Moral relativism is not wrong. Christian approval of slavery.

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

http://home.att.net/~Resurgence/L-christianrepublic.htm


--------------------------snip--------------------

One of the most dramatic examples of this is an encyclical written by Pope John Paul II, entitled Veritatis Splendor ("The Splendor of Truth.") In it, the pope wrote that the morality of an act has nothing to do with its result, its social context, its circumstance, its intent, or the process by which a person's conscience comes to his decision. The act is simply right or wrong, in and of itself, and it will always be that way, no matter what the surrounding considerations. Furthermore, the rightness or wrongness of an act is revealed to us by God, through the highest authorities of the church. They cannot be questioned. Humans are not supposed to wrestle with moral dilemmas, but to apply these revealed truths to every situation and problem in life.

The most obvious result of putting this belief into practice is that it gives supreme power to the highest leaders of the Church. It is no wonder that religious leaders find moral absolutism so attractive, and are so insistent upon everyone putting it into practice. Conservatives may object that the power actually belongs to God, and the church leadership is simply transmitting the information. But history clearly refutes this idea. African slavery in America received the full blessing of four centuries of popes. Considering the social and scientific disasters that the Church hierarchy (of all denominations) have been guilty of promoting, from the burning of witches to the enslavement of innocents, no thinking person could ever place blind faith in the fallible leadership of men.

That's just a practical observation; let's turn to a more theoretical treatment of moral absolutism. The problem with this theory is that not even the Bible considers an act to be wrong in and of itself. God gave Israel the Ten Commandments forbidding certain acts, but then he also ordered Israel to carry out those very acts against her enemies. This sort of moral relativism is apparent in Christian history as well. Slavery and war were not condemned as evil in and of themselves; Christian scholars and popes wrote entire libraries on what constituted "just and unjust slavery" and "just and unjust war." They drew all the exceptions permissible under God for these atrocities, which they viewed as correct in certain circumstances. They also did this with more positive behaviors, such as the only correct occasions to have sex, which the Church otherwise viewed as a great evil. The argument that morals are absolute, then, despite their context, is completely inconsistent with Christian history and practice.

The most a conservative can argue is that the law is relative, but it is up to God to decide where to permit the exceptions. Christians should then follow his exceptions as moral absolutes. This is a bit like the old-school physicist, who, upon learning that Einstein had proven that the universe is relative, proclaimed, "But this relativity is nonetheless absolute!"

[On the Road]

1. People Who Take This Approach

are the kind the administration wants as prison guards.

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

2. thanks to Moral Absolutism we have people in prisions<nt>

[leftyandproud]

3. should we empty the prisons and be more "tolerant"...

of people who commit crimes?

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

4. Once again its all relative.Do you think homosexuals should be imprisioned

?

[BeFree]

8. The only diff is

Those who have been caught and those who have not.

Therefore, unless one has been perfect, one deserves some jail time, eh?

"Should we empty the prisons..." L&P asks.
Why that's just plain silly. Many have been caught. As punishment for their crime they should serve time.

"... and be more tolerant?" Well, if you get caught would you want the rest of us to be tolerant of you? You don't have to answer, we all know the answer to that.

Reply to the main post: Very nice piece of work. May it be well read.

[Malva Zebrina]

5. Nothing can ever be written in stone

human beings will do and behave the way that is most conducive to their survival and the survival of their genes. The rules are determined by the rest of the human beings in their society who are also concerned about their survival and the survival of their genes, and upon who they depend upon to survive.

[NashVegas]

6. The RW Use of Selective Relativism

Look no further than Iraq, my friend.

[ProfessorGAC]

7. No Such Thing

There is no such thing as moral relativism. All morality, is by definition, relative. Killing in self-defense is one thing, otherwise it's murder. The killing is the moral abdication, it's the intent. So, the circumstances, relative to another set of circumstances is what differentiates the same act from another.

That being said, the term moral relativism is a made up term by two dimensional thinkers who believe in only black/white, up/down, good/evil.

It's a canard.
The Professor

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

11. And the Prof makes line #12

See my ever-growing (ooooo mama) sig.

[ProfessorGAC]

14. Well, Thank You!

The Professor

[DerekG]

9. Do you find the moral absolutism of the abolitionists abominable?

After all, there was nary a trace of relativism in the minds of many of the Christian abolitionists. John Brown's courageous campaigns in Kansas, Missouri and Harper's Ferry were fueled with righteous zeal; Henry Ward Beecher, William Lloyd Garrison (for the most part), David Walker, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and Rev. Elijah Lovejoy were also inclined to eschew relativism in favor of uncompromised stances. The emotional often dwarved the intellectual, and I will not disparage their efforts.

Like all ideologies, relativism and absolutism are both imbued with good or evil connotations.

Although I appreciate some of your posts (including the recent thread addressing the myth of the impoverished and crime), but I'm dismayed by your crusade against religion that has become omnipresent on the DU. I am a radical leftist, but it was Jesus Christ who led me unto that path, not Karl Marx (and Dr. King said the same in his autobiography).

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

10. Hmm what treatise did Jesus Christ write? in fact are there

even any solid facts outside a handfull that are known? Marx and King are on record at the moment, its odd quoting people years after there death, when even now, people dispite the recipe of elvis's favorite chicken.

[undergroundpanther]

13. Some things ARE immoral

Some things go against our continued existence and break humanity apart with strife.

Moral relativism is where you can rationalize torture as OK,where rape is OK.
If you think ANY of this torture stuff is OK in a civilized context you have lost your sanity,your empathy and your humanity. There ARE absolutes when we must live together and depend on one another. Once rape and torture are normalized than any sort of peaceful life among each other becomes impossible.Cooperation devolves into tyranny,slavery and prostitution.

If you do not want to subject yourself to the social contract of civilization and live among people who do not accept being tortured raped and abused than why do you pretend rape and torture are not wrong like the people like me who do not want to be raped,tortured or exploited??

I don't accept any bullies bullshit.Fuck their "theories" And I do not listen to a damn thing any enablers(moral relativists) for bullies say about civilization,torture, ethics crime or human'nature'.
(fundamentalists some academics,and hurting victims who identify with abusers are problems that come to mind.The places where socialized sociopaths love to mouth off about the evils of egalitarian ideas and human rights are where there is a "culture" that accepts such horrors as OK)
All bullies and bully enablers are all morally compromised. And they are dangerous to my health and the safety of my loved ones and friends and my culture(my culture consists of we who do not want torture and rape normalized or done to us or others).A sociopath is a problem for ANY society that values itself.Because a sociopath violates the consent of whom he exploits and harms them. People cannot be allowed to get away with some things,IF you want the benefits of civilized cooperation between people.






http://norlonto.net/index.cfm/action/articles.view/itemID/50/pg/1

[The Magistrate]

12. The Relativism Of The Christian Abolitionists, Sir

Was in their reading of scripture itself. It is impossible to find, in any portion of that book, a clear and absolute statement against slavery, while it is child's play to find texts that explicitly endorse the practice, even to the point of urging Christian slaves not to petition Christian masters for emancipation. In order to claim their opposition to slavery was Christian, these people had to perform the usual exercise of torturing the text to reveal the position desired, claiming some statements as priviledged over others, and treating certain instances as more revelatory of the diety's will than others, as suited their purpose best. That their position is agreeable does not alter that it was based on a relativistic exercise, nor does the absolute and uncompromising stand they took on the product of their relativism.

[Tigermoose]

15. This is total horse hockey.

I just read the Catholic Catechism and it reinforces Thomas Aquinas's view that every act considers three things,
the intention, the end, and the effects of the act itself.

Also, Old Testament moral teachings were revised by Jesus Christ. Please read Mathew when Christ directly addresses the Ten Commandments, and then tells us that all the commandments hang on these: Love God and Love your neighbor....and then when a lawyer asks Him who his neighbor is, Christ tells him the parable of the Good Samaritan, and in those days you didn't get much more "outside" the Jewish group than a Samaritan. So that tells us everyone is our neighbor, even those outside our groups.

I caution you, do not trust this website you are visiting. It seems to be attempting to purposefully mislead you and others.

[Az]

16. Um

Slavery in the US was actively propped up by its supporters by quoting the bible. I give you:

Eph 6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.

Col 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.

1 Tim 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.

Tit 2: 9-10 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

1 Pet 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

I doubt he was encouraging slavery but he certainly wasn't damning it either. There is tacit permission to continue the practice of slavery in the bible. There is no condemnation of it what so ever.

[Malva Zebrina]

17. Catechism

49 Without the Creator, the creature vanishes (GS 36). This is the reason why believers know that the love of Christ urges them to bring the light of the living God to those who do not know him or who reject him.