Is morality absolute?

[vashty]

---

Haha daghan jud nag kalalis ani!

[Breakeven]

normal rani sya bro. importante lang we'll deal it fairly.

[truthseeker]

What acts of betrayal? There is no betrayal if it's open. Betrayal would be if the man hid his wives from each other. In this case of multiple marriage, it is done in a way that is structured and in order and all parties are in accordance with each other.

for a true christian both are neither acceptable, to marry multiple wives nor to cheat and betray your spouse!

That's how precious relationship is in christianity.

[phoqscofield]

Everything is Constant except CHANGE

[andersonl]

@3nZ0y don't waste your time arguing with Breakeven bro, hehe.
It's clear he's not open for a fair negotiation. Leave him be.

[3nZ0y]

for a true christian both are neither acceptable, to marry multiple wives nor to cheat and betray your spouse!

That's how precious relationship is in christianity.

That is EXACTLY the reason ngano I want to point out that morality should be [and INDEED IT IS] subjective. Self-righteous lang kaayo paminawon nga there should only be one truth and that is our truth. Unya diay to nagsunod sunod ra sa religion sa ilang parents. If sa China pa gipanganak, dili unta to Kristiyano. Unya kay sa Christian parents man gipanganak, moingon dayon: ours is the real truth. Haaaays...

@3nZ0y don't waste your time arguing with Breakeven bro, hehe.
It's clear he's not open for a fair negotiation. Leave him be.

Don't worry, that was the last one for now. I was not arguing man jud pud since there is no point man. I just laid my argument. It is up to the readers to decide which one makes more sense. I don't have plans to convince them. That would be so un-atheistic...hahahah.

[TheSunKing]

Para nako, we can determine if a certain thing is moral if we do the thing and we can let the others do the same thing to us. Much more we equate it with the Golden Rule.

To determine if a certain act is moral or not, why not i-ask nato:

1: Does it offer benefits and pleasure to us, to the other party and to our society?

2: Can we allow others to do the same thing to us?

3: Can we allow others to do it regardless of age, gender and race?

Definitely, laws against murder and theft are moral absolutes. Dili jud ni cya negotiable because these cant offer benefits for both parties. Much more, theft and murder does not offer us any pleasure at all. Mohatag ni cya ug kaguol at the same time we cant garner any benefit from such acts.

Here is an interesting example:

In the case of premarital ***, we would normally allow ourselves to do it, but we DEFINITELY WONT encourage nor allow our unmarried children, much more the minor ones, into such acts. This makes PMS gravely immoral.

Moral relativists have asked the government to allow the legalization of prostitution and marijuana. However questions need to be asked:

Can we allow our daughters to become prostitutes once prostitution is legalized?

Can we allow our children to smoke pot in front of us once marijuana is legalized?


For me, moral absolutes are there to PROTECT us and not to restrict us. There are just things that need to be encouraged and certain behaviors to be discouraged so that we can live peacefully.

[SioDenz]

Kuwang man gud ni nga question:
Dapat apilan ug in which Point of View.

If General point of view, Morality is Relative - if your an Atheist or Theist.

In Atheist point of view, Morality is Relative - because they dont believe in absolute being.

In Theist point of View, Morality is Absolute because they believe in God.

Maybe a Good question is "Asa may mas maayu ana nila?"

[TheSunKing]

@ Siodenz

Ka gets ko sa point ni TS bro.... what he means is if naa jud ba general rule na i follow ang mga taw regardless of your belief or unbelief.

that is why i did not mention of God in my previous post although TS has presented specific moral codes for Christian and Jews as examples.

[3nZ0y]

Para nako, we can determine if a certain thing is moral if we do the thing and we can let the others do the same thing to us. Much more we equate it with the Golden Rule.

To determine if a certain act is moral or not, why not i-ask nato:

1: Does it offer benefits and pleasure to us, to the other party and to our society?

2: Can we allow others to do the same thing to us?

3: Can we allow others to do it regardless of age, gender and race?

If we ask those questions, then relative na ang basis, di ba? If that were absolute, the only question would have been: does absolute morality allow this or not?

Definitely, laws against murder and theft are moral absolutes. Dili jud ni cya negotiable because these cant offer benefits for both parties. Much more, theft and murder does not offer us any pleasure at all. Mohatag ni cya ug kaguol at the same time we cant garner any benefit from such acts.

Unsay difference sa murder, mercy killing and lethal injection?

Moral relativists have asked the government to allow the legalization of prostitution and marijuana. However questions need to be asked:

Can we allow our daughters to become prostitutes once prostitution is legalized?

Question: if ma legalize ang prostitution, automatic ba mamahimong prostitute imo daughter? Sayop man na nga pagtoo. How about the current prostitute? What will become of

Can we allow our children to smoke pot in front of us once marijuana is legalized?

If ma-legalize ni, tanan na mag marijuana? What if it is actually beneficial?

See, the problem with claiming that morality should be based on what YOU believe in is just wrong.

For me, moral absolutes are there to PROTECT us and not to restrict us. There are just things that need to be encouraged and certain behaviors to be discouraged so that we can live peacefully.

Well, imo sad na and I respect that. But consider this: himatyon, vegetable state, makina na lang nagpabuhi niya. Niingon siya daan nga di siya ganahan nga makina na lang mobuhi niya. Walay kwarta ang iya kapamilya para sa apparatus aron magpabilin siyang buhi. Immoral ba if tangtangon na lang ang makina og i-euthanasia na lang ang pasyente?

What are we protecting here? The life of a person [nga barely na lang] in misery?