Political Crossfire Forums

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

Pope Benedict XVI in his own words wrote: Having a clear faith based on the creed of the Church is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along by every wind of teaching, looks like the only attitude acceptable to today's standards... We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires.

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth.

We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

God is Love. God is Truth. God is Peace. God is unity.
God wants all to know him, everyone. Don't let lies separate you from the freedom God wants you to enjoy. If you don't believe, then why not ask him if he exists. A simple prayer, asked even in doubt, but keeps open the possibility of an answer will be answered; you can be sure of that.

"Ask and you shall receive, knock and it shall be opened for you. For the one who asks receives and for the one who knocks, the door shall be opened for him" This is a promise to you from Jesus of Nazareth.

feederband · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 4156 Location: Florida

Wallie_x wrote: If you don't believe, then why not ask him if he exists.

Ok here it goes.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Ok I'LL TRY AGAIN..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................What I'm I doing wrong Wallie? Damn I thought you were on to something...Can't believe you made me talk to my self...O'h well guess I've always been right what A relief....Any other tricks I can try to get your little imaginary friend to do something...

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Wallie_x wrote: Pope Benedict XVI in his own words wrote: Having a clear faith based on the creed of the Church is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along by every wind of teaching, looks like the only attitude acceptable to today's standards... We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires.

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth.

We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

God is Love. God is Truth. God is Peace. God is unity.
God wants all to know him, everyone. Don't let lies separate you from the freedom God wants you to enjoy. If you don't believe, then why not ask him if he exists. A simple prayer, asked even in doubt, but keeps open the possibility of an answer will be answered; you can be sure of that.

"Ask and you shall receive, knock and it shall be opened for you. For the one who asks receives and for the one who knocks, the door shall be opened for him" This is a promise to you from Jesus of Nazareth.
I'm glad you have found God, but remember that attempting to justify a stance based on Christian principles and quotations isn't going to get you very far with the people you are trying to convince: Non-Christians.

feederband · Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 4156 Location: Florida

UrielsFyre wrote: Wallie_x wrote: Pope Benedict XVI in his own words wrote: Having a clear faith based on the creed of the Church is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along by every wind of teaching, looks like the only attitude acceptable to today's standards... We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires.

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth.

We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

God is Love. God is Truth. God is Peace. God is unity.
God wants all to know him, everyone. Don't let lies separate you from the freedom God wants you to enjoy. If you don't believe, then why not ask him if he exists. A simple prayer, asked even in doubt, but keeps open the possibility of an answer will be answered; you can be sure of that.

"Ask and you shall receive, knock and it shall be opened for you. For the one who asks receives and for the one who knocks, the door shall be opened for him" This is a promise to you from Jesus of Nazareth.
I'm glad you have found God, but remember that attempting to justify a stance based on Christian principles and quotations isn't going to get you very far with the people you are trying to convince: Non-Christians.

So are you telling me if I was Christian I would of got a response..?

mojo · Joined: 08 Sep 2005 Posts: 5537 Location: Dreamland, NC

feederband wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: Wallie_x wrote: Pope Benedict XVI in his own words wrote: Having a clear faith based on the creed of the Church is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along by every wind of teaching, looks like the only attitude acceptable to today's standards... We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one's own ego and one's own desires.

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth.

We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

God is Love. God is Truth. God is Peace. God is unity.
God wants all to know him, everyone. Don't let lies separate you from the freedom God wants you to enjoy. If you don't believe, then why not ask him if he exists. A simple prayer, asked even in doubt, but keeps open the possibility of an answer will be answered; you can be sure of that.

"Ask and you shall receive, knock and it shall be opened for you. For the one who asks receives and for the one who knocks, the door shall be opened for him" This is a promise to you from Jesus of Nazareth.
I'm glad you have found God, but remember that attempting to justify a stance based on Christian principles and quotations isn't going to get you very far with the people you are trying to convince: Non-Christians.

So are you telling me if I was Christian I would of got a response..?

Well actually you did respond. So your both wrong.

Zoot · Joined: 30 Oct 2005 Posts: 2187

Quote: We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

That there are no moral absolutes and no absolute "meaning" or "purpose" in life is just a fact. It's not stated out of spite. It's uttered out of realisation. The realisation makes some people act like ****. The belief in God makes some people act like ****. They don't believe in God because it gives them an excuse to act like ****; they believe in God because it seems like it makes sense to them. People don't disagree with you out of spite, however annoying their belief or disbelief might make them.

Quote: Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

Well, I'm the greatest person I've ever known, so my individual spirituality must be the best, in my opinion.

eynon · Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 7:36 pm Post subject:

Zoot wrote: Quote: We can likewise also judge what are God's truths by the fruits they produce. Many parts of society are quickly degenerating toward an absolute moral depravity. Thanks to the lies of secularists who control much of American academia, they are spreading the amoral dogma of false absolutist diatribe with impunity. Being blind themselves, they measure only with that which they believe: there are no absolute truths -which in turn is a type of existential nihilism - existence has no meaning other than the definitions that we apply to it. That is the core tenant behind moral relativism, a.k.a. secular existentialism.

That there are no moral absolutes and no absolute "meaning" or "purpose" in life is just a fact. It's not stated out of spite. It's uttered out of realisation. The realisation makes some people act like ***holes. The belief in God makes some people act like ***holes. They don't believe in God because it gives them an excuse to act like ***holes; they believe in God because it seems like it makes sense to them. People don't disagree with you out of spite, however annoying their belief or disbelief might make them.

Quote: Sadly, nothing could be more false.

Spiritual realities can only be understood in spiritual terms. People's individual spiritualities do bear certain fruits. This also is a measure by which we can judge how close one may be to becoming a holistic person not divided by the slavery of sin.

Well, I'm the greatest person I've ever known, so my individual spirituality must be the best, in my opinion.

considering that your tag is an oxy-moron, do you still insist that you're the greatest person you've ever known? :wink:

Zoot · Joined: 30 Oct 2005 Posts: 2187

Quote: considering that your tag is an oxy-moron, do you still insist that you're the greatest person you've ever known?

How is it an oxymoron?

thefranzkafkafront · Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2006 8:05 pm Post subject:

All morals are relative.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

I thought this forum was to discuss religion, not secularism. I believe moral relativism is an impoverished lie; and so have many others whom we consider 'great' thinkers. Only shallow, ignorant and spiritually obtuse persons could believe such nihilistic nonsense at face value.

I'm sorry most of you have swallowed such empty diatribe without any true knowledge of your interior self. Your lack of spiritual awareness can only come from one source.

"It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing" Jesus of Nazareth.

You are spiritually dead.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

What others are saying:
BRAD HAMILTON (Free Republic) wrote:
Our culture is reverting to mindless savagery, pushed to the brink by the moral relativism of secularists.

The thesis of moral relativism---upon which the savagery of legalized abortion is enforced----appears to be that mankind exists in a guiltless vacuum, and is merely the sum of its private parts.....which, in this case, can be bought and sold at will.

Secularists demand that all of society kneel in obeisance to its incessant need for gratification.

The language of laws, our societal customs, and all of our cultural institutions must be gutted and should exist only to feed this carnal obsession.

The abortion savages, ACLU, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, together with left liberal and church-separation groups, are employed in this destructive objective.

The Political Correctness battering ram has been used by Dumbocratss and moral relativists---better known as the Secular Taliban and their acolytes--- to beat back believers, to silence moral people of every faith, to keep them out of the public square.

Now, it appears secularism is being outed in all of its savage parts. The abortion issue as well, is biting back.

Let the word go forth----Political Correctness is dead----killed by a wounded culture corrupted and devastated by the secularists hydra-headed PC monster.

It only remains for good people to bury secularism six feet under.

Hilmar von Campe wrote: We young Germans in the Nazi time were taught to hate and to be tough; we were taught that Christianity is something for weaklings and old women. Today young people are encouraged to engage in sexual promiscuity. They are told that the question of what is right or wrong depends on their own perception of it and that there is no absolute right or wrong. "Situation ethics" is the high sounding description of what is nothing but moral depravity. President Clinton demonstrated that concept in practice when he engaged in a sexual relationship in his office with an employee half his age, lied under oath about it, and then claimed that that saved the constitution. He still can see nothing wrong with his behavior, and neither can the millions of Americans who continue to champion him. Add to Clinton’s personal conduct his support for partial-birth abortion, his promotion of homosexuality and his appeasement of totalitarian leaders - just to name a few of his characteristic policies - and a picture emerges that illustrates in gruesome detail the end result of modern American education, including the education of American leaders.

Women's Liberation, where are you? (Hijacked by lesbianism of course)
Quote: Women once complained about being reduced to sex objects. Now, their daughters are volunteering to be sex objects.... Many who endorse provocative styles of dress have picked up on the liberal message of the '60s and taken it a step further. They see those who express distaste over the sexually explicit as hung up, old-fashioned. One young woman pointed out to me, 'It's almost politically incorrect to say that something is inappropriate.'...

"These girls are treated as objects just as surely as in any earlier generation. It's pre-liberation treatment in post-liberation disguise....

The Djin is out of the bottle
The relativist trash shows its true nature: it is utter depravity disguising itself as freedom.

thefranzkafkafront · Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:04 am Post subject:

Prove that relgious morals arn't subjective.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

thefranzkafkafront wrote: Prove that relgious morals arn't subjective.
Is that all you are capable of: coming up with nonsensical short one liners as replies? I've never seen you come up with anything near a comprehensive argument, only little sound bites of simplistic diatribe. (And please use your spell check won't you?)

The ideas of morals and virtue were expounded by the great greek philosophers, and have been around for centuries. So it is your job to discount what the greatest minds of humanity have said, not the other way around.

Fact: philosophers have never been able to prove the basis for morality on rational grounds. So why do we have morality? Because of the good it has produced over the centuries. Tell me, in your mindless relativism, is it ever o.k. to slap a child for nothing? If morals are relative, and not absolute, it should be perfectly moral to strike a child at random, if a society defined it as morally correct, right? :roll:

If we have no norms who then decides them, you? Hitler? Stalin? Clinton? Where have we gotten the ideas about what's right and wrong? Our whole system of law is based on the ideas of virtue and morality derived from Judeo-Christian ethics. Only fools would abandon a system that works. There are norms which which bespeak of morality apriori of human awareness. These are natural laws written into the fabric of creation; and those who fail to see them are usually people who never bother to meditate on the human condition.

We've seen the fruits of moral relativism 100 million dead last century at the hands of secular moral relativists reprobates and the above person wants proof.. :moon:

Moral relativism is responsible for the creation of degenerate monsters who murdered over 100 million people last century. That is proof enough that the idea is absolutely false:

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth speaking on how to discern 'false prophets.'
AND:
"It's true if it works!" John Stewart Mill

Moral relativism fails miserably on both accounts. It is dragging our country toward moral depravity. Liberals believe the behavior manifest in gay parades is normal..what idiots the secularists show themselves to be, nothing is taboo..even partial birth abortion.

Do you even have a high school diploma?

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Wallie_x wrote: I thought this forum was to discuss religion, not secularism. I believe moral relativism is an impoverished lie; and so have many others whom we consider 'great' thinkers. Only shallow, ignorant and spiritually obtuse persons could believe such nihilistic nonsense at face value.

I'm sorry most of you have swallowed such empty diatribe without any true knowledge of your interior self. Your lack of spiritual awareness can only come from one source.

"It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh profits nothing" Jesus of Nazareth.

You are spiritually dead.
Nope, I am very much spiritually alive. But, I subscribe to a different spirituality than you do.

Chaos_Leviathan · Joined: 09 Nov 2005 Posts: 88 Location: Houma, LA

Wallie you are trying to make moral relativism some type of band wagon approach to morality which it is not. Relativism is simply saying that some types of actions are acceptable under certain circumstances, and that there are actions that are morally ambiguous. To say that something is always just as wrong in a fallacy in thought brought about by strict adherence to dogma, and narrow mindedness.

Further more the deaths caused by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were not due to secularism any more than the deaths in the Inquisition, witch trials, and American Holocaust were the result of Christianity. In all those cases narrow minds and strict adherence to teachings were the cause of moral abstinence.

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

Chaos_Leviathan wrote: Wallie you are trying to make moral relativism some type of band wagon approach to morality which it is not. Relativism is simply saying that some types of actions are acceptable under certain circumstances, and that there are actions that are morally ambiguous. To say that something is always just as wrong in a fallacy in thought brought about by strict adherence to dogma, and narrow mindedness.

I will clarify. When I refer to the idea of moral relativism I am referring mostly to the many in macro-society who give blind allegiance to its basic premise: morality is relative. In my usage, 'moral relativism' is mostly a generalized figure of speech; liken to a reference to any of the other rampant myths prevalent today in modern society. Most people who believe it rely on only one fact. Morals vary, some times greatly, from culture to culture, therefore all morals are relative. That, I believe, is an impoverished lie.

later Chaos_Leviathan then wrote: Further more the deaths caused by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were not due to secularism any more than the deaths in the Inquisition, witch trials, and American Holocaust were the result of Christianity. In all those cases narrow minds and strict adherence to teachings were the cause of moral abstinence.

Hitler and Stalin were not secular? Their philosophies were not justified on the premises of Darwinism, atheism and especially secularism; in what world?

I see I did make a mistake in my wording. I should have put a subjunctive clause in my one sentence. The correction is below.
earlier wallie_x wrote: Moral relativism is *[almost fully] responsible for the creation of degenerate monsters who murdered over 100 million people last century.

later Chaos_Leviathan then wrote: Further more the deaths caused by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were not due to secularism any more than the deaths in the Inquisition, witch trials, and American Holocaust were the result of Christianity.

You lack insight about the human condition. Strict allegiance to dogma is only a small part of the problem. Humanity's self induced misery, murders, self-righteous intolerance, these are caused by humanity's tendency toward self-righteous pride, not what they believe in as religion. People simply justify their self-righteousness by what they believe. We see the same end product throughout history, regardless of what type of belief system one adhered to, whether pagan or Theocentric. So your point is only partially correct. Christianity was the dominant religion of the western society for centuries so naturally it was in the spotlight; there was no other religion in the west save small pockets of Islam.

Striped of humanities fallen nature Christianity has produced great good, where as secular humanist philosophies can say no such thing. The United States was built entirely on the ethics of Judeo-Christianity (albeit watered heavily from Protestant ideologies gleaned from the so-called 'Great Enlightenment.')

later Chaos_Leviathan then wrote: In all those cases narrow minds and strict adherence to teachings were the cause of moral abstinence.

Nice play on words, but it offers little in support your other erroneous assumptions.

UrielsFyre wrote: Nope, I am very much spiritually alive. But, I subscribe to a different spirituality than you do.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Jesus of Nazareth.

If you do not understand this profound passage, then you will not understand what I mean when I say: "You are spiritually dead."

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

What others are saying:
Quote: What is moral relativism? (defined)
Moral relativism says that (1) there are no objective normative facts, and (2) what is right or wrong is relative to particular societies or persons, or moral frameworks or perspectives. For example, clitoridectomy, the mutilation of the sexual organ of a young female, is practiced in certain communities in Africa and the Middle East. It causes a lot of pain and often has long term psychological and health consequences. Should such a practice be banned? A relativist will say that clitoridectomy is only wrong when see from a Western liberal perspective. But it is quite alright relative to certain African or Middle Eastern traditional belief systems. There is no objective answer as to whether it is right or wrong, whether it should or should not be banned. Values: Moral Relativism

PAUL JOHNSON wrote: Nietzsche saw God not as an invention but as a casualty, and his demise was in some important sense an historical event, which would have dramatic consequences. He wrote in 1886: "The greatest event of recent times - that 'God is dead', that the belief in the Christian God is no longer tenable - is beginning to cast its first shadows over Europe." Among the advanced races, the decline and ultimately the collapse of the religious impulse would leave a huge vacuum. The history of modern times is in great part the history of how that vacuum has been filled.
Nietzsche rightly perceived that the most likely candidate would be what he called the 'Will to Power', which offered a far more comprehensive and in the end more plausible explanation of human behavior than either Marx or Freud. In place of religious belief, there would be secular ideology. Those who had once filled the ranks of the totalitarian clergy would become totalitarian politicians. And, above all, the Will to Power would produce a new kind of messiah, uninhibited by any religious sanctions whatever, and with an unappeasable appetite for controlling mankind. The end of the old order, with an unguided world adrift in a relativistic universe, was a summons to such gangster-statesmen to emerge. They were not slow to make their appearance.
AND:
PAUL JOHNSON wrote: At the beginning of the 1920s the belief began to circulate, for the first time at a popular level, that there were no longer any absolutes: of time and space, of good and evil, of knowledge, above all of value. Mistakenly but perhaps inevitably, relativity became confused with relativism.
No one was more distressed than Einstein by this public misapprehension. He was bewildered by the relentless publicity and error which his work seemed to promote. He wrote to his colleague Max Born on 9 September 1920: 'Like the man in the fairy-tale who turned everything he touched into gold, so with me everything turns into a fuss in the newspapers.' Einstein was not a practicing Jew, but he acknowledged a God. He believed passionately in absolute standards of right and wrong.
He lived to see moral relativism, to him a disease, become a social pandemic, just as he lived to see his fatal equation bring into existence nuclear warfare. There were times, he said at the end of his life, when he wished he had been a simple watchmaker.
The public response to relativity was one of the principal formative influences on the course of twentieth-century history. It formed a knife, inadvertently wielded by its author, to help cut society adrift from its traditional moorings in the faith and morals of Judeo-Christian culture. PAUL JOHNSON QUOTES - MODERN TIMES

These excerpts speak for themselves.

Quote: IN OTHERS' WORDS:
"I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers."
- Viktor Frankl, "The Doctor and the Soul"
..and a very sad, 'Amen'

ToonArmyIsComing · Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 5888 Location: Ontario

Wallie_x wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: Prove that relgious morals arn't subjective.
Is that all you are capable of: coming up with nonsensical short one liners as replies? I've never seen you come up with anything near a comprehensive argument, only little sound bites of simplistic diatribe. (And please use your spell check won't you?)

The ideas of morals and virtue were expounded by the great greek philosophers, and have been around for centuries. So it is your job to discount what the greatest minds of humanity have said, not the other way around.

Fact: philosophers have never been able to prove the basis for morality on rational grounds. So why do we have morality? Because of the good it has produced over the centuries. Tell me, in your mindless relativism, is it ever o.k. to slap a child for nothing? If morals are relative, and not absolute, it should be perfectly moral to strike a child at random, if a society defined it as morally correct, right? :roll:

That's exactly the point: because of the failure to ground morality in rational terms, the Western societies have adopted a more Lockean and Hobbesian point of view where each person is involved in pursuit of happiness and is concerned with their own self preservation.

Besides, the Western societies outlaw such things as "slapping a child" because of the physical harm it causes rather than any moral values behind it. This is consistent with the puruit of happiness that I pointed to above.

Wallie_x wrote: If we have no norms who then decides them, you? Hitler? Stalin? Clinton? Where have we gotten the ideas about what's right and wrong? Our whole system of law is based on the ideas of virtue and morality derived from Judeo-Christian ethics. Only fools would abandon a system that works. There are norms which which bespeak of morality apriori of human awareness. These are natural laws written into the fabric of creation; and those who fail to see them are usually people who never bother to meditate on the human condition.

As a matter of fact I do think about human condition. The difference between us, however, is that you (and people like you) aspire to a higher morality where people are expected to perform in accordance to some extrinsic definition of morality, which often does not work while I (and people like me) am trying to establish a system based on the lowest common denominator to create a society where more people can pursue their own happiness without the extrinsic moral values being forced on them.

So in effect, you put society above the individual, I put individual above the society.

Wallie_x wrote: We've seen the fruits of moral relativism 100 million dead last century at the hands of secular moral relativists reprobates and the above person wants proof.. :moon:

Moral relativism is responsible for the creation of degenerate monsters who murdered over 100 million people last century.

If anything, religions are responsible for similar crimes throughout their history. :roll:

Wallie_x wrote: That is proof enough that the idea is absolutely false:

"And you will know them by their fruits" Jesus of Nazareth speaking on how to discern 'false prophets.'
AND:
"It's true if it works!" John Stewart Mill

Jesus of Nazareth was a man like any other man who happened to know how to speak well. Society has become a much more complex place than the days he used to walk around, so with all due respect, he doesn't seem like a good expert.

Wallie_x wrote: Moral relativism fails miserably on both accounts. It is dragging our country toward moral depravity. Liberals believe the behavior manifest in gay parades is normal..what idiots the secularists show themselves to be, nothing is taboo..even partial birth abortion.

Do you even have a high school diploma?

That's quite amusing. If anything, moral absolutists are attempting to shove their moral values on everyone and put people in jail and execute people and torture people and they want to take the US and go on crusades!!! :roll:

Wallie_x · Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 538 Location: Central California

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: That's quite amusing. If anything, moral absolutists are attempting to shove their moral values on everyone and put people in jail and execute people and torture people and they want to take the US and go on crusades!!!

Interesting dilemma, you call me a 'moral absolutist' but moral relativism is a premise based on an absolute. The idea, "There are no absolutes" (including morality) is self contradictory.

Most of your argument was comprehensive, and well thought-out, until the last part where you let out the 'Zeig Heil' mantra of the secular socialists.

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 9381

Wallie_x wrote: Chaos_Leviathan wrote: Wallie you are trying to make moral relativism some type of band wagon approach to morality which it is not. Relativism is simply saying that some types of actions are acceptable under certain circumstances, and that there are actions that are morally ambiguous. To say that something is always just as wrong in a fallacy in thought brought about by strict adherence to dogma, and narrow mindedness.

I will clarify. When I refer to the idea of moral relativism I am referring mostly to the many in macro-society who give blind allegiance to its basic premise: morality is relative. In my usage, 'moral relativism' is mostly a generalized figure of speech; liken to a reference to any of the other rampant myths prevalent today in modern society. Most people who believe it rely on only one fact. Morals vary, some times greatly, from culture to culture, therefore all morals are relative. That, I believe, is an impoverished lie.
And what exactly differentiates an "impoverished" lie from a regular lie?

Wallie_x wrote: UrielsFyre wrote: Nope, I am very much spiritually alive. But, I subscribe to a different spirituality than you do.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Jesus of Nazareth.

If you do not understand this profound passage, then you will not understand what I mean when I say: "You are spiritually dead."

You are quoting someone with no more qualification to judge my spirituality than you. You may look at him as some sort of diety or being of divine origin, but I don't. I could pull out quotes from people like Karl Marx or Mao Tse Tung, and they would hold the same weight as the quote from Jesus...absolutely none.

Whether you care to admit it or not, people can be extraordinarily spiritual, and spiritually alive, without buying in to the dogma that you choose to believe.