I agree. What good is church going if the family is rotten? Then it is just hypocrisy. Some keep church in their lives for a wedding or burial and a place to go on a certain day and I really do not know any Catholic women friends who follow their religion seriously in regard to birth control and abortion or divorce, etc. Plus there are decades of problems with alcohol and drugs, crooked businesses, and so on but all the commercial/religious holidays are celebrated anyway. I think children are able to sort through the sham of it so the family is really key to their own moral development or their struggles to improve and become a decent person.
On Mar 16, 6:16 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > That is what I am saying Rigsy. We do design our own morality. I for > instance see nowt wrong in leaving the descicion of religous faith for > my children up to them Other theists may well tell me that by doing > so I am failing them and so act imorraly. Ethicaly though my morality > seems to be in touch with the ethics of my society, and so I can say > that such a stance is both moraly and ethicaly correct. > > On 16 Mar, 11:08, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > It's maybe like the chicken and the egg. It depends, perhaps, on how > > the terms are used and meant. I think of ethics as a philosophical > > thing while morals as behavior but can refer to a business as > > unethical but a war as immoral. Why would morals be a personal choice > > rather than a system? If so, we could design our own! > > > On Mar 15, 7:13 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Heheh very strange what we all take as common knowldge isn't it. > > > > I had always understood the diffrance between morality and ethics to > > > be this. Morality is one personal definition on what is good or bad. > > > Ethics is concerened with doing that which is right. So one > > > descriptive and the other more concerned with the doing, or actions. > > > > I had always had this in mind when talking about morality here. > > > However a little while back, and by that I mean less than a year. We > > > had another debate about morality, some questions where asked abotu > > > what I mean when I say 'Moral' and when I say 'Ethical', it seemed > > > that my ideas where just a little out and due to the helpfull people > > > here I re thought teh definitions that i had always belived where > > > correct. That is: > > > > Morality is still ones personal opinion on what is good and what is > > > bad, but Ethics deals with a more social morality. That is you and I > > > could have differing ideas due to our morality, but our ethics come > > > fro the society or other groupings we find ourselves in. > > > > Now you say that this is also wrong? Hhahah gees, a little help > > > anybody? > > > > On 15 Mar, 11:54, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I disagree. Morality is not a personal decision but a communal one and > > > > is not innate but taught by the family and society. Morals are loose > > > > enough to change according to current trends and therefore not fixed- > > > > they are a cousin to "situation ethics". > > > > > On Mar 15, 6:31 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I think that is wrong mate. Morality is no more than ones personal > > > > > definition of what is right and what is wrong. > > > > > > On 14 Mar, 06:27, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > And no: morals are not based on reason, ethics are based on reason. > > > > > > Morals are the "spiritual " measure of right and wrong and ethics > > > > > > are > > > > > > the intellectual/societal force that makes living in groups > > > > > > possible. > > > > > > > Ethics are what we get when we apply logic and concern for others to > > > > > > ourselves. Morals come from illiterate bronze and iron age > > > > > > paedophiles > > > > > > and misogynists in silly little collections of quaint tribal > > > > > > stories. > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 4:32 pm, Staples <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Fiddler: > > > > > > > > "Morals are far too fluid...to be a guide in any dilemma; > > > > > > > reason...provides the ability to make decisions." > > > > > > > > Assuming you actually meant this, you implied that: > > > > > > > > 1. Morals are not a constant. > > > > > > > 2. Morals are not based on reason. > > > > > > > > How could anyone live with a system of morality like that - one > > > > > > > divorced from rationality and is "fluid", e.g., changes from day > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > day - on what basis? Irrationality? I suppose so.- Hide quoted > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
