Moral relativism

Hume said:
Washington and Jefferson owned slaves.
Click to expand...
Jefferson I know freed his. Hell, some might still even own his land.
Washington did, too. Your point is moot.
www.mountvernon.org

A Decision to Free His Slaves

In his will, written several months before his death in December 1799, George Washington left directions for the emancipation of all the slaves that he owned, after the death of Martha Washington.
www.mountvernon.org www.mountvernon.org
 
Matt Dillon said:
Jefferson I know freed his. Hell, some might still even own his land.
Washington did, too. Your point is moot.
Click to expand...
  • How many people did Thomas Jefferson own?
    Thomas Jefferson enslaved more than 610 human beings throughout the course of his life. 400 people were enslaved at Monticello; the other 200 people were held in bondage on Jefferson’s other properties. At any given time, around 130 people were enslaved at Monticello.
  • https://www.monticello.org/slavery/slavery-faqs
 
Matt Dillon said:
The Founding Fathers didn't like slavery, and that came up, but they couldn't do away with it at that time because it was an institution beyond their control.
Click to expand...
Thomas Jefferson freed two people during his life. He freed five people in his will. He allowed two or three people to escape without pursuit, and recommended informal freedom for two others. In total, of the more than six hundred people Jefferson enslaved, he freed only ten people – all members of the same family.

 
ZenMode said:
Muslim societies permit sex slaves during war.
Click to expand...
Therein lies the problem with personal morals. Its still rape if they dont have the sex slaves consent which the Koran doesnt require obtaining anyway. Finding a justification for an immoral action doesnt make the action moral.
 
Matt Dillon said:
The Founding Fathers didn't like slavery, and that came up, but they couldn't do away with it at that time because it was an institution beyond their control.
Click to expand...
I dont think it was entirely out of their control but they didnt address it because they were trying to create a country. Its like how soemtimes in life, you have to accept some things you dont like in the hopes that by doing so you achieve something greater. The founders knew slavery would have to be dealt with but they kicked that can down the road to form a nation.
 
Yakuda said:
I dont think it was entirely out of their control but they didnt address it because they were trying to create a country. Its like how soemtimes in life, you have to accept some things you dont like in the hopes that by doing so you achieve something greater. The founders knew slavery would have to be dealt with but they kicked that can down the road to form a nation.
Click to expand...
Sometimes you gotta be pragmatic and suck it up and do what needs to be done.
Whatever's going to have the best outcome. Worry about the other stuff later.
 
Hume said:
I am beginning to think.
Click to expand...
1txerc.jpg
 
Yakuda said:
Therein lies the problem with personal morals. Its still rape if they dont have the sex slaves consent which the Koran doesnt require obtaining anyway. Finding a justification for an immoral action doesnt make the action moral.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Rape is rape for the victims. What the victims experiences doesn't change because a religious book says it's ok.

But, this is the game moral relativists want to play, especially liberals who can't bring themselves to criticize a bad idea, (female genital mutilation and rape), because they think they're criticizing brown people, a minority group, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top