Does might make right?

[Arcoon Effox]

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

Arcoon Effox

Sir Kyle of Elsewhere

Artistic Layman

Are you retarded?

No, he's just deliberately obtuse for the purpose of promoting his agenda(s).

But his agenda is absolute nonsense. Bring up a topic and he'll ask you questions, and then the second he gets you into a question you can't answer, then it's "THEREFORE GOD!"

You skipped the step where he tries his hardest to manipulate the conversation into the position where you can't answer something.

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

SirPuzzle

I think might makes right is an accurate description of how morality operates in reality.

That's not to say that in theory I think it's a good foundation for morality. I'm just saying though that when you suspend your judgment and simply observe reality, might makes right is a decent (though not perfect) description of how morality manifests itself in humans.

Most humans are followers/conformists and are afraid to go against the grain. The people who are leader are usually those who have power, so it just makes sense that people are going to follow the people leading and agree with the leader's moral view, which is to say that people are going to agree in moral terms with those who wield power.

So yes might makes right does operate in reality and it's a decent (again, not perfect) predictor of the kinds of morals people pick up on and choose to believe.

Of course you do have people who go against the grain, there are always people who don't agree with the norm. But most people go with whatever is normal/average.

I could never follow something in which one isn't meant to question, and I could certainly never follow something that doesn't change when it's wrong.

Granted, it may be the norm, but as time passes, the norm changes.

[PreachingBear]

1 John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."

[ArcaneEldritchNeurons]

If right is not a synonym to ethical in this instance of use.

[Lady Vizsla]

Just because an act doesn't conform to someone's preconceived notion of what is right or wrong, doesn't mean there's something horrendous about it. I think abortion is cruel but others would argue there's nothing wrong with killing a foetus. In a materialist view, there are no objective rights or wrongs so the argument becomes pointless. Back in the day, beheading one's enemy was normal after battle. But nowadays our culture is conditioned to say, "How barbaric!" In addition when God kills someone's body, it doesn't mean his soul is gone. That is a different matter. The giver of life should have a right to take it as He sees fit. Regardless of how we feel about it.

[Arcoon Effox]

Lady Kariel

Just because an act doesn't conform to someone's preconceived notion of what is right or wrong, doesn't mean there's something horrendous about it...

So, killing people because they don't believe in the same things as you isn't wrong, then? The idea that ordering the extermination of a society for not worshiping you is wrong is actually just a "preconceived notion"?

Well, I guess what those ISIS guys are doing is A-OK, then, right...?

Lady Kariel

I think abortion is cruel but others would argue there's nothing wrong with killing a foetus.

Quick question: Why do you think that?

inb4 "'Cuz you're killing a baby"

Lady Kariel

Back in the day, beheading one's enemy was normal after battle. But nowadays our culture is conditioned to say, "How barbaric!"

So, because it happened "in ye olden dayes", that means it's OK, eh? You do realize that view supports Moral Relativism, don't you...?

Also, how do you know that your views on abortion aren't a conditioned response?

Lady Kariel

In addition when God kills someone's body, it doesn't mean his soul is gone. That is a different matter.

Is that right...? Well, that means it's no big deal to go around and kill anybody you want, then! I mean, we're only killing their body; it's not like their soul is gone... rolleyes

Y'know, you should probably provide some evidence that souls are real if you're going to suggest that their existence make killing people not so bad a thing.

Lady Kariel

The giver of life should have a right to take it as He sees fit.

Before that can be used as a valid justification, you need to prove that "God" is real, and is in fact "the giver of life".

That said, I'm still not sure that "giving life" to something would entitle the giver to take that life away. If that were the case, any parent would be able to kill their children for any reason, without any sort of recompense. (I wonder how such a thing fits into your views about abortion...?)

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

Lady Kariel

Just because an act doesn't conform to someone's preconceived notion of what is right or wrong, doesn't mean there's something horrendous about it. I think abortion is cruel but others would argue there's nothing wrong with killing a foetus. In a materialist view, there are no objective rights or wrongs so the argument becomes pointless. Back in the day, beheading one's enemy was normal after battle. But nowadays our culture is conditioned to say, "How barbaric!" In addition when God kills someone's body, it doesn't mean his soul is gone. That is a different matter. The giver of life should have a right to take it as He sees fit. Regardless of how we feel about it.

If you tell your people that you love them, you don't kill them just for being different.
If you tell your people that you condone slavery, you're plain ******** up because you allow your creation to subjugate the weak.
If you make a woman marry her rapist, you're torturing the woman more than you're torturing the rapist.
If you know/can do everything at a whim, then you should have no problem with making a world with free will and no evil, or should know how to benefit your creation without bending its will.
If nothing happens unaccording to your plan, then everything good AND BAD that happens is on you.
Also, if you know all, then nobody has free will. If your creation has its own will, then you aren't allowed to predict what they do, because they should be able to contradict you with their will. So if God can't be wrong then he knows everything we have done and will ever do. If we have free will, then he can't know everything.

If the giver of life has the right to take it away, then parents should be allowed to kill their children.
The reason we are conditioned to thing that such battle tactics are barbaric is because we have learned that, in most cases, killing another human being has no benefit. It's called ethics. You should learn it.
Also, a parasite is anything that lives off of another organisms body. So technically, a fetus is a parasite until it is born, and in such a case, especially when it's harmful to its host, the host has the choice of removing it. Maybe its saddening, but that's the case.

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

PreachingBear

1 John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."

Love isn't condoning genocide, rape, or subjugation. That's unethical, immoral, and cruel.


"Imagine, God created you, but if you're bad, he has a place of fire and brimstone and agony to send you to suffer forever and ever for all of eternity...... but he loves you...."
-George Carlin

[Arcoon Effox]

PreachingBear

1 John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."

Relevance to the topic, PLZ...?

[Sir Kyle of Elsewhere]

Arcoon Effox

PreachingBear

1 John 4:8 "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love."

Relevance to the topic, PLZ...?

Okay, this is completely off topic, but you have GOT to send me the item list for your outfit. That's a really decent Sephiroth cosplay.