mpg
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2005
- Messages
- 7,795
- Reaction score
- 1,784
- Location
- Milford, CT
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Which laws are examples of people forcing their morals onto others?
Which laws are examples of people forcing their morals onto others?
All of them.
While all laws are based on arbitrary morality, that doesn't mean that you can't create frameworks based around somewhat more objective standards. The rational basis test used in U.S. law is hardly perfect, but its certainly better than absolute monarchs or theocracies.
There are no objective standards, all morality is subjective.
DING! DING! DING! WE HAVE A WINNAH!!!
The very definition of laws is forcing the common morality of the society in which you live upon the members of that society. That's what a law is. The idea that some people have in thier heads that they're having someone else's morality forced on them and that that's a bad thing is gross immaturity.
There are no objective standards, all morality is subjective.
Was the Holocaust objectively immoral? Yes or no?
You're asking his opinion on it.
That's subjective.
---
People will have different opinions towards everything. While some think abortion is immoral, others do not. While some think homosexuality is immoral, others do not. If you were to pass any law, there would always be some opposition to it on a moral basis, regardless of whether or not the opposition was large or small.
I asked him a question, what is your answer to it?
I believe the Holocaust was immoral, yes, because I believe you shouldn't take something from someone else without their permission. That includes life.
So you then believe in objective morality.
No. If it were objective, it wouldn't be able to be challenged. Since that's my personal viewpoint, it is subjective. It would need to be a universal truth. 'x amount' of the population of the world may view the Holocaust as bad or immoral, but what about the others? What about people who supported the Holocaust? Neo-Nazis, anti-Semites?
Is it objectively true that the Earth is round?
No, the earth resembles an oblate spheroid and isn't perfectly round.
You're confusing two things, fact and opinion. Morality cannot be factual, much like 1+1=2 cannot be an opinion. Again, for something to be objective, it needs to be a universal truth. The earth is 'round' and that can be proven. The Holocaust being immoral cannot be proven.
You know what I meant.
5. The holocaust was intentional killings committed without sufficient cause.
Thus it is proved that the holocaust was immoral.
I did, the comment about the roundness of the Earth was me being a wise-ass.
This is the problem with your argument. Who decides what cause is sufficient? In your opinion, the reason was not sufficient, but to those who planned and executed the acts, there was sufficient cause/reasoning.
I've already established that the general norm is that intentional killings are immoral. If a person wishes to argue (whether they believe it or whether they're trying, as you are, to demonstrate a point regarding the nature of morality) that there was sufficient cause for the holocaust, then they have the burden of providing an argument for this position, and I will then provide a refutation, however I can't provide a refutation of an argument that hasn't been made.
You've argued that it's human nature. Prove it. You are the one claiming that moral objectivity is indeed a real thing, but haven't provided anything aside from 'sufficient cause' which is subjective. Obviously, someone must have believed there was sufficient enough reasoning or the event would not have taken place.
True, but there is a difference between legislating morality that maximizes freedom without causing harm to others and legislating morality that maximizes harm to others and minimizes freedom.
Generally when the morality comes from extremist sides of religion, we get the later. See Iran. Or Saudi Arabia.
No you haven't established any such thing.I've already established that the general norm is that intentional killings are immoral.
Neither statement can be proven true outside of a personal opinion.You're starting with the premise that morality is a matter of subjective opinion. This is circular reasoning. And the immorality of the Holocaust can be proved:
Which laws are examples of people forcing their morals onto others?
I did. It's against man's social nature, since if one human had the right to intentionally kill another, then the other would also have the right to intentionally kill him, yet this is a contradiction, since by exercising this "right" a person would deprive another of the same right.