Zone1 Are Religions Moral???

[Quantrill]

Of course it was.

Yes. We all know that already.

Don’t go waffling. You asked a different question. You asked for the definition of morality. However, she had already provided the very definition you sought.

It seems to say that. Sure.

It’s almost as if we have a first Amendment which limits what the government can do.

I’m not sure that the government needs any “standard” about what is or isn’t moral. Certainly, our government doesn’t take directions from the Catholic Church.

The church remains FREE to condemn what they see as the “abomination” of homosexuality. The government, however, is not obliged to accept the view of the church.

Good. It needn’t be.

Not by the definition used in the OP.

Again, that depends on whether you’re asking a devout Catholic or an agnostic.

And?

That set of standards is gauged by … what?
It’s ok if you see homosexuality as immoral. But it doesn’t follow that just because that’s how you see it, that you’re correct.

As a point of reference. I don’t care whether you are gay or strait. It doesn’t affect me, either way. And if it doesn’t have any effect on us, one way or the other, then why should the government have any say in that matter?

No, it wasn't.

Apparently not.

No, I didn't ask a differnet question.

No, It does say that.

No, I am not waffling. And I didn't just ask for a definition of 'morality'. Why are you lying? Is that immoral?

The first amendment has nothing to do with judging what is moral. How stupid.

I'm not asking about the govt. taking directions from the Church. I'm asking what standard, or principle the American govt. uses to proclaim homosexuality and transsexuals as moral. Are you saying the American doesn't know what is moral or not? Which begs the question, why the hell should any believe them?

You ignore the queston again. The point is what is the principle or standard by which the American govt. has determined that homosexuality and transsexual is moral. Your failure to answer is revealing.

Well, when you say 'it needn't be' then you recognize the problem of trying to define morality. Which is what I have been saying. Your morality is not the same as others morality. And thus you can't produce the standard or principles by which you arrive at your morality...other than 'you'.

No, that is a lie. The church preaches the Bible against homosexuality. The definition given in the OP doesn't support that.

How stupid. You continue to prove my point. You say, 'that depends on who you ask'. No shit! Morality is elusive.

Why ask 'And'? I just told you.

Ask the OP what the principle and standards are, not me. She stated it. Not me. Once you figure it out, get back with me. Till then you have done nothing but prove my point.

Quantrill

 

[ding]

How about this? The death penalty is a common penalty for murder in US states. It is rarely applied.

common​

1 of 2

adjective​

com·mon ˈkä-mən

Synonyms of common


Simple DefinitionA Simple Definition is available from our Learner's Dictionary to help you understand the meaning faster.
1
a
: of or relating to a community at large : public
work for the common good

b
: known to the community
common nuisances



2
a
: belonging to or shared by two or more individuals or things or by all members of a group
a common friend

buried in a common grave

common interests

b
: belonging equally to two or more mathematical entities
triangles with a common base

c
: having two or more branches
common carotid artery


3
a
: occurring or appearing frequently : familiar
a common sight

b
: of the best known or most frequently seen kind

—used especially of plants and animals
the common housefly
c
: vernacular sense 2
common names


4
a
: widespread, general
common knowledge

b
: characterized by a lack of privilege or special status
common people

a common laborer

c
: just satisfying accustomed criteria : elementary
common decency


5
a
: falling below ordinary standards : second-rate
Oh hard is the bed they have made him, / And common the blanket and cheap …—A. E. Housman

b
: lacking refinement : coarse
… said, in his common vulgar way, the City would have to lump it.—J. K. Jerome


6
: denoting nominal relations by a single linguistic form that in a more highly inflected language might be denoted by two or more different forms
common gender

common case


7
: of, relating to, or being common stock

How about you admit you made a mistake?

 

[Quantrill]

Quantrill

The bible also says in the OT/Torah, Genesis, Deuteronomy and Samuel that the descendants of Abraham must not let any living thing survive of the Amalek. Or to destroy every nation and do not show them mercy.

Is that moral?

Whether you or any other consider it 'moral' or not is immaterial. God doesn't care for man's 'morality'. God is not 'moral'. God doesn't do 'what is right' by man's rule. What God does is right. If He kills a whole nation off, it is just and right. If he saves a whole nation, it is just and right. God does the right. And He has no problem doing it.

Man's morality is just as fickle as man is.

Quantrill

 

[ding]

Please reread my post. Paul certainly had no firsthand knowledge of Jesus and the devil in the desert as there were no witnesses.

I see.

See how easy that was?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Common Theme Of Sanctimonious Stupidity "

* All Worried About Contention While Offering To Manifest It *

1. A recent poster said that all religions are the same. As the religions having moment are the Abrahamic three, let's restrict that title to these three. Are they, or any, moral?
"The word moral refers to principles of right and wrong in behavior. It describes actions that align with standards of goodness, fairness, and honesty, or it refers to the practical life lesson taught by a story." Google.
Where does each stand on the act of lying???
2.AI Overview
Yes, Judaism permits lying, employing ruses, and using strategic deception when dealing with enemies—particularly in the context of self-defense, warfare, or to save lives. [1, 2, 3]
The Sanctity of Life (Pikuach Nefesh): Protecting human life is the highest imperative in Jewish law (Halakha). Almost all prohibitions, including lying, are suspended if it is necessary to save a person from harm. [1, 2, 3]
3. AI Overview
Christianity does not universally authorize lying to enemies. Traditional Christian ethics often hold truth-telling as a strict moral absolute. However, there is ongoing theological debate, with many interpretations distinguishing between malicious deception and "righteous deception" used to protect life.
4. In the above we find a common denominator where lying is allowed: in support of human life.
If one were to value truth from the liberal media, Islam would be in the same category.
5. But Islam is in a very different category, which, in part, explains why that religion keeps nations in the 7th century.
'According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.”
Center for Security Policy (CSP), a Washington, D.C.-based think tank
Sharia demands death for any who try to leave Islam.

Honor Killings, Illicit Sex, and Islamic Law | Muslim Sexual ...​

Brandeis University
https://www.brandeis.edu › projects › fse › honor
"The so-called “honor killing” of women and girls in some Muslim nations is one horrifying manifestation of this global phenomenon."
Consider the above when you view the Israel Hamas Iran war.

Why are us taxpayers being required to fund religious instruction , proselytizing and indoctrination to captive audiences of children and adolescents through private school vouchers , that will include madrassa ?

. Carson v. Makin - Wikipedia .
Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case related to the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. It was a follow-up to Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue.

The case centered on the limits of school vouchers offered by the state of Maine, which disallowed the use of vouchers to pay for tuition at religious-based private schools. In a 6–3 decision, the Court ruled that Maine's restrictions on vouchers violated the Free Exercise Clause, as they discriminated against religious schools and the parents who chose them for their children. The minority opinions argued that the decision worked against the long-standing principle of the separation of church and state, since state governments would now be required to fund religious institutions.

 

[alang1216]

How about you admit you made a mistake?

How about you admit you misunderstood me? For that I'm deeply, deeply sorry.

 

[alang1216]

I see.

See how easy that was?

And how unnecessary.

 

[BackAgain]

No, it wasn't.

Apparently not.

No, I didn't ask a differnet question.

No, It does say that.

No, I am not waffling. And I didn't just ask for a definition of 'morality'. Why are you lying? Is that immoral?

The first amendment has nothing to do with judging what is moral. How stupid.

I'm not asking about the govt. taking directions from the Church. I'm asking what standard, or principle the American govt. uses to proclaim homosexuality and transsexuals as moral. Are you saying the American doesn't know what is moral or not? Which begs the question, why the hell should any believe them?

You ignore the queston again. The point is what is the principle or standard by which the American govt. has determined that homosexuality and transsexual is moral. Your failure to answer is revealing.

Well, when you say 'it needn't be' then you recognize the problem of trying to define morality. Which is what I have been saying. Your morality is not the same as others morality. And thus you can't produce the standard or principles by which you arrive at your morality...other than 'you'.

No, that is a lie. The church preaches the Bible against homosexuality. The definition given in the OP doesn't support that.

How stupid. You continue to prove my point. You say, 'that depends on who you ask'. No shit! Morality is elusive.

Why ask 'And'? I just told you.

Ask the OP what the principle and standards are, not me. She stated it. Not me. Once you figure it out, get back with me. Till then you have done nothing but prove my point.

Quantrill

Wrong wrong wrong wrong and illogical.

Carry on.

 

[22lcidw]

On the contrary, Dems favor MORE choices in how elections are held. They don't support solutions that are in search of problems.

They are outsiders that have condemned men throughout human history with the same crap. Using group versus group to attain ultimate power. That does not make Republicans perfect y a long shot. Someone split us into groups jut in politics alone as we see.