Morality questions

Former Member

If morality is truly subject to one's personal feeling, logically should there even be a judicial system?

If rape, stealing, etc. are moral absolutes then why make them illegal if moral subjectivism paramount?

Former Member

Well basic pragmatism, the justice system is not base on moral philosophy it is based on what society broadly wants to have as its rules........

Former Member

And why are those 'rules' in place?

Why should murder or rape be illegal? Aren't they the results of moral judgements?

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
And why are those 'rules' in place?

Why should murder or rape be illegal? Aren't they the results of moral judgements?

and come to think of it lets just say f*** it to human rights as well - after all they are just moral judgements too

:rolleyes:

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
And why are those 'rules' in place?

Why should murder or rape be illegal? Aren't they the results of moral judgements?

No they are pragmatic judgements based on the majorities decsion to make their lives safer.

People do not like being raped (:rolleyes: ). The govt deals with law and order thus the people make the govt protect them from rapists so that there lives are better.

It isn't really about morals.........

Former Member

It is about morals. Why should it be wrong to kill or steal?

Society has determined that these actions are wrong and has legislated against them.

Former Member

Yes it has determined they are wrong through simple self-interest, not philosophical musing........

Can you support your view that legislation is based on morality, other than that attained through societies self-interest?

Former Member

Not all legislation is based on morality and that is not my point.

and come to think of it lets just say f*** it to human rights as well - after all they are just moral judgements too

Why?

Former Member

I know what you are saying about subjective morality but that cannot work as the basis for a stable society thus majoprit rules generally apply so as to maintain some order.........

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
Why?

I was following your logic, thats why

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat


Why should murder or rape be illegal?

Your off your trolley you are :rolleyes:

and here is me who is not very educated and even I know the answer to that :rolleyes:

Former Member

I'm not 'off my trolley'.

I'm simply asking a question pertaining to moral philosophy.

Murder and rape must be considered unethical for a reason.

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
I'm not 'off my trolley'.

I'm simply asking a question pertaining to moral philosophy.

Murder and rape must be considered unethical for a reason.

are you "encouraging" debate or do you really think rape and murder are okay?

perhaps I'll turn this around
mono - why should they be made legal - what are the advantages, the benefts to society and individuals?

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
Murder and rape must be considered unethical for a reason. [/B]

ok I will try to write this as simple as I can, I see that your finding it hard to understand what rape actually is.

Someone grabs me and drags me into the bushes, he wants sex and I don't, he forces me to have sex so he is violating my body, he has abused me, that is what rape is. Just because someone wants to have sex they are not allowed to just stop any person and demand it and thats why they will get charged with the offence, because rape IS a serious offence.

That any clearer :rolleyes:

Former Member

Any act that harms another human being or ends their life is regarded as morally wrong because humans instinctively want to protect human life. It's then made illegal to try and prevent it happening. Punishing those who commit such crimes is aiming to deter people from committing it.

Laws are a reflection of society's fears and attitudes. We don't want people being killed, harmed or raped so we make it illegal.

So murder should be legal?

Former Member

Tell you what Mono, why don't we just privatise everything? Let's put the whole country on the stock market and sell everything off to the highest bidder - our morals can be bought by Jeffrey Archer, our freedom of the press can be bought by that nice Mr Murdoch, our culture can be bought by a merger of Coca-Cola and McDonalds.

We can even have franchises for murder, you pay £500 and that nice Mr Shipman will give you a form giving you clearance to shoot your postman. Instead of love we'll just have all women auctioning themselves on EBay for a night of sexual favours. Let the market decide! :rolleyes:

Former Member

I think shooting the rich and re-distributing their wealth amongst the rest of us should be legal.

Former Member

I think shooting the rich and re-distributing their wealth amongst the rest of us should be legal

That suggestion was so stupid it made me laugh out loud.




(You werent joking either were you?)

Former Member

Originally posted by Aladdin
I think shooting the rich and re-distributing their wealth amongst the rest of us should be legal.

That is a very GREAT disincentive to effort, why should I go out and bust a gut now, your just going to shoot me for doing it, I'll just be lazy and go buy myself a new gun then go and shoot you

Former Member

Yes I was joking Matadore. My views are not that polarised!

But if you are familiar with Monocrat's beliefs you will know that he thinks collecting taxes is stealing, or individuals should be allowed to own nuclear weapons since property is a right- in addition to what he was arguing about on this thread. So my remark was directed at him, tongue-in-cheek.

Former Member

So murder should be legal?

I don't think murder should be illegal as it violates a person's right to life.

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
I don't think murder should be illegal as it violates a person's right to life.

non sequitur

Former Member

*Sighs with relief*

Former Member

How doesn't that logically follow?

Are you disputing that a right to life exists?

Former Member

You've said you think murder should be legal because it violates a persons right to life?

Former Member

But surely is a person is mudered their right to life has been violated?

Are you saying if you kill someone in defence of your own life should be legal? Or any kind of situation where someone is killed?

Former Member

Self defence is not murder. You cannot make such a comparison Elysium.

If you willfully and with malice aforethought take another person's life, that's murder (in the 1st degree). In the heat of passion (i.e. an argument out of control) then its often deemed murder (in the 2nd degree) or in some cases may be reverted to manslaughter.

If a person is attacked and the situation evinces that fact then any resulting demise of the attacker is not usually held against the person who was forced to defend him or herself.

That said, justice is often politically motivated so just about any exception to such basic principles can be easily found.

Former Member

Originally posted by ElysiumUnknown


Are you saying if you kill someone in defence of your own life should be legal?

Yes.

You've said you think murder should be legal because it violates a persons right to life?

I haven't stated in this thread that murder should be legal.

Former Member

Actually you did Mono,

I don't think murder should be illegal as it violates a person's right to life.

reread your quote again and youll see why it was questioned.

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
Yes.

Er.... it is

Former Member

Sorry?