Do you have a moral standard?

[iguana_tonante]

So you can offend the majority because it is ok? What kind of morals are those?

My point is that everybody get offended. Difference is, a minority is actually in danger of having their rights taken away from them (e.g. too many to list). A majority, on the other hand, is not.

So, while there are people that can't legally marry, or adopt, or even walk hand-in-hand in certain places without the risk of being assaulted, some Christians in the US must invent such silly thing as "the war on Christmas" to fulfill their fantasy of being oppressed.

 

[Galactus]

Well we are not talking about some Christians, we are talking about Michael who does not have those views. So you are judging him by other people. As I said a very weak moral standard.

 

[StarryEyed]

Regarding the "Which standard?" question, I think I answered that. I believe there is indeed one standard, held by God, outside of myself and objective in that anything I do or say can be measured against it. It is an immutable standard, and there are definite right or wrong answers. The only thing is that I realize I must attempt to interpret the best I can, and act the best I can, which due to my nature as human means I WILL err and I WILL interpret incorrectly.

If this divine moral blueprint needs to be interpreted, it is useless. You will interpret it through your own moral filter. Faced with a vague, self-contradictory text, what else can you do? In the end, you decide your own morality - just like the rest of us.

The problem lies, rather, in human nature...given that we are of finite mind and subject to error, most anything we engage in excepting hard mathematics (as opposed to statistics, especially statistics on human nature) will require interpretation...and in my belief, prayer and meditation. Again, though, this is why humility is so important, because we do not simply attain a state of perfection because we say we are Christian--we're always growing and have to be ready to accept correction in the process of learning.

I agree whole-heartedly about the humility part. A lack of humility combined with the belief that you have access to a divinely-inspired moral standard is a very bad combination - particularly when the "standard" is wide-open to interpretation.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Well we are not talking about some Christians, we are talking about Michael who does not have those views. So you are judging him by other people. As I said a very weak moral standard.

Going back on topic, Micheal claimed to posses The Truth(TM). People challenged that. How is that having a poor moral standard?

 

[StarryEyed]

Well we are not talking about some Christians, we are talking about Michael who does not have those views. So you are judging him by other people. As I said a very weak moral standard.

What's your problem!?

The OP posed a question and people are answering it honestly. I don't see any disrespect in this thread. Disagreement, sure. So what? If you can't handle people disagreeing with your viewpoint, you're in the wrong place.

 

[SeerSGB]

I try to live by a handful of rules, call them morals if you want:

1) Wife and kids first, at the expense of all else and everyone else. What is best for them comes first ALWAYS, regardless of the situation or who it might screw over

2) Never ask more of someone that I'm willing to give, and never ask someone to do something that I can do.

3) No regrets, no looking back. Once you're commmitt to a course of action/decesion, even if it goes bad, never second guess or question only learn from it and improve.

4) Adversity is a learning experience, take all you can from it and improve.

5) Friendship is friendship, business is business never confuse one for the other.

 

[StarryEyed]

I try to live by a handful of rules, call them morals if you want:

1) Wife and kids first, at the expense of all else and everyone else. What is best for them comes first ALWAYS, regardless of the situation or who it might screw over ...

Holy shit!

 

[SeerSGB]

I try to live by a handful of rules, call them morals if you want:

1) Wife and kids first, at the expense of all else and everyone else. What is best for them comes first ALWAYS, regardless of the situation or who it might screw over ...

Holy shit!

Hey, what can I say, I believe everyone and everything-- including myself-- is secondary to the well being of my family. So for me it's a no brainer: Is it what's best for them? If no, then I don't do it.

 

[Pingfah]

I definitely don't see a treat other how you want to be treated.

If I was being a dick, i'd want people to call me a dick so I could stop being a dick.

Therefore, if I think somebody is a dick, I must call them a dick. Treat others as you would want them to treat you.

What if you don't think you are doing anything wrong? What then? What if you simply say what you mean?

We all know Michael and what he believes, yet it took about two seconds for people to attack him and begin to prove him wrong. That does not seem very respectful to me in the slightest. It is those little shots that clearly show that the do unto others is not followed.

Are you seriously trying to argue that it is insulting to challenge the beliefs of somebody who considers themselves to be correct?

That's a nice little moat you've dug around yourself there.

 

[TheBrew]

My morals are simple: Don't fuck with me, and I won't fuck with you and vice versa.

 

[UssGlenn]

Here's mine

If the proposed behavior was done by everyone would the net result on society be positive, neutral, or negative. If positive or neutral the action is moral, if negative the action is immoral. Obviously the analysis on the impact on society is a bit of a judgment call, I usually measure by average standard of living.

 

[Michael Chris]

Well we are not talking about some Christians, we are talking about Michael who does not have those views. So you are judging him by other people. As I said a very weak moral standard.

Going back on topic, Micheal claimed to posses The Truth(TM). People challenged that. How is that having a poor moral standard?

I don't think I do possess it fully or at least within my conscious self. I have much to learn and that's why I said I try. I'll clarify my previous answer as well the one set down by God as found in the Christian Bible (possibly extending into the Catholic deuterocanon, but I am not certain of the nature of its inspiration).

 

[iguana_tonante]

Going back on topic, Micheal claimed to posses The Truth(TM). People challenged that. How is that having a poor moral standard?

I don't think I do possess it fully or at least within my conscious self. I have much to learn and that's why I said I try. I'll clarify my previous answer as well the one set down by God as found in the Christian Bible (possibly extending into the Catholic deuterocanon, but I am not certain of the nature of its inspiration).

The very fact that you felt the need to clarify what redaction of the Bible you follow kinda shows that you missed the point here, Michael.

You claimed that you possess the truth (or, if you prefer the wording, that your Bible contains the absolute truth). People challenged that. Galactus argues that it was poor morals for people to do that. Again I ask: is immoral to do so?

 

[Michael Chris]

Going back on topic, Micheal claimed to posses The Truth(TM). People challenged that. How is that having a poor moral standard?

I don't think I do possess it fully or at least within my conscious self. I have much to learn and that's why I said I try. I'll clarify my previous answer as well the one set down by God as found in the Christian Bible (possibly extending into the Catholic deuterocanon, but I am not certain of the nature of its inspiration).

The very fact that you felt the need to clarify what redaction of the Bible you follow kinda shows that you missed the point here, Michael.

You claimed that you possess the truth (or, if you prefer the wording, that your Bible contains the absolute truth). People challenged that. Galactus argues that it was poor morals for people to do that. Again I ask: is immoral to do so?

No, at least not to question my morality. That's fine and dandy.

 

[bigdaddy]

Don't kill anyone and if someone is a bitch to me I'll be a bitch 100 times worse.

 

[iguana_tonante]

You claimed that you possess the truth (or, if you prefer the wording, that your Bible contains the absolute truth). People challenged that. Galactus argues that it was poor morals for people to do that. Again I ask: is immoral to do so?

No.

Explain that to your worlds-devouring friend here, then.

 

[Michael Chris]

You claimed that you possess the truth (or, if you prefer the wording, that your Bible contains the absolute truth). People challenged that. Galactus argues that it was poor morals for people to do that. Again I ask: is immoral to do so?

No.

Explain that to your worlds-devouring friend here, then.

Sorry, I don't think I'm following the thread correctly. It's been a long day. I was trying to clarify my first post, I thought that's what yours was about. If I misread, I apologize for the confusion.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Sorry, I don't think I'm following the thread correctly. It's been a long day. I was trying to clarify my first post, I thought that's what yours was about. If I misread, I apologize for the confusion.

Tell that to me, I've been awake for 30 hours straight and I'm checking my dissertation for typos as we speak.

 

[Michael Chris]

Nice! Good luck!

 

[May 20]

Yes, I have a moral standard. I learned many things about what is right and what is wrong from my parents, of course. Over time, I've learned why those morals matter (or, in a couple cases, why they don't) and have interalized and 'owned' those morals. And I'm doing my best to teach my children to have a moral standard.

I'm not perfect; even in the past year or so, my standards have shifted (though not radically changed), so I expect that future shifts could occur.