Sentences with phrase «objective morality does»

Objective morality does not exist, despite the protestations of numerous, disparate religions.

Objective morality does not exist... --------------- If that's true, then no one has any grounds to call Hitler a bad person, or that he even did anything bad or wrong at all.

Not exact matches

Do YOU think that God's watching the KILLING of someone's family to win a bet makes GOOD OBJECTIVE MORALITY?

You can't really believe that atheists, agnostics, deists and other religions can not determine right from wrong because they do not believe in an objective morality, don't be so obtuse.

Do you recognize even the POSSIBILITY that objective morality could exist, and that its source could be humanity as a collective?

«God did HEARTLESS and HORRENDOUS things... Don't try to PRETEND those are examples of GOOD «objective morality».

Since you don't subscribe to objective morality but only to subjective, given the scenario, would it be subjectively (the only morality you apparently subscribe to) good to you to murder the Jewish people?

Atheist morality is without any objective basis and, if followed with integrity, doesn't allow them to act against others who act contrary to their moral system (as they insist that each subjective moral judgment is equal in value, all being based purely on individual feelings).

Since objective morality wouldn't come from the Bible, where does it come from?

Do you recognize even the POSSIBILITY that objective morality could exist, and that its source could be that of a supernatural being?

But again, if there is no objective standard of morality, then Catholic priests who molest children are not doing anything bad, because it was right in their own eyes.

Do YOU think that FORCING marriage on r@pe victims and others makes GOOD OBJECTIVE MORALITY?

Why would the HORRIBLE HEARTLESS things done by God qualify him as a good source for anyone's idea of «objective morality?

Also, i don't remember if you and I have discussed morality in the past, but do you believe morality is objective or subjective?

You would say my opinion doesn't matter; opinions don't count in objective morality.

Since the senseless ra - pe of an innocent bystander is objectively morally wrong and objective morality is grounded in the nature of God, then God can not command this for it is acting contrary to His nature and His nature doesn't change.

But it can hardly be doubted that such a state of actually invincible error in moral questions exists also in society or in social groups in which the individual participates, so that his power of moral discernment does not go beyond a certain point, which, through no fault of his own, falls below objective morality.

I will conclude by saying that on the atheistic there is no objective morality anyways so I don't believe that the atheist has any grounds for accusing God or anyone else for that matter if doing anything evil or wrong.

AG, I asked because all too many believers are constantly making the claim that we could not be moral without God, and he is necessary for morality to be objective, and that without God everyone would go around raping and murdering, and that people would not do anything good.

You don't believe in objective morality or when god ordered genocide it would also be immoral.

Nowadays, morality is addressed in terms of «empathy» or doing «what you FEEL is right»... but morality is OBjective, not SUBjective, and God is the One to let us know what that morality is... not what you «think»...

Do you or do you not believe that there is an objective moralitDo you or do you not believe that there is an objective moralitdo you not believe that there is an objective morality?

You claimed that the reason people object to atheism is because they don't buy objective morality.

Yes we are, because you feel for it to be worth anything at all you must have an «objective» standard, which even you don't have if you believe that your morality comes from a god.

why feel the need to argue for an objective morality if you don't believe in the objective in the first place?

Incidentally, even if god exists then his does not represent objective morality either.

I don't believe in objective morality.

To equate morality solely with well - being does not make it objective; it simply assumes this is the case.

«Since the atheist does not believe in objective «right» or «wrong» (received divinely) but that morality is simply the product of culture and genetics - It is fascinating to see how angry they become at rulings like this... almost as if they believed the ruling objectively «wrong» (divinely received) or something...»

HawaiiGuest: «Then according to your belief, there is no objective morality, merely dictation from a diety that apparently doesn't even need to follow that morality.»

The bible appears to promote violence in selected passages, but the very fact that Christians analyze scripture with the underlying belief that there is such a thing as an objective truth and morality we don't have the freedom in our doctrine to falsely interpret passages from Leviticus to justify killing while ignoring Christ and the ten commandments.

Then according to your belief, there is no objective morality, merely dictation from a diety that apparently doesn't even need to follow that morality.

I do not ascribe to objective morality, and I am merely summarizing your point when it comes to what I think of when I hear objective morality.

That doesn't (I think) say much about the objective morality or respectfulness of nude sculptures and paintings, but it says a lot about the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly) that do indeed provoke some inquiry towards the subject of dying and the boundaries of morality - but this film does none of that, Haneke's objective here is no different than in Funny Games: he simple wants to use the shock value to prove that we are captivated to a sickening extent by watching horror unfold before us.

Ask him to define that «objective morality,» And ask him to explain how he knows that the 90 % of the American public that he thinks are incapable of critical thinking and who are immoral, don't accept that an «objective morality» (as he defines it) even exists.