Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI find it intellectually dishonest of you to play the 'moral absolute' card at all and sundry, and yet can not yourself, as a Christian, speak of God in absolute terms and explain what your conception of God is and why your conception of him is absolute and the differing conceptions of other Christians are not absolute.
I just find it interesting that you believe rape is always wrong for everyone yet you don't want to agree that it a 'moral absolute'. I find that to be intellectually dishonest.
Instead you just point to the bible as the foundation for this absoluteness, despite the glaring contradictions, horrors and differing interpretations.
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke to FetchmyjunkI have condemned killing another person as morally wrong but I have also said that it might, depending on the situation, be the morally correct thing to do. This kind of moral reasoning has been described by Fetchmyjunk as "incoherent", "illogical", and "meaningless", and he's asked me to "admit" it what feels like hundreds of times.
I find it intellectually dishonest of you to play the 'moral absolute' card at all and sundry, and yet can not yourself, as a Christian, speak of God in absolute terms and explain what your conception of God is and why your conception of him is absolute and the differing conceptions of other Christians are not absolute. Instead you jus ...[text shortened]... or this absoluteness, despite the glaring contradictions, horrors and differing interpretations.
Meanwhile, Fetchmyjunk has condemned killing another person as morally wrong but he has also said that it might, depending on the situation, be the morally correct thing to do. This is presumably an example of Fetchmyjunk's "moral absolutes".
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeMost Christians that I know agree that God's word is final and his laws are absolute. This is not something new that I made up.
I find it intellectually dishonest of you to play the 'moral absolute' card at all and sundry, and yet can not yourself, as a Christian, speak of God in absolute terms and explain what your conception of God is and why your conception of him is absolute and the differing conceptions of other Christians are not absolute.
Instead you just point to t ...[text shortened]... or this absoluteness, despite the glaring contradictions, horrors and differing interpretations.
Originally posted by FMFNo the kind of reasoning that is incoherent and illogical is this:
I have condemned killing another person as morally wrong but I have also said that it might, depending on the situation, be the morally correct thing to do. This kind of moral reasoning has been described by Fetchmyjunk as "incoherent", "illogical", and "meaningless", and he's asked me to "admit" it what feels like hundreds of times.
Meanwhile, Fetchmyjunk h ...[text shortened]... e morally correct thing to do. This is presumably an example of Fetchmyjunk's "moral absolutes".
FMF: There are no moral absolutes, but it is always wrong for everyone to commit the act of rape.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI don't expect you to understand that 'do not despise a thief that steals to satisfy their hunger' doesn't mean that stealing is suddenly ok. And I also don't expect you to understand the difference between the old and the new testament.
Including 'thou shalt not steal'?
And how about remembering and keeping the Sabbath?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkSee the "Hitler" thread for dozens and dozens and dozens of posts by me where I responded to this "point" (repeated ad nauseam by you) , scarcely any of which you even acknowledged as having been posted, let alone did you respond to them.
No the kind of reasoning that is incoherent and illogical is this:
FMF: There are no moral absolutes, but it is always wrong for everyone to commit the act of rape.
Me being certain that rape is never justifiable does not create a "moral absolute".
A South African man telling me, as one once did, with chilling certainty, that it's always morally wrong for white people and black people to produce children does not create a "moral absolute".
A Nazi declaring that it was always wrong to let a Jew who'd been listed for gassing to avoid going into the chamber (for any reason) does not create a "moral absolute".
A Christian telling me that homosexual sex is always wrong does not create a "moral absolute".
Neither a proponent nor an opponent of capital punishment create "moral absolutes" when they declare their stances to be always morally right and the opposite to be always morally wrong.
Originally posted by FMFI have never claimed that believing something with certainty makes it an absolute. All I am pointing out is the flaw in your logic. You assume that no moral absolutes exist and therefore nothing is ever always wrong, yet you believe rape is always wrong. That is flawed logic because your belief does not follow your assumption.
See the "Hitler" thread for dozens and dozens and dozens of posts by me where I responded to this "point" (repeated ad nauseam by you) , scarcely any of which you even acknowledged as having been posted, let alone did you respond to them.
Me being certain that rape is never justifiable does not create a "moral absolute".
A South African man telling me, a ...[text shortened]... ey declare their stances to be always morally right and the opposite to be always morally wrong.
1 edit
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkI disagree for the reasons I have explained in detail on several recent threads.
I have never claimed that believing something with certainty makes it an absolute. All I am pointing out is the flaw in your logic. You assume that no moral absolutes exist and therefore nothing is ever always wrong, yet you believe rape is always wrong. That is flawed logic because your belief does not follow your assumption.
Please note that I don't seek (or need) your agreement. Please note also that I understand your stance and you don't need to restate it. I have rejected your opinion, having considered it.
And just in case you think there is, there is nothing I want to "admit".
The fact that i believe rape is always wrong does not draw upon or create a "moral absolute", nor does your belief that rape is wrong.
Your belief that genocide can be morally justifiable if there is a reason [that you just so happen to accept as being valid and as long as it's not done for "no reason"] does not draw upon or create a "moral absolute".
I have rejected your assertions and you know why. I acknowledge your disagreement.
Is there anything else you want to talk about?
Originally posted by FMFIf it is true that your belief is illogical your disagreement doesn't somehow make it logical.
I disagree for the reasons I have explained in detail on several recent threads.
Please note that I don't seek (or need) your agreement. Please note also that I understand your stance and you don't need to restate it. I have rejected your opinion, having considered it.
And just in case you think there is, there is nothing I want to "admit".
The fac ...[text shortened]... ou know why. I acknowledge your disagreement.
Is there anything else you want to talk about?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkYou've typed out stuff like this before. I don’t agree with you. And I don't agree with any of the labels you attach to your personal opinions. So? Is there anything else you want to discuss?
If it is true that your belief is illogical your disagreement doesn't somehow make it logical.