[Sir Francis Dashwood]

That’s only true for those who hold that morality is absolute. Or if not absolute, flexible only to a certain extent. On the other hand, there are many of us who are perfectly arbitrary in our moral choices, who pull haphazardly from personal opinion, tradition, or what-have-you. Wouldn’t say they rely on any higher power, only a mixture of their own reason and accident.

Back to Hobbes again...

"...these are also called images, not for the resemblance of any corporeal thing, but for the resemblance of some phantastical inhabitants of the brain of the maker."

---

Morality is about Force. Government is about Force.

The only thing that makes man civilized is the ability for the weakest to kill the strongest.

So long as there is someone willing to pay, there will always be someone willing to collect...

The issue for most has now become who holds the collection plate in their temples for the god of communism or the gods of religion.

There is no morality without one singular source defining what morality is.

Plato’s Euthyphro is a great illustration.

Socrates advanced the argument to Euthyphro that, piety to the gods, who all want conflicting devotions and/or actions from humans, is impossible. (Socrates exposed the pagan esoteric sophistry.)

Likewise, morals are such a construction of idols used by the Left as a rationale for them to demand compliance to their wishes in politics, which most often are a skewed mess of fallacies in logic. Morals are a deceptive replacement for the avoidance of sin.

Today, "morals" are defined by a quasi-religious pagan philosophy based on esoteric hobgoblins. A greater number of "atheists" and "pagans" adopt the same hackneyed tenets of a false Judaic-Christian ideal (golden calf). They also subscribe to the Judaic fetishism of "sin," but will fight to their death in denial of it. Most of them are so wrapped up in their own polemics that they have become nothing more than pathetic anti-Christians with the same false hypocritical philosophy. They just slap a new label on it hoping nobody will notice - - they replace the idea of "avoiding sin" with "morals."

Morality and all of its associated concepts are from the belief some higher power defines what is correct in human behavior.

[Tublecane]

“Morals are a deceptive replacement for the avoidance of sin.”

How would anyone ever know what constituted “sin” if they themselves had not discovered it, or if they had been told by other men? That’s my problem. I’d like to ascribe to an absolute morality, but have no basis on which to decide. That’s a problem for me in much of life. I’m like a dog between two bowls of food that starves to death instead of eating one or the other.