Originally posted by FetchmyjunkTrue that about hitler. Don't know about the rest of your post.
Yes I notice you are able to justify anything you want, even adultery since morality is a matter of personal preference whether you would like to admit it or not. It is the start of a slippery slope. I'm betting even Hitler was able to justify the holocaust.
Most people justify their actions even if they are cold blooded murderers.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkIsn't this just you asking the same question yet again? You asked me a question. And I answered it. Point blank. And now you ask me the same question again? Stop taking the piss.
So therefore you believe it is universally true to say "Rape and sexual abuse of children is wrong"?
Originally posted by FMFWhy won't you answer the question and admit that you believe in a universal truth? Why are you afraid to admit that?
Isn't this just you asking the same question yet again? You asked me a question. And I answered it. Point blank. And now you ask me the same question again? Stop taking the piss.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou are ignoring the content of my posts and simply asking about the same things over and over and over and over again. For instance, if you sincerely believe you have engaged my views on morality - adultery for example - with a counterargument of your own, show me where. Which post was it? Was it the one where you were wittering on about Hitler and the Holocaust?
What exactly have you said that I have ignored?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkDo you have any response to this:
What exactly have you said that I have ignored?
In so far as adultery harms others, involves deception or coercion, or the breaking contracts/promises, I think it is morally unsound.
The definition I get with a quick Google is "voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not his or her spouse". I would say that such a sexual relationship that has the willing and informed and uncoerced consent of the spouse and the arrangement is not achieved through the instigation of harm or deception or psychological pressure or threats [or any other forms of coercion] or the breaking of contracts or reneging on promises [that the spouse wants to be kept], then I don't see it as morally unsound.
That's my take on a range of human behaviours that collectively might be referred to as "adultery". If you agree with these views of mine, that's fine, it's good, it means we agree ~ and even if the way you arrived at having more or less the same views as me was because you read about it in a book or you think a supernatural being told you that adultery is immoral, then I'm fine with that.
Originally posted by FMFWhat is really interesting here is that you can't get yourself to admit that you believe in a moral absolute. Why is that?
You are ignoring the content of my posts and simply asking about the same things over and over and over and over again. For instance, if you sincerely believe you have engaged my views on morality - adultery for example - with a counterargument of your own, show me where. Which post was it? Was it the one where you were wittering on about Hitler and the Holocaust?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI am not interested in your clumsy attempts to superimpose your subjective terminology onto the crystal clear responses and observations on morality I am offering. You once argued that a person getting angry with their sibling was "equally as evil as" murdering 6,000,000 people and you cited that as a "universal truth". So spare me your ludicrous terminology.
What is really interesting here is that you can't get yourself to admit that you believe in a moral absolute. Why is that?