I am a good person and I don't need a god for that

Reason, huh?

Got any?

 

Yes. I reason that you shouldn't murder babies for the crimes of their ancestors. Do you agree or disagree? I you refuse to answer, then I will refuse to answer your subsequent questions.

 

Post #66. Good people must have very short memories...

 

Yes. I reason that you shouldn't murder babies for the crimes of their ancestors. Do you agree or disagree? I you refuse to answer, then I will refuse to answer your subsequent questions.

 

Lol, your reason is that you reason!

Does not sound reasonable to me. Let me help you out -

"The reason theft/murder is wrong is because _______"

Fill in the blank Yardmeat. But you do not, cannot, and will not.

Why? No Reason.

 

No, it's not okay for me to kill babies for the actions of their ancestors, exactly like it is wrong for a parent kill a baby because the parents like to fornicate and destroy the consequences.

As far as God taking babies, He made them and He takes them. Exactly like He is going to take you.

 

If I got anything wrong about your position, I apologize, but that isn't a lie. I honestly thought you were telling the truth when you said you agreed that it is immoral to kill a baby for the actions of their ancestors. If you could explain your new position, that would help.

 

If humans are just the result of evolution, then what separates any of them from any other species in the world? Is it immoral to kill a young offspring of a cow?

 

Yeah, some people are full of crap like their economic theories.
All functioning societies, if they want to continue to function, must define what is murder. Who is taboo to kill to maintain social order. We may in retrospect think an owner killing a slave is murder, but to the owner it wasn't. In the future people may think the death penalty was murder. Some types of social order do get it quite wrong on who can be killed but they generally don't thrive or are forced to change. Where is the Third Reich and Khmer Rouge now?

 

So it is okay to kill babies for the actions of their ancestors if God tells you to, but it is not okay otherwise? If that's what you are arguing, then you have no objective morals. You are preaching Divine Command Theory, which is arbitrary, subjective, and anti-Biblical.

 

You still refuse to actually answer my question. Once you do, we can move on, but you refuse to do so. I still can't tell if you actually believe it is okay to kill babies for the crimes of their ancestors or not. Why can't you provide a simple answer? I don't know anyone else who waffles when asked it if is okay to murder babies.

 

Morality has two elements to it -- objective and subjective. Both overlap each other in some ways. Children are not born with a set of moral values, they are learned. That makes moral values objective to each and every human being until they are taught and adopted at which point they become subjective morals. Even in our world as adults not all morals are subjective, if a being doesn't share the same morals. To that being, your subjective morals are objective to them. The only real question is: How did moral values rise in the humans? If morals are simply subjective, then why don't we all share the same morals?

 

I'll help Greeny. To the Israelites it was not murder because the Pharaoh had threatened to kill their first born. It was "self defense".

 

But I'm talking about the Amalekites, not the Egyptians. And how is it "self defense" to kill babies and livestock for the crimes of ancestors of the babies from several centuries before?

 

Ever heard of blood oaths? It was culturally expected that children would revenge their parents deaths. This could be considered preemptive defense.

 

So why kill the livestock? Was the livestock going to declare a blood oath? And why were there other cities where Israelites, instead of killing ALL of the babies, kept the girl babies for themselves, as opposed to this case, where all babies were to be murdered? Let me guess: have a nice day? Also, this had been centuries before. Did every previous generation of kids forget about this but this one was going to somehow be different?

 

The Israelites were not allowed to profit from the deaths of others.

 

Then why wasn't there an order in all of their other wars to kill all of the livestock and the baby girls? Why were they, instead, told to take the virgin girls for themselves in other cases? And why were they told to kill babies for what their ancestors had done centuries before? I don't understand y'all's eagerness to defend infanticide.

 

Because of the way the Amalikites dealt with the children of Israel they were treated as a special case. That's what you call the righteous judgement of God. An eye for an eye.

 

"Your ancestors a few centuries ago would have killed my babies so I'm going to kill your babies" is an insane defense. The "God" you are defending is indistinguishable from a baby murdering demon.

 

Culture changes. You're condemning a culture because they are different than you. Are you sure you want to go down that hole?

 

I'm condemning the murder of children for the crimes of their ancestors. You are defending the murder of children. Are you sure you want to keep going down that hole? Why do you disagree that killing babies for what their great, great ancestors did is bad?

 

Good questions!

But we're they directed at Yardmeat? It looks like it so don't expect him to answer.

 

I already explained it to you. You should know by now that repeating the same questions over and over again will get you nowhere.

 

You guys can keep defending the murder of children all you want. I'm personally against it. I'm sorry the two of you have expressly disagreed.