Nathan, slavery is immoral; so is animal cruelty.

Do not feel compelled to click on my ad above. – BUM

 

“Now come on, surely if, as you say, it should be obvious to a non-religious person that slavery is immoral, you can say why.” – Nathan

 

Of course it is.

 

I have an innate moral sense that lets me know what is moral and what is immoral. I can internally and empirically detect moral/immoral statements in much the same way that I can detect the difference between colors, or flavors.

 

What is moral is not arbitrary, and I cannot choose what is moral and what is immoral…

 

It’s a sense that can be cultivated as well – a person can learn to crave healthy food for example.

 

It’s innate in people, although some people can be physiologically broken, like people who are colorblind – sociopaths for example. It can also take on cultural flavors – what a Thai person is craving for dinner tonight is probably different than what an Ethiopian is craving for dinner tonight – that doesn’t mean that there aren’t objective claims about what constitutes a food and what constitutes a poison.

 

Now, you made a few mistakes when talking about why you think slavery is wrong. First of all, as you agreed earlier, you cannot say such a blanket statement. Remember? Genocide is only sometimes wrong, as you say.

 

You should have said, “slavery is only sometimes wrong” – or at best, “slavery is wrong in all the times that God is against it” – which may be every time you’ve ever heard, but that hardly extrapolates.

 

Further, as my entry on slavery details, God many times does not have an issue with slavery at all.

 

Finally, I think you have this same internal moral sense.

 

I would guess that if you were walking down the street and saw a person torturing a dog to death on his front lawn that you would feel that this man is doing something wrong.

 

The unfortunate thing about a person who thinks that what is moral and immoral comes via divine fiat alone (rather than some innate moral sense), is that you wouldn’t be able to say that what the man is doing is wrong, unless you have access to what God has decided on the manner of animal torture.

 

Care to look for a Bible verse that condemns torturing a dog to death?

Or do you want to admit that you don’t think that animal cruelty is a moral issue?

Perhaps you have a direct line to God and He answers your questions about whether animal cruelty is wrong in this case?

 

free web tracker

shirt

Log in to write a note

Wow. I think someone has just lost a debate… Johnny 5

December 1, 2008

If you are not convinced that slavery is immoral then I would like to make you my slave.

December 2, 2008

Isn’t the answer to that T-shirt _supposed_ to be “turn the other cheek?” If that is so, then you can proceed with an infinite slap combo: slap one cheek. That immediately means that the OTHER cheek must be presented. When you slap that cheek, the original cheek now becomes OTHER. This infinite slap combo may proceed as long as you don’t slap both cheeks at once.

Tak
December 3, 2008

LoL NotKieran That shirt rules. I would totally rock something like that if I could get it in less hideous colors.

December 3, 2008

Had to move in there, but I managed to get this written, so it’s at my own diary at http://www.opendiary.com/entrylist.asp?authorcode=D781466 It’s quite long, so the tail end of it actually had to be put in a second entry, Counterpoint part II.

I’ve no problem rejecting any moral system that decrees acts moral or immoral without taking the of the consequences of those acts into account. We have the ability to objectively discern harm from benefit, but we cling to rules that discourage us from using this ability. Cutting open a man’s chest could be life-saving surgery or life-ending assault. The difference is in the details. Religiontends to declare those details unimportant in favor of telling us, “Just don’t ever cut people open.” At a cursory glance it looks like common sense, but on closer examination it’s a horrible oversimplification that can have all kinds of negative results. I think we like those oversimplifications because it’s easier to assume something is always wrong than to do the work and risk the mistakes of judging the world on a case-by-case basis.