Morality vs. Legalism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-08-2015, 02:15 AM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(03-08-2015 06:10 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-08-2015 11:11 PM)Stevil Wrote:  The problem I have is when people's expectations are that laws ought to be reflective of their moral beliefs.

Why not be more explicit here? You have a problem when people push laws for any other reason than for the sake of survival. Wouldn't that be more accurate?

Religious morality already promises you an eternal reward if you do it right. What I have a problem with is when people push their morals on others who do not subscribe to them. Obviously I recognise that some sort of social contract is necessary for society to function, hence *laws*, which do not have a moral basis but are for the benefit of society as a whole (not necessarily just survival).

If you can show that your religious based laws are better for society as a whole, *then* you can push for their adoption, but if I don't believe in Jesus, don't tell me the reason I can't look at porn (for example) is because Jesus disapproves. You'll have to find a non-Jesus reason to ban porn. Further, even if you do find such a reason, you'll have to prove that it is indeed a proper evidence based argument, and not some cloak for your religious agenda.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
06-08-2015, 06:31 AM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(06-08-2015 02:15 AM)morondog Wrote:  Religious morality already promises you an eternal reward if you do it right.

Not really, but okay.

Quote:What I have a problem with is when people push their morals on others who do not subscribe to them. Obviously I recognise that some sort of social contract is necessary for society to function, hence *laws*, which do not have a moral basis but are for the benefit of society as a whole (not necessarily just survival).

Do you mean push in a political/legal sense? That you take issue when this morality is pushed into creating laws prohibiting certain things, like banning porn? Or opposing gay marriage?

Quote:If you can show that your religious based laws are better for society as a whole, *then* you can push for their adoption, but if I don't believe in Jesus, don't tell me the reason I can't look at porn (for example) is because Jesus disapproves. You'll have to find a non-Jesus reason to ban porn. Further, even if you do find such a reason, you'll have to prove that it is indeed a proper evidence based argument, and not some cloak for your religious agenda.

I can think watching porn is wrong, yet be opposed to making it illegal to watch, just like gambling, or a variety of other things which I'd consider immoral, but not in support of any legal prohibitions against it. Cheating on your wife might be immoral, but I'm not particularly in support of making it illegal.

I'm guessing you only take issue, when laws are being pushed for?

If so, I do have a question. If this were the case it's not so much laws being pushed for, for religious reasons, but for reasons that you don't deem as beneficial to society? That you would also be opposed to what Matt would suggest, that he supports certain laws because of his likes and dislikes?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2015, 06:55 AM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(06-08-2015 06:31 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 02:15 AM)morondog Wrote:  Religious morality already promises you an eternal reward if you do it right.

Not really, but okay.
My point is, a lot of religious people, maybe not you in which case kudos to you, see e.g. a law criminalising homosexuality as a good thing. But we who are not religious have no reason to be bound by religion based laws, and again, those who are religious but of a different religion have no reason to be bound by your religion's morality. If you are religious, you can *still* follow your morality without needing to impose it on others who do not follow your religion.

Quote:Do you mean push in a political/legal sense? That you take issue when this morality is pushed into creating laws prohibiting certain things, like banning porn? Or opposing gay marriage?
Correct.

Quote:I can think watching porn is wrong, yet be opposed to making it illegal to watch, just like gambling, or a variety of other things which I'd consider immoral, but not in support of any legal prohibitions against it. Cheating on your wife might be immoral, but I'm not particularly in support of making it illegal.
OK, so you get it...

Quote:If so, I do have a question. If this were the case it's not so much laws being pushed for, for religious reasons, but for reasons that you don't deem as beneficial to society? That you would also be opposed to what Matt would suggest, that he supports certain laws because of his likes and dislikes?
Of course. Some people are motivated by self interest, like presidents who push for laws extending their terms of office - something which happens a lot in Africa. Some people would like to be able to log or mine indiscriminately and will lobby for laws making this easy for them. In the end, you have to have some mechanism for society to decide which laws are good or bad, and you also want to respect some kind of fairness principle, meaning that people get to vote on stuff too...

It gets complex, because say for example the entire UK converts to Judaism, is it then fine that they vote that Muslims must pay extra taxes? So personally I feel that things like a bill of rights and a constitution must take precedence over all other laws and laws which conflict with the same must be discarded, legal principles like the idea that laws can't be back-dated (you can't make a law that making porn is illegal and then prosecute people for making porn before the law was passed) must be respected.

So ja, it does almost come down to likes and dislikes in the end because someone who's sufficiently charismatic can win support for their particular views to take hold, but in an ideal world (ideal in my opinion) the likes and dislikes of a particular person would not be factored into what became law, purely some kind of objective measure of the benefit to society would be the standard.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
06-08-2015, 10:01 AM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(05-08-2015 03:08 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 02:32 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I'm not even really trying to argue with you here. I'm just curious about how you define these distinctions.
I tried to go down this path but noone wanted to define morality. They like it to be unspoken, something for them to decide at the time based on their "opinion".

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-landscape

Thanks, Stevil. We born agains tend to note this tendency of most or many but not all atheists. If we find someone guilty of premeditated murder, should we jail them if we "feel like it at the time"? Ridiculous to not have an objective set of real-world morals.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2015, 10:06 AM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(06-08-2015 10:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 03:08 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I tried to go down this path but noone wanted to define morality. They like it to be unspoken, something for them to decide at the time based on their "opinion".

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-landscape

Thanks, Stevil. We born agains tend to note this tendency of most or many but not all atheists. If we find someone guilty of premeditated murder, should we jail them if we "feel like it at the time"? Ridiculous to not have an objective set of real-world morals.

Clearly you should rather stone them.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 12:21 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(06-08-2015 10:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 10:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Thanks, Stevil. We born agains tend to note this tendency of most or many but not all atheists. If we find someone guilty of premeditated murder, should we jail them if we "feel like it at the time"? Ridiculous to not have an objective set of real-world morals.

Clearly you should rather stone them.

Ah, but if I were to stone them I should do so objectively.

...Or do you think if we find someone guilty of premeditated crime, we should exonerate them because "we feel like doing so"...?

Or will you be consistent and agree with Mr. Hitchens that substitutionary atonement is disgusting and that criminals should pay for their own crimes?

Please be more consistent in the future.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 02:19 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(07-08-2015 12:21 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 10:06 AM)morondog Wrote:  Clearly you should rather stone them.

Ah, but if I were to stone them I should do so objectively.

...Or do you think if we find someone guilty of premeditated crime, we should exonerate them because "we feel like doing so"...?
It's a shame that there isn't a god who can make these judgements and exact out perfect justice.
Seems us human's are left to our own devices with imperfect courts and inconsistent rulings and sentences.

But then again, in mature countries we are only interested in making society safe rather than making official moral judgements.
Some Arab countries have the Moral police, I don't know why they can't leave justice upto the all powerful, all knowing god?

It seems to me that these religious folk find their god to be impodent and lacking absent hence they take matters into their own imperfect hands.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
07-08-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(05-08-2015 03:08 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 02:32 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I'm not even really trying to argue with you here. I'm just curious about how you define these distinctions.
I tried to go down this path but noone wanted to define morality. They like it to be unspoken, something for them to decide at the time based on their "opinion".

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-landscape

That is a very... interesting recollection of that conversation.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 03:47 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(06-08-2015 10:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 03:08 PM)Stevil Wrote:  I tried to go down this path but noone wanted to define morality. They like it to be unspoken, something for them to decide at the time based on their "opinion".

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-landscape

Thanks, Stevil. We born agains tend to note this tendency of most or many but not all atheists. If we find someone guilty of premeditated murder, should we jail them if we "feel like it at the time"? Ridiculous to not have an objective set of real-world morals.

Defining a set of moral codes or values does not make them objective.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2015, 04:52 PM
RE: Morality vs. Legalism
(07-08-2015 03:47 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(06-08-2015 10:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Thanks, Stevil. We born agains tend to note this tendency of most or many but not all atheists. If we find someone guilty of premeditated murder, should we jail them if we "feel like it at the time"? Ridiculous to not have an objective set of real-world morals.

Defining a set of moral codes or values does not make them objective.

I think you're missing the key, there, Chas.

Obviously Q's beliefs are the objective ones, because he feels like they are.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: