re: Pornography is not conservative

quote:

---

There’s just no reason to change the definition of conservatism to fit them.

---

Agreed, words have a definition and pornography is in no way, shape, or form conservative to American culture.

That said, I do believe a porn star could be a conservative. We'd need to expand our vocabulary a whole lot if we have to account for all of these 7/8ths, 3/4ths, 5/8ths etc. conservatives, liberals, progressives, communists, etc. Based on Brandi Love's stance on Trump, masking, taxes, shut downs, nfl kneeling, trans issues, I'm find with considering her a conservative. Not a perfect one, but most aren't.

quote:

---

it is still subjective from the standpoint of an outside observer.

---

It may very well be inherently subjective.

See: The Euthyphro Dilemma

Theists will avoid one of the horns by saying that Morality doesn't come from God's own whims, it originates within his own nature.

Sounds cool, but now apply that dilemma to his own nature. Did he determine his own nature or not? If he did it's subjective, and if he didn't morality lies beyond/outside of him.

It seems you cannot reason yourself to objective morality, you can only assert it to be so.

quote:

---

18 different people?

---

lol I’m going to regret this thread

quote:

---

Therefore, if you make a decision merely by how you feel, then that's not a rational approach to the decision, whether that be for morality or anything else.

---

If you're seeking personal pleasure through your own behaviors, it's absolutely rational to give how you feel during/after your behavior a lot of weight.

quote:

---

The example you gave was not about doing something for the pleasure of others but ultimately for the utility of the act and its likely repercussions. Utility is another standard for morality but it's not self-evident that it's the right standard for morality.

---

Yes, but I never argued the reasons were self evident, only that they weren't arbitrary - like someone rolling dice or throwing darts.

quote:

---

Arbitrariness doesn't necessary mean you have no reason for something you do.

---

Arbitrary adj. - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

Whim noun. - a sudden desire or change of mind, especially one that is unusual or unexplained.

Unusual or unexplained aren't really words to describe someone adhering to a rational system.

quote:

---

It may very well be inherently subjective.

See: The Euthyphro Dilemma

Theists will avoid one of the horns by saying that Morality doesn't come from God's own whims, it originates within his own nature.

Sounds cool, but now apply that dilemma to his own nature. Did he determine his own nature or not? If he did it's subjective, and if he didn't morality lies beyond/outside of him.

It seems you cannot reason yourself to objective morality, you can only assert it to be so.

---

Interesting. The thing is, part of the reason I find arguments for God so unconvincing is that all of them are based on human reasoning and logic games, and I don’t really think human beings have the capacity to fully understand the universe as a material thing, let alone a being that contains the universe and is is capable of calling it into being. A being like that would several orders of magnitude greater than ourselves, and therefore our logical would be less applicable to it than a photon’s perspective on Faulkner. That’s a very dumb analogy. But to make my stance more complicated still, if such a being exists, and is aware of us, and cares about the goings on here as much as theists claim - I cannot believe that it’s primary interest is in our orgasms and how we have them. I realize this is a contradiction because it’s using human reason, and not even reason but baser intuition, but I still find that conclusion unavoidable.

quote:

---

You still pimping for that porn star that was refused entry to the Turning Point event? Lol!

---

As part of a broader stance, yes.

quote:

---

It does for practical purposes which is what we need to do business with each other and get through our lives.

---

You're making a moral argument from utility. A lot of "immoral" acts can be justified because it "works" in a particular context.

quote:

---

With regard to slave owners, we don’t tend to judge them as harshly as we could from out present point because slavery in was thought to be a moral good in their time and place. We intuitively recognize that their morality was contingent on that.

---

Maybe you don't tend to judge them as harshly, but have you looked around the past few years (especially)? The entire "woke" movement is tied up with how evil and oppressive our country is, going back to slavery. I, as a white male, am regarded as a villainy to many people because of slavery that ended over 150 years ago.

ETA - Hit "Submit" by accident.

quote:

---

And by the way, Christianity in the American south was all in on being pro-slavery... So if there was an objective truth there, we didn’t get it from Christianity.

---

The objective truth comes from God. Man is fallible and twists the truth to accommodate his own desires. The question is: can we understand that moral truth that God has provided to us? The answer is "yes". By the way, the form of slavery performed by our country was specifically condemned by the Bible, namely the kidnapping of free individuals for the sake of chattel slavery.

quote:

---

As for the Nazis, they lost the war. That’s one reason why their morality is rejected.

---

Seriously? You think it was only considered immoral because the Nazis lost? Did you think such an act would have been considered immoral by any people prior to the war?

quote:

---

I like your idea of objective truth to a point, but if it exists, it doesn’t appear to be something we have any access to or consensus on.

---

Fortunately, we have access via a personal God who has condescended to reveal it to us, both through writing it on our hearts in what we call the conscience, as well as through special revelation in what we call the Bible.

quote:

---

You missed the point. Being alive matters more to the collective us because right now we are alive and form our vantage point as living beings, being alive was good.it’s not an objective truth, but it is an almost universally held truth among living things.

---

All you've done here is provide an opinion. "Mattering more" is a description about preference. What is the basis for why living things "matter more"? What is the basis for why being American "matters more"? I know of people who are suicidal and would prefer to be dead. I know of people who hate this country and would prefer to move.

quote:

---

Equal to whom? The Milky Way? I promise you it doesn’t care. I, however, am an American and was raised to be an American and so have values that are consequently apart of me. Again, I won’t hold these values when I am dead. There’s no me separated from that context. So no, I am incapable of seeing all things as equal. However, if I were born in another time and place, I would have an entirely different set of beliefs.

---

In your worldview, you are nothing but the result of chemical processes being acted upon over time. You are star dust. You are advanced pond scum. You are of no objectively greater worth or value than an amoeba, a snail, or a monkey swinging in the trees far away from human civilization.

Which value judgements objectively matter the most, and how do we know?

quote:

---

Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am vast and contain multitudes. I don’t know anyone on earth who has an entirely consistent and rational worldview. Rationality is a way of thinking about the world and making sense of it, but it’s got its limits.

---

I'm arguing that the Christian/Biblical worldview is the only one that provides the necessary preconditions for intelligibility for reason, morality, etc. I'm glad you're willing to admit that your own worldview is irrational, at least in parts that you're able to see, and that's why I'm saying that the Christian worldview is preferable.

quote:

---

We evolved to be at this size, at this timescale, to use these tools to survive. It would be hubris to suggest that any form of thinking we exhibit would get close to untangling the mysteries of the universe. We can be a lot more certain in human affairs, but even then we will never have all the information, or know who is lying. What most people call “reason” in common conversation is just dressed up “common sense”. It’s their intuitive understanding of how things are based on their cumulative life experience. That’s not a put down - I do the same thing. You do too.

---

The issue at hand is what is the truth, and how can we know it. I believe your worldview is inadequate to account for that which is necessary to make sense of reality and my worldview is the only suitable option. If your worldview is correct, then there is no reason to do anything and certainly no reason to be compelled to think or act in any particular way.

quote:

---

...Is that a christian value? What would Jesus say? Of course it’s not. Jesus, if he were watching, would be furious with us. Because it’s not a Christian value. It’s an American one...

---

Jesus would be furious because there is an objective and universal standard that He (and we) can look at to judge us. That's been my point from the get-go.

quote:

---

entirely possible, but even if it is true, it’s not demonstrably true. It’s just a thing that sounds nice.

---

I believe it is necessarily true due to the impossibility of the contrary.

quote:

---

Which is the point I find myself making over and over again in these threads. From your perspective our morality is “equal” in that sense. Yet these topics almost always revolve around atheists claiming “that’s Christian nonsense, you can’t legislate that, we’re not all Christians and it’s oppressive.” Codifying values is codifying values. You dreamt yours up, mine came from a musty old book or the spaghetti monster or a giant rabbit I see in my sleep; it doesn’t matter. They’re all subjective, hence they all start with the same legitimacy when it comes to laws. Right?

---

I just think the reason for laws that are going to apply to everyone should be stated in language that should be understood by everyone regardless of whether they assent to the dogma behind the laws. Ie you can’t outlaw abortion in this country because the pope doesn’t like it, but you can overturn Roe and send it back to the states because it was overreach by the Supreme Court and then individual states could band ban it, but even then it would have to be for protecting the lives of the unborn and not written “in accord with the wishes of Pope Francis” if that makes any sense

quote:

---

Maybe you don't tend to judge them as harshly, but have you looked around the past few years (especially)? The entire "woke" movement is tied up with how evil and oppressive our country is, going back to slavery. I, as a white male, am regarded as a villainy to many people

---

Those who subscribe to “Wokeism” essentially claim you’re a racist by birth if you’re white.