Are you purely good? Are you honorable to those who would do you harm?

Question

at least to promote morality until the person is effecting others.

In common law it is agreed that there are two laws that all religions and philosophies agree on which are do all you agree to do, and do not harm others. Contract and criminal laws I think. But morally, I suppose it is immoral to be self serving to the point that you are taking away other peoples abilities to exist with freedom.

I guess a better question is, do you seek vengence? Or do you set an example of complete morality by not retaliating unless necessary to protect yourself?

Answer 1

Oh, a disguised libertarian question....nice way to put it...LOL

Libertarians, true libertarians that is, believe in freedom of choice of everything provided you dont use force or fraud to get it.....I try to live by this at all times....I am not sure I am successful at it 100% of the time but I sure try to be.

I do believe I have the right to defend my own so I dont have a problem with that. I do NOT believe that I have the right to be agressive first so I stay away from situtaions that seem to push me in that direction.

I think that all people are born inherently good but learn to be bad. When they find out that it is much easier to be bad then good they tend to take the easy way out on things. This is a big provblem in our society today as we have an increased number of "freeloaders" sucking off the government which in turn "forces" us to pay taxes to support those free loaders.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absoutely. Government is BAD regardless of how you look at it because if left alone it will always use FORCE to get what it wants rather than dealing in a free market / contract based society.

Unfortunately for us, most people in our society today believe that our political leaders are all knowing and trust them completely. As such, they trust what they do and say and attempt to emulate them. Is it any wonder that corporations and indiviuals are alwasy getting in trouble with the law when they do the same thing government does.

Why dont people hold government responsible for their actions like they hold their neighbors responsible. Oh yeah, I forgot, they believe in government morality - lie, cheat, steal do whatever you can to get what you want.

Opps, did I say that about our great government - LOL

Look, all religions believe in some form of the golden rule "do unto others as you want done unto you". The problem is no one practices it anymore because everyone is busy trying to "survive" the government intrusions in thier lives. This makes the majority of people less then "honorable"...even if they dont want to admit it to themselves...who wants to admit they are bad people...they will always find a way to justify their actions by one method or the other....even if its wrong...that way they can blame someone else without taking responsibility for thier own actions.

Answer 2

I don't think it makes me good but I try to stand on my integrity in all that I do, morality is a question that there is so many answers to in the first place one will probably never really figure it out

Answer 3

No.

I have no loyalty to you whatsoever. I would encourage you to act in your own best interest, because it isn't my responsibility to look out for you.

You might consider this harm to you, but that is the price you pay for maintaining your beliefs.

Although, I always do get a chuckle out of 'honour among theives' mentality. It is the funniest thing to hear about criminals who have a pecking order for rapists or pedophiles. "Pot calling the kettle black."

Answer 4

No I'm not if that's the definition.

I'm a mirror of what is reflected at me.
If someone is good to me and is good then I am good to them in kind without question.
If someone is bad to me is bad then I am bad to them in kind without question.

Exceptions include:

If someone is bad to me and is generally good then I withhold my badness temporarily noting their general goodness for this initial offense. Maybe it was badness under pressure or a lapse in composure. And it also depends on severity of bad deed.

If someone is good to me and is generally bad then I MAY withhold my badness temporarily noting potential for the bad one to become good. But I may choose badness if this bad one is bad in wholesale to others. I punish the bad one who did good by me for that one's badness towards others. It depends on the severity of the good act.

I don't necessarily believe in that turning the other cheek jazz. Someone who's just no-good and doesn't care about being no-good deserves every bit of bad that person can get.

I'm literally a golden rule kind of guy who gives potential free chances for general good or chance good since it is a rare commodity in a bad world.

The bad deserve no honor.
John Lucas