Poll: What is/are the source of morals/morality?

okay. i'm not a pillar of knowledge on this subject, and i certainly don't have a strong point of view. but c'mon, there *has* to be a higher power somewhere. stuff just wouldn't have *worked* otherwise. :)

I don't get it. Why?

I mean, how good is a value system that exists only to not piss off some man who lives in the clouds?

yeah, i agree. the question of whether or not a general or specific religion exists is not really relevant to whether or not the source of morality stems from it.

Right, for morality to come from a higher being or religious dogma, involves accepting the existence of the higher being or veracity of religious dogma as a precondition to answering the question.

morals don't necessarily come from a religion.

one lesson in criminology and theories can tell you that.

I personally don't think they come from a religion at all since I don't believe religion to be true. But there in lies the reason for the poll, to see what others thought. :)

i wasn't suggesting that the higher power had to be a religious thing. it's just that there must have been *a* creator of some sort. i just don't believe that stuff just created itself, if you know what i mean. :)

Then who created the creator? If he could exist without someone creating him why not the universe?

The big bang theory.

did that have a creator?

12 years of catholic school can make one jaded.

What about Pete Best?
I think it's safe to say that he's the source of morality for all of mankind!

"Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words - "mank" and "ind". What do these words mean ? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind. "
- Deep Thoughts

What Would Pete Best Do? That is the governing principle of my life

so that would be abbreviated:

WWPBD?

:)

Kevin Bacon is the center of the universe ;)

Granted, but that has nothing to do with morality.
:)

Sure he does. :)

Morals have to do with culture and Kevin Bacon is in our culture. :)

well, if you're religious, then morals come from God, who was a character in Dogma, which featured Matt Damon, who was in Ocean's Eleven with Brad Pitt, who was in Sleepers with Kevin Bacon.

so there. :)

Stop being so modest, we all know that you are God.

Clapton is God.

:)

SEE!!!!!!!

Kevin Bacon is directly related to GOD!

:o

If a poll ever demanded a Pete Best choice it's this one.

Wouldn't that qualify as a Higher Being? :)

I already beat you to it.
:)

Would you like a Pete Best shaped cookie or something?

Naw, I'll settle for an oreo. :)

I don't know that I agree with any option, really....

I think morality is a natural thing to an extent.... I think a sense of morals is partially ingrained in us, and partially a result of a good upbringing.
Morals are, to a large extent, taught... or learned from observation.

I disagree. I believe there are moral absolutes (and I don't mean stuff like smoking weed, sex before marriage, or any of the other so-called religious right type morals). Something is either right or wrong, black or white. The problem I find is that people equate issues which are personal preference (i.e. the aforementioned list above) with moral situations.

Morality is a result of human life. It is the code by which a human chooses value.

To clarify... what would you consider to be a "moral absolute"?

That the initiation of the use of force (in any form, i.e. stealing, fraud, murder, coercison) is immoral.

What about theft in the name of justice... ie, Robin Hood.

Seeing as force is only proper in self-defense/retalitory, and then only against those who initiate the use of force, the retalitory use of force requires an object set of rules to prove who committed a crime and to objectively define punishments.

If the retalitory use of force (outside the context of immediate life or death self-defense cases) were left up to individual it would soon degenerate into mob rule. That's why governments are a necessary evil.

In the case of Robin Hood, he was just as guilty as the Sherrif and Prince since he indiscriminately stole and indiscriminately gave the loot to others. The story of Robin Hood is used more to justify socialist wealth distribution schemes, rather than in the name of justice.

To steal you don't have to use force to get said item or whatever you are stealing.

There is something called "white collar crime."

That the initiation of the use of force (in any form, i.e. stealing, fraud, murder, coercison) is immoral.

So then "morals" are based on English Common Law which is the basis of our law?

I thinkyou're mixing up "morals" and "Penal law" and "Criminal law."

Other way around, Law is based on Morals, not vice versa.

Vodka.

;)

*slack jawed... drool.... brian turning into cottage cheese*

EEww...who's Brian and how does one turn into cottage cheese? That's gotta be disgusting...

Yeah, seriously!

.... damn.

well you see I put this advertisement in the paper... "looking for a brian that can turn into cottage cheese" and it was a simple as that.

damn, -somebody- is gonna be upset that you turned her boyfriend into cheese. jeez, girl. ;)

Morals are a waste of time.

rock on brother friend!!

Good, then you can write my paper for Criminology.

Morals are relative to particular to societies. For example, in one orthodox jewish sect it was forbidden for couples about to be married to dance with each other before the wedding. One couple, about to be wed, asked their rabbi, if sex before marriage was permitted. The rabbi said, sex before marriage was ok. The woman asked: "even with the woman on top?" "That's ok" answered the rabbi. The man asked: what about sex while standing up?" "Certainly not." answered the rabbi. With a disappointed mi�n the woman asked: "Why not?" "Well," said the rabbi, THAT might lead to DANCING."

From a more serious aspect, consider the xth commanment: Thou shalt not kill. This did not stop bishops in all relevant countries from blessing weapons in both world wars, and many others, meant to kill others; "for we are right, and god is on our side."

Would you consider Adolf Hitler to be a moral man? He wrote his credo in prison, published as "Mein Kampf." That book set out his intention to rid the world of the evils of Zionism and Bolshevism and replace them with the ideal of human culture, the arian race. Between 1933 and 1945 millions of Germans supported this moral stance. After this period hardly any do. Morals change with time and circumstance. They are not writ in blood. I venture to say about the above example, that had the marshall plan been implemented after WWI instead of the punitive Versaille Treaty, neither of which had anything to do with morality, one having to do with vengeance, the other with expediency, neither WWII nor the holocaust would have occurred. Hitler might have remained some insignificant Austrian non commissioned officer ranting away in a munich "Bierhalle." Consequently, the jewish - islamic conflict since 1948 would not exist. Morals? Relative. Anyone want to start me on "Justice? Please don't.