who then governs or decides what is morally right and or morally wrong? For example...who is to say that killing someone is indeed wrong? If someone doesn't believe that it is wrong, and that person kills someone, should that peron not be punished for his actions? Afterall they don't believe in moral objective values... Right?
2007-01-06 12:33:36 · 9 answers · asked by ? 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Moral value is determined by the society in which we live. Even though we say we don't want to have our lawmakers legislate morals that is exactly what they do. The legislature makes the laws. Morals are what we as a people, together,decide what is right and what is wrong. Morals reach far beyond individual interpretation. Some people are not punished for murder. They killed for reasons other than no belief in moral values. One of the prerequisites for standing trial is the persons knowing the difference between right and wrong. Freedom: see Liberty. Liberty: Freedom within the guidelines. Set by the whole society not by the individual.
2007-01-06 12:55:38 · answer #1 · answered by Eva 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Laws are created out the moral values of a collected group of people. The united states is a democracy, which means that if the majority thinks it's wrong, then something is done about it.
So, the government governs my actions, and when they don't, it is myself who does. If I am incapable of seeing what is right and what is wrong, I avoid the situation.
I don't see how a higher power fits into that situation...or infact needed at all...
2007-01-06 12:42:53 · answer #2 · answered by Ghost Wolf 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, he shouldn't be punished, however if I love the dead, I would kill him, because that's my belief and my fare world. However, if that is like that, we would be killing each other all the time. So if we are cleaver (as we were) we would prefer to accept some rules equal to every body to make it easy to live for all in a community, so we are strong to kill other communities, until we decide to create a bigger community.
2007-01-06 13:10:19 · answer #3 · answered by ivandescobar 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It goes back to the strong versus the weak. The law of the jungle in nice suits. To wit. The killing, murdering of babies as they are being born. Because the stronger one just does not want it.
2007-01-06 12:37:05 · answer #4 · answered by swamp elf 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no objective morals without God. Without God why is burning babies bad? Honestly email me why id like to know. I have never made the "it obvious" argument there are other reasons why it must be God. So ur "its obvious" rebuttal doesnt apply to me Because the. Only logically sound reason for OM is God. But thats the secondary reason the primary one is cuz God said so, He cant lie.
2016-05-23 01:08:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because the society in which they live sees it as wrong, you have to live by society's rules, well unless it goes the law is in direct conflict, but if it is still expect society to punish you for it.
2007-01-06 12:36:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
And that is exactly why THERE ARE NO TRUE ATHEISTS.
If there are no morals ( which there are)
there is no god ( BUT THERE IS GOD)
Our laws are based from GOD'S Holy word...
Thou shalt not steal....robbery is a crime
Thou shalt not kill....murder is a crime
Thou shalt not bear false witness.....perjury is a crime
THANK-YOU !
Christian in PA
2007-01-08 12:50:45 · answer #7 · answered by Penny Mae 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only the winners acted (and killed) morally.
Because the winners write history.
Should the terrorists win they will be considered heroes!
2007-01-06 12:37:18 · answer #8 · answered by PragmaticAlien 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's agreed on by the community or leader and enforced by them or the leader.
2007-01-06 12:36:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋