It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by arcana imperii
Is it ok to change common belief and moral systems to fit your own system of belief.
(Like changing the bible, removing parts that don�t agree with what you believe)
Is it okay to simply create your own version of existing religions and philosophies so that they truly represent what you want from that religion or philosophy.
Originally posted by arcana imperii
What If a religion preaches love and peace but a part of there holy book preaches intolerance.
What if a religion is based on helping others and a signal prophet of that faith suggested genocide.
What if there�s evidence that the religion has already been corrupted and changed.
Originally posted by Netchicken
I would say that in most part its either your, or others, faulty interpretation of that religion. So does the "love and peace" example REALLY say just that, or are there occasions when what you have termed "intolerance" is appropriate.
You need to check that:
A) you have a good, or correct understanding of that belief system to start off with.
B) Someone else, whom you are debating with, knows what the heck they are saying.
C)That you have got your facts correct (this is really A above.)
[Edited on 10-7-2003 by Netchicken]
Originally posted by arcana imperii
But that my point isn�t every thing relative what�s right what�s intolerant to one person is not to another.
Originally posted by Netchicken
Well, no.
Certinaly everything is relative in some respects, but there are values that transcend all belief systems. Basic laws of humanity, like murder is wrong.
As well, you are assuming that everyone is equal. What if morality was defined by a being that is greater than yourself, a being that has the ultimate insight as to the best way for you to live because he created you and has a plan for your life?
Now that kind of morality is superior to mere 'human' derived morality.
Originally posted by arcana imperii
But that my point isnt every thing relative whats right whats intolerant to one person is not to another.
Originally posted by FreeMason
Well let's go back to "Universal Morality" here...
Take murder for example, what is murder?
It's obviously not killing, because we kill all the time and attempt to justify it on multiple levels.
Murder is the unnecissary killing of someone useful to your "group".
To say the least.
Murder also it our current times can be expanded to simply, the unjustified killing of anyone.
But in the furthest past it would have been the more barbaric former.
What I mainly mean with "Universal Morality" though is hard to necissarily define, but I would say it's more along the lines of a general code of ethics, morals, but most importantly a form of respect that we show eachother.
Things that we all will say make us decent, if we look back on what we were before.
A Nazi concentration camp officer probably wouldn't have seen any problem with his job during the acts, but when he was forced to look at it from a "higher degree" of morality, he like anyone else, would feel ashamed.
Even if the slightest bit...or they are messed up in the head some way
Sincerely,
no signature
[Edited on 10-7-2003 by FreeMason]