This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
If There is No God... (debate)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Malgayne
Morally, no, ethically, yes.
By which you mean that you personally do not agree with it, but the majority did?
There's no doubt in my mind that, had the Holocaust happened in a part of the world less important to the West, there would've have been no intervention.
This is true, and it continues to happen today with a number of genocidal nations in third world countries that the US government doesn't deem "important" enough to step in. Does that make it morally/ethically righteous for the US government to take that course of action? After all, they
are
the authority, aren't they?
Post by
buzz3070
no i think he is saying that to the nazis it was morally good to carry out the holocaust but to the rest of the world it was immmoral.
Post by
334295
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
I already gave my example on Nazi Germany. Well they may have been the majority in Germany, they were the minority when compared to the rest of the world. That's why we went to war.
Out of curiosity, are you proposing that if majority opinion had not been wide enough, or heartfelt enough, to consider it worth going to war to prevent the Holocaust, then that would have made the Holocaust a morally good thing?
I don't think that's what he meant. Simply that the world would have been forced to accept that it was. The phrase "History is written by the victors" comes to mind. I don't believe that smoking marijuana is a morally bad thing, but I have to accept that the government can punish me if I don't follow their rules.
Post by
blademeld
Morally, no, ethically, yes.
By which you mean that you personally do not agree with it, but the majority did?
Yes, more specifically, at the time it occured.
Like with the example of slavery, it happened among us, however, we are now appalled by it.
Post by
334295
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
307081
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Malgayne
Even if you believe in god and a moral absolute handed by him,
you are still choosing your own morality by choosing to belive in god!
It's amazing to me that religious people don't realize that. Even if you say, my god said killing is wrong, you're making the choice to use a particular god as your athority and thus you are essentially deciding your own morality.
This is an argument that pre-assumes that there is no God.
If there is an actual, factual God, then saying that believing in His existence is a "moral choice" or a "religious choice" is nonsensical. That's like saying that believing in carbon is a "moral choice" that everyone has to make for themselves. Whether or not you believe in carbon, it continues to exist.
IF there is a God, then He exists whether or not we choose to believe him or choose to accept his authority.
Yes, more specifically, at the time it occured.
Like with the example of slavery, it happened among us, however, we are now appalled by it.
This is still dodging the question a little bit, if you don't mind my saying so. Let me ask it this way: Do you believe that if slavery could be prevented, it would be a good thing?
Likewise, racism still contines to be widely prevalent throughout the United States. It's fairly clear that no matter what we preach as our actual "moral code", the vast majority of citizens of the United States still feel that some degree of racism is acceptable. If majority rules, then is racism ethically correct?
Post by
TheMediator
I wonder if my post got lost in the shuffle...
I read it, it didn't really say anything new though.
Anyways, this Nazi thing is getting quite off topic IMO. It doesn't really argue things one way or the other - because "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is excused in plenty of scenarios, so you couldn't say one way or another if it applies to the Holocaust or not
then is racism ethically correct?
There isn't absolute right or wrong. Yes, if the majority of the people say racism is ethically correct, that's what they say, but that doesn't make things right or wrong.
Post by
Malgayne
I wonder if my post got lost in the shuffle...
I read it, it didn't really say anything new though.
Anyways, this Nazi thing is getting quite off topic IMO. It doesn't really argue things one way or the other - because "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is excused in plenty of scenarios, so you couldn't say one way or another if it applies to the Holocaust or not
It's important because it's a good example of something that pretty much everyone attending the argument believes is wrong. If you prefer we can switch to something more exciting, like baby-eating. :P
Post by
307081
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
334295
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
It's important because it's a good example of something that pretty much everyone attending the argument believes is wrong.
So then are you saying because most people believe its wrong, its wrong? I thought that's what you were arguing against?
Post by
Malgayne
It's important because it's a good example of something that pretty much everyone attending the argument believes is wrong.
So then are you saying because most people believe its wrong, its wrong? I thought that's what you were arguing against?
Precisely why I'm using it as an example—Everyone agrees that baby-eating is wrong, but does that fact suddenly change if we were the only people in the whole world who thought so?
Except that a number of people have attempted to argue in favor of baby-eating, to spite me. :P
Post by
Laihendi
What decides what is 'good'?
Religious and political leaders, at least in this country.
Malgayne, as crazy as this sounds, eating babies is wrong according to your morals, but not necessarily everyone's. There is no universal right and wrong when it comes to morals, only what's right to you and what's right to someone else.
Post by
Malgayne
Let me try it this way instead: Is baby-eating wrong because it's wrong? Or just because we say it is?
Post by
334295
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Well I think everyone agrees that the point of living is to enjoy life.
So, if someone isn't enjoying themselves, is it acceptible to kill them, since there is no point to thier life?
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.