Can someone's moral beliefs be stupid?

[I Am Stoner]

Prayed for what? 'Oh god, please turn me straight!' My friend did pray, she had told me, and she said it didn't change how she felt. I truly believe she had the possibility of killing herself, if she didn't have good supporting friends, and apparently a priest that wasn't a bigot :P

Christians believe that prayer is a form of communication from them to god. Just coz you ask doesn't mean he'll give. Even my dad, who is a reader in the church of england says that.

[Lawr]

No, I'm talking about the scenario where there was no mother.
(http://forums.eyesonff.com/general-c...ml#post2483677)

Prayed for what? 'Oh god, please turn me straight!' My friend did pray, she had told me, and she said it didn't change how she felt. I truly believe she had the possibility of killing herself, if she didn't have good supporting friends, and apparently a priest that wasn't a bigot :P

There are other factors to prayer that are shown in the book of Daniel. You can't just pray once and expect instant results. Like Stoner said, it's communication. You can't talk to a girl just once and expect to get married. You're friend may not have prayed hard enough, or she is in a sort of recovery. I'm assuming she hasn't commited suicide, so her prayer may have been answered, but her returning to heterosexuality may be over time.

[Fonzie]

So, what is this thread about again?

So far I've read about masturbation, Jesus, and butthurt, so I'm a little lost at the moment.

[Madame Adequate]

So, what is this thread about again?

So far I've read about masturbation, Jesus, and butthurt, so I'm a little lost at the moment.

It's pretty much butthurt. (Edit: I say that, but I do actually agree with Roto) The most interesting posts have been from PG and Big D. I shall address the second of these now:

[If someone reads the New Testament, discovers Christ's message of humility, tolerance and compassion, then adopts that morality as their own... is that person an imbecilic thicko who deserves ridicule? I'd say not. It's a religiously motivated moral code, but that doesn't make it inherently worthless or idiotic. Even if it is Christian in origin.

Believing or doing something only because a religion says it is so, with no attempt to understand the underlying or complicating factors, is uninformed in my opinion. It's always better to understand why, rather than just obeying mindlessly. However, we're all brought up in an environment where we just take for granted many moral and ethical practices. It's not all explained to us step-by-step; we just accept that things are done 'that way' go on about our lives. Are the common standards of behaviour, courtesy and decency 'ignorant' too?

That depends on what you believe the basis of morality is, or more accurately, the basis of what consitutes moral behaviour. A utilitarian perspective would say that what matters is the action, the end result. A Kantian would conversely argue that intent is all that matters - consequences are not a component in analysing moral action. Applying that thought to what you say, a person cannot be moral if they're mindlessly obeying, even if they are mindlessly obeying beneficial rules.

[Big D]

That depends on what you believe the basis of morality is, or more accurately, the basis of what consitutes moral behaviour. A utilitarian perspective would say that what matters is the action, the end result. A Kantian would conversely argue that intent is all that matters - consequences are not a component in analysing moral action. Applying that thought to what you say, a person cannot be moral if they're mindlessly obeying, even if they are mindlessly obeying beneficial rules.

Indeed. "Doing the right thing without knowing why" is fine, but hardly means that the person is a shining pillar of moral fortitude. Similarly, the very best intentions aren't worth squat if they consistently lead to predictably crummy results.

Ideally, people should focus on "doing the right thing for the right reason", but given the wide spectrum of what people deem "right", it's never going to work perfectly.

[Peegee]

OOC: It's funny how I didn't like Kant until I read him. I don't agree with it all, but stuff like categorical imperative and the intent-based morality that milf mentioned I really agree with.

[Del Murder]

I don't even know what morals are. It's just a buzzword to me. We believe what we believe, and yes, some beliefs are more stupid than others. Sometimes the stupidity of beliefs is subjective, sometimes it isn't. For example, the belief that all Jews must die is obviously stupid. However, saying that the act of sticking your genitals into a rectum is 'morally' wrong, considering what the biological and social purposes of those things are, is not as obvious. A belief that that opinion is stupid is not so far fetched either, but it is not as clear a case.

[Spuuky]

I can't believe I almost missed this thread because it's in General Chat.

Before we begin, let's note that I am not a Christian.

Here's a hypothetical: God speaks directly to me. I hear him explicitly speak the Bible to me. I am willing to accept, on this basis, that the Bible is the divine word of God. I am willing to accept, also, that the Bible's assessment of God as a being of pure moral goodness is correct, based on my personally empirical observation of God. The word of God becomes, then an essentially unbreakable moral law. If God says homosexuality is bad, I am not unjustified in believing that to be the case.

I understand that you can't conceive of this hypothetical. I get that you can't acknowledge the concept of faith in anything other than your own judgment, however good or bad that might be. I can't conceive, however, of this kind of logic: "it is okay because you can't prove that it isn't." This isn't even logic, really. I have never understood why moral relativists place some kind of burden of proof on everyone else, but none on themselves. Why should I believe that morality is flexible or personal? How can you even conceive of a morality that is based on nothing except personal experience or taste? The "I am right because you can't prove me wrong" Atheism Brigade seems to think that "acceptance of all other beliefs" is a universal moral code, and I can't figure out why, except speculate that accepting all beliefs (and, as a result, stifling your own) is somehow utilitarian.

I guess it comes down to a fundamental disagreement of what constitutes "morality," as that one guy said. Utilitarianism would suggest that homosexuality isn't wrong. Divine authority would suggest that it either is or isn't, depending on the divinity you believe in the authority of. There are others, but these ones are the ones that seem to be arising here.

Also, to those who think that rational thought is the end-all of epistemology: go read some Dostoevsky, for god's sake. People have feelings, and they aren't always rational, and they are definitely real.

[DMKA]

I don't even know what morals are. It's just a buzzword to me. We believe what we believe, and yes, some beliefs are more stupid than others. Sometimes the stupidity of beliefs is subjective, sometimes it isn't. For example, the belief that all Jews must die is obviously stupid. However, saying that the act of sticking your genitals into a rectum is 'morally' wrong, considering what the biological and social purposes of those things are, is not as obvious. A belief that that opinion is stupid is not so far fetched either, but it is not as clear a case.

This.

[BardTard]

Yes I do. All religion really is (the one I know, Christianity) is based off of a book. The way I see it is not making your mind up for yourself. I don't know much about ALL religions (buddhism/hindu/all that other stuff) but I'm an atheist and to be honest, I have to say my morals couldn't be better. If it doesn't hurt, it's not wrong, and that's that. Like the bible says it's wrong to be gay but what makes it wrong? Because it kills the population? Like the population's ever going to die, seriously.

People I know (like my mom) just agree with things being right or wrong based on whether or not it's in the bible and it pisses me off.