Amazon.com Widgets
  • There is no point in voting "no" to this, is there. Really?

    If I vote Yes, and there is right and wrong, then I am right. And if there is actually no right and wrong, I am still not wrong.

    If I vote No, and the is actually right and wrong, then I am wrong. And if there isn't, even then, I still can't be right.

    The only answer that makes any sense is Yes, even if it is wrong.

    Posted by: zek
  • Created By Humans

    Yes, of course there is such a thing as right and wrong. They are labels, created by humans, to help us navigate the world. What a society labels good or bad shows what it values and what it abhors. While it is true that there no objective, absolute standards by which to judge right and wrong, that is irrelevant. Right and wrong exist as social conventions, regardless if they are tied to anything absolute.

  • The proof of right and wrong.

    Look at the polls on this debate for example, currently stating 42% saying right and wrong is real, 58% saying it is not.
    How could it be divided at all if there were no right and wrong? Right and wrong are nothing but opinions, they are not specific rules of life. The fact that this poll is split anything lower then 100% in one direction proves that right and wrong does exist, and is nothing but an opinion in the eye of the beholder. Everybody's right and wrong is different, but it in fact does exist. It just isn't the same for everybody.

  • Humans do not have the power to say what is right and wrong

    How can we as humans decide what is right and wrong if it comes from us if we had that power then there would be no wrong in the world it's just our thoughts and perspective because when you say it is not right to be gay who are you to judge them we are all equal beings if we weren't then we would not be together on this planet so in all how can there be right and wrong when we are all the same, the way to decide that would be a earthly vote to decide and everyone on the planet would have to agree for it to be passed or its just someone's opinion

  • Should gay ma

    The basic principle most animals is that males go with females. Nowadays it is normal for male and male persons(female and female) to be together, in some cases even marry. I think legalizing gay marriage was a wrong decision to take, I think allowing it in a first place is wrong.

    Gay marriage is against all religions. Well god created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God created mom and dad, not dad and dad. And plus the whole ritual of marrying someone came from ancient religions. And guess what all of them have something in common they all allow marrying of a male individual and a female individual.

    It is against nature because the nature created two kinds of genders male and female. And no other, that’s why every creature on this planet that mates with another specie, mates with an opposite sex. That’s how we populated the planet, and that’s how we should still do it.

    Plus people can contract more STD’s from homosexual intercorse, than from hetrosexual. And I understand that some people think that all people are equal that means we all deserve the same right. But it is immoral. And you may say "You can't legislate morality?" But in reality we have been doing for the past decades. Where do you think the law about stealing came from. We created it based on our moral beliefs, we believed that stealing is wrong that's why we came up with a law.

    Gay marriage is unnatural. It is against nature and people shouldn't just look at this like this is nothing. Gay marriage will cost a fortune for the government because they will have to pay for the benefits. Also legalizing gay marriage could lead to "slippery slope". I mean will the society allow beastialatical mariage, pedophilial marrige or multiple people marrige. I think the society should treat homosexualism as a disease. No, I am not out of my mind. If pedophilia is considered insane than why should homoseualism be considered another why. It is just not how world was set up. So if you want to live in a world like it should be don’t accept gay marriage. Fight it!

  • Should gay ma

    The basic principle most animals is that males go with females. Nowadays it is normal for male and male persons(female and female) to be together, in some cases even marry. I think legalizing gay marriage was a wrong decision to take, I think allowing it in a first place is wrong.

    Gay marriage is against all religions. Well god created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God created mom and dad, not dad and dad. And plus the whole ritual of marrying someone came from ancient religions. And guess what all of them have something in common they all allow marrying of a male individual and a female individual.

    It is against nature because the nature created two kinds of genders male and female. And no other, that’s why every creature on this planet that mates with another specie, mates with an opposite sex. That’s how we populated the planet, and that’s how we should still do it.

    Plus people can contract more STD’s from homosexual intercorse, than from hetrosexual. And I understand that some people think that all people are equal that means we all deserve the same right. But it is immoral. And you may say "You can't legislate morality?" But in reality we have been doing for the past decades. Where do you think the law about stealing came from. We created it based on our moral beliefs, we believed that stealing is wrong that's why we came up with a law.

    Gay marriage is unnatural. It is against nature and people shouldn't just look at this like this is nothing. Gay marriage will cost a fortune for the government because they will have to pay for the benefits. Also legalizing gay marriage could lead to "slippery slope". I mean will the society allow beastialatical mariage, pedophilial marrige or multiple people marrige. I think the society should treat homosexualism as a disease. No, I am not out of my mind. If pedophilia is considered insane than why should homoseualism be considered another why. It is just not how world was set up. So if you want to live in a world like it should be don’t accept gay marriage. Fight it!

  • Should gay ma

    The basic principle most animals is that males go with females. Nowadays it is normal for male and male persons(female and female) to be together, in some cases even marry. I think legalizing gay marriage was a wrong decision to take, I think allowing it in a first place is wrong.

    Gay marriage is against all religions. Well god created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God created mom and dad, not dad and dad. And plus the whole ritual of marrying someone came from ancient religions. And guess what all of them have something in common they all allow marrying of a male individual and a female individual.

    It is against nature because the nature created two kinds of genders male and female. And no other, that’s why every creature on this planet that mates with another specie, mates with an opposite sex. That’s how we populated the planet, and that’s how we should still do it.

    Plus people can contract more STD’s from homosexual intercorse, than from hetrosexual. And I understand that some people think that all people are equal that means we all deserve the same right. But it is immoral. And you may say "You can't legislate morality?" But in reality we have been doing for the past decades. Where do you think the law about stealing came from. We created it based on our moral beliefs, we believed that stealing is wrong that's why we came up with a law.

    Gay marriage is unnatural. It is against nature and people shouldn't just look at this like this is nothing. Gay marriage will cost a fortune for the government because they will have to pay for the benefits. Also legalizing gay marriage could lead to "slippery slope". I mean will the society allow beastialatical mariage, pedophilial marrige or multiple people marrige. I think the society should treat homosexualism as a disease. No, I am not out of my mind. If pedophilia is considered insane than why should homoseualism be considered another why. It is just not how world was set up. So if you want to live in a world like it should be don’t accept gay marriage. Fight it!

  • Right or wrong

    If there isn't a right or wrong, guilt, laws, and consequences for bad behavior should not exist. If there is no right or wrong, killing people should be just as normal and acceptable as buying a candy bar. I mean, the big bang theory was proved wrong, if there ISN'T a divine deity what is there? Explain that next time you say there isn't a god.

  • We Made Up Right and Wrong

    We humans made up what is right and wrong. We humans classified things and actions. Like money doesn't have actual value. The universe does not know what right and wrong is. Maybe alien life may not know what right and wrong is. HUMANS made up all these things. I repeat, HUMANS made up love and value and stuff. Love does not exist. Value does not exist. Evil does not exist. WE made them all up. We gave money value even though they don't have value. WE determined actions. HUMANS made up bad and good. If I ask the universe, "What is bad and good?" It will say "I don't know what that means." I repeat, HUMANS made up all these things. The universe does not recognize bad and good. Maybe alien life does not know what love is. Hitting someone is wrong, according to humans but the universe? The universe does not even know what wrong is! The universe never made up these good and bad stuff. We did! WE HUMANS made up all the shit about bad and good.

  • Being a republican

    There is a way something can be right and wrong, it is called being a republican. Republicans, right winged nut jobs, and their political views, talk about nothing but wrong. So remember, if someone asks you if there is such thing as right and wrong, its called being a republican.

  • You all are not being clear enough!

    Morality (what is right or wrong) is obviously a human construction. We can calculate science, maths, logic; we cannot calculate right and wrong. We cannot use logic to prove it is wrong to take innocent life, for instance; you may say the body you are harming is not yours, that you do not have consent to kill the person, but what requires you to have consent? What universal law says you even own your own body? None.
    With that said, we use right and wrong to allow us to survive in society; it benefits us all if we lock away murderers and help those in need. Just because objective right and wrong does not exist, does not mean we should go around pillaging and raping; we would all rather make our own rules to live by and be happy (a utilitarian view) than live in anarchy, and spend our lives defending our houses with shotguns.

  • Just look at the stars.

    Just look at the stars and ask yourself if there is a right or a wrong. We are so insignificant to the universe, that it doesn't matter. Therefore, there is no right or wrong in the context of the universe. Civilization however, needs moral beliefs in order to survive, otherwise we'd all be hurting and killing others to survive.

  • There is no such thing as right or wrong.

    Peoples opinion does not simply mean that they're based on facts, opinions are very dangerous things, because they're not based on facts. Everything is based on our current knowledge and experiences, and they both are limited, what i'm trying to point out here is that, life is full of lessons that we have to accept and learn, we have to accept what is fact and move along and start evolving, or else we will end up being in conflicts endlessly as we still are up to this day.

  • If there is no God, there is no right and wrong

    Unless there is some all powerful deity to be the arbiter of right and wrong then there is no objective right and wrong and even if something that powerful existed it probably would not care what we mere mortals did anyway. It is just something people believe exists because of their own personal codes of conduct.

  • There Is No Right or Wrong

    If there was, then why are we debating about whether or not there is? If there was a right and wrong, wouldn't we all agree on it and not have various opinions on the matter? Whatever one person believes to be "right" or "wrong", another person may not. So there isn't a clear definition for either.

  • Relativity Is Universal

    What's right to one is wrong to another. Two opposite ends of a spectrum are only defined by their relation to the other; and vice versa.
    "Truth is absolute; truth telling, and truth hearing, relative." Human compulsion to assign labels to these ambiguous terms is all that we can rely on- and these labels are constantly in motion.

  • It's just the difference in opinion

    Example: People in USA think that Osama bin laden is a terrorist but according to him and his misinterpretation of the holy quran, he is right.
    Another one: Police thinks that killing a man is a crime but when a man is killed, the reason why the killer is killed him/her matters. When the killer is just doing it because his/her family is in danger then I personally think it is right.

  • Not objectively no

    While there is such a thing of a sense of right and wrong, they are simply superficial and aesthetic, they are not objective and written in stone for all people and all times. People's views and opinions change, for an obvious example, look at the history of slavery around the world.

  • If I had to give a definite answer, then no.

    The way in which an individual views the world around them and the system of ethics that govern such a world is particular to the individual. What I mean is that the morals that influence one persons actions are different (if not similar) to someone else's.

    However there are morals/ethics that are in essence similar for a majority of people and it is because of this majority that parts of society such as laws are created. The accepted majority is what is therefore deemed as 'right' while opposing opinions is therefore 'wrong'. This in turn varies from community to community and culture to culture. So, if what is deemed as 'right' is merely the most popular of opinion and this popular opinion differs in each society, then isn't 'right' just another word for the winning opinion. Right and wrong do not exist, as this opinion constantly changes over time.

    It is impossible to tell someone that their opinion/action/beliefs are wrong just simply because they do not follow the same principles and guidelines as yourself.

  • There is no external system of "right" or "wrong"

    There are two popular stances for objective morality: religion and Ethical value assignment.
    Religion creates their stances for objective based on the beliefs and tenets of its beliefs. By nature these are subjective in that people came up with the laws of each religion. However if religions claim that these laws were handed, given, written, etc by God, entities, spirits, etc... To them, the religion makes two assumptions:
    1) That the supernatural being is morally perfect
    2) That the rules made by the supernatural being are objective
    These assumptions, without evidence, can not be used in an argument. Because of the unverifiable nature of these assumptions, religion can not give us a definite objective morality.
    Ethical value is an idea that is becoming popular among philosophers and atheists alike; After all this gives atheists a moral code with which to battle religion's battering of atheist ethics. Ethical value states that humans by way of nature, psychology, and biology have needs that must be met. These needs are organized hierarchically: ex. Water and food needs must be met before a person focuses on love and companionship. These ideals are based on values given to each variable within the context of the time and happenings when the decision or action is made. Unfortunately the assignment of values to each variable is by nature subjective. Any two people could assign the values of the variables different ways. Also this belief system revolves solely around the human condition. This doctrine states that people need to make the decisions that advance humans as a species. If advancing the human condition means slaughtering an entire rival species or even a species that lives in the same area is it still moral? To this idea and its followers yes. To most everyone else no. Morals are always subjective simply because there are no external signs of morals. Morals exist only within cultures and individuals.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
JustCheNo says2013-07-01T15:05:14.827
Only a liberal Atheist would have to ask this question.