[jlogajan]

it would be absurd for anyone to argue that the state shouldn't legislate against murder because a prohibition against murder exists in almost every religion in almost all places and times.

It isn't "the state." Freedom loving individuals don't want to be murdered. They jointly agree to a system of self-protection. It has nothing to do with "religion." It is self-survival.

[Quix]

Christ said that anger in our hearts is = to murder.

Sooner or later, if we are angry long enough with someone, we will murder something about or connected with them even if it is "only" the relationship; their reputation etc.

I think your point about it being survival only is a mostly hollow one. Folks don't think that far ahead when the pleasure of the moment beckons. . . and less so when their pride, egos etc. are involved.

[aruanan]

It isn't "the state." Freedom loving individuals don't want to be murdered. They jointly agree to a system of self-protection. It has nothing to do with "religion." It is self-survival.

He's talking about "legislation"; therefore, it is "the state". Besides, you entirely missed the point of what I said about virtually all types of morality being found within the province of one or another religion. I was saying that just because some moral precept is also found in one or another system of religious morality, this doesn't make that precept an example of "religious morality" to be avoided as a subject of legislation, either pro or con.