What do you think of this comment about morality?

Question

It is a bit long, sorry but a good read.

By Haterproof:

ok. let's start off with morality. if you're talking about relative 'morality' then you're not really talking about morality at all.. you're just talking about SUBJECTIVE STANDARDS. morality MUST address ALL THINGS. not just those you are applying it to otherwise how would you ever have any basis to refer to anything as "immoral" if nothing is ever compared?

science and philosophy are not based on morality anymore than a shovel is based on work or a screwdriver is based on achievement. they are simply TOOLS of investigation, not agents of morality or even a basis for it. the example hardly applies. and **** plato. plato asked questions. he didn't accomplish 'morality' or even define it properly. he made his investigation into it and made some stabs at it and that's about it. morality demands an absolute standard otherwise the definition of morality is too subjective to apply to anyone without being hypocritical in the application.

and it is an oxymoron because religion is a source of great immorality (referring to those who speak "in the name of God" yet hold arbitrary criteria for doing so and apply that arbitrary criteria to others.)

and you can argue that atheists can be moral, but i would simply refute it by saying they have no set criteria that would be considered 'moral' and they certainly couldn't live up to that criteria if they did offer a definitive moral standard.

also regarding the "exception" to the rule, in this case, there is none. i didn't mean to imply that there was an exception. i simply meant that that's the only way one could provide an exception. but since that isn't possible, there really ISN'T an exception to the rule.

when we say there's always exceptions to the rule, usually we're referring to our own waffling standards, practices and ideals. like men and women not having the possibility of friendship, that is a rule with exceptions because it's not a principle. it's not a natural law, it's a rule of thumb. a GIST. a succinct composition of understanding which allows for relatively minor interpretational disputes. just like our justice system. it's not a principle or a natural law. it's an ideal, thus subject to various exceptions. morality is not subject to such exceptions at any time.

and morality shouldn't be an individual exercise because it doesn't simply apply to one individual. it applies to everyone. it does not exist in one particular individual's context.

and **** everyone else, i happen to be a "pundit" (as long as you're not making any hindi references).. education curses a man that way. so such questions will ALWAYS interest me.

and as far as hypocrites go, you're wrong there too. EVERYONE is a hypocrite. you couldn't name one person who isn't a hypocrite in some way, shape or form.

and as for many "good" people, i'd disagree there too. i have yet to meet a 'good' person. i've met RELATIVELY good people but NEVER a good person. they don't exist.

One of the smartest man I know online.

Edit:

It is funny how he talks of atheists and theists in this quote, and yet only the theists so far get it. Don't ever call an atheist immoral.

Answer 1

Good food for thought indeed.
TY

Answer 2

I agree with him except for the following statement:

[morality demands an absolute standard otherwise the definition of morality is too subjective to apply to anyone without being hypocritical in the application.

and it is an oxymoron because religion is a source of great immorality (referring to those who speak "in the name of God" yet hold arbitrary criteria for doing so and apply that arbitrary criteria to others.) ]

Religion is not the source of great immorality. Men are. People who use religion as an excuse for great immorality are, in reality, NOT religious.

In true religion, religion is not the standard, Jesus Christ is. When man can reach the perfection of Jesus, then they have achieved true morality. Since that is IMPOSSIBLE in man, Jesus did it for us.
All man has is either the effort or Christ.

I choose Christ.


BECAUSE, By the deeds of the law there shall no person be justified in God’s sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin and all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 3:20, 23
THEN, They all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Thessalonians 2:12 Also I say unto you, whosoever shall confess me (Jesus) before men, him shall the Son of man (Jesus) also confess before the angels of God: But he that denies me before men shall be denied before the angels of God. Luke 12:8-9
HOWEVER, The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Peter 3:9
FOR, Jesus said, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father, but by me. John 14:6
THEREFORE, If you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. Romans 10:9
THEN, He that overcomes, the same shall be clothed in white robes; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. Revelation 3:5
SO, That whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:15

Answer 3

I am a Christian. And as a Christian I know that there are none of us who are 'moral'. We might appear to be moral to each other, but according to the Bible, none of us are. And since I am more concerned with what God says than what any man might say, I am not moral, and I cannot even approach the subject without admitting guilt.

So the Moral Majority and those who would attempt such legalistic practices as they do, and subject others, even non Christians to their standards are about as vile and filthy as they come. Furthermore, they deter the preaching of the Gospel, because they poisoned it with their applications of substandard innocence. Filthy, filthy people they are.

Answer 4

I think it's poorly written, and contains too many absolute comments based on the writer's limited view of the world.

Answer 5

This is the worst kind of skewed propaganda to support an agenda.
With this thinking you can justify any behavior you want... undisciplined and irresponsible.
Foolish and harmful - there IS a right and wrong.

Answer 6

Sounds very desperate. Poor him and poor you.

Answer 7

I get what he is saying but I have to agree with Molly S as my common ground.