[spunkets]

"Who says it is wrong to violate someone's life? You? Sorry. You don't choose the rules for society in your world."

Your respect for the rights of others is noted.

"Society's conventions choose the rules."

No. The rules either involve the respect for the life, sovereignty of will and the rights of others, or there is arbitrary authoritarian rule by some through deceit and coercion. There is no other possibility.

"If I am in Indonesia in a radical Muslim community, they believe it is right to take your life and will enter into bold celebrations as they parade your lifeless head around their community."

Rule by a few, by deceit and coecion.

'The community actually has determined, by their convention, that having you dead is what's right for them."

Others simply jail their victims. Same thing, different crowd of clowns and buffoons.

"You have no basis to say they are wrong. Right and wrong can not exist in your world. Only opinion. "

My basis was given above. The only other choice is arbitrary authoritarian rule by some, using the methods of deceit and coercion.

"You may not like it that you are being tortured and killed, but you can not say it is wrong."

I'll say whatever I want and I'll also fight them.

"Society's convention already dictated that it was okay."

I suppose they justified it with a vote. Now where have i seen that before? ...

[Blogger]

"Who says it is wrong to violate someone's life? You? Sorry. You don't choose the rules for society in your world." Your respect for the rights of others is noted.

Cute. You know precisely what I mean. If not, read on.
"Society's conventions choose the rules."
No. The rules either involve the respect for the life, sovereignty of will and the rights of others, or there is arbitrary authoritarian rule by some through deceit and coercion. There is no other possibility.
But WHO determines what respects life? I mean, look in our own society. We have had over 40 million babies killed in the womb. A large number of folks in our society say that they weren't killing a life. You may say that they are. What makes your view any better than theirs? Convention? Some moral code? Who decided the moral code? Society has made baby-killing legal. On what basis can you possibly say society is wrong? Your grandiose idea about respecting life? They already determined that this wasn't a life. On what philosophical/theological/any-thing-alogical grounds can you possibly say that they are wrong? It is merely your opinion - which is worth no more than anyone else.

Also, this sovereignty of will stuff. Do they not have free will in your world? Can than not determine that baby killing or Spunkets decapitation is really okay? If not, the will is not sovereign but is captive to some unknown rule imposed by whom?

"If I am in Indonesia in a radical Muslim community, they believe it is right to take your life and will enter into bold celebrations as they parade your lifeless head around their community."

Rule by a few, by deceit and coecion.
You obviously know very little about Indonesia. Killing Christians is a noble thing for many (not just a few). Deceipt? Perhaps? But who determines that it is deceptive that killing Christians isn't really a good thing for the preservation of society?

'The community actually has determined, by their convention, that having you dead is what's right for them."

Others simply jail their victims. Same thing, different crowd of clowns and buffoons.
By what right do you call them clowns and buffoons? By your "moral code" which in reality is what is right in spunkets eyes. What makes spunkets opinions any greater than the Saudi jihadists? It is your opinion or your societies opinion. You have Zero grounds to say right and wrong. You can only say "like" or "dislike".

"You have no basis to say they are wrong. Right and wrong can not exist in your world. Only opinion. "

My basis was given above. The only other choice is arbitrary authoritarian rule by some, using the methods of deceit and coercion.

What says deceipt and coercion are wrong? You can only say you don't like them, not that they are wrong.

"You may not like it that you are being tortured and killed, but you can not say it is wrong."

I'll say whatever I want and I'll also fight them.
And well you may. And Osama will say to you that you are a fool and that you have no right to arbitrarily rule over his sovereisn will. And as he kills you, his people will rejoice. How can you say they were wrong. It was merely your opinion. "Society's convention already dictated that it was okay."

I suppose they justified it with a vote. Now where have i seen that before? ...
Lots of places. But in order to make your claims to a moral code, you have to have something above human opinion that a)Life is sacred. b)Individual rights are to respected. c)Right and wrong do OBJECTIVELY exist. The ONLY way that this is possible is if there is a Moral LAWGIVER who is above human opinion. It MUST be above human opinion for it must be objective if you are to conclude that right and wrong really exist. Fight all you want. You will be fighting for an opinion, not an objective truth. And, knowing the natural tendency towards evil on the part of humanity, you will lose.