Suicide or Martyrdom?

[stuartcr]

Stuart, if you are absolute, then I should consider my decisions with respect to you.

No, your absolutes are yours, not mine.

What does it mean 'my absolutes'? How 'my absolutes' can be absolutes?

I believe absolutes only exist for the individual, not for all. Absolute is not a good term to be used with beliefs, but it's what we've got to work with.

[RickD]

Stuart, if you are absolute, then I should consider my decisions with respect to you.

No, your absolutes are yours, not mine.

What does it mean 'my absolutes'? How 'my absolutes' can be absolutes?

I believe absolutes only exist for the individual, not for all. Absolute is not a good term to be used with beliefs, but it's what we've got to work with.

So,
Raping children and torturing puppies is wrong only for some people? You are saying it's morally acceptable to rape children in certain circumstances?

[PaulSacramento]

FYI:

ab·so·lute

adjective
1.
not qualified or diminished in any way; total.
"absolute secrecy"
synonyms: complete, total, utter, out-and-out, outright, entire, perfect, pure, decided; More
antonyms: partial, qualified
used for general emphasis when expressing an opinion.
"the policy is absolute folly"
synonyms: definite, certain, positive, unconditional, categorical, unquestionable, incontrovertible, undoubted, unequivocal, decisive, conclusive, confirmed, infallible
"the absolute truth"
(of powers or rights) not subject to any limitation; unconditional.
"no one dared challenge her absolute authority"
synonyms: unlimited, unrestricted, unrestrained, unbounded, boundless, infinite, ultimate, total, supreme, unconditional
"absolute power"
(of a ruler) having unrestricted power.
"he proclaimed himself absolute monarch"
synonyms: autocratic, despotic, dictatorial, tyrannical, tyrannous, absolutist, authoritarian, arbitrary, autonomous, sovereign, autarchic, autarchical, omnipotent
"an absolute monarch"
LAW
(of a decree) final.
"the decree of nullity was made absolute"
LAW
see absolute title.
2.
viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative.
"absolute moral standards"
synonyms: universal, fixed, independent, nonrelative, nonvariable, absolutist
"absolute moral standards"
antonyms: relative, flexible
GRAMMAR
(of a construction) syntactically independent of the rest of the sentence, as in.
"dinner being over, we left the table"
GRAMMAR
(of a transitive verb) used without an expressed object (e.g., guns kill ).
GRAMMAR
(of an adjective) used without an expressed noun (e.g., the brave ).
noun
noun: absolute; plural noun: absolutes
1.
PHILOSOPHY
a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.
"good and evil are presented as absolutes"

ob·jec·tive

adjective
1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
"historians try to be objective and impartial"
synonyms: impartial, unbiased, unprejudiced, nonpartisan, disinterested, neutral, uninvolved, even-handed, equitable, fair, fair-minded, just, open-minded, dispassionate, detached, neutral
"I was hoping to get an objective and pragmatic report"
antonyms: biased, partial, prejudiced

not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.
"a matter of objective fact"
synonyms: factual, actual, real, empirical, evidence-based, verifiable
"eight objective measurements to track student performance"


1.
a thing aimed at or sought; a goal.
"the system has achieved its objective"
synonyms: aim, intention, purpose, target, goal, intent, object, end; More

[stuartcr]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

[PaulSacramento]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

You may believe that ( there are no morals that cover EVERYONE) BUT in reality that is not the case.
You will find in any culture, any civilization now and in the part, the view of right and wrong.
It has always been there.

[1over137]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

So, morals between you and God and between others and God may be different? In which God you believe? And this God is ok having different morals with respect to different people?

[stuartcr]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

You may believe that ( there are no morals that cover EVERYONE) BUT in reality that is not the case.
You will find in any culture, any civilization now and in the part, the view of right and wrong.
It has always been there.

Yes, there has always been views of right and wrong. I just do not believe those views have always been the same.

[stuartcr]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

So, morals between you and God and between others and God may be different? In which God you believe? And this God is ok having different morals with respect to different people?

I believe there is only one God. I imagine He is ok with it, as I believe my beliefs about Him, come from Him.

[RickD]

Stuart,

Please answer this:

Raping children and torturing puppies is wrong only for some people? You are saying it's morally acceptable to rape children in certain circumstances?

[PaulSacramento]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

You may believe that ( there are no morals that cover EVERYONE) BUT in reality that is not the case.
You will find in any culture, any civilization now and in the part, the view of right and wrong.
It has always been there.

Yes, there has always been views of right and wrong. I just do not believe those views have always been the same.

Whether they are or always have been the same is not relevant at THIS stage of the discussion.
What is important is the realization that, YES, there has always been an understanding or right and wrong, which means that there is an absolute moral from which to decide right and wrong, good and evil.
From there we can go to the next step.

[1over137]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

So, morals between you and God and between others and God may be different? In which God you believe? And this God is ok having different morals with respect to different people?

I believe there is only one God. I imagine He is ok with it, as I believe my beliefs about Him, come from Him.

So, you believe that your belief about him that he has different morals between different people comes from him. *shrug

[stuartcr]

Stuart,

Please answer this:

Raping children and torturing puppies is wrong only for some people? You are saying it's morally acceptable to rape children in certain circumstances?

You know, you already asked me this in the collateral damage discussion. I'll answer again;
I imagine TO (not for) some people it is not wrong. Probably not many, as I cannot speak for others. To me, neither is acceptable.

[stuartcr]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

You may believe that ( there are no morals that cover EVERYONE) BUT in reality that is not the case.
You will find in any culture, any civilization now and in the part, the view of right and wrong.
It has always been there.

Yes, there has always been views of right and wrong. I just do not believe those views have always been the same.

Whether they are or always have been the same is not relevant at THIS stage of the discussion.
What is important is the realization that, YES, there has always been an understanding or right and wrong, which means that there is an absolute moral from which to decide right and wrong, good and evil.
From there we can go to the next step.

To me, it is relevant.

[stuartcr]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

So, morals between you and God and between others and God may be different? In which God you believe? And this God is ok having different morals with respect to different people?

I believe there is only one God. I imagine He is ok with it, as I believe my beliefs about Him, come from Him.

So, you believe that your belief about him that he has different morals between different people comes from him. *shrug

I would prefer it if you used caps as the first letter when speaking of the one God. Him/He

[PaulSacramento]

I'll try to do this without using the word absolute;

I believe that my morals are between myself and God, and others' morals are between themselves and God. I believe we each have our own set of morals and there are none that cover everyone. We compromise in order to fit into society, which is different depending upon time place, circumstances, etc. If we do something which is not acceptable to our current societal mores, then we expect consequences.

You may believe that ( there are no morals that cover EVERYONE) BUT in reality that is not the case.
You will find in any culture, any civilization now and in the part, the view of right and wrong.
It has always been there.

Yes, there has always been views of right and wrong. I just do not believe those views have always been the same.

Whether they are or always have been the same is not relevant at THIS stage of the discussion.
What is important is the realization that, YES, there has always been an understanding or right and wrong, which means that there is an absolute moral from which to decide right and wrong, good and evil.
From there we can go to the next step.

To me, it is relevant.

It is relevant, BUT not at this point.
First we accept there there IS a right and wrong, you can't get "there" without leaving from "here".