re: Ledell Lee case is one reason I can't support the death penalty

quote:

---

We know you like taxpayer money being spent on prisoners

---

You do realize you are asking to use the more expensive option correct? I have said atleast 3 times that if it was like you wanted that may change my mind but as of now it's more expensive.

I can promise I'm to the right of you on size of government, taxes, states rights, personal property rights, 2nd amendment, freedom, war and prolly a million other things

And you keep saying the same stupid shite about prisoners on tax payers dime, yet you keep touting the more expensive option. Sure ylur little fricking fairy tell world it's cheaper but in the real world it's not.

You keep saying there is no reason why someone shouldn't be executed in 6 months and although I agree, that's not the real fricking world.

Done arguing say what the frick you want I don't give a frick anymore nor do I give a frick if you think I'm a liberal, I'm pretty secure knowing where I fall on the political spectrum, not your made up bullshite.

quote:

---

When you answer with "neither: that which is good is neither existent apart from God, nor is determined from arbitrary whims of God", the dilemma becomes false.

---

I know that sounded really good in your head, but you essentially just responded with "neither, both are wrong", and spiked the football.

The addition of "that which is good is neither existent apart from God" is simply asserting that the first horn is incorrect, and the continuation of "nor is determined from arbitrary whims of God" is simply asserting that the second horn is also wrong.

quote:

---

No, perfection as a description of God includes His holiness and goodness and God is the pinnacle of those things. Also, evil isn't something positive but something negative: the lack of goodness. God lacks nothing in His holiness and therefore no evil can be found in Him.

---

According to God, sure. But how do you know he wasn't lying about that?

quote:

---

God's revelation in the holy bible tells us about Himself, and His kept promises prove His faithfulness and truthfulness.

---

Oh, so his word said he kept his promises? Big surprise there...

And even if he did keep his promises, perhaps he kept them to just lure you in. You know, feeding you truths on insignificant items in order to sell you on a big lie.

Since I'm committed to being better, I'll not quote every possible line (that fits within the character limit) but will just pull out the parts I think are most important for continued discussion or at least are most deserving a rebuttal, and then I'll try to keep my responses concise.

quote:

---

Not necessarily, just that many of the unworkable interpretations are best left alone by virtue of being unworkable.

---

This entire section is predicated on your belief in utility as the ultimate guide for morality. As I stated, utility has its purposes, but it is a poor guide for morality and certainly not an objective guide or standard. It's one arbitrary standard among many. I reject it because it is on equal footing with all other subjective standards and it's inferior to the objective standard God has provided.

quote:

---

Your "objective standard" requires complete faith that it's good moral standard (as opposed to an evil moral standard). You have no mechanism by which to judge whether or not your deity is actually the good guy. His divine inspiration? Writing his law onto your heart? It could all be a lie and you, simply being the clay, would be non-the-wiser.

---

One of the best ways to know it's true is that it comports with reality. The things the population generally understands as morally right and wrong comport with God's moral law, which is what we'd expect if the moral law was written on the hearts of men. Otherwise, we have the scriptures as the ultimate mechanism and reason to help inform us that it is so. The argument about morality being subjective without the biblical God is actually quite compelling for a lot of people due to us being moral creatures (inclined to act morally) and having a desire for moral truth.

quote:

---

As opposed to who? Me? That doesn't apply to me.

---

Do you ever judge or condemn people for the "evil" actions they commit? Do you ever feel wronged in some way and seek retribution, recompense, or justice in any way? If so, you are acting inconsistently with a worldview that adheres to moral subjectivity.

quote:

---

No, you can consistently have faith that the moral code you're following is not only correct in distinguishing right from wrong, but that you're interpreting it correctly.

---

My reason can also testify that the only possibility for objective moral truth comes from the same source that my faith does: from God. I believe that is a more preferable place to be than considering that evil doesn't truly exist in the world (because there is no objective standard of goodness to define it as such and to condemn it).

quote:

---

According to God, sure. But how do you know he wasn't lying about that?
...
And even if he did keep his promises, perhaps he kept them to just lure you in. You know, feeding you truths on insignificant items in order to sell you on a big lie

---

If God could lie, it would go against His perfect, holy character, and therefore He would not be perfect, and therefore He would not be God. God is perfection, including moral perfection. Being able to lie would mean He wasn't God.

quote:

---

This entire section is predicated on your belief in utility as the ultimate guide for morality. As I stated, utility has its purposes, but it is a poor guide for morality and certainly not an objective guide or standard. It's one arbitrary standard among many. I reject it because it is on equal footing with all other subjective standards and it's inferior to the objective standard God has provided.

---

Why is it a poor guide for morality? Keep in mind whatever your answer is, it's coming from someone who knowingly and proudly worships a child killer.

With respect to being just one arbitrary standard among many, all being completely equal with one another... If that were true you'd see a somewhat even distribution in human populations between a near infinite number of "arbitrary standards". Yet you don't. Clearly waving your hand and deeming everything subjective as "arbitrary" isn't correct.

quote:

---

One of the best ways to know it's true is that it comports with reality.

---

The same reality that the being in question created? Is it outlandish to think that an evil being would create reality to comport to his own evil moral standard?

quote:

---

The things the population generally understands as morally right and wrong comport with God's moral law, which is what we'd expect if the moral law was written on the hearts of men.

---

A God writing his moral code onto the hearts of men, and men generally following that moral code, speaks nothing of whether or not the moral code is good or evil. That same scenario would logically play out if God were evil, he wrote his evil moral law onto the hearts of men, and men generally followed the moral code that was written onto their hearts.

You'd also expect to see a lot of similarities within human moral codes if it arose naturally from the mechanisms I've already highlighted.

quote:

---

Otherwise, we have the scriptures as the ultimate mechanism and reason to help inform us that it is so. The argument about morality being subjective without the biblical God is actually quite compelling for a lot of people due to us being moral creatures (inclined to act morally) and having a desire for moral truth.

---

Using the word of a deity to show that the deity wasn't lying is about as circular as circular logic gets. I don't think you can reason your way out of this either.

Also, you appealed to popularity two sentences prior ("The things the population generally understands as morally right and wrong comport with God's moral law..."). The majority of the world doesn't believe that morality is subjective without the Biblical God because the majority of the world doesn't believe in the Biblical God.

quote:

---

Do you ever judge or condemn people for the "evil" actions they commit? Do you ever feel wronged in some way and seek retribution, recompense, or justice in any way? If so, you are acting inconsistently with a worldview that adheres to moral subjectivity.

---

A worldview that adheres to moral subjectivity says I don't get to have a subjective stance on morality?

That doesn't sound right...

quote:

---

My reason can also testify that the only possibility for objective moral truth comes from the same source that my faith does: from God.

---

I disagree, but even if that were true you don't know if that standard is ultimately good or evil. You can only take the word of the deity you worship, and trust that when he says he isn't lying that he really isn't lying.

quote:

---

Why is it a poor guide for morality? Keep in mind whatever your answer is, it's coming from someone who knowingly and proudly worships a child killer.

---

Morality is about right and wrong while utility is about what "works". If it "works" to commit genocide, then that's what is moral in that paradigm. If it "works" to steal from others to redistribute earned wealth, then that's what is moral in that paradigm.

I knowingly and proudly worship the one, true God, who is God over all creation, including children. He and He alone has the right to punish sin as He sees fit, or to forgive according to His mercy. And it "works" for Him, so it must be moral within your own stated moral paradigm. But even in the objective moral standard that He has set forth, what He does is moral because He is morality, itself.

quote:

---

With respect to being just one arbitrary standard among many, all being completely equal with one another... If that were true you'd see a somewhat even distribution in human populations between a near infinite number of "arbitrary standards". Yet you don't. Clearly waving your hand and deeming everything subjective as "arbitrary" isn't correct.

---

That's not how it works. Clearly if the choice of ice cream and broccoli was equal, my children would have somewhat of an even distribution between them of both, yet if I give them the choice, they will always choose one over the other. According to their arbitrary preferences, ice cream is clearly "better" than vegetables.

quote:

---

The same reality that the being in question created? Is it outlandish to think that an evil being would create reality to comport to his own evil moral standard?

---

In order to judge God as evil, you have to first accept that God is real. Then, you have a standard for good since evil is merely the absence of goodness. God is good, not evil, because God is being (being is good), God is love (love is good), and God is the first cause of all (goodness must precede evil, and since nothing precedes God, God must be good).

quote:

---

A God writing his moral code onto the hearts of men, and men generally following that moral code, speaks nothing of whether or not the moral code is good or evil. That same scenario would logically play out if God were evil

---

Since God is good and not evil, this isn't a problem.

quote:

---

You'd also expect to see a lot of similarities within human moral codes if it arose naturally from the mechanisms I've already highlighted.

---

Perhaps, and yet there wouldn't be a rational basis for saying that a naturally-forming morality is the right standard, only a natural one. Animals kill, steal, and rape in nature to survive and procreate because it "works" for them. Clearly not morality but utility.

quote:

---

Using the word of a deity to show that the deity wasn't lying is about as circular as circular logic gets. I don't think you can reason your way out of this either.

---

How do you show someone has lied without using their words? Do we need to define what a lie is for this discussion to continue?

Even so, it's not just the words of a deity, but the very cause of being. If God is God, then there is nothing greater to appeal to than Himself, as expressed in His own words.

quote:

---

Also, you appealed to popularity two sentences prior... The majority of the world doesn't believe that morality is subjective without the Biblical God because the majority of the world doesn't believe in the Biblical God.

---

Since God is necessary and not contingent, it would follow that all people are dependent upon Him, whether they believe it or not. The short answer is that the world would be incoherent without God and that all people need to borrow from the Christian's worldview to make sense of the world, even if they don't know it or understand that they are doing it.

quote:

---

A worldview that adheres to moral subjectivity says I don't get to have a subjective stance on morality?

That doesn't sound right...

---

It is right. You can't make definite statements about morality if you believe that morality is subjective. The best you can do is say "I don't like that", but you can't condemn anything as immoral by your own standard because any action you think is immoral might be moral to the person doing it, and unless you want to be hypocritical and inconsistent, you have to allow the moral subjectivity of the other person just as you allow it for yourself. That's what subjectivity is; each person experiencing and expressing morality as they see fit or prefer it to be.

quote:

---

I respect your view but disagree with it. God made man in His image and we have no right to take the lives of others unless God has granted us the authority and cause to do so. God has done so through the civil magistrate's use of the death penalty to uphold justice; through the military to protect the nation; and to the lay person or civilian via self defense and defense of the lives of others. Those are the only circumstances where God has permitted human instruments to take human life, but God has granted that permission all the

---

I think defending ourselves or others is in a whole different category than executing someone for retaliation.

The Old Testament is filled with writings that don't apply to us today, slavery, beating your wife, sacrificing family members.

Jesus told us to forgive and turn the cheek when someone offends us. I follow the teachings of Jesus first and foremost. I don't believe for one second that Jesus would be standing up and defending the death penalty.

Perhaps you can provide me scripture where Jesus ever advocated for the death penalty.

quote:

---

I can promise I'm to the right of you on size of government, taxes, states rights, personal property rights, 2nd amendment, freedom, war and prolly a million other things

---

I am waiting for you to post your views on those things Mr."Right".