
And it’s difficult to argue, coming from a deeply red area of the US that I’m coming from a culture that vilifies the death penalty.
The closest you’ll ever get to an objective moral truth is that you’re free to believe any fucking thing you want, but your rights stop at you. Imposing your beliefs on another living being is supremacy.
If God is real, then Objective Morality is real. If white society wishes to secularise, they have to realise that they no longer have a justification to tell other cultures what to do.
How do you define cruelty without God being real? How can you know for sure that God is apathetic or ignorant?
If there is no basis for objective morality at all, we have no grounds to condemn other cultures for actions that go against our culture. I would condemn cruelty happening abroad because I believe everyone is made in the image of God, and God’s commandment for all of Humanity was to love one and other. If God isn’t real, then why should I care what happens in other countries, if the only morality I have is based on my white, western culture?
If there is no God, humans are just lumps of cells anyway, not too far removed from plants and animals. So why would it be my business what is going on abroad?
Pretty simply, do you require help knowing the difference between what is cruel and what is not? You might need psychiatric help my guy
How can you know for sure that God is apathetic or ignorant?
Because of the suffering of innocents. Any all powerful creature that allows suffering on the scale we are familiar with either doesn’t know about it, and is thus ignorant, or doesn’t care, and is thus apathetic. Perhaps this creature both knows and cares, in which case it is either powerless to stop it, and therefore not all powerful, or it is a cruel being, and not one by which to set your moral compass.
If there is no basis for objective morality at all,
There isn’t. Morality is a supposition.
we have no grounds to condemn other cultures for actions that go against our culture.
This relies on a number of assumptions which are mostly wrong. Am I condemning an entire culture or the actions of a few people? Do the people of that culture think this is a good idea? Are there members of that group that condemn this? Are those members represented? Is the practice being condemned harmful?
I would condemn cruelty happening abroad because I believe everyone is made in the image of God, and God’s commandment for all of Humanity was to love one and other. If God isn’t real, then why should I care what happens in other countries, if the only morality I have is based on my white, western culture?
So you require someone else to tell you what is right and what is not? Are you incapable of independent thought? Are you devoid of compassion and empathy?
An empathetic person would abhor the suffering of others without divine intervention.
Should God appear to you and demand you sacrifice your eldest son, would you begin sharpening your knife?
If there is no God, humans are just lumps of cells anyway, not too far removed from plants and animals.
We are not removed greatly from animals no. We are animals. We’re pretty far removed from plants though.
So why would it be my business what is going on abroad
Empathy my guy. I was kind of kidding before but now I’m actually concerned you lack basic emotional skills that are natural and innate to most people. That’s definitionally psychopathy, you might want to look in to that.
Pretty simply, do you require help knowing the difference between what is cruel and what is not?
Morality is a supposition
No, because we inherited that knowledge from Adam. The fact that we can tell the difference seems to show that an objective morality exists - this includes things such as taking care of elders and avoiding animal cruelty, something which can’t be explained with evolutionary “survival of the fittest”
Because of the suffering of innocents. Any all powerful creature that allows suffering on the scale we are familiar with either doesn’t know about it, and is thus ignorant, or doesn’t care, and is thus apathetic. Perhaps this creature both knows and cares, in which case it is either powerless to stop it, and therefore not all powerful, or it is a cruel being, and not one by which to set your moral compass.
The suffering is generally called by other people most of the time, and man-made factors. Also, can anyone truly be counted innocent? Humans rebel against authority from the earliesr possible age, often before even their first birthday. Likewise, if humans aren’t innocent, then stopping that suffering would mean immediately wiping out every single one of us. God promises eternal rest where there will be no suffering or crying - God is patient and gives us a fair chance, and then judges us. At that point, the idea of God not caring doesn’t work either- God literally became incarnate as a Human and submitted Himself to death, bearing the punishment for sins. He isn’t uncaring - He’s extremely merciful and doesn’t expect to be “won over” with good deeds.
This relies on a number of assumptions which are mostly wrong. Am I condemning an entire culture or the actions of a few people? Do the people of that culture think this is a good idea? Are there members of that group that condemn this? Are those members represented? Is the practice being condemned harmful?
What if the majority of them were in favour?
So you require someone else to tell you what is right and what is not? Are you incapable of independent thought? Are you devoid of compassion and empathy?
Without God, Human morality can be corrupted, such as chattel slavery or the holocaust.
Should God appear to you and demand you sacrifice your eldest son, would you begin sharpening your knife?
I don’t worship a God who would require me to sacrifice my eldest son, so that question isn’t relevant.
If objective morality isn’t real, the only reason you’ll have to condemn this is that it goes against your culture. Which is cultural supremacy to some degree
Objective morality isn’t real. If it were, you’d be able to prove it.
And it’s difficult to argue, coming from a deeply red area of the US that I’m coming from a culture that vilifies the death penalty.
The closest you’ll ever get to an objective moral truth is that you’re free to believe any fucking thing you want, but your rights stop at you. Imposing your beliefs on another living being is supremacy.
If God is real, then Objective Morality is real. If white society wishes to secularise, they have to realise that they no longer have a justification to tell other cultures what to do.
Ok.
God isn’t real. If a being of infinite power does exist, it is apathetic, ignorant, or cruel.
If the source of your objective morality is a fairy tale, you have no basis for claiming your morality is objective, let alone accurate.
How do you define cruelty without God being real? How can you know for sure that God is apathetic or ignorant?
If there is no basis for objective morality at all, we have no grounds to condemn other cultures for actions that go against our culture. I would condemn cruelty happening abroad because I believe everyone is made in the image of God, and God’s commandment for all of Humanity was to love one and other. If God isn’t real, then why should I care what happens in other countries, if the only morality I have is based on my white, western culture?
If there is no God, humans are just lumps of cells anyway, not too far removed from plants and animals. So why would it be my business what is going on abroad?
Pretty simply, do you require help knowing the difference between what is cruel and what is not? You might need psychiatric help my guy
Because of the suffering of innocents. Any all powerful creature that allows suffering on the scale we are familiar with either doesn’t know about it, and is thus ignorant, or doesn’t care, and is thus apathetic. Perhaps this creature both knows and cares, in which case it is either powerless to stop it, and therefore not all powerful, or it is a cruel being, and not one by which to set your moral compass.
There isn’t. Morality is a supposition.
This relies on a number of assumptions which are mostly wrong. Am I condemning an entire culture or the actions of a few people? Do the people of that culture think this is a good idea? Are there members of that group that condemn this? Are those members represented? Is the practice being condemned harmful?
So you require someone else to tell you what is right and what is not? Are you incapable of independent thought? Are you devoid of compassion and empathy?
An empathetic person would abhor the suffering of others without divine intervention.
Should God appear to you and demand you sacrifice your eldest son, would you begin sharpening your knife?
We are not removed greatly from animals no. We are animals. We’re pretty far removed from plants though.
Empathy my guy. I was kind of kidding before but now I’m actually concerned you lack basic emotional skills that are natural and innate to most people. That’s definitionally psychopathy, you might want to look in to that.
No, because we inherited that knowledge from Adam. The fact that we can tell the difference seems to show that an objective morality exists - this includes things such as taking care of elders and avoiding animal cruelty, something which can’t be explained with evolutionary “survival of the fittest”
The suffering is generally called by other people most of the time, and man-made factors. Also, can anyone truly be counted innocent? Humans rebel against authority from the earliesr possible age, often before even their first birthday. Likewise, if humans aren’t innocent, then stopping that suffering would mean immediately wiping out every single one of us. God promises eternal rest where there will be no suffering or crying - God is patient and gives us a fair chance, and then judges us. At that point, the idea of God not caring doesn’t work either- God literally became incarnate as a Human and submitted Himself to death, bearing the punishment for sins. He isn’t uncaring - He’s extremely merciful and doesn’t expect to be “won over” with good deeds.
What if the majority of them were in favour?
Without God, Human morality can be corrupted, such as chattel slavery or the holocaust.
I don’t worship a God who would require me to sacrifice my eldest son, so that question isn’t relevant.