The ethics of morality

In the “The existence of Objective Morality” thread, Pieman333272 made the claim that atheists are more likely to have [legal] abortions, have “mindless sex” (by which I assumed he meant casual sex), and watch porn.

Well, I provided some statistics that suggested his claim was wrong, but the strong implication from Pieman was that he feels that these activities are immoral, so I asked him what he felt were the objective ethical reasons why this was so.

He said he thought that the question was off-topic. I disagreed, but agreed to start a new thread. Here it is.

So, I invite contributors to pick one of those activities, and provide **objective **ethical reasons why it is wrong. By which, I mean that you have to provide good, solid rationales.

Thanks
W

Would you be so kind as to elaborate us with what you mean by objective reasons, as it seems to be unclear to me? Having a solid* rationale * essentially means* reasons for belief*, which doesn’t necessarily translate well into objective measures. An example would be of benefit to all involved.

Abortion, casual sex and porn?

It is well-documented that many women have abortions simply because having a baby will be a nuisance. This is clearly a breach of the right to life of an unborn child but in an amoral universe the right to life - like all other rights - is often an inconvenient convention. Its only rational basis is that life is a gift from God instead of a purposeless accident.

Porn makes life in a fantasy world have greater validity than life in the real world with one’s wife and family. It is engaging in idleness which we all know is the “devil’s workshop.” Worst of all, porn is not a victimless crime, Women and children are its sad victims and are being used and abused. Porn can lead to rape and even serial murders. Those serial killers who were interviewed admitted to an addiction to porn. For all of these reasons, the use of pornography is objectively immoral, and those degrading themselves through viewing it are socially depraved, morally sinful and personally responsible for their evil actions.

Indeed! The addiction to porn is a form of escapism which stems from boredom and dissatisfaction with life as it is. Like any addiction it is slavery to a perverted desire for an artificial and unnatural stimulus…

Only a few responders here so far and one takes you so far out of context, it is my charitible nature to assume they must have missed reading your post and simply keyed in on the words abortion, sex and porn instead of reading what you posted.

I never heard of this amoral universe thingy until now. Universe?
The Universe is Amoral?

Do you think it is moral? Conscious or rational or purposeful? :slight_smile:

The OP asked for objective, ethical reasons why abortion, casual sex and porn are immoral. Isn’t it enough to say they undermine society by harming “the other” as well as “the self?” Abortion kills a human being and deadens the soul; casual sex belittles the sacredness of marriage and is often cause for divorce harming the children; porn robs an individual of his integrity and others (women and children) of their humanity.

Good analysis (as usual)!

Can you show that they do this?

False. A fetus and an embryo can not be killed because they are not ‘alive’. This should clarify the issue.

I don’t know that such a thing is possible, could you clarify the process by which this occurs and what stimulus it is based upon?

I think you’ll find that this is entirely subjective and making claims of what it does not do does not necessarily represent truth for everyone.

When in marriage I’m sure it does.

I’m confident that porn only exists in humanity and subsequently it is embracing a certain form of humanity rather than ‘robbing’ from it.

Abortion is wrong because it is the direct killing of an innocent human being. Of course the fetus is alive; it is a living organism, distinct from its mother. There is no scientific disagreement in this, and linking to a wikipedia article about “life” is also not very relevant.

False. A fetus and an embryo can not be killed because they are not ‘alive’.

Another atheist contradicting science and reason.

I worked in a psychiatric hospital for two years!

When unbridled “choice” in matters of sexual behavior becomes part of the cultural norm, sociey experiences chaos. Men are no longer men, women are no longer woman, marriage is no longer marriage, and a preborn child is no longer a preborn child. We haven’t arrived at the apex of this phenomenon yet, and I hope we never will. But look at the situation in Hollywood, the ghetto, and sometimes even in suburbia, you’ll find fathers not protecting their families from the abortionist’s knife, mothers feeling abandoned by their partners seeking to abort the babies they created (with God, whether they realize it or not), marriages disintegrating and preborn babies being labeled derogatorily as fetuses (which really means “little one” in Latin) or “blobs of tissue.”

False. A fetus and an embryo can not be killed because they are not ‘alive’. This should clarify the issue.

Pick up a book on embryology. Don’t you think you were alive in your mom’s womb? Note this link. It should clarify the issue: priestsforlife.org/images/index.aspx?flv=RYH_650x366

I don’t know that such a thing is possible, could you clarify the process by which this occurs and what stimulus it is based upon?

Anyone willingly involved in an abortion, which is the intentional killing of an unborn human being, loses his/her moral integrity–which is why I say loses one’s soul. If one dies in such a state of unforgiveness (lack of repentance), that person’s actual soul will be lost. We are in hell if we cannot hope and pray.

I think you’ll find that this is entirely subjective and making claims of what it does not do does not necessarily represent truth for everyone.

You should read some of the threads on objective truth. You seem to believe that everyone has his/her own truth. How could society survive if that’s the case? For from objective truth comes law – moral and civil.

I’m confident that porn only exists in humanity and subsequently it is embracing a certain form of humanity rather than ‘robbing’ from it.

I need an explanation how it is that “porn only exists in humanity . . .” What type of humanity is porn “embracing?”

That should be enough time to try and figure out who the real inmates are! :wink:
And here I thought you had to be a philosophy professor.

That is of course presuming choice has anything to do with it and I’ve never come across any reason that suggests it does.

If you do not like the appropriate terms for the process of birth, that’s fine but just because you find it “derogatory” does not mean it is.

Why would that clarify the issue?

I doubt many of your theological references are true but in order to keep the thread on track I won’t address them. We’ve just gone through this, an embryo and a fetus are not considered “alive” by the definition of “life”

I’ve browsed them and I have looked into much of that topic, it does interest me quite a bit.

No, but everyone certainly has their own opinion of truth.

The majority rules and sometimes people realise that forgetting their difference in opinion avoids unnecessary conflict and helps for social cohesion.

Not necessarily, I’ve found that when an objective truth is proposed one can seek a method to fulfill that objective, for example, the objective being the preservation and wellbeing of the human race. That is an objective and laws can be derived from it that would be ‘true’ regarding this objective. However, that is the limit of objective truth in the matter, it doesn’t mean that this process is objectively right or wrong, or if it is the best way to go about it. So we still digress into opinions of truth when trying to achieve the objective.

Have you encountered another species that engages in or creates porn.

The type that creates and/or enjoys porn.

I have been - in a varied career. :slight_smile:

I’m using the word “choice” as the pro-aborts use it: pro-abortion. Choice, in the greater sense, means what decisions we make. I’m concerned with moral and immoral choices or decisions. Don’t you agree that when you make a bad choice, it affects not only yourself, but others? For example, killing one’s child affects the whole family throughout all generations. That child is lost and so is a great part of the future.

BTW, in my post I made a typo. I meant that the term “fetus” means “little one” NOT a “blob of tissue.” Sorry!

If you do not like the appropriate terms for the process of birth, that’s fine but just because you find it “derogatory” does not mean it is.

What is “derogatory” is the rudeness and illiteracy of the pro-aborts who refer to the unborn child as a “fetus” in the derogatory sense, although it is scientifically correct after the embryonic stage.

Why would that clarify the issue?

Did you actually click on the link? You’d learn something which would clarify the issue of the evil involved in killing unborn human beings. Aren’t you glad your mom was pro-life?

I doubt many of your theological references are true but in order to keep the thread on track I won’t address them. We’ve just gone through this, an embryo and a fetus are not considered “alive” by the definition of “life”

Oh pleeease! How do you figure an embryo and fetus are not alive. And what is the definition of life in your opinion?

I’ve browsed them and I have looked into much of that topic, it does interest me quite a bit.

No, but everyone certainly has their own opinion of truth.

“Opinion of truth?” Truth is still objective. What is your opinion of it?

The majority rules and sometimes people realise that forgetting their difference in opinion avoids unnecessary conflict and helps for social cohesion.

What if the “majority” announces: Kill the Jews! Or, kill all the disabled and elderly? Or kill all the kindergartners, or teens, or anybody we don’t like?

Not necessarily, I’ve found that when an objective truth is proposed one can seek a method to fulfill that objective, for example, the objective being the preservation and wellbeing of the human race. That is an objective and laws can be derived from it that would be ‘true’ regarding this objective. However, that is the limit of objective truth in the matter, it doesn’t mean that this process is objectively right or wrong, or if it is the best way to go about it. So we still digress into opinions of truth when trying to achieve the objective.

Our opinions are subjective ideas about truth. Objective truth was codified by God’s Revelation in the Ten Commandments and further understood in the New Testament as the Law of Love. (“Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God with your whole heart, soul, mind and strength; and love your neighbor as yourself.”) Then there’s the Golden Rule to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. But before Revelation, people in early social groups had to come to an understanding of what is objectively moral and immoral, which is the law written into our hearts.

Have you encountered another species that engages in or creates porn.

The type that creates and/or enjoys porn.

The use of porn is a disordered act. Because we can make choices regarding morality, of course only humans can degrade themselves. We can choose to reach for sublime heights (as the great saints by imitating their virtues) or lower ourselves into the sewer of filth. A hellish thought!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.