Hitler

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
No that is not what I am saying of course you can condemn rape as morally wrong, but can you unequivocally state that someone who does not hold the same view that you hold about rape is wrong in their belief that rape is morally justifiable?

Yes. If someone believes that rape is morally justifiable, then yes, I can say that I believe they are wrong to think that. Can you only find yourself able to do so because of your assumptions about the Bible?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Of course you don't like that fact that morality becomes a matter of personal preference when you assume there is no absolute standard for right and wrong.

This is a dodge.

Here is what I said:

I have addressed your use of the expression "personal preference" [and explored the role "personal preference" plays in the declarations you make about the universality of your own personal opinions] numerous times but you have just been blanking it out time and time again. If you are averse to discussing it, you ought to have the manners to stop bringing it up.

Your dodge (above) means that you still haven't addressed what I have said.

Originally posted by FMF
Do you rationalize your plagiarism [on the previous page] as deceitful or not deceitful?

BUMP

Originally posted by FMF
But your beliefs in supernatural beings and supernatural events are entirely rooted in your subjective opinions and personal preferences. Your unilateral declarations that your own opinions constitute "universal truths" is entirely subjective.

I think you are purposefully missing my point. I you were to assume that there is no absolute standard for right and wrong, could you unequivocally state that someone who holds a different view on morality to you is wrong in their view? Yes or No?

Originally posted by FMF
Yes. If someone believes that rape is morally justifiable, then yes, I can say that I believe they are wrong to think that. Can you only find yourself able to do so because of your assumptions about the Bible?

But if there is no objective standard of right and wrong it is then your subjective opinion versus their subjective opinion, and therefore you cannot unequivocally say that their view is wrong and you would have to admit that their view may be just as valid as your view.

Originally posted by FMF
This is a dodge.

Here is what I said:

[b]I have addressed your use of the expression "personal preference" [and explored the role "personal preference" plays in the declarations you make about the universality of your own personal opinions] numerous times but you have just been blanking it out time and time again. If you are averse to discussing it, you ou ...[text shortened]... nging it up.

Your dodge (above) means that you still haven't addressed what I have said.[/b]

And you have not addressed my point that if there is no objective standard of right and wrong morality becomes a matter of personal preference. Please tell me why my statement is wrong.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
And you have not addressed my point that if there is no objective standard of right and wrong morality becomes a matter of personal preference. Please tell me why my statement is wrong.

I don't think I have any choice - or personal preference - whatsoever when it comes to condemning rape. I believe my hands are tied, so to speak, by my conscience and by the heinous nature of the immoral act. For you to suggest that I only condemn it because of "personal preference" is at best obtuse, and at worst a casual attempt to dehumanize me on account of me not sharing your superstitions. I'll now wait for you to address the points I have made about the role "personal preferences" play in your self-aggrandizing claims about your own opinions.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
But if there is no objective standard of right and wrong it is then your subjective opinion versus their subjective opinion, and therefore you cannot unequivocally say that their view is wrong and you would have to admit that their view may be just as valid as your view.

If you did not believe in supernatural beings would you "have to admit that" the views people who think rape is not wrong were "valid"?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I think you are purposefully missing my point.

I think the problem is not that I am missing your point but, instead, that you cannot process the fact that I disagree with your point.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
I you were to assume that there is no absolute standard for right and wrong, could you unequivocally state that someone who holds a different view on morality to you is wrong in their view?

Of course I can unequivocally state that someone who holds a different view on morality to me is wrong in their view. People disagree about morality all the time. Christians disagree about morality all the time. There are interfaith disagreements all the time. Believers and non-believers disagree all the time. Non-believers disagree with each other all the time. You declaring your own views "universal" means nothing when it comes to such disagreements. Morality varies from culture to culture; it varies geographically; it varies from generation to generation; it has varied down through history. If someone says 'rape is not wrong', I can unequivocally state that someone who holds that moral view is wrong. I don't find it difficult at all.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
My assumption is that the truth revealed in the Bible is objectively true.

Do the beliefs propagated by Church of Scientology also create "universal truths" that are binding on us all? And would an insistence that they do create "universal truths" that are binding on us all be "objectively true"?

Originally posted by FMF
I don't think I have any choice - or personal preference - whatsoever when it comes to condemning rape. I believe my hands are tied, so to speak, by my conscience and by the heinous nature of the immoral act. For you to suggest that I only condemn it because of "personal preference" is at best obtuse, and at worst a casual attempt to dehumanize me on account of ...[text shortened]... t the role "personal preferences" play in your self-aggrandizing claims about your own opinions.

Why is it you feel your hands are tied? Why would someone who feels rape is not wrong be incorrect in their view if there is no objective standard of right and wrong?

Originally posted by FMF
If you did not believe in supernatural beings would you "have to admit that" the views people who think rape is not wrong were "valid"?

If there is no objective standard for right and wrong, what makes your view that 'rape is wrong' objectively right and someone else's view 'that rape is ok', objectively wrong?

Originally posted by FMF
Of course I can unequivocally state that someone who holds a different view on morality to me is wrong in their view. People disagree about morality all the time. Christians disagree about morality all the time. There are interfaith disagreements all the time. Believers and non-believers disagree all the time. Non-believers disagree with each other all the time. ...[text shortened]... vocally state that someone who holds that moral view is wrong. I don't find it difficult at all.

Would their view be subjectively wrong or objectively wrong?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Why is it you feel your hands are tied? Why would someone who feels rape is not wrong be incorrect in their view if there is no objective standard of right and wrong?

I have explained to you already what I believe are the sources of my moral sensibilities. I have done so again and again and again. You choose to proceed as if I have not addressed this point, and you keep asking the same questions - albeit reworded or reframed - over and over and over and over again.