Morality Decreasing With Time?

With the economy based on modern industrial capitalism, we see a number of phenomena:One is that the family now becomes unnecessary. In the good old days, the family was the basic unit of economic production; life centered on the homestead, all members of the family contributed to the production on the homestead. Now the adults have separate jobs outside the home, children have no production value (and, in fact, are a drain on resources), pensions take the place of the children's care of the old folk, and children are also educated outside the home, and most if not all recreational activities take place outside the home. Also, most recreation are individual activities, or the members of the family engage in recreational activities with people outside the family.The second thing is that the mode of living in an industrial capitalist society are very different than in the more agricultural/small town societies of yore. That means that people had to cope by finding new ways of surviving in the society, which means that mores had to change with the times. Furthermore, with its emphasis on personal advancement and person consumption, industrial capitalism is based on an ethic of self-centeredness.I find it ironic that the greatest defenders of "traditional morality" are also the greatest advocates of an economic system that will and has destroyed "traditional morality".

---

Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. -- Otto von Bismarck

quote:

---

Good is good irrespective of time.

---

This is false. Morality not only changes over time, but it changes from place to place, depending on the local culture.

---

Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. -- Otto von Bismarck

In my opinion?What were the relevant actions?David found Bathsheba attractive -- presumably (I will assume that their affair was mutually consensual), Bathsheba was attracted to David. Nothing wrong with that.David and Bathsheba carried on an adulterous affair. Was that wrong? It's hard to say. Considering that Bathsheba was probably little more than property to Uriah, and the whole honor thing might have made things a bit dicey (look how David had to kill off Uriah to hide the affair), a secret affair was probably the only way at that time they could have acted on their mutual attraction.But then, when Bathsheba became pregnant and their affair was about to be discovered, instead of admitting to it, taking the consequences, and using his power to protect Bathsheba, he decides to kill off Uriah. That is pretty much wrong.This is just my opinion, being raised in 20th century North America.An interesting note: in the punishment for this sin, God allows David to choose to have a large number of his innocent subjects die in a plague. Pretty wrong there, too, so it appears that the author of the Ten Commandments doesn't exactly have the moral high ground either.

---

Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied. -- Otto von Bismarck