Where do moral laws come from?

[rightwinger]

Of course you can

Murder is not moral. We have laws against it
Stealing the property of others is not moral......We have laws against it
Assault and rape is not moral...We have laws against it

But that's not why they are illegal. These acts are illegal because they violate the rights of others.

Isn't that what morality is?

Your interaction with others

No.

What is the moral code of an individual by himself other than survival?

I dunno. What are you implying? You asked "Isn't that what morality is?" in response to my statement that the acts in question were illegal because they violated rights, not because they were immoral. To which I answer no, morality is different than rights. You threw in "Your interaction with others" for some reason, but that's not morality either.

I'm not following you

What is an example of morality that does not involve your interaction with others?

 

[Boss]

I disagree. Once people stopped wandering and started settlements the tendency for xenophobic violence had to end because it was no longer possible to know every person in a settlement. It had nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with expediency

There weren't any settlements. There were only tribes. The tribes were mostly family. You're jumping way ahead to a settlement... that's post-civilization. There is no evidence of any civilization existing without spirituality.

Now, neither of us knows for certain, the answer is elusive. But it's my theory that human spirituality must've preceded civilization or we would've found remnants of ancient civilizations devoid of spiritualism. And I can conjecture how this spiritual connection was something early man could use in forming trust relationships with others. Tribes suddenly grew into civilizations.

I said once people stopped wandering and started settlements

I don't know what's so hard to understand about that

before that xenophobic violence was the norm

Well but that's the thing... man didn't suddenly have a collective epiphany! Something happened to change them from wandering to settling. You can SAY ...oh well, they realized it was more beneficial to work together... How did they realize that? What happened that made them able to trust each other not to be killed in the middle of the night and have all their stuff stolen?

MY premise is, for many years mankind lived by laws of the jungle, survival of the fittest. At some point, they discovered spiritual awareness. It was through that spiritual connection they were able to develop trust relationships with others who also shared spirituality. This is when settlements and civilizations started. In order to set aside "laws of the jungle" behavior, something bigger has to replace it. There has to be some "greater purpose" understood. Spirituality fits this need.

 

[rightwinger]

I disagree. Once people stopped wandering and started settlements the tendency for xenophobic violence had to end because it was no longer possible to know every person in a settlement. It had nothing to do with spirituality and everything to do with expediency

There weren't any settlements. There were only tribes. The tribes were mostly family. You're jumping way ahead to a settlement... that's post-civilization. There is no evidence of any civilization existing without spirituality.

Now, neither of us knows for certain, the answer is elusive. But it's my theory that human spirituality must've preceded civilization or we would've found remnants of ancient civilizations devoid of spiritualism. And I can conjecture how this spiritual connection was something early man could use in forming trust relationships with others. Tribes suddenly grew into civilizations.

I said once people stopped wandering and started settlements

I don't know what's so hard to understand about that

before that xenophobic violence was the norm

Well but that's the thing... man didn't suddenly have a collective epiphany! Something happened to change them from wandering to settling. You can SAY ...oh well, they realized it was more beneficial to work together... How did they realize that? What happened that made them able to trust each other not to be killed in the middle of the night and have all their stuff stolen?

MY premise is, for many years mankind lived by laws of the jungle, survival of the fittest. At some point, they discovered spiritual awareness. It was through that spiritual connection they were able to develop trust relationships with others who also shared spirituality. This is when settlements and civilizations started. In order to set aside "laws of the jungle" behavior, something bigger has to replace it. There has to be some "greater purpose" understood. Spirituality fits this need.

Dogs bond in a pack

Do they have spiritual awareness?

 

[Boss]

Dogs bond in a pack

Do they have spiritual awareness?

Humans did the same thing, they called them "tribes".

Have you ever seen a dog civilization?

 

[RWNJ]

You can not legislate morality!

Moral laws are not difficult to understand. It boils down to one simple truth. Love your neighbor as yourself. If you love someone, you can do them no wrong. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Syriusly]

No. We are constantly evolving towards it. Find the highest standard possible for any behavior, one that man doesn't really want to follow, and you will have most likely discovered it.

Oh really? Well then, the Bible must be wrong about men laying with men and it must be perfectly okay for men to suck dick? Isn't that where we've evolved?

All true, but since error cannot stand it is only a matter of time for our conscience and consciousness to evolve just like every other stage in the evolution of matter evolved before it. Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is critical to that process.

Again, our societal consciousness has evolved into one that glorifies homosexuality and women objectifying themselves. Women dress as vaginas and demand abortions on demand and societal consciousness celebrates them and books them on TV talk shows.

I think your theories about evolving toward a higher morality are problematic.

Hmmm well the Bible advocated stoning people for adultery- and that it was immoral for women to wear pants.

And that slavery was not only to be tolerated, but that slaves were to obey their masters.

I realize that many people think that we haven't evolved and yearn for the good old days- but yes we have evolved.

 

[RWNJ]

No. We are constantly evolving towards it. Find the highest standard possible for any behavior, one that man doesn't really want to follow, and you will have most likely discovered it.

Oh really? Well then, the Bible must be wrong about men laying with men and it must be perfectly okay for men to suck dick? Isn't that where we've evolved?

All true, but since error cannot stand it is only a matter of time for our conscience and consciousness to evolve just like every other stage in the evolution of matter evolved before it. Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is critical to that process.

Again, our societal consciousness has evolved into one that glorifies homosexuality and women objectifying themselves. Women dress as vaginas and demand abortions on demand and societal consciousness celebrates them and books them on TV talk shows.

I think your theories about evolving toward a higher morality are problematic.

Hmmm well the Bible advocated stoning people for adultery- and that it was immoral for women to wear pants.

And that slavery was not only to be tolerated, but that slaves were to obey their masters.

I realize that many people think that we haven't evolved and yearn for the good old days- but yes we have evolved.

Well, let's see here. Those queers we used to stone are now going after anyone who so much as disagrees with their perverted lifestyle. They try to tell us that we cannot follow our conscience, let alone the moral guidelines that God gave us. They are just as bad as any mythical group of people who supposedly "persecuted" them.

And the Bible does not condone slavery, nor does it tolerate it. Also, you are mistaking what the word slavery, in the Bible, actually meant. It was referring to indentured servitude. The Bible also gave guidelines on how to treat "slaves" The Bible also condemns what we know as modern slavery. People used to get the death penalty for practicing it. So, you really need to educate yourself. Your ignorance offends every thinking person on here.

 

[Syriusly]

No. We are constantly evolving towards it. Find the highest standard possible for any behavior, one that man doesn't really want to follow, and you will have most likely discovered it.

Oh really? Well then, the Bible must be wrong about men laying with men and it must be perfectly okay for men to suck dick? Isn't that where we've evolved?

All true, but since error cannot stand it is only a matter of time for our conscience and consciousness to evolve just like every other stage in the evolution of matter evolved before it. Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is critical to that process.

Again, our societal consciousness has evolved into one that glorifies homosexuality and women objectifying themselves. Women dress as vaginas and demand abortions on demand and societal consciousness celebrates them and books them on TV talk shows.

I think your theories about evolving toward a higher morality are problematic.

Hmmm well the Bible advocated stoning people for adultery- and that it was immoral for women to wear pants.

And that slavery was not only to be tolerated, but that slaves were to obey their masters.

I realize that many people think that we haven't evolved and yearn for the good old days- but yes we have evolved.

Well, let's see here. Those queers we used to stone are now going after anyone who so much as disagrees with their perverted lifestyle. They try to tell us that we cannot follow our conscience, let alone the moral guidelines that God gave us. They are just as bad as any mythical group of people who supposedly "persecuted" them..

Oh well let's see here. Those 'queers' as you so quaintly call them, you criminalized until the Supreme Court told you that you couldn't. For a couple hundred years Christians so 'tolerated' homosexuals that they passed laws so you could throw them in jail for being homosexual.

Remember- Christians have actually- really- persecuted homosexuals- not your faux outrage over a few business owners being told that they have to follow the same business laws as every other business.

When Christians get thrown in jail by homosexuals, for daring to go into a church- then- then- Christians will be experiencing the kind of persecution that they imposed on homosexuals for decades.

If you want to say that homosexuals are as 'bad' as Christians- of course they are- you are all human beings with all of the accompanying faults.

 

[Syriusly]

[Q
And the Bible does not condone slavery, nor does it tolerate it. Also, you are mistaking what the word slavery, in the Bible, actually meant. It was referring to indentured servitude. The Bible also gave guidelines on how to treat "slaves" The Bible also condemns what we know as modern slavery. People used to get the death penalty for practicing it. So, you really need to educate yourself. Your ignorance offends every thinking person on here.

What the New Testament says about slavery

The purpose of the series of essays on slavery was to point out that there have been some examples of positive changes in morality since biblical times. When the authors of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures (a.k.a. Old and New Testaments) were alive, slavery was a perfectly normal and expected social institution.

Matthew 18:25: "But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made."

Luke 12:45-48: "The lord [owner] of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more."

Ephesians 6:5-9New International Version (NIV)
5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.

9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him

 

[rightwinger]

Dogs bond in a pack

Do they have spiritual awareness?

Humans did the same thing, they called them "tribes".

Have you ever seen a dog civilization?

To them it is

 

[rightwinger]

No. We are constantly evolving towards it. Find the highest standard possible for any behavior, one that man doesn't really want to follow, and you will have most likely discovered it.

Oh really? Well then, the Bible must be wrong about men laying with men and it must be perfectly okay for men to suck dick? Isn't that where we've evolved?

All true, but since error cannot stand it is only a matter of time for our conscience and consciousness to evolve just like every other stage in the evolution of matter evolved before it. Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is critical to that process.

Again, our societal consciousness has evolved into one that glorifies homosexuality and women objectifying themselves. Women dress as vaginas and demand abortions on demand and societal consciousness celebrates them and books them on TV talk shows.

I think your theories about evolving toward a higher morality are problematic.

Hmmm well the Bible advocated stoning people for adultery- and that it was immoral for women to wear pants.

And that slavery was not only to be tolerated, but that slaves were to obey their masters.

I realize that many people think that we haven't evolved and yearn for the good old days- but yes we have evolved.

Well, let's see here. Those queers we used to stone are now going after anyone who so much as disagrees with their perverted lifestyle. They try to tell us that we cannot follow our conscience, let alone the moral guidelines that God gave us. They are just as bad as any mythical group of people who supposedly "persecuted" them.

And the Bible does not condone slavery, nor does it tolerate it. Also, you are mistaking what the word slavery, in the Bible, actually meant. It was referring to indentured servitude. The Bible also gave guidelines on how to treat "slaves" The Bible also condemns what we know as modern slavery. People used to get the death penalty for practicing it. So, you really need to educate yourself. Your ignorance offends every thinking person on here.

You are free to hate anyone you wish

What you can't do is force the government to support your hatred

 

[Syriusly]

No. We are constantly evolving towards it. Find the highest standard possible for any behavior, one that man doesn't really want to follow, and you will have most likely discovered it.

Oh really? Well then, the Bible must be wrong about men laying with men and it must be perfectly okay for men to suck dick? Isn't that where we've evolved?

All true, but since error cannot stand it is only a matter of time for our conscience and consciousness to evolve just like every other stage in the evolution of matter evolved before it. Truth is discovered through a conflict and confusion process. Diversity of thought is critical to that process.

Again, our societal consciousness has evolved into one that glorifies homosexuality and women objectifying themselves. Women dress as vaginas and demand abortions on demand and societal consciousness celebrates them and books them on TV talk shows.

I think your theories about evolving toward a higher morality are problematic.

Hmmm well the Bible advocated stoning people for adultery- and that it was immoral for women to wear pants.

And that slavery was not only to be tolerated, but that slaves were to obey their masters.

I realize that many people think that we haven't evolved and yearn for the good old days- but yes we have evolved.

Well, let's see here. Those queers we used to stone are now going after anyone who so much as disagrees with their perverted lifestyle. They try to tell us that we cannot follow our conscience, let alone the moral guidelines that God gave us. They are just as bad as any mythical group of people who supposedly "persecuted" them.

And the Bible does not condone slavery, nor does it tolerate it. Also, you are mistaking what the word slavery, in the Bible, actually meant. It was referring to indentured servitude. The Bible also gave guidelines on how to treat "slaves" The Bible also condemns what we know as modern slavery. People used to get the death penalty for practicing it. So, you really need to educate yourself. Your ignorance offends every thinking person on here.

You are free to hate anyone you wish

What you can't do is force the government to support your hatred

Well I hope that remains the case. I hope our government will not be forced to support such hatred.

 

[Boss]

Dogs bond in a pack

Do they have spiritual awareness?

Humans did the same thing, they called them "tribes".

Have you ever seen a dog civilization?

To them it is

No, not really. Dog packs function by the same primitive laws of the jungle as ancient man before civilization. They don't rally around the sick and weak dog in the pack, they let the wolves have him. Civilization requires much more than pack mentality. I believe human spirituality is the key component. Why? Because we find absolutely NO evidence of any human civilization in the ancient past that didn't have some type of spiritual belief. All kinds of debate can be had over what that specifically was, but it's present and evident in every archaeological discovery we've ever unearthed.

 

[dblack]

But that's not why they are illegal. These acts are illegal because they violate the rights of others.

Isn't that what morality is?

Your interaction with others

No.

What is the moral code of an individual by himself other than survival?

I dunno. What are you implying? You asked "Isn't that what morality is?" in response to my statement that the acts in question were illegal because they violated rights, not because they were immoral. To which I answer no, morality is different than rights. You threw in "Your interaction with others" for some reason, but that's not morality either.

I'm not following you

What is an example of morality that does not involve your interaction with others?

I don't know. It doesn't matter. The "interaction with others" thing was your creation. My claim is that government should be restricted to protecting our rights, and not empowered to enforce morality.

 

[rightwinger]

Isn't that what morality is?

Your interaction with others

No.

What is the moral code of an individual by himself other than survival?

I dunno. What are you implying? You asked "Isn't that what morality is?" in response to my statement that the acts in question were illegal because they violated rights, not because they were immoral. To which I answer no, morality is different than rights. You threw in "Your interaction with others" for some reason, but that's not morality either.

I'm not following you

What is an example of morality that does not involve your interaction with others?

I don't know. It doesn't matter. The "interaction with others" thing was your creation. My claim is that government should be restricted to protecting our rights, and not empowered to enforce morality.

Murder, rape, assault, stealing are all morality

 

[Boss]

My claim is that government should be restricted to protecting our rights, and not empowered to enforce morality.

I actually agree with this... to a degree.

I'm a libertarian, so I embrace individual liberty. I think people should basically be free to do as they please as long as it isn't harming others or society. Certain immoral behaviors harm society and others, so I have a problem with them and can't support an individual's liberty in those cases. I have the right to express my opinions based on my own moral criteria as do you and everyone else. ALL of our laws are the manifestation of someone's idea of morality. That's their entire purpose! To impose a certain "moralistic" standard on the collective society in which we live. We see this in virtually EVERY law on the books. You'll find it difficult to pinpoint a law that isn't fundamentally rooted in some idea of a moral standard.

Where I break this down is between the powers of FEDERAL government as opposed to State governments. I believe the duty of the Federal government is to basically protect our natural rights which are inalienable. Nothing else. Any societal or cultural "morality" issue should be handled in the order of hierarchy with regard to the maximum individual liberty.... What does THAT mean, Boss?

Here is the hierarchy of individual liberty... 1) Self- the individual has 100% freedom to do as they please. 2) Home- the individual has limitations on freedom pursuant to rules of the house. 3) Community- the individual has limitations on freedom pursuant to rules of the community. 4) State- the individual is limited based on collective views of their state. Wherever the lines can be drawn by the "will of the people" and collectively established, that's where it should happen. But it should always attempt to follow this hierarchy of individual liberty.

 

[Boss]

Murder, rape, assault, stealing are all morality

So is speeding or parking in a fire lane. EVERY law is rooted in a principle of morality at some level. It's virtually impossible to give me an example of a law that isn't.

 

[ding]

Before space and time were created the laws of nature were already in place. The potential for all realities existed before space and time existed because those laws of nature were in place before space and time. Everything which has unfolded since space and time were created occurred because of the laws of nature. Moral Laws existed before beings that know and create existed. Moral Laws were waiting in time for beings that now and create to catch up to them, thus realizing its potential and fulfilling their role in progressing our conscience and consciousness. So where did the moral laws come from? They came from God who is existence itself; who s reality itself.

Where did you come up with all that? Did you form your own religion or cobble pieces together from others?

Laws come from man, they differ from state to state, country from country.

I see. So slavery can be moral if a society decides it it moral?

 

[ding]

You can not legislate morality!

I agree. It is not moral if you are forced to be moral.

no one is forced to be moral

But just like the bible don't follow the rules and get punished although the punishments of man aren't quite a sever as the ones god uses

Oh and moral laws come from the minds of the people who wrote them

Secular laws try to force people to be moral.

Did you ever see God trow anyone in prison? But since you don't believe in God it is illogical for you to argue that God's punishments are more severe than man's.

If you believe that morals are defined by man then you believe morals can be anything man says they are. That is a slippery slope.

There's nothing slippery about it. Morals differ wildly across the globe. I can't even be disputed. Morals differ here, all over the place. Some people think an adult having sex with a 12 yo is moral.

Perception of morals differ. The highest possible standard doesn't. When man normalizes his deviance from the highest possible standard, predictable surprises will occur. Gradualism is the cultural marxist practice of eroding standards of morality. In fact, you just proved that moral relativity is a slippery slope with your statement that some people believe that it is acceptable for an adult to have sex with a 12 year old.

 

[Boss]

So slavery can be moral if a society decides it it moral?

Go study the first 85 years of US history man! The government condoned it, the congress condoned it, presidents condoned it, courts condoned it, the general public condoned it. They didn't do that on the basis it was immoral. They justified the morality of it by distorting how we define "people" or "humans" or "citizens."

Again, contradictory to your OP, the parameters of morality CHANGE.