Is the latest morality the best?

[Vera_Ljuba]

The poster you are referring to compared the value of pets to that of humans. That is a wildly perverse sense of morality.

Getting boring, but such misrepresentations must be corrected. There was not one word about “value” of humans (is there a going rate for trading slaves these years? ) it was about “treatment” of humans compared to the “treatment” of animals.

Now, maybe this misrepresentation comes from genuine misunderstanding (I cannot know) or from intentional distortion.

 

[goout]

As much as I like Billy Preston, his music tells me nothing about how you personally determine Absolute Truth. And how I know if you have it right.

If you don’t have an answer, it might be good idea to admit as much so I don’t have to keep asking.

Spoon feeding of capable adults is degrading. I refuse to do it.

 

[goout]

Getting boring, but such misrepresentations must be corrected. There was not one word about “value” of humans (is there a going rate for trading slaves these years? ) it was about “treatment” of humans compared to the “treatment” of animals.

Now, maybe this misrepresentation comes from genuine misunderstanding (I cannot know) or from intentional distortion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vera_Ljuba View Post
What about the phrase: “mercy killing”? Is that also naïve? Decent human beings do not hesitate to put down their suffering pets. There is something wrong when we treat our pets more humanely then our fellow human beings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vera_Ljuba View Post
There is nothing wrong with this approach - on the contrary! Just bring it to the logical conclusion.

From this concept it follows logically that one should treat fellow humans even MORE lovingly and compassionately than pets. If it is considered cruel to allow pets to suffer needlessly, then it is even more cruel to allow fellow humans needlessly.

 

[PRmerger]

What’s good for pets is way better for human beings, in ever increasing larger amounts!

Try again bro indeed.

Indeed.

And it still needs to be determined: is Vera FOR mercy killing? It certainly sounds as if she is, ok with intentionally killing a suffering individual, given the example you cited above.

Or is she against it, but sees it as an unintended effect of trying to alleviate someone’s suffering?

It certainly sounds as if she is, also, AGAINST intentionally killing a suffering individual…

 

[inocente]

Let me try this again.
Morality is not “mine”. I am not it’s source and arbiter. You seem to have trouble with this concept.
And I couldn’t care less what a first year ethics student thinks. For the same reasons.

The poster you are referring to compared the value of pets to that of humans. That is a wildly perverse sense of morality.

In your opinion.

How are we doing with the latest morality?

According to some, objective morality got lost, and as a result everyone is running amok, it’s the zombie apocalypse!

But others are saying there weren’t really any zombies to worry about in Pleasantville, so why live life in gray nostalgia?

youtube.com/watch?v=CvpLgUs-hmw - (son helps his mom conform with “objective” morality)

youtube.com/watch?v=E6EbLP9YEQA - “Must be awful lucky to see colors like that. I’ll bet they don’t know how lucky they are.”

 

[goout]

In your opinion.

No actually, not my opinion.

Your best coherent criticism of me is that I am a parrot for Catholic morality.
You could call me brainless and unthinking, and that would be more coherent than claiming that I exalt my opinion.

New club idea: Catholic parrots!

 

[inocente]

No actually, not my opinion.

Your best coherent criticism of me is that I am a parrot for Catholic morality.
You could call me brainless and unthinking, and that would be more coherent than claiming that I exalt my opinion.

New club idea: Catholic parrots!

I’ve never mentioned Catholic morality, don’t put words in my mouth. Or is deception morally good? What’s your opinion?

 

[edwest2]

Internet opinion culture. Where there is no truth except opinions. I suggest those who come to Catholic forums, keep asking the same questions and getting the same answers, reconsider why they keep posing the same questions over and over and apparently expecting the Ultimate Carved In Stone Answer. Because they don’t like any of the answers they’ve gotten, except their own opinion.

Further sheesh,

Ed

 

[goout]

I’ve never mentioned Catholic morality, don’t put words in my mouth. Or is deception morally good? What’s your opinion?

And I didn’t say you did mention Catholic morality, did I now.

Can you answer your own question about deception?
How about ill-will.

Here it is again.
Morality is not mine.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Internet opinion culture. Where there is no truth except opinions. I suggest those who come to Catholic forums, keep asking the same questions and getting the same answers, reconsider why they keep posing the same questions over and over and apparently expecting the Ultimate Carved In Stone Answer. Because they don’t like any of the answers they’ve gotten, except their own opinion.

Moreover, they have no answers of their own to offer the questions asked of them.

Such as, why should reason be the ultimate arbiter of morality when reason often enough sells itself to the highest immoral bidder?

The Bible and the Catholic Catechism offer the word of God as guide and counselor when reason fails or acts the whore of values. But the usual atheist objection is that reason is sufficient. Tell that to millions of victims of moral relativism.

It is the devil who preaches freedom from all restraints, but especially the restraint of objective moral values. Only the truth can make us free, yet how can the truth prevail when a thousand conflicting lies clamor for acclaim?

 

[inocente]

Internet opinion culture. Where there is no truth except opinions. I suggest those who come to Catholic forums, keep asking the same questions and getting the same answers, reconsider why they keep posing the same questions over and over and apparently expecting the Ultimate Carved In Stone Answer. Because they don’t like any of the answers they’ve gotten, except their own opinion.

Further sheesh,

As I said, I think the Ultimate Carved In Stone Answer is that some posters around here are nostalgic for their young days. Things ain’t what they used to be.

But I never mentioned Catholicism, so why this sudden onset of defensiveness? I mean if you want to move the thread onto how any particular religion gets its viewpoint across now compared to the past then I’d have no expertise and so will duck out. Or if you want the thread to be about only the 4.5% of the world which is the American population I’ll duck out. Or if you want to generate an oppressive, bullying, dark atmosphere, say the word and I’ll drop out.

Joseph Ratzinger said “radiate encouragement and enthusiasm”. Further sheesh squared my man.

:compcoff:.

 

[inocente]

And I didn’t say you did mention Catholic morality, did I now.

Come off it, you said “Your best coherent criticism of me is that I am a parrot for Catholic morality”. It’s right there, you saying I mentioned Catholic morality but I never said any of that, everyone can see your post, it’s only a couple of posts above this one.

btw I just noticed your post #195. Now originally you told me “on another thread a poster equates the dignity and value of human life to that of pets” (post #166) but there you link posts on this thread when you said “wildly perverse sense of morality”. If you have a problem with the views of other posters on this thread, please sort it out with them. I’m not interested, I only joined the thread because the OP tickled my fancy, everything else is off-topic to me.

Now please calm down bro, you’ll do yourself a mischief. We’re only here to shoot the breeze, take a deep breath.

 

[edwest2]

Real life does not equal “shoot the breeze.” People do come here looking for some sort of guidance. The outside world, through the media, will give them hundreds of bad ideas and model bad/wrong behavior as good, neutral or OK. What’s good or worthwhile about that?

And ‘things don’t change’ by themselves. People - only people - change things. Keep that in mind, especially regarding morality.

The “All my friends dress like this!” doesn’t cut it if a parent is in the home. A young, attractive teenager is going to think like that. An adult should know better.

Ed

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The “All my friends dress like this!” doesn’t cut it if a parent is in the home. A young, attractive teenager is going to think like that. An adult should know better.

Ed

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.” G.K. Chesterton

 

[PRmerger]

And how are we doing in regard to all those questions about where we find this Absolute Morality?

Someone must know…

We find absolute morality through the use of our reason and intellect.

However, for the atheist, it makes no sense to declare that there is absolute morality (which, to your credit, you assert.)

Except, the atheist seems to always, curiously, argue *for *absolute morality while stating vociferously, “Absolute morality doesn’t exist!”

It’s definitely an area of cognitive dissonance for the atheist.

 

[inocente]

And ‘things don’t change’ by themselves. People - only people - change things. Keep that in mind, especially regarding morality.

Precisely. And that’s exactly why morality is better today, because people have been taught to question and openly discuss rather than just accept the status quo. You’re definitely radiating encouragement and enthusiasm.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

The view that reason alone suffices to insure the possession of moral absolutes is not valid. Reason has failed too often, either deliberately or by deception or by conditioned reflex (political correctness, for example) to be relied upon as the ultimate arbiter of moral right and wrong. Just look at the modern dictatorship of moral relativism to find that reason has been seduced and that morals are worse than ever, and that condition has become the new status quo that hardly anybody questions.

 

[edwest2]

Precisely. And that’s exactly why morality is better today, because people have been taught to question and openly discuss rather than just accept the status quo. You’re definitely radiating encouragement and enthusiasm.

When I find a solution to a problem, that’s the solution. Catholic teaching has that. Truth does not go in and out of fashion.

Sure, people can question and openly discuss, but when the answer is the answer, we just have to educate others, especially young people.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

The view that reason alone suffices to insure the possession of moral absolutes is not valid. Reason has failed too often, either deliberately or by deception or by conditioned reflex (political correctness, for example) to be relied upon as the ultimate arbiter of moral right and wrong. Just look at the modern dictatorship of moral relativism to find that reason has been seduced and that morals are worse than ever, and that condition has become the new status quo that hardly anybody questions.

That’s it. People don’t get it partly because it’s constantly reinforced and marketed through the media. And for some, they get it on the job, even Catholics. “Hey, I just moved in with my boyfriend so why don’t you do the same? We split the rent, have more money and cool stuff.”

I see that happening and since everyone who opposes cohabitation gets shouted down or ignored, doesn’t suddenly make it more moral. It was never moral, but watch enough movies and TV shows and it’s wonderful. And if you get tired of him/her or things become annoying, just walk out the door. Doing good is not always easy.

Life is more than money, sex and a place to park your car.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

We find absolute morality through the use of our reason and intellect.

However, for the atheist, it makes no sense to declare that there is absolute morality (which, to your credit, you assert.)

Except, the atheist seems to always, curiously, argue *for *absolute morality while stating vociferously, “Absolute morality doesn’t exist!”

It’s definitely an area of cognitive dissonance for the atheist.

“There are no moral absolutes!”

Do you really believe that?

“Absolutely!”

• OR -

Written on a building in France, date unknown.

“It is forbidden to forbid!”

Ed