Other Resources The Political Joe » Discrimination in Boy Scouts Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 5
 
 
2015-08-13 5:19 PM
in reply to: NXS

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Originally posted by NXS

Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?

I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited....

Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?


2015-08-14 8:02 AM
in reply to: jmk-brooklyn

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn

Originally posted by NXS

Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?

I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited....

Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?


Yes I believe there are moral absolutes. However, if those originate with man, they will not be absolute but subject to change.




2015-08-14 8:09 AM
in reply to: NXS

User image

Pro
15467
5000500050001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by NXS Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?
I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited.... Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?
Yes I believe there are moral absolutes. However, if those originate with man, they will not be absolute but subject to change.

Since you believe there are "moral absolutes", what are they in your mind?

2015-08-14 8:40 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Deep in the Heart of Texas
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

2015-08-14 8:53 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by NXS Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?
I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited.... Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?
Yes I believe there are moral absolutes. However, if those originate with man, they will not be absolute but subject to change.

Since you believe there are "moral absolutes", what are they in your mind?




No, that's what gives you moral relativism.

2015-08-14 8:57 AM
in reply to: Hook'em

User image

Pro
15467
5000500050001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?



2015-08-14 8:58 AM
in reply to: NXS

User image

Pro
15467
5000500050001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by NXS Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?
I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited.... Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?
Yes I believe there are moral absolutes. However, if those originate with man, they will not be absolute but subject to change.

Since you believe there are "moral absolutes", what are they in your mind?

No, that's what gives you moral relativism.

Huh?  Either there are moral "absolutes" or there isn't, right?

2015-08-14 9:11 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Deep in the Heart of Texas
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

2015-08-14 9:21 AM
in reply to: Hook'em

User image

Pro
15467
5000500050001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by Hook'em

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

I agree.  Principles are certainly different that "moral absolutes" for humans.  I don't think "moral absolutes" for humans actually exist.  Different societies thrive and flourish with differing morals.

2015-08-14 9:44 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

I agree.  Principles are certainly different that "moral absolutes" for humans.  I don't think "moral absolutes" for humans actually exist.  Different societies thrive and flourish with differing morals.

I've tried to think of what morals there are that "most" people agree on.  Obviously the don't murder, steal, physically abuse type stuff are fairly well supported across all spectrums but it starts to get dicey real quick.

2015-08-14 10:23 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by jmk-brooklyn
Originally posted by NXS Yes, in way. But if someone gets to "gets to decide what is right and wrong", where do their morals originate?
I'm neither a lawyer nor a politician. But I'm smart enough to know when I'm being baited.... Do you not think that there are any moral absolutes? That is, are there no standards of how humans should treat one another unless the standards are codified by a legal system or religion?
Yes I believe there are moral absolutes. However, if those originate with man, they will not be absolute but subject to change.

Since you believe there are "moral absolutes", what are they in your mind?

No, that's what gives you moral relativism.

Huh?  Either there are moral "absolutes" or there isn't, right?




Yes there are absolutes but they don't originate from man. So they must come from outside ourselves.



2015-08-14 10:43 AM
in reply to: tuwood

New user
900
500100100100100
,
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

I agree.  Principles are certainly different that "moral absolutes" for humans.  I don't think "moral absolutes" for humans actually exist.  Different societies thrive and flourish with differing morals.

I've tried to think of what morals there are that "most" people agree on.  Obviously the don't murder, steal, physically abuse type stuff are fairly well supported across all spectrums but it starts to get dicey real quick.




Murder? Really? Some believe it is morally acceptable to murder a innocent unborn child. Our SCOTUS believes it is morally acceptable. It gets dicey real quick because we say we believe in moral absolutes, but in reality we don't. We would rather decide what is right and wrong by how it makes us feel or what others think about us (moral relativism).

2015-08-14 11:18 AM
in reply to: NXS

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

I agree.  Principles are certainly different that "moral absolutes" for humans.  I don't think "moral absolutes" for humans actually exist.  Different societies thrive and flourish with differing morals.

I've tried to think of what morals there are that "most" people agree on.  Obviously the don't murder, steal, physically abuse type stuff are fairly well supported across all spectrums but it starts to get dicey real quick.

Murder? Really? Some believe it is morally acceptable to murder a innocent unborn child. Our SCOTUS believes it is morally acceptable. It gets dicey real quick because we say we believe in moral absolutes, but in reality we don't. We would rather decide what is right and wrong by how it makes us feel or what others think about us (moral relativism).

I was thinking of the post birth murders that most people agree on, but you make a great point that even that "cut and dry" one is isn't even cut and dry. 

2015-08-14 1:09 PM
in reply to: NXS

User image

Veteran
1019
1000
St. Louis
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by NXS
Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by Hook'em

Don't hurt people, don't take their stuff, take responsibility, keep your promises, and mind your own business.

I would agree with those......but there are societies that don't agree, and even in our own society, we surely hurt people (death penalty), don't always mind our own business (especially as a nation, sanctioned by our society), and our govt. will take your stuff (even for something as simple as selling marijuana).

So......are these truly absolute?  Do they only apply to individuals, or should society follow these as well, in order to call itself a moral society?

Other cultures may not believe in these "moral absolutes" at all.....so are the truly "absolute" for humans?

I'm not into defining moral absolutes, just principles which, if followed, would make individuals and societies better.  I'll suggest that most of the problems of man (and by extension society) stem from failing to stick to one or more of those principles.  

I agree.  Principles are certainly different that "moral absolutes" for humans.  I don't think "moral absolutes" for humans actually exist.  Different societies thrive and flourish with differing morals.

I've tried to think of what morals there are that "most" people agree on.  Obviously the don't murder, steal, physically abuse type stuff are fairly well supported across all spectrums but it starts to get dicey real quick.

Murder? Really? Some believe it is morally acceptable to murder a innocent unborn child. Our SCOTUS believes it is morally acceptable. It gets dicey real quick because we say we believe in moral absolutes, but in reality we don't. We would rather decide what is right and wrong by how it makes us feel or what others think about us (moral relativism).

I think there is overwhelming agreement that it is unacceptable to murder an innocent unborn child. What's disputed is how long after a man ejaculates do you have an unborn child. Some believe it's the exact moment the sperm makes contact with the egg, others believe it's many months down the line. Even SCOTUS ruled that abortions and a woman's right to privacy is protected only up to the point of viability, which is why so many states have been able to legally ban abortions after the 20th week (assuming no health risks to the mother).

Since the question of when does life begin is philosophical in nature, there will never be a consensus. But pretty much everything Tony listed boils down to living by the golden rule, which is pretty much a staple of just about every single religion and civilizaton that has ever existed throughout the entire history of mankind. 

2015-08-14 2:33 PM
in reply to: Bob Loblaw

User image

Master
2800
2000500100100100
Minnetonka, Minnesota
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
Absolute truth? That is easy.... No buckets in the transition area!
2015-08-14 2:41 PM
in reply to: ejshowers

User image

Pro
15467
5000500050001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by ejshowers Absolute truth? That is easy.... No buckets in the transition area!

 

BURN HIM!!!!!  ^^^



2015-08-14 9:15 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by ejshowers Absolute truth? That is easy.... No buckets in the transition area!

 

BURN HIM!!!!!  ^^^

I work really hard to not be intolerant of other beliefs, but this has just gone too far!!!  Buckets for all!!!!

2015-08-18 9:01 PM
in reply to: #5134741

Regular
174
1002525
Subject: RE: Discrimination in Boy Scouts
As others have asked, what lawsuits did BSA lose?

The Supreme Court decided in dale v bsa exactly your point. That BSA is a private organization that can discriminate and make standards for its leaders in whatever way it chooses.

BSA had since decided to change its standards. I was under the impression that those standards were changed voluntarily (or at least, not under threat of a lawsuit). If that is not the case, please let me know.
New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Discrimination in Boy Scouts Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 5
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Obamacare Pajama Boy Pages: 1 ... 2 3 4 5

Started by mcgilmartin
Views: 5549 Posts: 118

2013-12-24 3:16 PM NXS
RELATED ARTICLES
date : June 10, 2008
author : peteo
comments : 0
Training for a Tri!!! I get to treat my body as if it were a field mule while my wife runs circles around me and splashes water up my nose at the pool. Whoohoo give me some more!!