U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-13-2009, 07:26 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,767,816 times
Reputation: 35909

Advertisements

Much of what we are calling a decline in morality is in fact a willingness to question authority. To challenge the social rules, which are not based on morality, but on a wish by those in power to exercise control over society. Was our society more moral when men relegated women to second-class citizenship and denied them education and locked them out of professions? Was our society more moral when Blacks were denied access to the culture? Was our society more moral when there were no labor unions and few restrictions on child labor? Was our society more moral when widows and their children were turned out in the streets with no social system in place to aid them? Was our society more moral when the advocates of the above policies never failed to show up in church on Sunday mornings?

-------------

Wally gets a promotion and puts up a memo.
Dilbert: "This smacks of an abuse of power."
Wally: "Why else would anyone want power?"

 
Old 04-13-2009, 08:33 PM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,460,123 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Much of what we are calling a decline in morality is in fact a willingness to question authority. To challenge the social rules, which are not based on morality, but on a wish by those in power to exercise control over society. Was our society more moral when men relegated women to second-class citizenship and denied them education and locked them out of professions? Was our society more moral when Blacks were denied access to the culture? Was our society more moral when there were no labor unions and few restrictions on child labor? Was our society more moral when widows and their children were turned out in the streets with no social system in place to aid them? Was our society more moral when the advocates of the above policies never failed to show up in church on Sunday mornings?

-------------

Wally gets a promotion and puts up a memo.
Dilbert: "This smacks of an abuse of power."
Wally: "Why else would anyone want power?"
Questioning authority isn't the same as beligerant bully tactics. The difference is using the system in place designed for redress vs talking head propaganda machines, drama queen rampages with fire arms, purchasing legislation, or outright sociopathic anarchy just to name a few.

I think on some levels you're correct in that on face value our constitution was never fully realized from day one because some were 5/8ths of a human being, or zero valued chattel, by writ. The last frontier it would appear are gays. Power shifting toward equality has been very difficult when those in power derived their self worth artificially by economically vamping the esteem of others to stand taller. However, this is not moral decline I speak about. The power struggles of people less able to enforce their sense of morality on the population are equivalent of a pouty child stomping around with tantrums wanting it's way.

The tide I speak of is far greater than the sub group levels, the individual special interest or poli party. The rights of individuals having been elevated beyond their own merit encroaching on, or to the detriment of, the greater good are in question. The true character of human animals comes out when circumstances force their backs up to a wall. What are you willing to do for money if it means your child will die of a curable disease without that money? When these circumstances are orchestrated at higher echelons, there's little recourse when collusion is systemic. This is where amigo and I agree that there's an uncanny aftertaste to these greater trends.

Capitalistic muscle of boycotting or shunning behavior is rendered powerless when citizens are blinded by abstractions/ 6 degrees of separation. Who knew Kathie Lee Gifford was enslaving children for her wardrobe? I don't honestly believe even Kathie lee knew, but we've all been guilty of her 'crime'. What we've collectively voted for as valuable is showing up on every cable channel and radio wave. America is quite hideous when viewed through those lenses.

Tell all books, confessionals, reality tv shows, where's the dirt gossip rags... what's the point of airing out dirty laundry if you never mean to wash it or correct yourself present time to future? At times it feels as if the whole of america has gotten proud of being a drunkard, and those opposed are strapped for resources to cover the enormous price tag of law enforcement. True paleo conservatives have been conspicuously silent.
 
Old 04-13-2009, 11:38 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,767,816 times
Reputation: 35909
My point is that children challenging parents is considered morally wrong by the parents, who are teaching moral values to their kids. "Bad boy!" All forms of disobedience to established authority is then considered morally wrong. And suddenly we have a nation, swirling down the crapper, where poster after poster comes on and insists that is it immoral to do things that you are told not to do by the guardians of correct comportment. The concept of morality, which is philosophically a very narrow one, gets expanded to include a broad spectrum of dogmatic edicts. Already mentioned as immoral acts are things like childbirth, unemployment, and rewarding kids who get good grades.

It is very easy to see where your coming from when you declare that human sexuality is by its very existence an immoral thing unless done under papally sanctified conditions, and even the Pope is immoral because he thinks it is OK for women to have sex, even if they do not have a high paying job to pay for the cost or raising a child in the USA without any assistance.

Many people here, by the way, have what looks like a very unhealthy, nearly pathological fixation on the sexual element of morality, to the exclusion of any others.

Last edited by jtur88; 04-13-2009 at 11:53 PM..
 
Old 04-14-2009, 12:44 AM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,460,123 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
My point is that children challenging parents is considered morally wrong by the parents, who are teaching moral values to their kids. "Bad boy!" All forms of disobedience to established authority is then considered morally wrong. And suddenly we have a nation, swirling down the crapper, where poster after poster comes on and insists that is it immoral to do things that you are told not to do by the guardians of correct comportment. The concept of morality, which is philosophically a very narrow one, gets expanded to include a broad spectrum of dogmatic edicts. Already mentioned as immoral acts are things like childbirth, unemployment, and rewarding kids who get good grades.

It is very easy to see where your coming from when you declare that human sexuality is by its very existence an immoral thing unless done under papally sanctified conditions, and even the Pope is immoral because he thinks it is OK for women to have sex, even if they do not have a high paying job to pay for the cost or raising a child in the USA without any assistance.

Many people here, by the way, have what looks like a very unhealthy, nearly pathological fixation on the sexual element of morality, to the exclusion of any others.
You've ignored every post I made, reverted back to the arguments you've already stated about minutae that I specifically avoided, and now you're telling me I declared human sexuality is immoral???

I forget sometimes that people are really meaning to talk to themselves.
 
Old 04-14-2009, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Eastern time zone
4,469 posts, read 6,174,921 times
Reputation: 3481
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
My point is that children challenging parents is considered morally wrong by the parents, who are teaching moral values to their kids. "Bad boy!" All forms of disobedience to established authority is then considered morally wrong.
Not universally. Civil disobedience has a long history as a moral response to issues like slavery, war, the rape of the environment, helping the homeless. Witness the American Friends' Service Committee, the arrests of Maryknoll nuns all over the world (including at the School of the Americas), the International Solidarity Movement, Food Not Bombs, abortion clinic protesters. Whether you agree with the specific acts endorsed by any of these groups, they are nonetheless groups engaging in civilly disobedient acts based in the moral beliefs of the individuals participating.
 
Old 04-14-2009, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,767,816 times
Reputation: 35909
Quote:
Originally Posted by harborlady View Post
You've ignored every post I made, reverted back to the arguments you've already stated about minutae that I specifically avoided, and now you're telling me I declared human sexuality is immoral???
Nothing in my post implies or states that I was addressing you or your points. You come closer than most people to comprehending my position on this. I spoke in generall to those who are sexually fixated, who seem to believe that a serial killer may or may not be immoral, depending on whether he uses the missionary position in the dark with the virgin wife he met in Sunday school..

Aconite, I spoke of the fact that children are raised to regard civil disobedience as immoral, because their parents miscategorize disobedience as a form of immorality, a hardened concept they retain into adulthood.
 
Old 04-14-2009, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
857 posts, read 1,231,121 times
Reputation: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Is the lack of morals that seems to be so present in today's world destroying our society?

I'm NOT talking about religion. I'm talking about general morals. Things like people helping each other out, people taking responsibility and being held accountable for THEIR own actions, etc. There seems to be a flood of people who don't seem to care about anyone but themselves and who absolutely refuse to accept consequences for their own behavior. How is this affecting society? What will be the effects if the trend continues?

Curious as to everyone's thoughts....
What can we say, we all bought into capitalism. Money/Possesions = Happiness, those with money deserve it, those without it did something wrong. This attitude lead to 'You leave me alone and I leave you alone'. Don't talk to your neighbors, stay inside your big ass house and watch your big ass tv (its what you worked so hard for right? Big TV = More Happy). Keep human interaction to a minimum, its all a distraction that keeps you away from your tv anyway...

I am not blaming whats on tv, that is just a result of what the audience wants. What I am blaming it on is a society that could not tell you the 3rd amendment of the Bill of Rights without google but can tell you who got voted off american idol last week... we're losing touch with reality and turn to screens to distract us from the real world.. I mean look at all of us, we use an online forum to discuss all kinds of things but how many go home and discuss these same topics with their family without the tv on?
 
Old 04-14-2009, 09:38 PM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,460,123 times
Reputation: 2772
ulnevrwalk I guess some of us feel it more because the abstractions divorcing people from actual reality aren't something we grew up with full time. Are blog threads verbal x box for what % of the population? No consequence, get another screen name.
"What's real and what's for sale". ~ Stone Temple Pilots
These kids aren't oblivious by any stretch of the imagination, but jaded... that's an indictment of adults IMO. One adults who've refused to grow up ought to realize.
 
Old 04-14-2009, 09:39 PM
 
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,564,739 times
Reputation: 47459
no - lack of punishment is destroying society.
without it there is no discipline, without discipline there is no learning.
reward only works good with rats.
 
Old 04-14-2009, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,767,816 times
Reputation: 35909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
no - lack of punishment is destroying society.
without it there is no discipline, without discipline there is no learning.
reward only works good with rats.
Yeah, we've only got one percent of all adults in prison, 2 percent of all males. Come on America, let's catch up with the rest of the world and start punishing people. More than 50% of all young black males will do jail or prison time during their lifetime. We've really got to start punishing these people.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top