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.
People like using this argument in various threads of this forum.
Given their position then, they must believe murder is okay for those people who consider it to be okay (which is, in fact, most murderers). If morals are truly subjective, then murder can only be illegal in a legal context.
So for example, a "morals are subjective" proponent can't say "it is wrong to kill." They must only say "it is currently illegal to kill." and they must also say "if the murderer thinks it's okay to murder, then it's okay for him/her, and it's not my business to change their opinion"
If the legal context ever changes, (as it has for, say, abortion), then these people must accept murder as okay for people who think it's okay, and legal, but can only refute it by saying "but it's not my kind of thing."
This is very dangerous thinking, which is why I believe progressive liberalism is absolutely destructive to societies.
Last edited by DonJuanQuixote; 12-11-2016 at 06:14 PM..
If morality is subjective, then by definition there is no morality.
Regarding abortion, there will always be people who value their own personal convenience over anyone or anything else. People come up with very inventive (and usually stupid) arguments to justify terminating a life. Things such as "it's like a cancer" or "it is a parasite within my body," both of which require a complete and fundamental lack of knowledge of science to accept. People also claim that a fetus is not alive until it can support itself, which is odd because that's not a requirement for the definition of life. In fact, the only thing true is that the people who attempt to justify abortion are people who are attempting to justify their either complete irresponsibility or their own stupidity.
Speaking Of controversies, who do you like tonight, the Giants or Dallas? I'm rooting for the Giants, but expect the Cowboys to win. Kick-off in 15 minutes!
Also I would find the argument about abortion a LOT more convincing if the people making the argument acted like they cared for people.
Whenever people say "care for people," that invariably means "raise my kids for me." Like "oh, if you were really against abortion, then you'd let me continue to have as many kids as I want and then you would make sure that they were all taken care for completely." How about the simpler solution? If you care about people, just don't have a kid that you don't want? I'm pretty sure that satisfies both sides of the argument. No abortion. No suffering kids. Oh, wait, it requires liberals not to be completely irresponsible, which is pretty impossible.
Let's assume you are female and you are about 10 weeks along and the doctor tells you the baby inside you has massive deformities, undeveloped heart, missing part of his/her brain and will be profoundly in a vegetative stateforever, and will need round the clock care and will not live likely passed 3 months old and suggests a D&C which is Dialation and Curretage that removes the contents of the uterus. Doc says to keep the baby to term will cost you upwards of $2 million in care and the baby will still die, as this particular malady has 100% infant mortality death rate. What do YOU do?
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.
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.
