Sentences with phrase «better moral people»

Is there ancient wisdom in the bible that can help direct us to being better moral people in the face of environmental threats?

God makes good stuff... Even good moral people who don't know he was made by him.

But apparently it's a country where good moral people can be manipulated by self - serving politicians into being distracted from the larger issues by high - school debate questions like «when does life begin» or «should gays marry,» or even «is being gay a choice.»

Lots of rock throwing here from all of these good moral people with all of the answers to the worlds problems.

Not exact matches

These are indeed admirable qualities for a person to have and, in some situations, displaying them will serve you well, but both research and history suggest that great leaders aren't always paragons of unbending moral correctness.

You only need to read the headlines to see the ethical and moral breaches in all walks of life (and that goes for scientists who who fudge figures as well as business people who fudge balance sheets).

Well - meaning conservatives, while trying to encourage young people to behave as they should, have lost the moral high ground in the AIDS debate, and regaining that ground will be exceedingly difficult.

People didn't become moral or good in 33 BC.

They would be on much better intellectual and moral ground if they just allowed for the fact that yes, the religious Jews had Jesus killed so that they could protect their authority, but that as much to do with modern Jewish people as the Romans killing the Maccabees has to do with modern Italians — it's utterly irrelevant.

Since most people rely on some kind of substance to help them escape pain, to relax, or to socialize, the moral question is whether the immediate good outweighs the possible harm» something very specific to each situation.

A better strategy would be to point out how one doesn't need religion to be a moral person, and then demonstrate how some of the people that claim to be a beacon for religious zealots (the GOP) practice an existence devoid of morality.

«Drug testing,» as Elliott notes, «has always involved a kind of moral trade - off in which subjects are asked to take risks for the good of other people.»

Some people who say it, really do believe in some equivalent of The Great Spirit, but those who don't usually mean» I'm reflective and moral, so please think well of me.»

Well, I guess atheists lose, then, as they all lazily sit back, drink alcohol, smoke weed, and bully people of religion, calling them hypocrites while not showing their own moral standards so that their own hypocrisy can be judged.

If the righteous «religious» folks spend half as much time worry about their own lives and morals instead of butting into other people's, we'd all be better off.

People can knock God and the bible but it shows the type of person you are if your knocking something that helps make you a better person and have morals..

Case in point, it is not logical to suggest there is «good» vs «bad» if there is no ultimate moral authority, no higher power that created everything, including free will and the ability to choose whether to heed that drive to do what is «good» vs doing what you want to do at the expense of «good» and of other people.

But, as John Paul, Havel, and others said at the beginning of the revolution and say now, it was above all a matter of people discerning the possibility and moral imperative of «living in truth» and «calling good and evil by name.»

And to live in society and even just have friends one must prove he or she is a «moral» person, this morality is just a morality that lacks gods, such as a belief that what is good is what brings about the most happiness or freedom or whatever your ethical system supports.

I find inner strength with meeting socially accepted morals and belief that I am a good person.

I am a good person and my morals are centered on the idea that I do unto others what I wish them to do unto me.

What good are morals if the one giving them supports morals that most people consider to be awful like slavery and discrimination against women, gays and the handicapped, as well as beating children and slaves without punishment in some cases?

Finally, add the well - developed moral and legal prohibitions on directly killing innocent persons and you quickly arrive at the conclusion that killing human embryos is wrong.

Having been a Baptist for nearly twenty years and a Latter - day Saint for 35 years now, I can tell you his religion, if it is lived fully, will only make him a much better person, and not one you would have any problem trusting from a character and moral point of view.

On stupidity, people actually think that atheism requires having no good morals.

I think I'm too simple in my thinking that; if you don't like it, DO N'T WATCH... if you don't agree with it, DO N'T CHOOSE TO LIVE YOUR LIFE THAT WAY... Seems like a very simplistic way of thinking, but I have personal opinions on EVERYTHING, but I don't force others to live their lives according to my moral fiber... i don't judge people for living their lives the way that makes them happy... And i believe that IGNORANCE is the basis for INTOLERANCE... people are famous for HATING things that they don't understand... again, if it MORALLY offends you, don't read stories on things that you don't agree with, don't watch shows that portray choices that you don't agree with... The Brown family seems close knit, almost like extended family living under one roof... the kids work together and get along much better than a lot of «mainstream» households i see...

You do not need religion to be a good person or to have good morals.

A God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell - mouths mercy, and invented hell - mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!

It can seem to a person that he or she is really quite a bit better than other sinners and has a special moral alliance with God.

The moral virtue of devotion to the well - being of others supposedly obliterates the rule of etiquette against minding other people's business.

The notion that constitutional - moral ideals, like equality and liberty, are ones that reason can analyze and apply comports with the notion of a natural law that is accessible to all people of good will («written on the heart,» in Paul's words).

Most things are, but it is worse when the people doing it are so fervent in their «knowledge» of what is right and moral and good and the stakes they claim are involved.

(6) God can not make a person (P) significantly free with respect to an action (A) and yet causally determine or bring it about that P go right with respect to A — i.e., to create creatures capable of moral good, God must create creatures capable of moral evil.

As an atheist I make no claims of moral superiority or that God is helping me to be a better person.

I'm a man of science, but science will never be able to answer philosophical dilemnas or drive people to moral behavior or compassion which are the driving forces of a better society.

The economic crisis presently being endured in much of the West and beyond also reflects this truth: the whole meltdown in many ways had its source in that unbridled capitalism that decreed the autonomy of the individual and the moral good of each person being allowed to pursue wealth without any relationship to the rest of human society.

A person may prolong his life by eating right, good exercise, good habits, moral attributes that strengthen the mind, abstaining from harmful habits, resisting desires to go to clubs, parties, socials, etc, that includes mischief making mankind, etal.

People of integrity can disagree on precisely what policies are best, or are attainable, with respect to clearly moral questions in medicine and genetics.

That lack of a moral compass sure makes them better people.

Such persons must be of good moral character, pious, honest, of sound discretion, and blessed with a good memory; and the series of such transmitters must be continuous from generation to generation.

Just because good and bad have no moral basis doesn't mean that it's in your best interest to kill people.

The idols of moral people are not usually what we would consider evils; but a good for which we have an inordinate love, something intrinsically good that we love more that God.

The moral framework of Islam states the principles of etiquette for polite society for the common people as well as for the most advanced.

In today's divided moral landscape, with thoughtful, well - meaning people on both sides of every issue, there's no better way to show that you're a serious thinker than by acknowledging that every controversial issue is «complex.»

It is futile for a person to conclude that a behavior is moral, good and healthy simply because he's had the desire for as long as can be remembered — even seeminly since birth.

I'm not saying the unnecessary suffering of animals is good, or moral, but rather pointing out that your perspective on the subject is no more rational, no more based on fact, than that of the people you are arguing against.

Instead of simply stating the law and reacting in panic when it is widely broken, those concerned for traditional moral wisdom would do much better to affirm the high possibility of the life of faithful love, and to understand with love what is happening to people in ghettoes, in college campuses, in the life of the family today.

Second - a point noted earlier - how are we to explain those people who do not seem to give a damn for the Good or for moral action in any form?

Aristotle wrote that the criterion of good moral action is not a principle or a law so much as «the man of practical wisdom» ¯ that is, the person in your environment who habitually makes the wisest and bravest decisions of anyone else you know.

Furthermore, the alternative that you state should have proof of its effectiveness in producing highly moral people, for example, better than Mother Teresa.