Religious Morals Are Meaningless.....

I've always felt that morality is irrelevant and that it is ethics we should concern ourselves with when considering human behavior. Morality is too subjective. Example: the young men who flew the planes into our buildings on 9/11 were acting morally according to their conscience, but their actions were unethical. Murder is not always immoral, but it is always unethical. Morality is in the eye of the beholder. It's a subtle distinction, but an important one.

 

Is there a difference that is substantial between "moral" and "ethics"?

"eth·ic (thk)
n.
1.
a. A set of principles of right conduct.
b. A theory or a system of moral values: "An ethic of service is at war with a craving for gain" (Gregg Easterbrook).
2. ethics (used with a sing. verb) The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy.
3. ethics (used with a sing. or pl. verb) The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession: medical ethics."

 

"In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so."
Immanuel Kant

Murder is always immoral. There's for example not a difference in murdering a woman or to do a planful execution of her baby in her womb without any real need to do so. If someone would say "Abortion became moral because the people in the western democracies decided so" then this would be nothing else than a pi-bill. Laws and moral are different things. Morality allows us to control wether laws are senseful or destructive.

In Germany for example in the moment six Presbyters of an evangelical community have some problems because they gave a person asylum in a church. This situation forced the state to correct a mistake. On the other side the state likes to force this people to say "never again we will break laws of the state" - but the moral is on the side of the presbyters. Moral forces people sometimes to break laws although they are not criminals.

http://youtu.be/sW-rhAb1MiA

 

If there is no real need to have an abortion then why on earth would a woman plan it? You're not making any sense. Unless, of course, you appoint yourself arbitor of the woman's needs.

 

It is criminal to break penal law. That's what criminal means. That you apparently don't think of them as criminal only indicates that you make no real distinction between morality and law. Which, if not an error by itself, is prone to cause erraneous conclusions.

 

I HATE IT REALLY VERY MUCH IF SOMEONE ASKS ME IN SUCH A STUPID WAY SOMETHING WHAT IS NO QUESTION AT ALL. Stop this propagandistic bull(*)(*)(*)(*) if you are speaking with me. And by the way: in most cases are men responsible for abortions and not women. I hope you don't like to "discuss" with me now about the millions over millions of "reasons" why people are murdering their descendants and are creating a world where the children of the children will d-a-m-n their ancestors because we will be in their eyes ugly brutal beasts without any humanity who had caused their very bad living conditions.

http://youtu.be/Gwrm8UK1VIk

 

You still haven't answered the question: Why would an abortion be planned if there is no real need for it?

 

I don't answer this "question". You are making the statement "women are planing abortions". I never in my life met only one woman who planned an abortion - but I met someone who told me that he will kill me in a legal way if the Nazis will take the power again in Germany.

http://youtu.be/DYhzYFblATE

 

Laws are a waste of time. If it needs a law then something went wrong and someone doesn't know how to solve problems any longer. A world without laws is thinkable - a world without moral not - it would be a hell.

http://youtu.be/7Ty_0PcWyy0

 

Joo know, it's really tiresome when you keep making the Is/Ought Fallacy.

This one's just wrong on so many levels. It assumes that A) Religious people follow religious morals, that B) Religious morals are the "objective" ones, that C) Prisons operate based on morals, and that D) The morals the prisons would operate upon are the "objective" ones.

 

No answer required, of course.

I did indeed take the liberty of assuming that "a planful execution of [a womans] baby in her womb" referred to the procedure of abortion.

Of course if you meant something like a 'planful' kick in a pregnant womans stomach to kill her baby (?) then I assumed wrong. Even then, though, it is rarely the same as murdering a woman.

Well, I've never met a woman who chose to have an abortion without planning it first, seeing the choice is of course a planning in and of itself, so I can only take it as you've never met a woman who chose to have an abortion.

 

I don't have any idea why you like to discuss with me about abortion and your very strange use of the word "plan". I don't care any longer how the people are reasoning that deep sins are great deeds, that murder helps life, that good is bad, that evil is wunderful and so on and so on ... It's a waste of time to speak about. Time and nature will solve this problem. I'm only sad that so many innocent hunman bings and other creatures have to die because of such wrotten forms of human thoughts - but I can live with this deep existential suffer.

http://youtu.be/W9uT39TsChc