Is one person's moral opinion as good as another's?

But the morality is the same. It is the perceived facts that differ (ie whether or not souls are reincarnated as animals). The morality involves eating relatives. It is not a moral judgment that cows are reanimated souls. It is a moral judgment that we should/should not eat our loved ones.

Ok...so if the cow IS a reincarnated reletive...then it would be wrong to eat it I suppose........but..............ISSSSSSSSSS the cow a reincarnated reletive ??

If it's true that the cow is indeed your old Uncle Goober, than it would indeed be morally wrong to eat it.......

But if it ISN"T your old Uncle....and it's just a cow.......born to eat grass and end up on a plate........than there's nothing wrong with eating it...unless of course you are a vegan and such things are abhorant to you....or, you just like cows and can't stand the thought of eating one. But that wouldn't mean that it would be morally wrong for someone else to eat it............(*GAAAAAA!!*)..... head....hurts.....must.....find......aspirin..........quickly.....before...it......melts.....away......


Guess what I'm trying to get at is.........get down through all the muck and garbage that we add to an issue, through our own flawed opinions about a given moral issue....because opinions are not always based on fact and truth...sometimes a person has an opinion about something just because someone else says it's so......not necessarily because they've looked into the issue or not.................anyway, waaaaaaayyyyyyy down deep underneath the pile we create with our own opinions and beliefs.....is the TRUTH......and THAT's where you find what REALLY is.....and that's where you find God..."seek and ye shall find" ;)
 
Last edited:
Riso-chan said:
And yet, there are values of right and wrong on more clearly defined circumstances that often stay fairly black and white all around, thusm most people's view on these issues will often be the same. ~Angela
yeah I think a lot of cultures have a lot of overlapping values which is a result of some things being universallly accepted as right or wrong, which is nice since at least we can all agree on some things ;)
125gJoe said:
If related to 'jihad', you can expect no courtesy at all.
that's a reality of their belief system. It's unfortunate, since if everyoe could simply accept everyone else's right to exist in the way they wat the world would be a better place ;)

in my experience most people with strong tied to their beleif systems don't extend the same courtesy I give to them. Tolerance isn't as widely preached as it should be I think. That's just my opinion derived from my own experiences.

I know what you merna about the headache EMG... I have that ame thing right now :p:
 
LunchBox said:
.. .... if everyoe could simply accept everyone else's right to exist in the way they wat the world would be a better place ;).... ...
Agreed.

I find it hard to believe that the next big war will still be a Holy War. I thought we had progressed beyond that.


_________________
 
Okay, let's keep this one on topic guys:) It has been extraordinarily civil in this thread. I'm happy about that...sometimes you have to worry around here:D

I thank everyone for your opinions (please, don't think this means the thread is done or whatever, I just wanted to say thanks for all the help!) and for handling the topic so well:)

I also appreciate people sticking (for the most part) to the topic and respecting the restrictions...esepecially since I posted this question on one other forum and got one answer that didn't make any sense and another implying I am a damned and wretched individual because of the exclusion of religion in the topic (dont' worry though, they are "praying for my soul")...as if I were the one who defined the disciplines of moral philosophy :rolleyes:

Thanks y'all!!
 
glad to be of help ;) really though this is pretty interesting. I used to take a lot of philosophy in college and had a lot of discussions about this kind of thing before, and it was always hard to keep religion out of it (and I haven't been doing the greatest job of it here either :p: )
 
Leopardess said:
I posted this question on one other forum and got one answer that didn't make any sense and another implying I am a damned and wretched individual because of the exclusion of religion in the topic (dont' worry though, they are "praying for my soul")...as if I were the one who defined the disciplines of moral philosophy :rolleyes:

Thanks y'all!!
Holy smokes, Leo..... Thank God, they are praying for you :D

seriously though, how someone can find this conclusion from you just posting this inquiry is beyond me but like most would say, stranger things have and will happen.
 
My opinion is posted, and sorry about the couple of sidetracks off the topic.

------------------


________________________
 
i must respond to the question of animals and their moral or amoral nature.

chimpanzees will punish/banish/kill a member of the troop for seriously harming or murdering another member of the group- sounds like morality

for those of you who insist that morals come from religion you should know that the chimps in one particular african forest have been captured on film practicing religious cerimonies associated with the first day of the rainy season.

dolphins also display moral behavior teaching they're calves right from wrong not just how to catch fish and stay away from sharks- they also punish murder.

gorillas and chimps who have learned sign language have show that they know right from wrong also.

and if you ever have the opportunity to spend time with some orangatangs you can have no doubt they have a sense of morality.
 
Lol....I could make a comment on your comment about those of us who 'insist' that morals come from religion.....but I won't........I don't want to be responsible for getting another thread locked...lol....I've got enough of those on my history here already.....don't want a record of two in one day !! :laugh:
 
AquariaCentral.com