Foundation for Morality: Supernatural?
Debate Rounds (3)
I will allow the contender to make his/her argument first.
you could argue things that you personally view as moral, but how does it objectively bind anyone? and, you might argue for something that would be 'do unto others as you'd do unto them' or 'dont steal' or wahtever without God, on the basis that you'd not want others mistreadting you, stealing from you, etc. but, that only has practical sensibilities to it, and doesn't objectively bind anyone. and, it doesn't stop someone from being an outlier. a defaulter. someone who generally uses those rules so as to ensure he's not wronged, but will sometimes default from the rules for his own gain.
basically, without God, what basis, especially is it objective?, do you have to bind yourself and especially to ask others to follow your thoughts?
dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
you did state that i and others are "under the impression" that there's only one thing that could be an objective basis for morality, God. you implied that you have the truth, that there's other basis for objective morality?
you point out that humans have minds and bodies for a reason, part of nature. as such, there is a basis in morality to value what they say as moral or immoral etc. but, as did the Greeks view sex with boys as moral, and we view as reprehensible, people's morals without anything more objective than their own assertions, are not objective.
i do not claim you cannot know objective morality, unless you believe in the God of Abraham. I only contend you would have to believe in an objective source, like a creator who is called God, or things like this. it is beside the point whether we restrict it to the God of abraham etc.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.