People who say that there are no moral truths or that morality is relative ought to be executed or exiled by the State, as those who do not accept any moral authority as being above human opinion cannot be trusted to obey the civil law, nor can they be trusted not to pervert the civil law to their own ends if put in positions of political or judicial authority.
And, obviously, any academics that teach such positions in any setting other than "devil's advocate" ought to be removed from their positions and stripped of their degrees/doctorates as a form of public disgrace.
>>7435144
>executed
Murder is a sin.
Otherwise I think you're right.
>>7435144
>says moral relativity is wrong
>tolerates anyone who accepts ANY moral authority
>>7435144
>morality is relative=all acts are permissible
what's that christfag? I couldn't hear you with your mouth full of Dostoevsky dick
srs tho, if everyone accepted that what we consider 'moral' is - no matter how we rhetorically dress it up - entirely founded upon self-interest, self-preservation and self-determination, then there would be no need for violence or crime. A society privileging egoism above any other moral creed would necessarily require each egoist to co-operate with each other, because that would be the most profitable way of serving their own self as an end in itself.
I think that's what Donald Trump was trying to say.
>>7435144
>cannot be trusted to obey the civil law
What if they have a strict moral code that doesn't line up with the law?
>>7436198
>there would be no need for violence or crime
People need an impetus not to commit atrocities: this is why Christianity is important.
>>7435144
Since when does the notion that morality is relative automatically coincide with a lack of morality?
>>7435171
topkek
>>7435144
What if someone believes in a moral truth that requires them to disobey a civil law?
>>7436277
This is really the main reason people think monotheists are dumb. They just can't give up the position that the world would go up in flames without them.
