Sentences with phrase «conscience of right and wrong»

Not exact matches

It is a riff on the problems I've seen in people in leadership roles that I have no other way to interpret but as them demonstrating sociopathological behaviors — no apparent conscience touched by issues of right / wrong, no apparent compassion and empathy for others who are suffering or how their own abusive actions induce suffering.

«But why would the very God I believe imprinted us all with a conscience — with a deep sense of right and wrong — ask me to deny that conscience by accepting genocide as just?»

C.S. Lewis describes the sense of right and wrong that exist in every person's conscience as the Moral Law written on our hearts.

Nevertheless the bee, or any other social animal, would in our supposed case gain, as it appears to me, some feeling of right and wrong, or a conscience....

@BoldGeorge, «Morality and conscience is a matter of our hearts, the concepts of right, wrong, and fairness are «programmed» in each of us from God.»

God the Creator of ALL things Created, granted man a conscience and the sense of Right and Wrong.

Those propounding this idea of «conscience» urge us to recognize three things: that the spiritual and moral life is a journey; that when the Church teaches that some things are just wrong and no combination of intentions and consequences can make them right, the Church is proposing an «ideal» to which the most «generous» response may not always be possible; and that confessors and spiritual directors should be compassionate and discerning guides along the often rocky pathways of the moral life.

lol, yes clay i am an atheist... i created the sun whorshipping thing to have argument against religion from a religious stand point... however, the sun makes more sense then something you can't see or feel — the sun also gives free energy... your god once did that for the jews, my gives it to the human race as well as everything else on the planet, fuk even the planet is nothing without the sun... but back to your point — yes it is very hypocritical of me, AND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the groAND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the groand on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the groand wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the groand plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the group.

If a significant number of theologians, bishops, and priests operate with a concept of conscience (and perhaps seemingly with the Pope's blessing) that reduces objective absolute moral norms to optional guidelines, that concept will free Catholics individually to determine what is right and wrong not just about divorce and remarriage, but about many other issues.

In my observation, the abused person must become angry — in that way, they honor their own conscience and / or sense of justice (what was right; what was wrong).

He made the case that if we base our objections to this on our own conscience rights, we may absolutize the privatization of moral principles, such that the public square is no longer responsible to any standard of right and wrong.

With respect to the food laws, for instance, Paul upheld private conscience as the legitimate determiner of right and wrong, so that two different people could eat the same meat, and for one it would be a sin yet for the other it would not (Rom.

But aside from these assertions, I wonder if another possibility might be entertained: that Fish is (largely) right in his exegesis of Milton's poetry and prose, but that Neuhaus is also largely right in his defense of a Christian liberalism (in the sense of participating in the liberal conversation with a good conscience), but only because in certain key respects Milton is wrong.

As a result of original sin God's very existence is no longer obvious to us and our conscience is no longer always an accurate guide to what is right and wrong.

This time in childhood, sometimes called «the age of reason,» is also when kids begin to form a conscience, differentiate between right and wrong, and act not just on impulse but because something is the «right» thing to do.

In such a climate as modern - day Shanghai it could be argued that, in such a climate, it is not possible to remain strictly honest to the letter of the law, and thus it is up to the individual's own conscience to toe that very fine line between what is morally right and wrong.

Their ability to tell right from wrong had remained intact, and they never suffered a «crisis of conscience.»

It makes him a zealous advocate driven by his personal conscience — his own sense of right and wrong — to accomplish a just result.

As Justice Cory explained in Finta, «manifestly unlawful» is an order that «offends the conscience of every reasonable, right thinking person; it must be an order which is obviously and flagrantly wrong.

As Lord Chief Justice Mansfield put it in 1784: «It is the duty of the judge, in all cases of general justice, to tell the jury how to do right, though they have it in their power to do wrong, which is a matter entirely between God and their own consciences.»

All of the activities are designed to build trust, healthy relationships, and a full conscience (i.e., age appropriate ability to use moral judgment to choose right from wrong and to feel remorse for wrongdoing) in traumatized children while supporting their parents to provide for their special needs and powerful nurturing.

Supportive relationships with parents, adults, and friends also help children develop trust, empathy, compassion, and a sense of right and wrong (a conscience).