Page 138 of 159 FirstFirst ... 3888128136137138139140148 ... LastLast
Results 1,371 to 1,380 of 1582

Thread: So what is this toxic masculinity thing anyhow?

  1. #1371
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,940
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    22170
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    You may choose to view my statement as a “moral judgment” but it’s not. It’s a socially-based opinion. I, given my Western social acculturation, certainly view tossing homosexuals off rooftops as “barbaric” …don’t you? Even if the Muslin faithful think it’s what God wants. They are entitled to their view, I think they are wrong because its cruel.
    But I believe morals are objective. You don't. So you have no basis to make that judgement call. The fact that you do, shows us that deep down you do believe morals are objective even if you won't admit it openly.




    But they have evolved considerably since then. We no longer use scripture to justify slavery or the Jim Crow Laws or the denigration of women, the killing of witches and in most instances, the denial of homosexual rights and etc. The Dominionists, and their desire to return to good ole’ fashioned OT Morality, being the exception.
    You seem to think "evolve" equates to "better" but then since morals are just relative values there is no better. They can "change" but they can't "evolve" into anything better or "devolve" into something worse. There was nothing wrong with Jim Crow laws under your moral worldview. There was nothing wrong with burning witches, or gassing Jews, or anything else. It simply is a different value set than we have today.




    So, you accept the Muslim moral code with its Sharia amputations and roof-tossing and stoning of ‘sinners’? Interesting.
    I don't have to. I believe in objective morality. YOU have to accept it under what you claim morality is. Keep up, Tassman. YOU are the one saying that there is no objective right or wrong.

  2. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  3. #1372
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,437
    Amen (Given)
    2492
    Amen (Received)
    1802
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    But I believe morals are objective.
    So? Muslims believe morals are “objective” too, including when they toss homosexuals off rooftops. They are just doing what God wants, just as Christians did when they incarcerated homosexuals.

    You don't. So you have no basis to make that judgement call. The fact that you do, shows us that deep down you do believe morals are objective even if you won't admit it openly.
    Are you telling me what I believe “deep down”?

    You seem to think "evolve" equates to "better" but then since morals are just relative values there is no better. They can "change" but they can't "evolve" into anything better or "devolve" into something worse. There was nothing wrong with Jim Crow laws under your moral worldview. There was nothing wrong with burning witches, or gassing Jews, or anything else. It simply is a different value set than we have today.
    It was a “value set” based, so it was claimed, on scripture. Now it is no longer. So much for “objective” biblical values. Historically, Islamic and Christian morality has evolved along with the evolving moral values of the day.

    I don't have to. I believe in objective morality.
    So do Muslims. Just a different “objective” morality.

    YOU have to accept it under what you claim morality is. Keep up, Tassman. YOU are the one saying that there is no objective right or wrong.
    My claim is that morality reflects the evolving values of society. This has been historically true in practical terms re the “objective” morality of the bible or Koran.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  4. #1373
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,940
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    22170
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    So? Muslims believe morals are “objective” too, including when they toss homosexuals off rooftops. They are just doing what God wants, just as Christians did when they incarcerated homosexuals.
    It means that we have a basis for complaining about whether some other group or person is moral or not. You don't.



    Are you telling me what I believe “deep down”?
    I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy between what you claim morals are (subjective) and how you react to other societies that don't agree with your morals.

    My claim is that morality reflects the evolving values of society. This has been historically true in practical terms re the “objective” morality of the bible or Koran.
    Yes, you claim that, but then you seem to have some objective sense of this goal or standard that morality is striving for, making it better. That standard is an objective goal that you believe exists that morals are evolving to. Which means you think morals are objective. Otherwise morals would not "evolve" they would just change from society to society, neither one being better or worse than the last. Slavery might not be moral today, but it might be again in 100 years. And if so, it would not be "better" or "worse" than today. It would just be the morals of that society, which even might be this society one day.

  5. Amen RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  6. #1374
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    25,198
    Amen (Given)
    1740
    Amen (Received)
    5131
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Slavery might not be moral today, but it might be again in 100 years. And if so, it would not be "better" or "worse" than today. It would just be the morals of that society, which even might be this society one day.
    Actually to degrees slavery is still quite prevalent world wide: https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...meback/266354/

    So by Tass' light it must be OK...
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  7. Amen Sparko, RumTumTugger amen'd this post.
  8. #1375
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,437
    Amen (Given)
    2492
    Amen (Received)
    1802
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    It means that we have a basis for complaining about whether some other group or person is moral or not. You don't.
    Your basis for such “complaining about other people’s morality” is precisely the same as for me and everyone else. Namely, the the community values with which we have been acculturated.

    I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy between what you claim morals are (subjective) and how you react to other societies that don't agree with your morals.
    I’m sure you agree that tossing homosexuals off rooftops is “barbaric” and for the same reason as I. Until relatively recently homosexuals were treated abominably by Western society too. Our community values have changed whereas those of certain Islamic societies have not.

    Yes, you claim that, but then you seem to have some objective sense of this goal or standard that morality is striving for, making it better.
    There is no “objective sense” other than the ever-changing social values and behavior so as to better survive as a cooperative social species.

    That standard is an objective goal that you believe exists that morals are evolving to. Which means you think morals are objective.
    Our morals are no more “objective” than those of the tribal communities that wrote the Old Testament and its New Testament derivatives. The people who wrote those books were merely reflecting the subjective social mores of the day; they were no more objective than our social mores.

    Otherwise morals would not "evolve" they would just change from society to society, neither one being better or worse than the last. Slavery might not be moral today, but it might be again in 100 years. And if so, it would not be "better" or "worse" than today. It would just be the morals of that society, which even might be this society one day.
    Indeed. Great civilizations have risen and fallen throughout human history…along with their prevailing value-systems. Our own society might indeed crumble…especially as global warming destroys our environment.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  9. #1376
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,940
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    22170
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Your basis for such “complaining about other people’s morality” is precisely the same as for me and everyone else. Namely, the the community values with which we have been acculturated.
    Except since you claim that morals are just each societies own values your complaint has no teeth. It would be like complaining that Germans wearing lederhosen is evil.



    I’m sure you agree that tossing homosexuals off rooftops is “barbaric” and for the same reason as I. Until relatively recently homosexuals were treated abominably by Western society too. Our community values have changed whereas those of certain Islamic societies have not.
    it's just that's societies morals Tassman, right? Just their culture. Nothing right or wrong with it.






    Our morals are no more “objective” than those of the tribal communities that wrote the Old Testament and its New Testament derivatives. The people who wrote those books were merely reflecting the subjective social mores of the day; they were no more objective than our social mores.
    Indeed. Great civilizations have risen and fallen throughout human history…along with their prevailing value-systems. Our own society might indeed crumble…especially as global warming destroys our environment.
    See you can't make up your mind. You want morals to be objective and subjective at the same time. You are a hypocritical moron who can't even see your own contradictions. If morals are just cultural values then they have no actual "right or wrong" values. They just "are". They can't get "better" or "worse" and you have no basis to complain about anyone else's morals any more than you have a right to complain about what they think is their favorite flavor of ice cream.

  10. #1377
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    17,380
    Amen (Given)
    5754
    Amen (Received)
    6124
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    See you can't make up your mind. You want morals to be objective and subjective at the same time. You are a hypocritical moron who can't even see your own contradictions.
    This is the exact same knot I've seen every moral relativist tie himself in when trying to defend his views. There are very few atheists who have the intellectual honesty and courage to follow their worldview to its logical conclusion and embrace nihilism.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  11. #1378
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,940
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    22170
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Man View Post
    This is the exact same knot I've seen every moral relativist tie himself in when trying to defend his views. There are very few atheists who have the intellectual honesty and courage to follow their worldview to its logical conclusion and embrace nihilism.
    The very fact that Tassman is on theologyweb arguing about what is right and wrong shows that he believes there is an objective standard. Otherwise, why bother.

    CS Lewis covered it quite well in Mere Christianity


    "But the most remarkable thing is this. Whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in a real Right and Wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later. He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining "It's not fair" before you can say Jack Robinson. A nation may say treaties do not matter, but then, next minute, they spoil their case by saying that the particular treaty they want to break was an unfair one. But if treaties do not matter, and if there is no such thing as Right and Wrong— in other words, if there is no Law of Nature—what is the difference between a fair treaty and an unfair one? Have they not let the cat out of the bag and shown that, whatever they say, they really know the Law of Nature just like anyone else?

    It seems, then, we are forced to believe in a real Right and Wrong. People may be sometimes mistaken about them, just as people sometimes get their sums wrong; but they are not a matter of mere taste and opinion any more than the multiplication table"

  12. Amen seer amen'd this post.
  13. #1379
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,437
    Amen (Given)
    2492
    Amen (Received)
    1802
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Except since you claim that morals are just each societies own values your complaint has no teeth
    What else is morality if not a set of rules based upon the community values of each society?

    It would be like complaining that Germans wearing lederhosen is evil.
    Bad fashion sense is not necessarily "evil".

    it's just that's societies morals Tassman, right? Just their culture. Nothing right or wrong with it.
    I didn’t say there was anything wrong with it, according to the standards of their culture. But such activity is no longer acceptable in our culture today, any more than bible-based witch-killing, racial discrimination or incarcerating homosexuals is acceptable. It was once, it is no longer.

    See you can't make up your mind. You want morals to be objective and subjective at the same time.
    I never said that, this is your misrepresentation of what you think I said.

    You are a hypocritical moron who can't even see your own contradictions. If morals are just cultural values then they have no actual "right or wrong" values. They just "are".
    Correct. As I’ve said many times. Exactly the same applies to the morality you consider ‘objective’, namely that contained in the bible…or the Koran or the Analects of Confucius, if it comes to that. The people who wrote those books were merely reflecting the subjective social mores of the day; they were no more ‘objective’ than the social mores of today. Just much older and out of touch with current social values.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  14. #1380
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    49,940
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    22170
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    What else is morality if not a set of rules based upon the community values of each society?



    Bad fashion sense is not necessarily "evil".



    I didn’t say there was anything wrong with it, according to the standards of their culture. But such activity is no longer acceptable in our culture today, any more than bible-based witch-killing, racial discrimination or incarcerating homosexuals is acceptable. It was once, it is no longer.
    So basically, "I didn't say there was anything wrong with wearing lederhosen according to the standards of their culture, but such fashion is no longer acceptable in our culture today."



    Then you have no complaint. But the fact that you are here arguing with me and others about what is good and what is bad, what is moral and immoral, means that you do believe in some moral standard of "good" that we should all strive towards. And the fact that you think Muslims murdering homosexuals is immoral in their own society shows you believe that standard to be objective and universal.



    I never said that, this is your misrepresentation of what you think I said.
    No it is just my observation of what you have said in this thread and others. You both want to claim that morals are just subjective cultural values and that the morals that YOU believe should be applied to everyone. Do you try to force your preferences for Ice Cream flavors on others? No. Yet you think you can tell others, including me, what my moral standards should be.

    The fact that you can't even see what you are doing is just the icing on the cake of your ignorance.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •