Unf**king Believable, A mosque to be built at Ground Zero

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by pavlosmarcos, Jun 8, 2010.

  1. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Agreed. Laws give a nod to morality, but don't completely inform it. Then again, moralities also differ.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801


    I see that you have a mental obsession.
    Go to the doctor to check your connections between neurons.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,289
    All comes under the premise of law, including what can be termed as moral or not. There is the legal tort of CLEAN HANDS. If one conducts immorality, he cannot accuse another of the same - because that is unethical.

    Similarly, if one unlawfully restricts a person from commiting any immorality - then he cannot say no immorality was commited - because it was processed unethically and made impossible anyway. Morality is what one does which they aught not to do - so it only applies if they could do a wrong, knew it was wrong - and still did so. I gave an example, namely if you tie up a woman head to toe so she cannot move - she cannot be accused of immorality - its a contradiction in terms.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. IamJoseph Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,289
    Yes, morality can be a subjective term. But certain agreed fundamentals apply. IMO, a briefly clad woman who is nonetheless respected by her colleagues - is more moral than one who is covered head to toe with no guarantee they would be moral in tempting situations. So different forms of morality apply, and this is best tested when there is an open avenue to be immoral - and this is avoided.
     
  8. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
  9. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801

    All laws must be moral.
    But not all moral laws must be laws.
     
  10. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,227
    I'd go so far as to suggest (this is without giving it serious thought) that shouts of "immoral" at law breakers stem mainly* from the perception that the immorality is in breaking the law itself, not in the act that is being perpetrated.
    And maybe inspired by the fact that the perpetrator is seemingly getting away with it when you yourself didn't when you tried it...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    * Meh, okay, maybe in many cases.

    Oh dear. Fail.
    Can one shout "immoral" at a woman who sleeps with five guys in one week?* What does the law say? Can one take someone to court for stealing? Even if the accuser is a convicted thief?
    The law does not legislate on morality.

    * I'm not giving my personal position on this (it's beside the point anyway).

    Nope. morality isn't to do with "right" and "wrong" (that's legality). It's about perceptions of "right" and "wrong".
     
  11. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801

    I hope I got that.

    If we consider that laws are a contract between members of a society, then their violation in itself is immoral.
    I can believe that some laws are immoral, but I have to respect.
    Or, I am morally against abortion.But I do not agree that abortion should be prohibited by law.

     
  12. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801

    Morality depends very much on their own perception.
    Is immoral to cheat at cards.
    However, if a league of cheaters, which is announced: "the best cheater win",for me is not immoral.
     
  13. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    So being required to wear a seat belt while driving is a moral matter?
     
  14. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801



    I never said the laws are moral.
    I said that laws must be moral.
    Since then, laws still change over time.
     
  15. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    You just contradicted yourself.
     
  16. Ja'far at-Tahir Grand Ayatollah of SciForums Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    612
    Honestly, your posts just keep getting better and better. So not only are Muslims evil now we are being compared to the Nazis. What an absurd world you live in. This is ridiculous, even for this forum.

    Are you out of your fucking mind? This is patently absurd, seriously, even for this forum with all it's crazy anti-Islamic ideas, this one right here is taking the cake. To state that Osama bin Laden is a neo-prophet (which is a moronic term to use anyway in this context) would be to go against the teachings of Islam. Muhammad (saw) was the seal of the prophets (as), period. Not only this, Osama bin Laden has no authority whatsoever to issue any fatwas and has no title whatsoever. Not only this, just because you don't or choose not to see opposition doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
     
  17. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    "Neo-Prophet" is clearly too far. "Hero" might be a more appropriate term, in some circumstances.
     
  18. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801
  19. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    It is physical fact. If the reality of the world seems absurd, and contrary to your idealistic visions of Islam, I am sorry about that - the rest of us are not dealing with an Islam that does not condone such things. We are dealing with an Islam that does.
    And they choose to further these noble aims by building a huge, dramatic, obviously political "Islamic cultural center", apparently financed by the misogynistic coreligionists and inequality exemplifying political allies of those who financed 9/11 (possibly the very same people, in some cases), right next to the site of that very successful assault.

    They decide to begin this bettering by provoking and offending as many Americans as such a project possibly could.

    So are they stupid, or are they lying?
    So you can't think of any examples either. No surprise there.
     
  20. Ja'far at-Tahir Grand Ayatollah of SciForums Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    612
    Again, you keep making these declarations as if they were fact. What's absurd is again you keep refering to Islam as if Muslims were the Borg and it's ridiculous. Not to mention this whole argument your trying to use of "ideal," Islam is also equally as stupid, I have already explained this. Scroll up, re-read, then come back to me because honestly, I'm sick of fucking repeating myself over and over and trying to address the same bullshit, over and over and over and over again.

    Heavy talk but where's the proof? Oh, wait, apparently, it's self-evident because no one here can prove this horseshit to me.
     
  21. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Still can't think of an example? There's a billion Muslims on this planet, in hundreds of different places - surely you can come up with one group, anybody, that matches what you claim to be true of all of Islam.

    It would be even better if that group had some connection to the people behind this deeply offensive "Islamic cultural center" , to counteract the appearance of the wrong kind of Islam, the stuff that according to you is not really Islam, currently dominating the project.
     
  22. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    Not to interfere, but I think that you are referring to the difference between "should be" and "are". "Should" implies what "ought" to be, or what would be in a perfect world.

    "Must" means "by necessity" or absolutely "has to be". If this is not what you mean, my apologies...
     
  23. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,801

    "Laws must be moral but are not." This sentence is meaningless?
    If so, I expressed myself wrong.
     

Share This Page