A question on morality. Did someone have to tell you that rape is wrong?

Question for other theists.

Did someone have to tell you that rape is wrong? If no one had told you that rape was wrong would you have thought it was OK? Does fear of hell keep you from raping? Do humans have the ability to figure out right from wrong without being told?

If you like exchange rape for murder, theft, arson... etc.

 

Direct the question at all people and it would be worthy of consideration. IMHO.

 

I have a good idea where atheists get their morality as I got mine from the same place. My question is to better understand those who get their morality from religion. I seek perspective to better help me understand my large Christian family and their moral values. I ask here because the questions I ask can be perceived as an attack which does not bode well for family relations. Here if I inadvertently pizz someone off or someone pizzes me off its no big deal. The forums are a safe place to explore ideas, challenge my beliefs, and gain in perspective.

 

That all seems to me (IMHO) like a rationalization (making excuses for your behavior) based on a fear of confrontation with family members. Like you said... it is no big deal if you offend someone who is not close to you. Which makes me question why you would desire to take the chance of pissing someone off (as long as they are not a family member). If you believe that your beliefs are correct, then why not stand up for those beliefs where it seems to matter the most for you.... with your family??

 

This is becoming a red herring. I made my motive clear, accept it or reject it. If you will not answer the questions I posted in the OP then I feel no obligation to answer any more of your questions.

 

Does the heat in the kitchen sometimes get a little unbearable?

 

From a purely personal perspective.

I believe that morals are subjective, based around the culture and history of the various people who inhabit this planet .. there are some morals that at first glance would appear to be universal and as such the religious brigade claim them as coming from god .. however, when looked at a little closer it is plain to see that immoral things such as murder could easily become universally immoral based purely on a common sense factor, it makes no logical sense for murder to be accepted in society.

Now to your question on rape, one does not have to look very far into history to see that some forms of rape were seen as morally acceptable .. rape within marriage for example, even up to 1992 this was not seen as illegal in some states and even now it does not command the same level of punishment in some states as a rape outside of marriage. Look a little further back and you can find plenty of examples (including the bible) where the victorious army would be rewarded with the spoils of war that included the rape of captured females, this was seen as normal and not morally wrong .. yet, rape of a female from within your own people was morally wrong.

It is the changing attitudes of what 'normal' is that changes culture and therefore what is seen as moral or not.

So IMO there is no such thing as universal or inherent morals

 

I heard it from my parents.

 

There are some people in our society---that think when someone makes more money or has more stuff then they do---then it is ok to take it. to steal it. This is justified because its not fair. The answer is to take it in order to be fair. What do we teach about stealing?

How can someone justify rape? Is it fair that the woman have her skirts short--teasing men. Is it fair that a man has to deal with the beauty of a woman when her face and beauty is shown? Who's fault is it---rape. The man who must do what he can with his biology and hormones....or the woman who flaunts herself--teasing and asking for trouble.

 

Well said and I agree.

Even if rape were legal I would stand in opposition to it because it harms the victim. My morality is independent of laws, social norms, or religious edicts. No one ever sat me down and gave me the "Robert, do not rape women because its wrong speech", but like you pointed out with murder, some things are just common sense. But that's my point... I do not understand those who need to read in a book that a thing is wrong for it to actually be seen as wrong. Things become ridiculous when superficial and non harmful things like long hair on a man or a braless woman are judged as wrong/immoral because of some interpretation of an ancient tome.

 

Sure there are some who think like that but that is a criminal mind and they know what they are doing is illegal. You know how I learned that stealing is wrong? Through person experience, observation, and common sense. The first time that I can remember a kid taking a cookie off my plate (experience) I felt hurt and angry and understood that what the kid did was wrong and since I did not like it I should not do it to others (common sense). The first time that I remember a kid taking a ball from another kid (observation) I understood how bad it feels to have someone take something from me and I understood that I had just witnessed a wrong being committed (common sense).

To me morality is not rocket science... as a general rule if I would find a thing harmful then I should not do that thing to another. (Exception can be made in the defense of life) So its a mystery to me why some need to read old tomes to understand that stealing is wrong when it is so obvious to me. I am finding it hard to believe that Christians actually have to read the Bible to learn that stealing is bad, or that the only thing that keeps a Christian honest is the fear of hell. But yet I hear no Christians denying it.

Do you equate short skirts with teasing?

The man is obviously at fault. Are you playing devils advocate here or do you really believe that a "woman who flaunts herself--teasing and asking for trouble."?

 

lol, I rejected most of the insanity my parents taught me by the time I hit puberty.

 

well they sure wouldn't learn it from the bible

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy 22:28-29&version=NIV

 

If you (this presupposes a self) were the only thing that existed in the universe, are you moral or immoral? There is clearly an unavoidable aspect to morality that is social. Even in the Old Testament, Yahweh, is leveraging power AGAINST other beings of equal or lesser value... =>... #Pagans

As the story goes, at some point, Yahweh was the only thing that existed. So where did morality come from? Did Yahweh create morality, or is it a spontaneous bi-product of Adam's misappropriated usage of Free Will?

"Hey, I'm Adam, and I used my Free Will to do what I was told not to do...React to ME!"

I swear that's a Whitesnake lyric. Or is it reflective of a conflict? Who wrote this and what is their conflict? Context.



Morality is not empirical. When it is, it's flaws show through.

 

The OP's question is flawed in the respect of morality. The question should be directed towards Atheist and should be "Why have morality if no God exists?" After all...aren't we just another animal born from chance as most followers of Darwin's Theory would suggest. Or are we as mankind something more then a highly evolved goldfish?

 

I choose to believe you're joking.

 

I'm an Atheist, so the question is not even directed at me, but it made me think of that answer and it made me laugh

These questions of morality are odd at times, primarily because "morality" is very subjective, because everybody has their own morality standards they live up to (or try to live up to) and to top it of, morality changes over time. 70 to 80 years ago it wasn't necessarily "morally" wrong to hate Jewish people for being Jewish, 100 years ago it was considered "morally" acceptable for women to be second class citizens and 200 years ago slavery was "morally" ok.

People like to believe morality is objective, but it's actually extremely subjective.

 

I never knew about rape at all until I had a thirteen year old cousin drugged and raped by an older guy. The cousin was a boy.

 

Morals are determined and shaped by society and as such should be constantly evolving.

Many elements of morality found in the bible have long been ignored or corrupted by contemporary social perspectives.

some advocate that morality can only derive from THEIR religion. Examine the current clustermuck of ISIS. Do they behave "morally" in demanding conversion, expulsion or death as the Koran and sharia demand? do they behave morally when they cut off the heads as a form of execution? do they behave morally when enslaving women and children? If you asked them, they;d say they are operating under the highest devine (moral) aegis. Can't see how that persective could be any more subjective and in and of itself morally bankrupt.

 

are you saying if you did not believe in God you think you would be immoral? not all of us are only good cause we think a God is watching... I do think some fall into that category, and for them... it's a good thing they believe that, course there are also those that believe it's moral to kill or punish non-believers...

.

 

A better question is what does God have to do with morality? Lots of people do not believe in God and are good moral people. As a Deist I believe in God but God does not dictate morality to me nor do I act in a moral way out of fear of going to hell. Morality can be learned through observation, experience, and common sense... no belief in God nor an ancient tome is required.

 

When you heard of the rape did anyone have to tell you that it was wrong or did you innately understand that it was wrong?

 

It was innately wrong to me and I didn't know why. I had to teach myself about morality from that, and sexual morality as well.My first teachings about sexual morality came from the Bible and my Christian family.

Now, beginning this year, because homosexual is no longer deviant and immoral and special people that need to be protected, and sexual acts like bondage are now being taught to children not even teenagers yet, I am re-evaluating my stance on sexual morality.

If these things are okay, then why should there be any sexual morality at all? Why should bigamy and incest be illegal? Why should any other sexual act be illegal?

It causes harm?

Well, teaching things like bondage is no difference than teaching that pedophilia and child molestation is okay, that means that they don't care about what harms another person. So why should anyone care about who is being harmed?

Confusion, doubt, frustration, discontent, disheartened, resentful, ungratified, pretty much rule the day here, because of this inconsistency and hypocrisy.

 

The same here. If I sense harm being done to another I recoil from that which causes the harm. I never had to be told that rape is wrong as it was just self evident once I understood its harmful effect on the victim. From a very early age I innately understood that if I find a thing harmful to me then I should not do that thing to another.

Who gets to decide that? You? Me? Someone else? If the law says its illegal does that mean that it is immoral... and if it is legal does that mean that it is moral? If morality is innate then what does it matter what a law says? For example I believe abortion is immoral as it harms the fetus... but none the less it is still legal. As I do not see homosexuality as harmful I do not see it as immoral... I see it as amoral, just like heterosexuality.

Harm is the key factor in my morality. Bigamy and incest cause harm... but so can BDSM (bondage). But BDSM is not immoral when practiced between consenting adults in a safe environment and does not inflict permanent damage or damage to the point of needing a doctor. With that said I am against it being taught to small children and honestly am not sure at what age one should be taught of its existence... perhaps at 18 y/o.

As morality is subjective how can there ever be any moral consistency? An objective moral truth in my head becomes a subjective opinion once I express it to another.

 

That I have no answer for. I view all legislation as someone's idea of morality, because all legislation really is is codified morality.

When you trace the origins of the legislation, you'll find that all legislation has the one basic argument: because somebody believes it is wrong. Even the most tyrannical legislation stems from this argument.

But this also creates a contradiction for me, because I believe that it's wrong to impose one's morality on to others. Imposing one's morality, whether it be religious or not, is what causes all the atrocities in the world.