what is moral justification?
152979
its justifying an action by claiming it is the "right" thing to do.
195263
You know, this is actually an interesting question.\n\nMany religious people believe that it is religion that gives them morals and prevents them from Hell and such. But really, it's not that at all. You can have morals but no religion.\n\nI believe that there is a moral world order, a sort of universal code that must be adhered to in order to preserve order and good in the world. This is not my religious feeling, but instead my moral compass, if you will. \n\nI don't do good deeds for fear of hell, or as supplication so that I may enter heaven. I do good and fight evil because I feel that good must always prevail over evil, or we will have lost our humanity, and become beasts.\n\nMorality is very often a black and white issue. Rape is never grayscale. It's never justified, and the people who commit it need to be put in prison or in an electric chair. They have forfeited their humanity, and like dangerous animals they need to be locked up or destroyed.\n\nOther issues that are black and white to me are murder, arson, and terrorism. Terrorism is never justified, no matter what. I don't care if US Black Hawk helicopters shot up your village or somthing as a kiddie and killed your mujahdeen daddy. The fact of the matter is that you can NEVER EVER kill civilians in cold blood for political reasons. You can never treat humans as tools for political advancement. \n\nMurder is never justified because killing another human being is just wrong. I say only murder, not killing, because murder is cold and premeditated. Manslaughter is also included in this. That a person could plan and execute a deadly attack on another is shocking to me.\n\nArson is never right either. No one has a good reason to be burning some buildings down.\n\nI disagree with you about Stalin. That was not religiously motivated. Nor was the Holocaust. In fact, the years 1936 to 1945 were remarkably unreligious given Germany's usually strong Catholic base. Hitler disliked the Church and largely they went along with him. However, Hitler did not claim divine support. \n\nHowever, atrocities are often commited in the name of religion. How about the Crusades, or the Thirty Years War? Thousands of lives wasted, all in the name of God!\n\nSometimes I think my moral compass is better than your Bible. I have all the morals with none of the religious radicalism.
855719
reasoning is one of the undeniable facts of what make us human. no other creature in the world has our capacity to question or to have faith. reason allows us to form concepts and to have various abstract ideas. it has been a hotly debated topic in philosophy since the beginning.
950761
God is the moral authority. He set the guidelines for us all, whether we like it or accept it or not.    Yes I believe in moral absolutes, and thats what is wrong with society, most dont anymore.    What God says is right, is right, and wrong is wrong.  Ppl try to set their own guidelines , Doest work.  What about the man tht beats his wife and convinced it is ok because she is a lousy wife he says/   Is that right? NO. Yet his consciencde says it was.    The Holy Spirit is our true conscience. but the devil speaks to us too. We check all things out according to Gods word and we kNOW who we were haring and go from there.   \nYOu listed several examples of why setting our own guideliens will never ever work, because self gets involved and we mess up.   Only when God sets the guidelines and we follow does this work. God says that obedience brings blessing and disobedience brings curse.  ANd it is right on, just like that. \nThe man that feels justified to cheat on his wife... Well ok. he cheats, and  well lets just say he has some consequences that will usually go for life. Loses his wife, kids,  disrepect, including at  some point, self respect, can spend years trying to undo it. Yes he set his own guidlines.  Did it work?  Did it make him happy?   Did it get him to where he wants to be. Will it work for him over time.  /?? NO.  Only in following the desires of Gods heart, will we find perfect peace, love and joy. Any other way leads to misery, destruction and eventual hell, if we dont repent and stop it.  GOOOD question. I have said for years this issue needs to get discussed and re looked at by a generation that thinks anything goes now, and no I dont just mean young people.   God says He never changes.  So if it was wrong  150 years ago, it still is, no matter what popularity to certain situations are now.   GOOD question. thanks for asking.....
632213
Where can we find those free people, coty?\n\nJenni, tell me, how do we enforce morality? Morality has to be ingrained.  It has to be in examples seen and heard every day, from different sources.  TV? Turn it on.  What do you see? Trash?  Radio? What do you hear? More trash? People cheating, lying, stealing, killing, cursing, drinking, doing drugs? Morality is learned from our national and community leaders (who have failed abysmally to establish high standards, either party), newspapers, TV, radio, schools, peers, other adult acquaintances, and of course from parents and other adult family members.  You sound like a moral, caring person, but how many of them are out there?
370920
"They are really more like guidelines..."  I heard that once.  Common wisdom is morality is a personal choice, and cannot be obtained by imposing laws.  Laws and penalties can influence behavior by incentive and pushishments.
537673
It's only immoral if you believe it is immoral.  It happens to fit into my idea of morality.
567205
All things being equal, any decision is best made by logic since logical decisions almost always reflect reality. Making decisions by "morals" is just another way of saying "making decisions based on ideology." Some ideological decisions work, but trying to decide everything within the limits that every ideology has will often lead to greater problems. \n\nA good example from my own life is my stance on abortion. I intensely dislike abortion, perhaps because I have 5 children and 8 granchildren. But from a logical and realistic standpoint, there is no other option than to place the decision to have an abortion where it belongs: with those who get pregnant. Forcing a pregnant person to bear to term a baby she doesn't want is, IMHO, just plain stupid. It's an incorrect application of ideology.
883223
Unless morality is based on the Law of God, the definition of "morally right" simply becomes "whatever I think is morally right", and "morally wrong" becomes "whatever I think is morally wrong". Of course, that would only define my own personal subjective morality, since there would be no such thing as objective morality. Your definition of "morally right" would be "whatever YOU happen to think is right", which might be completely opposite to my definition of "morally right". If morality is completely subjective, why even speak in terms of morality? Morality would consist of "you do whatever you feel like doing, and I'll do whatever I feel like doing". I couldn't judge any action of yours to be immoral, nor could you judge any action of mine, or of terrorists, or of governments, to be immoral. "What's right for you may not be right for me" would be the foundation of morality, whether we werespeaking of murder, rape, child molestation, or any other act. All acts would be morally neutral, and would become "right" or "wrong" only in the minds of individuals. Morality is meaningful only when there is an objective standard against which to compare subjective ideas of morality. An act is objectively moral when it fits the objective standard of morality.
362780
morals  character and health
465975
Morality is very subjective.  It's something we learn, and something we develop.   There are somethings that MOST people with agree with, like murder is wrong.  But there are many issues where people differ on it.  \nMorality is not set in stone.  It's a belief system that stems from who we are, and the society we are a part of.
66636
In addition to the idea that there are universal morals (such as killing and stealing), just because morality is relative doesn't mean it doesn't exist.\n\nAttitudes towards sex are a great example of moral relativity.  Even in our own country we've become very accepting of pre-marital sex. This doesn't mean we still don't have a set of morals about sex, it just means they've changed over time.  Morality shifts, but still exists.
93923
Well...  What religion does is make morality an objective idea instead of a subjective one; people obey the tenets that a certain religion sets forth.  Morality without religion is subjective; it is every individual's own perception of right and wrong -- which often differs.  Very similar is the difference between Christianity and humanism; one sets God as the absolute of all reality, and the other sets humankind as the absolute of all reality.  \nSo, do people need "god" to be morally "responsible" to their own concept of morality?  No.  Whether their idea of morality is correct, on the other hand -- take Hitler's morality for instance; he may very well have been responsible to his idea of morality -- is a totally different question.
140549
"Moral Equivalence" is a term of the political arena, usually usually used in a negative way.\nIt was widely used during the Cold War and claimed that in a conflict, the two sides of this conflict could not be morally ranked in the sense that one side was better than the other. There also could be no ethical difference in the evaluation of the actions of either side.  This was a popular idea among the European (and I suppose American) Left of the day that somehow held that both parties to the Cold War were morally corrupt and equally evil. \nI have seen some modern day Blogs that seem to imply that the modern-day-actions of the USA in the "War against Terrorism" (however deplorable they may be) are actually as evil as Terrorism itself. \nThis is a perfect example of applying "moral equivalence" to a modern setup
590629
Morality as in?\nIf you tell me I can help.
258264
I concur.  I feel like adherence to a prescribed moral principle removes personal responsibility.  I've felt that way (only perhaps less eloquent!) since I was eight.  If you are a good person because you adhere to the Bible / church values unquestioningly, you aren't actually a good person.  You are only truly good if you are the person choosing your own behavior.  I think fundamentally it boils down to manners - in greater or lesser dimensions.
1081118
Self righteousness implies moral superiority and as such it is my belief that this is a human trait that crosses political boundaries but is particular to people and groups that exhibit pathological hatreds. \nPersonally, my morals are neither superior nor inferior to anyone else's. They are mine and mine alone. Finally, I would ask that if a person is going to make rational decisions that they should know how to think for themselves.