Discussion Concerning morality

[Quintilian]

Whilst it has been given much conversation, the matter has not been given fair representation, it is easy to assume morality relative rather then objective; but no conversation is fair without understanding the choices at present.

1. Morality comes from natural law which the creator has put in place to govern over the behaviors of intelligent sentient beings, that he has put these laws into effect for the maximum and optimal quality of life. Whereby, the quality of life is dependent upon the quality of one's behavior in part.

2. Morality is subjective and not objective, when considering the behaviors and thoughts of morality, if it were evident that what is good and bad were true, why do many cultures find different behaviors which would be considered universal bad? For example, in Japan it is socially expected for one younger to give his seat to the eldest, where as in America it is little if ever done.

3. Good & evil exist as what is beneficial to one another; what is of my benefit may be disadvantages to you, reality therefore being amoral, how can you judge a behavior for being good or bad when circumstances may be completely against the notion?

4. What is moral is what is legal, if it is deemed so by law and voted by legistlation, then it must be carried out. For when teo laws contradict it is the law that affects the greatest number, hence it is only right or wrong on a social basis.

These options are written out as fair as possible, you may add your own, and thereby proper deduction can conclude for yourself.
I stake my claim on number one.

 

[Shinrinken]

Remember people don't have the same morals as you and when they don't have it, don't let them have yours when it time to pass judgement on them. I reminded of this quote when it comes to morals and how we should use them towards others.
"When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles."
So, when the so called leaders of a group talk about wanting to put people who don't vote for their side in camps, calling for riots and attacks on those who aren't in lockstep with them, and basically admitting using lawfare on their political rivals. Don't act like they have morals or should be treated like they can be trusted. For when they get the chance they would do anything they can to strip you of your rights with a smile on their face and act like they're a hero for doing so.

You should be better then those with none, yes. However, those who make it a war without rules don't get to complain when you agree to the new terms and use it against them. As well as deny them what they fucking admit what they would have deny you if they won. At the end of the day don't be a slave to your morals. However, don't be quick to toss them out at the first sign of trouble.