Are Christian Morals Superior?

[Siz]

I think liquorice candy is utterly disgusting. Let's outlaw that, yes?

Seconded and passed.

Are you two fucking insane? I will hunt you down...

Someone actually likes licorice? Are you messing with us right now? Licorice is probably the most vile substance known to mankind....

Actually it's my favourite confection and I'll always have a supply at home. I've currently got some beautiful Italian hard liquorice that I got for my birthday. Delicious! And I will fight you to the death to defend it.

[Ali]

And Stevil too? Positively jaw dropping.

New plan. We ship all of the licorice candy in the world to the only two people in the world that can bear to eat it (Siz and Stevil) that way the rest of us never have to go through the trauma of taking a bite of it on accident ever again.

[technolud]

Ali, it sounds like you are dealing with some traumatic event deep in your past involving licorice.  It is just candy after all.

[Asmodean]

Yes. See, that's what happens when someone tries to legislate taste. People hunting eah other down over candy.

In this case, however it's The Asmo's taste that's being legislated, and that is like TOTALLY different. 

[Ali]

Ali, it sounds like you are dealing with some traumatic event deep in your past involving licorice.  It is just candy after all.

I would call every event in which I have come into contact with licorice "traumatic."  There is nothing worse than biting into what you are thinking will be some sort of edible candy, only to find out that it's licorice.    Nothing worse, do you hear me?  Forget war. Forget the casual evils we inflict upon our fellow man.  Forget chopping down the rain forrest.  Licorice doesn't belong in it's own special ring of hell, it is it's own special ring of hell.

[technolud]

I would call every event in which I have come into contact with licorice "traumatic."  There is nothing worse than biting into what you are thinking will be some sort of edible candy, only to find out that it's licorice.  Angry  Nothing worse, do you hear me?  Forget war. Forget the casual evils we inflict upon our fellow man.  Forget chopping down the rain forrest.  Licorice doesn't belong in it's own special ring of hell, it is it's own special ring of hell.

Wow!  Thats strong.  Not much I feel that strongly about.  Certainly not candy.

[Sandra Craft]

I would call every event in which I have come into contact with licorice "traumatic."  There is nothing worse than biting into what you are thinking will be some sort of edible candy, only to find out that it's licorice.  Angry  Nothing worse, do you hear me?  Forget war. Forget the casual evils we inflict upon our fellow man.  Forget chopping down the rain forrest.  Licorice doesn't belong in it's own special ring of hell, it is it's own special ring of hell.

Wow!  Thats strong.  Not much I feel that strongly about.  Certainly not candy.

I sympathize with Ali.  Whenever I bite into licorice unawares, it feels like my mouth is trying to turn itself inside out to escape.

On the other hand, licorice did help me make a friend once.  She loved licorice and whenever I bought a bag of jelly beans I'd pick out all the licorice flavored ones and give them to her.  It was quite a bond.

[Stevil]

Did I forget to mention how perfect Black Sambuca is?
Come on people, wotz wrong wit yous?

[Recusant]

Did I forget to mention how perfect Black Sambuca is?
Come on people, wotz wrong wit yous?

Sambuca is nice, but I prefer ouzo. 

[technolud]

This licorice discussion is what happens when HAF discusses anything involving morals for too long.  Sort of a sugar craving brain burn out I think.

I looked up morality on Wikkipedia and they cover a lot of the same ground but interestingly religious based morals make up just a subset of the different schools of thought concerning moralism. 

It seems "ethics" might be a less charged word to use here. Seperating actions "based on the notion of a virtue" from actions based on edicts from GOD.


Morality and ethics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality)


From Wikkipedia:

"Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is that branch of philosophy which addresses questions about morality. The word 'ethics' is "commonly used interchangeably with 'morality' ... and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral principles of a particular tradition, group, or individual."[6] Likewise, certain types of ethical theories, especially deontological ethics, sometimes distinguish between 'ethics' and 'morals': "Although the morality of people and their ethics amounts to the same thing, there is a usage that restricts morality to systems such as that of Kant, based on notions such as duty, obligation, and principles of conduct, reserving ethics for the more Aristotelian approach to practical reasoning, based on the notion of a virtue, and generally avoiding the separation of 'moral' considerations from other practical considerations."[7]
Descriptive and normative

    In its descriptive sense, "morality" refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores. It does not connote objective claims of right or wrong, but only refers to that which is considered right or wrong. Descriptive ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense.
    In its normative sense, "morality" refers to whatever (if anything) is actually right or wrong, which may be independent of the values or mores held by any particular peoples or cultures. Normative ethics is the branch of philosophy which studies morality in this sense.

Realism and anti-realism

Philosophical theories on the nature and origins of morality (that is, theories of meta-ethics) are broadly divided into two classes:

    Moral realism is the class of theories which hold that there are true moral statements that report objective moral facts. For example, while they might concede that forces of social conformity significantly shape individuals' "moral" decisions, they deny that those cultural norms and customs define morally right behavior. This may be the philosophical view propounded by ethical naturalists, however not all moral realists accept that position (e.g. ethical non-naturalists).[8]
    Moral anti-realism, on the other hand, holds that moral statements either fail or do not even attempt to report objective moral facts. Instead, they hold that moral claims are derived either from an unsupported belief that there are objective moral facts (error theory, a form of moral nihilism); the speakers' sentiments (emotivism, a form of moral relativism); or any one of the norms prevalent in society (ethical subjectivism, another form of moral relativism).

Theories which claim that morality is derived from reasoning about implied imperatives (universal prescriptivism), the edicts of a god (divine command theory), or the hypothetical decrees of a perfectly rational being (ideal observer theory), are considered anti-realist in the robust sense used here, but are considered realist in the sense synonymous with moral universalism."

[Sandra Craft]

This licorice discussion is what happens when HAF discusses anything involving morals for too long.  Sort of a sugar craving brain burn out I think.

Good an explanation as any and better than most (tho I could go on nitpicking about the sweetness angle).

I looked up morality on Wikkipedia and they cover a lot of the same ground but interestingly religious based morals make up just a subset of the different schools of thought concerning moralism. 

It seems "ethics" might be a less charged word to use here. Seperating actions "based on the notion of a virtue" from actions based on edicts from GOD.

See?  Semantics.  Good article tho, I may go into wiki and read more while I'm waiting for the cable guy to arrive.

[Crow]

Christianity, meh... now liquorish! I don't mind it, if I ever see those thin liquorish tubes that are filled with sherbert I will buy the whole box otherwise I'm not fussed. Oh and Laduree liquorish macaroons are pretty damn addictive as well.

[technolud]

Come on people, wotz wrong wit yous?

Stevil, you here is New Joisey as well?

[Stevil]

Come on people, wotz wrong wit yous?

Stevil, you here is New Joisey as well?

Nah, New Zealand eh!

[Asmodean]

When will New Zealand become Old Zealand anyways?  ??? How long can all those "New" places remain new?