₦airaland Forum

Maynmann:
Yes, some countries don’t allow death sentences no matter the offence.
Even in countries that does death sentences, Have you forgotten we have different degrees of murder and not all warrant the criminal should be killed.

Also the idea of a judge and a court is a gradual human thinking, when israelites were killing women because they were SEDUCING them, which judge ruled it?

Killing someone after they killed someone, what’s the morality behind it?

You are nor making sense, God is the ultimate law giver and Judge. He could Judge anyone, societies that contravene his law regardless you agree with UT or not, it does not count.

LordReed:
Murder already means unsanctioned killing, you have already passed judegement to say it is wrong. It is like asking if wrong is wrong.

Simple question, is murder objective or subjective?

LordReed:
No it means killing is subjective. Murder is a legal term to describe unsanctioned killing.

is murder subjective?

Maynmann:
In some instances slavery is not objectively wrong right

So if a Judge Judge sentence a criminal to death it means committing murder is subjective?

LordReed:
Can you hear yourself? Now it is on to justifying slavery in the name of your god. Pathetic.

It still makes it INCREDIBLY SUBJECTIVE, you did nothing but make that abundantly clear.

So, of a judge sentence a murderer to death it means murder is subjective?

LordReed:
Are you turning to lies or are you just plain ignorant.

Leviticus 25:42
Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves.
Leviticus 25:44
“‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.
Leviticus 25:46
You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life,

Very plainly it says it is the Israelites that are not to be sold as slaves while slaves from other nations are to be viewed as property FOR LIFE.


Morality is indeed subjective and everyone has the right to choose but if you want to live amongst people then you must acknowledge other people's right to choose too. May be for people like you who want to dictate your god and religious views to other people dialog would seem weird. What is there to dialog when you just tell people what is moral and if they don’t agree with you call them devils. LoLz.

Israelities could buy slaves from outside Israel which was a form of God's judgment for their wicked ways.
Just as a judge can take a murderers life even though take one's life is objectively wrong.

.

Morality is indeed subjective and everyone has the right to choose but if you want to live amongst people then you must acknowledge other people's right to choose too. May be for people like you who want to dictate your god and religious views to other people dialog would seem weird. What is there to dialog when you just tell people what is moral and if they don’t agree with you call them devils. LoLz.

You are back again to the real issue, so if the society agree that rape is good then it is OK?

Again m, if everybody agree that something is wrong or right, that means morality in that society is no longer subjective right?

LordReed:
Actually is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. Once you introduce any form exception whether its for era or society you have made it subjective. If it was objective as you say then there'd be nothing like oh it was that time, they couldn't do otherwise. Why couldn't the god tell them stop slavery now, the same god that told them don't eat shell fish but you want us to believe the god couldn't say STOP SLAVERY NOW.

Because morality is subjective we all should be in dialog to find out what is best for us individually and collectively, not imposing dumbarse nonsense from centuries ago in the name of religion or some god.

You are not making any sense
This doesn't make sense! Exception does not imply subjectivity.

LordReed:
Actually is you who doesn't know what you are talking about. Once you introduce any form exception whether its for era or society you have made it subjective. If it was objective as you say then there'd be nothing like oh it was that time, they couldn't do otherwise. Why couldn't the god tell them stop slavery now, the same god that told them don't eat shell fish but you want us to believe the god couldn't say STOP SLAVERY NOW.

Yes God did! However, not directly.

Leviticus 19:34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.



Leviticus 25:42 For they are my servants, which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: they shall not be sold as bondmen.

God told israel they should not deal on slave trade.
Remember both the stranger and the fellow Israelites should be treated the same.

Israelites bought slaves from slave traders to relieve the slaves.

Because morality is subjective we all should be in dialog to find out what is best for us individually and collectively, not imposing dumbarse nonsense from centuries ago in the name of religion or some god.

If morality is subjective then everybody is right. You cannot tell anyone that he or she is wrong .
We can only dialogue is there is an objective standard.

LordReed:
What do you mean leave them alone? Leave them to continue fighting?

You have just shot yourself on your foot! So in modern times prisoners could be taken but refuse to the fact that war captives were actually taken in ancient times?

LordReed:
Do you think all combantants should be killed?

Why not just live them alone why taking them as prisoners?

LordReed:
LMAO! Why does it matter what era it is if the morality of it is as you say objective? What bearing does the difference in society have to play in it?

It's the other way round, because morality is objective God works to bring people out of sin.
If morality is subjective then everyone is right and should stay the way they are.

What you aren't getting is you are making it clear that the morality you calling objective is actually subjective. Bwahahahaahaha!

that is because you don't know what objective morality or subjective morality is.

Wilgrea7:
You don't seem to understand. Pointing to an arbitrary God to answer the question of where morality comes from simply doesn't work.

Let me give examples. i will try to phrase it in the same manner you did

1. If there are digital overlords (simulation argument) then it makes sense that morality would be objective because the overlords would program it that way

2. If there is an unknown part of our brain responsible for morality then it makes sense because our brains have very similar composition which would explain why we all have ingrained morality.

All these, including yours, are possible attempts to explain why we have this "ingrained morality".. but without any sort of proof, they remain just claims.

This is a situation of

1. We have something
2. We want to know the origin of this something
3. Something else must have caused this something

Be it the universe, morality, consciousness or what not. Pointing fingers to some arbitrary unproven thing does not help .. in any way

If you want to claim it's one thing or the other, then provide proof. That's all we're saying




I'm not comparing society to god. I'm merely pointing out that adding the idea of god your argument does not make the moral laws you subscribe to any less societal. Not until you can prove said god.

You are comparing society to God, your argument sees to suggest society can also determine morality, this is false and it has being proven so.

LordReed:
Yet it is being done but if it was people like you POWs would either be killed or be slaves forever. The famous US senator and presidential candidate John McCain was a POW during the Vietnam War. If it was up to you and your god he would have rotted in a Vietnamese gulag because giving him back to the US would not have been smart.

comparing two completely different cultures and scenarios.
In ancient times wars are often from generation to generations, the wars that the fathers could not win would be continued by the children.

Can you listen to yourself? You are trying to preach a morally superior position that only reveals itself to be so inferior even brutalists think it's dumb.

slavery was part of literally every human society sometimes buying slaves an mean saving them from harsh condition eg famine, people do sell themselves into slavery as a survival strategy

From what commanded the israleities on how to treat the strangers, it means slaves in Israel were better treated.

LordReed:
Come and be my slave, I promise I won't oppress you. LoLz.

POW are not slaves, they are to be given back once the war ends. When the Bible says buy slaves it says those slaves are slaves forever.

Why take prisoners of war at all?

Maynmann:
So seducing someone warrants death?m
If it is universal why did your god tell people to take virgins for themselves?
Who told samuel to kill the king, did samuel did good?
Will that king children think samuel did good by killing their father?

Seduction can be fatal if the purpose is seducing someone in other to kill him then the seductress deserves death.
Virgins obviously were not among those who slept with the men in order to lure them to their destruction.

Killing the king was justice because the king has done murdered innocent people unjustly.

LordReed:
LMAO! You won't answer because it rubbishes your position on so called objective morality. Bwahahahahaha!

You only rubbished your point of view, in reality we all know rape is wrong universally which means there is God, atheism cannot allow for this.

LordReed:
Come and be my slave, I promise I won't oppress you. LoLz.

POW are not slaves, they are to be given back once the war ends. When the Bible says buy slaves it says those slaves are slaves forever.

whether they are given back or not is not the issue, people do take prisoners of war.
You seem to think the ancient times where like this modern time. Giving back soldiers back to a nation that have sworn to destroy you from generation to generation is not the smartest thing to do

LordReed:
LoLz. Don't deflect, if rape is objectively wrong why does the Bible accept some forms of rape. When you can point to where I said atheists accept rape you have a point meanwhile answer my question,.

that is you, don't run away from what you implied.

Maynmann:
Why should there be slaves in the first place?

The people taking prisoners of war don’t have universal morality?

If someone seduces, the person should be killed according to steep.

They have, everyone know what is wrong or what is right, it is universal, but people choose to ignore it, just as they reject God.

Maynmann:
Why should there be slaves in the first place?

The people taking prisoners of war don’t have universal morality?

thee is slavery because it is a broken world of sin?

LordReed:
LoLz. Except the ones they took during war. I dunno how you can delude yourself that buying slaves or taking slaves after battle is not an acceptance of the practice of slavery.

The slaves where not taken to be oppressed, by the way why do you have prisoners of war then?
Go ahead answer

LordReed:
So why did the Bible accept certain types of rape if rape is simply an objectively unacceptable thing?

you mean atheists accept rape, yeap rape is neither good or bad it depends on society or individual preferences... lordreed

LordReed:
No, in your world it might though.

You have confessed it already. Morality is subjective meaning rape is subjective.

LordReed:
LMAO! Buy your slaves from other nations is not an acceptance of slavery. Bwahahahahaha!

The Israelities were commanded not to oppress the stranger Ms among them meaning they don't take slaves forcefully, and in those days slavery was different it was a way of getting workers etc



Exodus 12:49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

Exodus 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.

LordReed:
I didn't imply it, I stated it clearly. All morality is subjective.

Morality based on your god is also subjective because if the god changes his mind then the morality also changes.

I certainly can say something is right or wrong, what carries weight is the reasoning behind my saying so and people are free to agree or disagree. I dunno why you think things happen otherwise.

So in your world view rape can be good right?

LordReed:
What is universal morality?

that was an error on my part , rather objective morality, objective morality does not depend on society or individual preference. For example rape is wrong regardless of whether society accept it or not, regardless of individual preference or not. It is wrong because it degrades because people are made in God's image.

LordReed:
The same universal morality that accepted slavery at some point then said slavery was bad at another?

The bible never accepted slavery, but however the bible takes a different approach. This approach was gradual holistic, God's plan is to change the heart of men true his love and forgiveness this he achieved through Jesus.

LordReed:
Wrong. That's what you are saying. You wrote it very clearly if your god says something is good then it is good.

You asked for the basis of my morality and I gave it, it has nothing to do with what society says.

yes that is what you implied, you said morality is subjective and you used north Korea as an example,

Your so called objective morality DOESN'T exist since all morality is subjective. In your case you think your morality is based on what your god says which is in itself subjective.

morality is objective because there is God, objective morality exist that is why you could say rape is wrong, murder is wrong racism is wrong, that is why you know North Korea is wrong for abusing humans on and on.
If morality is subjective then you cannot say anything is right or wrong since it all depends on individuals or society.

budaatum:
No Steep, I am not comparing any god to man. What I am comparing is you to your own opinion of your god.

Your god is after all not an object but a subject created by subjective you, though I'm aware you aren't aware you create your god in your own image.

There is no such thing as your god here, I am talking of God as a real being.

If there is God then morality would not be subjective simple, trying to push a subjective view point into a world where there is God does not work, it is a contradiction.

Wilgrea7:
The problem I have with this your "society defines morality" narrative against the atheists, is that you don't realize how much this applies to you. Like, you're describing yourself in so much detail and you don't realize.

The only difference between you and the people you claim get their morality from "society", is the unproven claim that a "god" said so.

Till now I'm yet to see any god who claims to have created us, spell out its so called moral laws in a clear way for everyone to see or hear. All we have are reports of people claiming they heard from a god. claims that cannot be substantiated in any way.

What's worse is that these so called "laws of gods" are very, very identical to the societal laws you would expect.

There are time frames in the bible where things slavery, polygamy, apostasy and genocide were perfectly normal in the society at the time.

Even today, you're doing as society tells you. But not this society. the society of several years ago. The only difference is that you claim a god told you to do so.

A god who is still yet to be proven, and whose method of revelation seems to be almost identical to someone who received no revelation, but claimed he did so.

My world view is, if there is God then it makes sense that morality would be objective, because he made everyone and we all belongs to him, so it makes sense that what is right in one place would be right every where.
That is why, North Korea would be wrong for denying right to life.

What you are trying to do is compare society to God which is illogical because the definition of God and the definition of society is not the same.
Just because birds can fly does not mean fishes should fly.