Morality: Who Needs God?

AISH ^ | N/A | by Rabbi Nechemia Coopersmith

[steve-b]

You are confusing the existence of God with belief in the existence of God. They are not the same thing.

I am reminded of the joke about a visitor who noticed a horseshoe nailed above Niels Bohr's door. He asked, "Surely a great scientist such as yourself doesn't believe in that sort of silly superstition?"

Bohr replied, "Of course I don't believe in such nonsense. However, I have been informed that it will bring good luck whether I believe in it or not."

[johnb838]

The inquisitors were RIGHT! They were simply fighting the same battle we are today - resistance to imperial islamic supremacism. That they've been spun into historical demons is not their fault.

[HumanaeVitae]

No, steve, you're ludicrous.

I've defeated you like ten times in debates here on FR, and I have no need to do so again.

See post #80 and the link. It's a link to the Ludwig Von Mises institute and a complete demolition of Rand in a more comprehensive manner.

I don't have time to defeat you any longer. You've on ignore.

[HumanaeVitae]

Well, you may get your wish. Technology is getting harder and harder to control.

[OWK]

I've already answered your questions in 164 and 181.

That wasn't an answer at all. It was avoidance.

So how do we tell when one is commiting murder under the libertarian dogma?

By determining whether or not the inidividual who was killed, initiated physical force against the one who killed.. If not... then murder.

How do we separate those who are really responding to an initiation of force, from those who are just saying that? By an objective review of the facts.

Let's apply it to the Joshua question. Joshua slit the throats of women and children who did not pose him any harm, and who did not initiate physical force against him.

Hence Joshua's actions were murder.

[Nix 2]

How very chauvinistic of you. LOL.
So therefore, should your wife decide to sleep with someone other than you without force or fraud, surely you would forgive her because she clearly wouldn't mind if you did the same? All things being relatively consistent, of course.

[laredo44]

Some humans have the notion that God approves of murdering infidels and beating women who expose their faces, so we need a better way to evaluate moral claims than "because God says so".

How about this? You can either a) choose to be beaten for exposing your face, b) beat those with exposed faces, c) be neither beater nor beaten, or d) have no opinion. While we may have some who choose options b) or d), it is highly doubtful anyone would choose a). Since we can achieve universal agreement, option a) is morally wrong.

[OWK]

The inquisitors were RIGHT! They were simply fighting the same battle we are today - resistance to imperial islamic supremacism. That they've been spun into historical demons is not their fault.

Ah yes... rip the flesh off the backs of living men, in an effort to help them confess their love of Jesus.

Fightin the good fight...

[HumanaeVitae]

"One of the greats of our time (and a favorite of mine) was Albert Einstein...a direct quote:"

Einstein was a socialist, you know.

[steve-b]

And Osama could (if he were still alive) cite chapter and verse from (what he asserts to be) the word of God to prove that his actions were not "murder". What of it?

[HumanaeVitae]

Ah yes... rip the flesh off the backs of living men, in an effort to help them confess their love of Jesus.

Apparently you don't realize that your ideology caused the Holocaust (neo-pagan moral relativism).

[laredo44]

Since we can achieve universal agreement, option a) is morally wrong.

Apologies, meant to say beating someone for an exposed face is morally wrong.

[HumanaeVitae]

Sorry, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to address the point: Some humans have the notion that God approves of murdering infidels and beating women who expose their faces, so we need a better way to evaluate moral claims than "because God says so".

Matthew 22: 36-41

Sometimes steve, I don't know if you're Faye Raye or the biplanes.

[steve-b]

God obviously doesn't define murder in those terms.

God thinks like Bill Clinton?

[Equality 7-2521]

If we didn't have a prior contractual obligation not to sleep with other people... lol.

Seriously, I'm not actually married but I'm sure you see my point. The vast majority of rational people don't want their spouses to cheat on them. The vast majority of rational people don't want to be murdered. And the vast majority of rational people do not want to be stolen from.

Don't misconstrue this to mean that majorities determine morality. The people who want to be murdered, robbed, raped, and cheated on are in such a very small minority that I believe we can safely assume that they have some type of personality disorder or psychological problem.

[HumanaeVitae]

...they figure out the principles of morality for themselves.

Which is impossible, per the ought-is perplex.

[OWK]

Apparently you don't realize that your ideology caused the Holocaust (neo-pagan moral relativism).

My moral code prohibits the initiation of force or fraud.

It is absolute.

Please explain how this could account for the holocaust.

[Daus]

Well, you may get your wish. Technology is getting harder and harder to control.

And last time I checked, this new found access to technology was being brandished in the name of god, not in the name of a 'personal' moral code.

There is more to fear from a flawed interpertation of a divine moral code, than from a 'pure' libertarian.

[f.Christian]

Libertarian matrix ... bubbles --- balloons --- clowns !

[f.Christian]

Fun house mirrors --- logic ---plays // skits --- thrills ...

Libertarian matrix ... bubbles --- balloons --- clowns !