U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 12-12-2016, 03:47 PM
 
Location: The middle of nowhere
9,158 posts, read 4,173,242 times
Reputation: 7770

Advertisements

Since the other thread has pretty much turned into an abortion debate, I have decided to start this thread to discuss the difference between common morality and religious morality.

I don't believe all forms of morality are equal. There is a common morality shared among humans regardless of race, religion, etc. These include prohibition on things rape, theft, murder, pedophilia, etc. These are things that without dispute harm others and that almost everyone believes should be stopped and punished by the government.

The second form of morality is religious morality. These are morals that can vary quite significantly throughout different segments of our society depending on faith or worldview. In our society these are what were once called "blue laws" and today are quite controversial because we have been pluralistic. In this category are things like gay marriage, marijuana legalization, gambling, alcohol, pornography, etc. Unlike common morality, if these things are not inherently harmful and are definitely not on the level of something like murder which is a person taking the life of another person. Some of them, like alcohol, porn, and marijuana do have negative impacts if overindulged in, but those impacts are the consequence of a personal decision, not one person harming another.

I personally believe that it's in society and the government's best interest to impose the first type of morality as its necessary for a successful society. The second type however is up to individual conscience based on his or her own faith or worldview and in a free society, the government has no business getting involved there.

Do you agree? Why or why not? If you think the government should be regulating the second set, why and how is that compatible with a free society?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-12-2016, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Sugarmill Woods , FL
6,235 posts, read 5,931,590 times
Reputation: 13647
Everyone wants government interference when it serves our own purposes, and oppose it when it doesn't, human nature is self-serving.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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