Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who's More Moral?
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 121 of 125 (393871)
04-08-2007 4:03 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by anastasia
04-06-2007 2:36 PM


Re: For important things, show rather than accept
Well, I don't think that, for the most part, people follow a religious moral without personal conviction of its validity.
most of the time, its solely because they were taught it at some point
In other words, women in and out of religion can feel abortion is wrong based on what their body tells them.
people say this but i'm of the belief that their upbringing and society has more to do with it than some bodyly warning
Some people can stay away from things based on trust of another person's rendition of a dusty old book, but there are not too many morals that we have to just accept on faith.
tell that to the gay community, outside of a dusty ol' book, the anti-gay folks have nothing, other than the icky factor
If someone told me that I can only wash my car once a month and with distilled water, I could question that! if there is no reason behind it. I have found that most religious morals have some reason behind them that are not empirical per se, but can still be shown sufficiently to me to allow for belief in their worth.
well if you use such a weak example sure you can argue it, but you didn't grow up being taught this was the right way of washing your car all your life.
now lets see, lets take for example the whole thing about pork with jewish people, now people have been trying to figure out why they condemned the eating of pork, some wonder if its because of disease, or something along that line
to me it seems like any of the laws in the OT, basically because the people around them did it, it was considered wrong, thats it!
the people who wrote the bible up to jesuses time considered anyone who practiced anything from another religion wrong, even if it worked and made sense.
look at the law about cutting hair, only reason its there? because the egyptians would shave their heads
This is as I said above. I don't find that it is true in many cases if at all. God says keep holy the Sabbath. There are still many reasons why a religious person would benefit from doing this apart from what God says.
like what? sabbath means day of rest, a lot of christians don't do this, go to walmart on any sunday, tons of church goers are there buying stuff, thats not resting.
christians have no clue anymore what keeping the sabbath means, in fact they don't even have the day right
There are not so many reasons for a secular person to not work on Sunday or to attend church. But still this 'moral' is capable of being shown to Christians as 'good'.
but 99% of christians don't even follow this 'moral'
saterday is the sabbath after all
sunday was a worship day for pagan converts to christianity.
I am not going to get uptight about the 'before marriage' part. It is more about having sex without commitment. You I am sure can see that this would be immoral if a child will not be cared for as a result
what about those who don't care about marriage though? what if they love eachother so much but don't view marriage as anything more than an outmoded system?
are they any less committed?
Birth control does not make this problem disappear entirely. It is not fool proof, not safe for all women, not proven safe long term. There have been many bad varieties that had consequences to the fertility of female children. Then, of course, there is still that question of whether it is murder.
like what? even from a bit of reading about the generic ones theres nothing like you are discribing, sounds more like the minority, which happens, but its not a cause for alarm
as for abortion being murder, it is legal, so no it is not murder, please go look what murder is before calling abortion murder
There is still that question of whether sex SHOULD be used for fun. You will find that to some people, it is very important to save sexual activity for a commited relationship even for mental reasons. So yes, it is not empirical either way IMO, it depends on the individual's convictions. I don't think that people will practice abstinance without some sort of belief in its validity. (not just a God says so)
why not, it is fun! if sex isn't fun people wouldn't have sex very much.
sorry but most of the time those people who are saving themselves base it on thier religious beliefs, or some ingrained belief, theres no reasoned point to saving yourself for some unknown
people practice abstinance for a number of reasons, most of them based from religious reasons, if not all of them.
why do you say god said so is not a valid reason? thats the biggest reason for 90% of christians i've found

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by anastasia, posted 04-06-2007 2:36 PM anastasia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by anastasia, posted 04-09-2007 7:01 PM ReverendDG has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024