If you base morality on society's laws, it is easy to interpret those laws by asking the judiciary and legislatures.
If you base morality on some vague, ellipitically written holy book that has widely different interpretations, you end up with nothing. Anyone claiming to base their morality on such a holy book cannot be proven false.
2007-11-25 05:54:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by CC 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Look at the mega churches, people can be easily swayed, that and in Germany, the Holocaust was not broadcast as a triumph, it was carried out in secret by young men who would be shot for disobeying. The US firebombing of Germany and Japan was viewed as our brave boys in blue striking back at a heartless enemy bent on world domination, if Germany won, how would these act be viewed differently? Also, what would have happened to the American pilots who refused. I say its easier to pass judgment form here. Serbia and Turkey were civil wars on fire and these acts have happened over the years and will problem happen again. Japan followed an emperor believed to be Divine and followed their own views of superiority.
Old Men give orders from palaces young men do or die or go to jail.
2007-11-25 06:54:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
maximum anyone is non secular, and the majority commit immoral acts. the reason some human beings say that society will fall down devoid of religion is whilst they attempt to apply morality to "instruct" God. that's a defective argument, yet that's what they use although. the element religions make is that the assumption of "morality" itself is incomprehensible devoid of a few reference, so it may make no experience to chat approximately committing immoral acts if there is not any contract on what's ethical and what isn't. the variation between you and "non secular" human beings is they use the innate morality latest in all people as evidence of an objective popular given by employing God, on a similar time as you're making the element that morality is largely a organic area of all humanity and God isn't needed. the place those 2 meet is once you attempt to apply your "morals." anyplace you will be able to get your morals from, they might have non secular overtones because of the fact you're then asserting how issues "ought to" be, and that's preaching. you would be employing your guy or woman standards, others theirs, and so on, till morality will become a moot element. then you definately'll ought to you assert your equipment of ideals ought to be triumphant, and subsequently undertake Atheism that's quasi-non secular hence. Believers in God think of that anyplace interior the spectrum of human morality their strikes might lie, human beings's morality is derived from the author for a objective, and is innate in all humanity, whether or no longer they be attentive to him or no longer. you think it extremely is an evolutionary variation, no longer something incorrect with that, they simply say evolutionary or no longer, it has a greater physically powerful objective.
2016-09-30 03:40:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by cluff 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
people will follow immoral orders out of fear for their own life or because in this case they feel the responsibility does not lie with them, so they won't feel responsible for their deeds. If an immoral act becomes the norm it will also change their perception of the moral value of this act.
And there always some immoral people. If they get into power they will cause other people to behave immoral too.
2007-11-25 05:47:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone has their own sense of morality and value system. For example, Nazi Germany was led to believe that they were morally obligated to rid the planet of inferior humans, so they believed they were acting morally.
2007-11-25 05:40:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
hypocrisy is infinitely easier to execute than piety. and we humans always do what's easy.
2007-11-25 05:50:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by THX1138 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well noone's perfect.
2007-11-25 05:40:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
1⤋