Are morality and ethics dead in the US?

I don't think the OP is in any position to determine whether or not the US has any 'morality and ethics' while possessing the racist and prejudiced attitude she has displayed on ATS...

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: grandmakdw

Your still confusing morals and ethics with the LAWS and STATUTES that govern us.

One is abstract, the other is concrete.

Morals and ethics are shared values for a society. They have nothing to do with laws and statutes.

We have no shared values in the US.

Look at "Black lives matters"
if you think the golden rule is a shared value
in the US.
Look at the uproar over when someone dared
to utter the words
"All lives matter"

It is quite clear that in the US, all lives do not matter,
the public has made that quite clear.

So the golden rule does not apply in the US and is not a shared
value.

Go back and look at the definitions of morals and ethics,
they are both intertwined with a shared set of
values and a shared moral compass (be it moral or immoral to us)
the compass is one that is shared within a society.

By that definition, the only shared value we have is the
within nature of value of reciprocity
love those within group only and devalue
kill, be unkind to those outside of group.

Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama, c. 623 – c. 543 BC )[45][46] made this principle one of the cornerstones of his ethics in the 6th century BC. It occurs in many places and in many forms throughout the Tripitaka.

Comparing oneself to others in such terms as "Just as I am so are they, just as they are so am I," he should neither kill nor cause others to kill.
—Sutta Nipata 705

One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness hereafter.
—Dhammapada 10. Violence

Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
—Udanavarga 5:18

Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.[47]

Buddha ^^ From the same link given previously by several of us.

originally posted by: grandmakdw


It is quite clear that in the US, all lives do not matter,
the public has made that quite clear.

That's B.S. You didn't see whites being lynched in America by the hundreds (if not thousands). You didn't see "blacks only" signs in Main Street establishments. You don't see more whites killed by cops in proportion to their population numbers. White lives have ALWAYS mattered. Black lives haven't always mattered. There were plenty of Christians who felt that it was okay for blacks to be subservient to whites. Because more blacks are killed by cops in proportion to their population numbers, it's appropriate to say that Black Lives Matter (although I would personally add the word "too" to the end of that).

The Progressive is a monthly magazine of investigative reporting, political commentary, cultural coverage, activism, interviews, poetry, and humor.

This magazine has been around for over 100 years...read this mission statement, grams.
Read it carefully.
Then get over yourself and try doing some actual reading and watching and listening.

Ready? Are you sitting down? - HERE is what Progressives want, and who we are:

We stand against:
militarism,
the concentration of power in corporate hands,
and the disenfranchisement of the citizenry.

www.progressive.org...

The Progressive champions
peace,
social and economic justice,
civil rights,
civil liberties,
human rights,
a preserved environment,
and a reinvigorated democracy.

Its bedrock values are nonviolence and freedom of speech.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

not a single quote with a date nor any link to any viable source for research.

You live in a capitalist society where morals and ethics are not really valued qualities. You can't blame the non believers for this. I'm not religious and have better morals than many Christians. Religious folk need to ask themselves if believing in God stops them committing immoral or unethical deeds.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
You live in a capitalist society where morals and ethics are not really valued qualities. You can't blame the non believers for this. I'm not religious and have better morals than many Christians. Religious folk need to ask themselves if believing in God stops them committing immoral or unethical deeds.

"Oh there's a thin line between Saturday night and Sunday morning." Jimmy Buffett.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

not a single quote with a date nor any link to any viable source for research.

You mean unlike the Bible?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

What the hell are you talking about? You don't know how to use the internet? The wiki page gives you dozens and dozens of "viable sources" - or did you want me to 'cherry-pick' one?

You are mistaken if you think ONLY "Christianity" espouses the Golden Rule.

And I DID give a date for when Buddha himself said the very same things RIGHT HERE, two posts later.

Fail.
If you want to believe the Bible is literally all true, there are far more worthwhile websites and forums for you to hang out at than here, where we are mostly people who are educated and not so brainwashed. Frankly I don't know why Bible Thumpers would be here at all!! How did you find this place, and why did you join? To proselytize? Because that's not allowed, and even if it was, it should be clear to you by now that the MAJORITY of members have either no INTEREST in religion, or are here to deconstruct it and present enlightened thinking that is, apparently, far over your head.

Not that you're the only one on ATS who is an Evangelical, mind you; just that your collective ideas don't go over very well around here.
For Very Good Reason.

This is so unbelievable and tired. OP...why don't you just admit for once in this forum that you are stubborn and refuse to consider reason?

Whether you like it or not and whether you care to actually think or not, people CAN AND ARE capable of morality without a book or deity telling them to be. I am a follower of Isis. But I don't need her to tell me to be a good person to be a good person.

Yes I of course make mistakes as we all do. But beyond that, I generally and overwhelmingly prefer to help others and make everyone else around me comfortable, safe, and happy. Do you want to know why I do this?

Because it's the right thing to do...period and end of story. That's it and that's all....it is the right thing to do to treat your fellow human, animal, mother Earth or whatever you choose as equal. I don't need a book to tell me that kindness and giving are good things.

All these martyrs for the "christian cause" seem to have an enduring pathological need to be the victim at every second possible. Then when someone points out that they are atheist they are immediately branded as immoral despite the fact that the specific atheist may be a selfless giver.

Yes of course there are atheists who are bad...without question

But guess what? Your book doesn't seem to do what you claim it does. How many christians have we seen cheating, lying, assaulting and murdering others...sleeping with children, abusing animals and the countless other crimes while hiding under the "good book." And what about all the christian leaders who preach daily that homosexuality is an abomination and then are found to be sleeping with men on a daily basis?

It's rampant and it's all BS...because the fact is a book or a belief in a higher power ARE NOT necessary predictors of good behavior and are not necessary pre-existing factors for appropriate behavior. Period

The scariest thing about this argument is that people will tell you without that book or without that belief that morality does not exist. Why is this scary? Well think about it...it spreads the message that these people are saying "I would not be moral if it weren't for this book or instruction by my belief structure."

That's it....that's what is holding some of these people to acting like decent and kind human beings...one little tether

Does God have morals and ethics?

a reply to: grandmakdw

Just because morals and ethics are shared values in a society doesn't mean everyone must agree with every example of them. I don't agree with gays, organized religion, welfare, abortion and many other things in this world but I'm not the only one in it.
Just because it's not for me doesn't mean I label it bad, evil, wrong or whatever. There is a difference between tolerance and acceptance.

I choose to be pro-life because my first pregnancy had to be terminated due to a car accident. Let me tell you I think of that child as much as the 2 sitting next to me every day of my life.
But even cursed with as much pain as I feel for this topic I understand there are others that feel differently. Others that have been raped, others in need that may act out of desperation and do something dangerous or simply others that made a stupid mistake, etc.
I cherish all life but I have not put myself on a glass pedestal thinking every moral, ethical value I have is the end all rule for society.

Not even murder is cataloged this way yet everyone can agree it's wrong. There's Capital, 1st, 2nd, 3rd degree, manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc. It's greatly situational, there just is no blanket statement that covers every occurrence.

As for empathy, I do agree we've become more emphatic as a society, but I like to believe it's from conditioning. Many are afraid of being wrongfully accused and sued, I blame the lawyers for this.

Do you realize that the Islamic State is fighting for these very principles? They feel their sense of morality and ethics, attached to their religious doctrine is the only correct one, everyone else must abide or die. No flexibility, no compromises, no exceptions.


Your last part I agree with a little:

Value of reciprocity, love those within group only(all humans)

And devalue kill, be unkind to those outside the group.(anything that tries to end our human way of life)

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: grandmakdw

Your still confusing morals and ethics with the LAWS and STATUTES that govern us.

One is abstract, the other is concrete.

No I am not, this is in your mind that I am confusing them.

I know that morals and ethics are an abstract construct
but I also know that in order for morals and ethics to
exist in a society, that the society must mutually agree
upon the morals and ethics. The US in no way shape
or form has any agreement at all regarding mutually
agreed upon morals or ethics. Situational and personal
moral and ethical ideas exist, but that does not make
a basis for morality and/or ethics within a country.

The US no longer has any basis for morality and ethics
as there is absolutely no consensus as to what is
moral and what is ethical.
Not even the golden rule as many groups feel that
only their group is worthy of having their lives matter,
and no other lives in the US matter but their own,
and this idea is supported by a huge number of people
outside the group, validating the idea that the golden
rule is not an agreed upon consensus. Thereby not being
a moral or ethical agreed upon idea which might
create consensus.

originally posted by: Prezbo369
I don't think the OP is in any position to determine whether or not the US has any 'morality and ethics' while possessing the racist and prejudiced attitude she has displayed on ATS...

Those are your interpretations of me, I could as easily say that the things you have posted on ATS are an anathema to me thereby rendering your judgement of me moot.

You are being judgmental and you are being racist and prejudiced by assuming those things in me because of my political stance. So you are as guilty of judgmentalism and bigotry as you claim I am.

Thereby proving once again,
morality and ethics are dead in the US.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: grandmakdw


It is quite clear that in the US, all lives do not matter,
the public has made that quite clear.

That's B.S. You didn't see whites being lynched in America by the hundreds (if not thousands). You didn't see "blacks only" signs in Main Street establishments. You don't see more whites killed by cops in proportion to their population numbers. White lives have ALWAYS mattered. Black lives haven't always mattered. There were plenty of Christians who felt that it was okay for blacks to be subservient to whites. Because more blacks are killed by cops in proportion to their population numbers, it's appropriate to say that Black Lives Matter (although I would personally add the word "too" to the end of that).

Then why the very large and very loud outcry
when someone said that all lives matter,
and in response people became hostile
people became enraged
people excoriated the politician who said it
forcing the politician to apologize and basically
say that all lives don't matter?

There are enough people in the US who were outraged
and enraged at the statement "All lives matter."
That is proves the golden rule does not exist in the US at all
as a moral or ethical agreed upon basis for life in the US.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
You live in a capitalist society where morals and ethics are not really valued qualities. You can't blame the non believers for this. I'm not religious and have better morals than many Christians. Religious folk need to ask themselves if believing in God stops them committing immoral or unethical deeds.

How do you know your morals are superior to others?

By what standard? Your own standard? Your own opinion?

That is really having no standard at all if you say I know my morals are better than everyone elses, because I said so, and I know me and I am superior to everyone else.

a reply to: grandmakdw

That is really having no standard at all if you say I know my morals are better than everyone elses, because I said so, and I know me and I am superior to everyone else.

You do this on a daily basis.

a reply to: grandmakdw

How do you know your morals are superior to others?

By what standard? Your own standard? Your own opinion?

I'll take this one, too - even though you aren't addressing me (which is fine, btw).

We know by OBSERVATION of how some people ACT.

originally posted by: grandmakdw

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
You live in a capitalist society where morals and ethics are not really valued qualities. You can't blame the non believers for this. I'm not religious and have better morals than many Christians. Religious folk need to ask themselves if believing in God stops them committing immoral or unethical deeds.

How do you know your morals are superior to others?

Superior to some. Equal to others. We ALL know what's right and wrong:



It's the LIVING by what's right is the issue and I'll put my morals up against ANYONE any day.

originally posted by: KyoZero
This is so unbelievable and tired. OP...why don't you just admit for once in this forum that you are stubborn and refuse to consider reason?

Whether you like it or not and whether you care to actually think or not, people CAN AND ARE capable of morality without a book or deity telling them to be. I am a follower of Isis. But I don't need her to tell me to be a good person to be a good person.

Yes I of course make mistakes as we all do. But beyond that, I generally and overwhelmingly prefer to help others and make everyone else around me comfortable, safe, and happy. Do you want to know why I do this?

Because it's the right thing to do...period and end of story. That's it and that's all....it is the right thing to do to treat your fellow human, animal, mother Earth or whatever you choose as equal. I don't need a book to tell me that kindness and giving are good things.

All these martyrs for the "christian cause" seem to have an enduring pathological need to be the victim at every second possible. Then when someone points out that they are atheist they are immediately branded as immoral despite the fact that the specific atheist may be a selfless giver.

Yes of course there are atheists who are bad...without question

But guess what? Your book doesn't seem to do what you claim it does. How many christians have we seen cheating, lying, assaulting and murdering others...sleeping with children, abusing animals and the countless other crimes while hiding under the "good book." And what about all the christian leaders who preach daily that homosexuality is an abomination and then are found to be sleeping with men on a daily basis?

It's rampant and it's all BS...because the fact is a book or a belief in a higher power ARE NOT necessary predictors of good behavior and are not necessary pre-existing factors for appropriate behavior. Period

The scariest thing about this argument is that people will tell you without that book or without that belief that morality does not exist. Why is this scary? Well think about it...it spreads the message that these people are saying "I would not be moral if it weren't for this book or instruction by my belief structure."

That's it....that's what is holding some of these people to acting like decent and kind human beings...one little tether

It is scary that people think they know what are the correct morals and ethics for everyone else.
Why do they think that? Because they think they are superior to everyone else and everyone else
must agree with what they think is moral or ethical or they are immoral or unethical. With
no objective standard by which to judge their own morality, except they claim it is the best.

This is a slippery slope to extreme fascism where without any real basis by which to judge morality, the
morality and the ethics of the people in power are deemed to be correct and foisted on others, without
the consideration that their own judgement may be faulty or their personal ideas may actually not be moral
or ethical at all.

When, as has happened in the US, every single source of objective
standards by which morality can be judged (either for the good or for the bad)
(one can say that the commandment against adultery is now bad in their
eyes as some on ATS claim that everyone cheats; at least it is an objective
standard from which discussion can begin)
by throwing out all objective standards of morality, there is no basis to even
objectively look at what is or is not moral.

The US has abandoned and often made illegal in the public arena all forms of
moral standards that have been the basis for moral discussion for thousands
and thousands of years. By doing that we have thrown out the baby with the
bathwater and subjective and personal "morality" are now the supreme decider
of what is moral and ethical. This morality and ethics varies from person to
person, from political and religious views and there is no longer an anchor or any
thing that is not subjective and prone to rapid and wild swings of public opinion
or the ideas of the current ruling class.

Therefore, I still posit that
there really is no longer any true morality or ethics in the US any longer.