Moral relativism

Melchizedek=Tecumseh said:
You're 30 years behind times! In urban America lots of people are trying to live on Minimum wage or just above Minimum wage!
Click to expand...
Argument from randU fallacy.
Price controls always do the same thing: cause shortages. This is fascism. It was first introduced by Democrats.

Market rate is above minimum wage for most jobs.
 
Hume said:
But where does the original constitution--which we are discussing--mention rights?
Click to expand...

The Bill of Rights ARE part of the "Original Constitution" and their inclusion was a contingent factor for ratification by the states.

The sticking points that delayed ratification were the 9th and 10th, not the 1st or 2nd - which are the ones democrats are most desperate to nullify. The order of the first ten Amendments is the order of difficulty gaining consensus among the deligates.
 
Hume said:
No, government is the law.
Click to expand...
Government is not the law, Hugo. The law is the law.
Strawman fallacy. Answer the question put to you.

It was legal for to own slaves in the United States. Was it moral? According to your earlier statement, it was. According to your treatment of government as god, it is.

Is it moral to euthanize a human being? In Canada it is legal. Does that make it moral?
 
Yakuda said:
There is no reason to pass a law that you can't own a whale because someone left a dead whale in an aquarium. Leaving a dead whale in an aquarium is not a moral issue
Click to expand...
Law is not a moral issue either.
And there is a reason. The city did not want to pay for disposing a dead whale again...ever.
 
Yakuda said:
And none of them would have wanted to be a slave. This is akin to the trans bullshit. You don't become a woman because you feel like one and slavery doesn't become moral because some people think it's ok.
Click to expand...
...according to your morals.

'Trans' are moral according to themselves, but not according to your morals (or mine).
 
Hume said:
So you deny there was first written a Constitution and then three years later, amendments on individual rights.
Click to expand...

The Anti-Federalists made support of the Constitution contingent upon the Bill of Rights. There was no Constitution possible without it. Had the Federalists attempted to renege on immediate inclusion the government would have failed.

The BoR was integral to the United States Constitution from the start. The form of the rights was more heatedly debated than the federal structure laid out in the first five articles. Further Article VII is specifically designed to address the ratification process as the BoR was a key element that the newly established government could not exist without.

GROK defines the "Original Constitution" as;

  • Preamble: Establishes the goals of the Constitution, such as forming a more perfect union and securing liberty.
  • Articles:
    • Article I: Establishes the Legislative Branch (Congress).
    • Article II: Establishes the Executive Branch (President).
    • Article III: Establishes the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court).
    • Article IV: Addresses the states and their powers.
    • Article V: Outlines the amendment process.
    • Article VI: Establishes the Constitution as the supreme law.
    • Article VII: Details the ratification process.
  • Amendments: The first ten amendments are known as the Bill of Rights, which guarantees individual freedoms and rights.

Yes, the BoR are included as the original Constitution, as the government could not be formed without them.
 
Yakuda said:
Of course its all the constitution. Hume like lots of people here play word games. see what I mean? Post 577. Just ignores that the government doesnt not grant rights but is instituted to "secure" our unalienable rights. The left has made a career of doing just that though. Notice how they described abortion as a right even though it doesnt exist anywhere.
Click to expand...

The democrats and Marxists in general seek to end the Bill of Rights. The denial by Hummer that the BoR is part of the Constitution is more than just ignorant, it is driven by the totalitarian urge for tyranny that defines the democrats.
 
Hume said:
No idea what that means.
Click to expand...
I already know you are illiterate, Hugo, so a little enlightenment:

'Government' (noun): a leadership of a society.
'is' (verb): to have to be.
'your' (pronoun): a reference to another, in this case, you.
'god' (noun): an object of worship, particularly when that object of worship has a 'higher power' of some kind.

Government is your god.
 
Into the Night said:
Law is not a moral issue either.
And there is a reason. The city did not want to pay for disposing a dead whale again...ever.
Click to expand...
Well if there had already been a law when the guy skipped town and left the dead whale in the aquarium the law doesnt really matter does it? I get why the law was passed but we already have tons of these knee jerk laws on the books already. I doubt many people voted for the politician who dreamed up that law because of that law.
 
Into the Night said:
...according to your morals.

'Trans' are moral according to themselves, but not according to your morals (or mine).
Click to expand...

Mental illness is neither moral nor immoral.

Some who are mentally ill and suffer from the "trans" delusion are no doubt moral, others are clearly not.

Omar Mateen, the tranny who murdered 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Florida could easily be viewed as immoral. But in his psychotic break he believed that his god Muhammad (ne' Allah) ordered him to "cleanse the world of homosexuality" as penance for his own homosexual/transexual proclevity.

Was he immoral, or just insane and driven by a philosophy of pure evil (Islam)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top