jump to last post 1-11 of 11 discussions (102 posts)

Do we get our moral code from the bible?

  1. profile image0
    Rad Manposted 4 years ago

    I have written a hub on this subject and I recently came across this video. It's part 3/3, and I didn't take the time to what the first 2 parts yet, but it's fascinating.
    http://youtu.be/fm-bTW3FhL0

    1. profile image0
      jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Au contraire, the bible get our morals from us.

      1. Disappearinghead profile image89
        Disappearingheadposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        By 'us' who is 'us'? Whether you believe it was written by God or man, western civilisation got its moral code from the bible, and used it to derive its civil laws. That's a simple history lesson.

        1. jdflom profile image78
          jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I came to a lot of moral conclusions either on my own or through the advice of my parents, and both weren't very religious. My parents didn't follow the bible and neither did I. So, I can safely say none of my moral code was derived from the bible, and any similarities are merely common sense coincidence (to me).

          If you believe the bible was written by god, then I could see why some people believe it was derived from "the bible." However, if one believes the bible was written by man, such as myself, then those moral sets would have come from "us," or humans from that time period.

          I would agree with you that a lot of civil laws are probably derived from the moral tenets of the bible, but to me they are also common sense for a civilization to progress peacefully and if history happened differently, we would have still come to the same conclusions. But that's just the way I see it.

        2. profile image0
          jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So you think before the bible there was no moral code in the west.
          the Greeks and Romans had a moral code.
          The Chinese and Indian civilizations got moral codes with out the bible.
          in fact all human societies have a moral code.

          When I said 'us'. I meant human species and the different tribes that constitute it. I presume it is conceit that made you think 'US' as the west, isn't it? But I hope it is not so.

          1. Disappearinghead profile image89
            Disappearingheadposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yes I'm very conceited.

            1. profile image0
              jomineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Its up to you. But that doesn't change the fact that bible got the moral code from humans and not the other way round. That is the bible just codified the prevailing morals.

              1. Druid Dude profile image59
                Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I would agre that these are stories that were pased down, generation to generation by word of mouth around the dinner fire long before they were written down, but, in order to live 'In Community' people need recognized boundaries, especially those 'New' to the community who might never have had boundaries before.

    2. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I certainly hope we don't get our morals from the Bible. If that's the case, my wife needs to be stoned to death since she wasn't a virgin when we were married. And I think I need to be put to death, or at least smote, since I gathered sticks on the Sabbath (quite literally - I did yardwork last Sunday!) But seriously, none of the moral codes in the Bible we take for granted are unique to Christianity, and in fact are built into us by evolution. A society wouldn't last long (nor a species) if murder was OK, for example.

      Also, looking at, say, the sermon on the mount, I would say very few people follow that. Perhaps someone should have told W & Obama "Blessed are the peacemakers."

    3. Onusonus profile image86
      Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      We absolutely do. It is a fallacy for those who argue that moral codes in society based on religion are nothing more than "universal truths".

      For example; it is illegal to murder. This should be a "universal truth", but the same people who think such are in favor of abortion.

      Don't steal; should be a "universal truth", except it's ok for the same group to say you can redistribute wealth by force, and call it charity.

      Moral failings in man made philosophies are proof that the God given rule of law provides more freedoms to mankind than any man made law ever could.

      1. Cagsil profile image61
        Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        And, here comes the "abortion" argument which has no weight with regards to what constitutes "murder".
        Where in the world did you happen to come across this thought? It's pure nonsense.
        Untrue.

        1. Onusonus profile image86
          Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks for illustrating my point. So you are against murder but it's ok to kill babies, and you are against stealing but you are in favor of redistributing wealth.

          1. jdflom profile image78
            jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think you are inferring too much from Cagsil's disagreement with your statement.

            1. Onusonus profile image86
              Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Well if that's the case then let him speak for himself.

              1. jdflom profile image78
                jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I'm not speaking for him, just stating it seemed like you jumped to conclusions and spoke for him and I was pointing that out.

                1. Onusonus profile image86
                  Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Well, if I jumped to a conclusion then I'm sure he will be more than capable of correcting me.

          2. Cagsil profile image61
            Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The level of ignorance in the previous post is beyond all comprehension.

            Killing babies? You're ridiculous.

            Redistribution of wealth? Again, your ridiculous.

            Killing babies is not abortion. It's murder. Your problem is in your pathetic definition of what a "baby" is.

            As for the Redistribution of Wealth? Your ridiculous because I don't support the redistribution of wealth because it's BS. Kind of like your posts half the time.

            1. Onusonus profile image86
              Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Ok so you aren't into wealth redistribution, society has taken it's effect. But I would have to disagree with the evidence of the "family planning" clinic dumpsters that are riddled with human body parts. Where life existed, a step is taken to end it.

              1. Cagsil profile image61
                Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                roll

              2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You realize that aborted fetuses aren't really put into dumpsters right?  I mean hyperbole is one thing but lets sorta stay within the realm of reality here.  The abortion debate is quite hot enough without resorting to perpetuating urban myths.

      2. jdflom profile image78
        jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        “We absolutely do. It is a fallacy for those who argue that moral codes in society based on religion are nothing more than "universal truths".

        I also disagree with this statement. I have moral codes – I don’t kill or steal for example. I did not get that or learn that from the bible. No one taught me killing is wrong, I came to that conclusion on my own. My parents taught me that stealing was wrong and explained why when I was very young, they did not get that from the bible either as neither of them read the bible since they were of a different religion and not very religious anyway.

        The other option doesn’t have to be a “universal truth,” either. It’s more along the lines of organization and structure for a progressing civilization. If we rampantly kill and hurt each other, we won’t survive. In the context of the present, for most people, it is merely common sense.


        “Moral failings in man made philosophies are proof that the God given rule of law provides more freedoms to mankind than any man made law ever could.”

        Moral failings? Such as the ones in the bible that Rad Man pointed out like rape, forcing women to marry that have been kidnapped, and slavery? The bible says those are okay… Where do the moral failings really lie?

        Frankly, I’m glad we don’t get our morality literally the bible, or else we would be a very primitive and barbaric society where we could have slaves and treat people despicably.

        1. Onusonus profile image86
          Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Based on the society you grew up in, you seem to be unaware of the source of the laws that surround you. They came from somewhere, the societal norms that you experience on a day to day basis (especially in America) were rooted by our Jesus loving forefathers. Sorry. sad

          1. jdflom profile image78
            jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I'm very aware of where the laws came from. But we weren't talking about laws, we were talking about moral codes.

            I don't refuse to kill someone because it's illegal, I refuse to kill someone because I don't believe in harming other people. That conclusion I came to on my own and had no help from the law or from the bible or from any other outside influences.

            And while societal norms may have been rooted by our forefathers, they actually consisted of Christians, Atheists and Deists.

      3. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Perhaps the next time I need guidance I'll look of the following passage.
        Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV
        If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

        Your correct that Murder should be a universal truth, but lets see.
        Exodus 21:15 NKJV
        And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.
        Leviticus 20:10 NLT
        If a man commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, both the man and the woman who have committed adultery must be put to death.
        Leviticus 21:9 NLT
        If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.
        Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT
        Anyone who is captured will be cut down—run through with a sword.
 Their little children will be dashed to death before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked, and their wives will be raped.

        Well it's certainly not a universal truth in the bible. I'm not a fan of abortion either, but I don't think we get our judgement of abortion from the bible. I don't think it mentions abortion at all.

        All you calling tax stealing? Redistributing wealth by force? You don't want to pay tax, but you want to drive your car on the roads.

        1. Onusonus profile image86
          Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          of course you took nearly all of those passages out of context.

          Exodus 21:15; the word "strike" is used in context as attempted murder just a few verses earlier.

          Leviticus 20; talking about the death of the spirit, judgment of God, not physical execution.

          Leviticus 21:9 Fire, Hell= afterlife.

          Isaiah 13, that's a prophecy, not a commandment.

          Jesus wins, you loose. wink

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            No wonder your religion causes so many fights. LOL that the words mean something other than what they say.

            No morals - that is your problem. sad

            1. jdflom profile image78
              jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              +1

            2. Onusonus profile image86
              Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Yes especially if you don't actually, you know, read them.

              1. Cagsil profile image61
                Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I've read it several times. So, what's your excuse?

                1. Randy Godwin profile image92
                  Randy Godwinposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  AA has a problem with words sometimes.  See, he even misspelled his username using O's instead of A's!  tongue


                                                             http://s1.hubimg.com/u/6186572.jpg

                  1. Cagsil profile image61
                    Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    lol lol lol

                2. Onusonus profile image86
                  Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Excuse for what? Living by a standard of morality? My excuse is simply that when I read the Bible it instills a sense of morality. I feel an overwhelming urge not to kill people because it says not to. I don't hate people because it says hate is the same as murder. I love others even when I don't agree with them, or if they despise me. I help little old ladies across the street, I give to charity, I mow my neighbors lawn, chop wood for widows and invalids, jump start a car for a stranger, I'm forgiving, counter to my human desire not to be, I'm financially responsible, I'm faithful to my wife and children. All because I read, study, believe in, and am immersed in the Bible.

                  1. jdflom profile image78
                    jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I feel an overwhelming urge not to kill people because it says not to.

                    Can I get clarification because I don't want to make assumptions -- if you didn't read the bible or it said otherwise, you would give in to your urges to kill people?

                    If that is the case, that's a pretty scary thin line... but please, I don't want to twist yours words, so would you elaborate?

                  2. profile image0
                    Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Well I do all those things as well, except I don't need a book to tell me not to kill. If we are similar but you read the bible and get moral guidance from it and I do not we need to see what makes us the same. Well It's most likely we are both human that binds us to live a moral life. While we are on the subject, lets have a look at prison inmates. The US prison system has a disproportionate number of Christian inmates while Athiest make up less the 1 of a percent of inmates. What does this tell us?

                  3. Cagsil profile image61
                    Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Apparently it went over your head. I'm not surprised.
                    Really? I have two hubs, one that explains your morality and to be considered "God's Will", and then I have a hub on Individual Rights vs Morality, which discusses and shows how "God's Will" of morality is impossible to achieve.

                    Only ignorance or ego would dispute the findings.
                    Yeah, I know. And it's false.
                    Really? Would have the same urge if you didn't read the book?
                    Hate isn't the same as murder. However, there's a similarity between the two and that both do destroy one's self in the long run.

                    This isn't a bad thing. I can say the same. How odd is that?
                    And, you wouldn't be if you didn't read it? Again, how odd is that?

              2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                As I said - no morals.

                Just cut and paste.

                No wonder your religion causes so many fights. Did you shoot anyone today? Or just misquote the bible out of context?

          2. BLACKANDGOLDJACK profile image83
            BLACKANDGOLDJACKposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Not to mention that he has a big problem with the word RAPES.

            More to follow.

            So many village atheists, so little time.

  2. jdflom profile image78
    jdflomposted 4 years ago

    I didn't watch the video yet since I am at work, but I will when I get home. You have me very curious.

    From an atheistic standpoint, since I believe man created the bible as a work of fiction, it would seem to me that while some may get their moral code from the bible, the moral code was written in there by man... And based on that, some really get their moral code from the ideas those men had, in which I am assuming was an effort for a more peaceful society (in a way) -- along with control of the people.

    I will watch that video later and comment on it.

    1. Druid Dude profile image59
      Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Our moral code is inate. It comes with the being. It is part of the path of knowledge which has led us here, and at the end of this path is full civilization. We still got a ways to go. Even a child knows sometimes when something is wrong, even when they haven't yet been taught the concept.

  3. profile image0
    Rad Manposted 4 years ago

    Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT
    However, you may purchase male and female slaves from among the nations around you.You may also purchase the children of temporary residents who live among you, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property,passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat them as slaves, but you must never treat your fellow Israelites this way.

    I don't know about you guys, but I don't think this qualifies as good advice. This is just wrong on so many levels.

    1. Cagsil profile image61
      Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      lol

    2. jdflom profile image78
      jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Rad Man: I would agree that the bible has way more wrong than it has right, from history to how to live one's life... Since I believe it's a work of fiction, I see it merely as a book of fairly tales.

      1. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        This is one of my favourites. Where is the justice or humanity?

        Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV
        If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

        1. jdflom profile image78
          jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          How romantic!

        2. BLACKANDGOLDJACK profile image83
          BLACKANDGOLDJACKposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Did I mention that Rad Man has a big problem with the word RAPES? Or soon will have.

          1. Cagsil profile image61
            Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The fact that YOU don't have a problem with it, speaks volumes.

          2. profile image0
            Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Ahhh. I could be wrong but I think that is a threat. To set the record straight, I don't have a problem with the word (rapes). I do have a problem with the act.

      2. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Or...

        Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NKJV
        When you go out to war against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hand, and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and desire her and would take her for your wife, then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. She shall put off the clothes of her captivity, remain in your house, and mourn her father and her mother a full month; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall set her free, but you certainly shall not sell her for money; you shall not treat her brutally, because you have humbled her.

      3. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The one takes the cake.

        Deuteronomy 20:10-14 NIV
        When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.

        If you attack a city, do the right thing and offer peace, if they accept make them slaves, if they fight back kill all the men and do whatever you want with the women, children and livestock.

        I don't think I'll be looking here of any moral guidance.

    3. Druid Dude profile image59
      Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Haven't I said, time and again that my belief has nothing to do with christian, islamic or judaic churches...begining to think you fellas can't read. How can you debunk a book if you can't read?

      1. profile image0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I was not directing this comment at you.

  4. livelonger profile image88
    livelongerposted 4 years ago

    I think the Bible has quite a bit of wisdom in it, and it provided a lot of the foundation of what has evolved to be our set of ethics today, but no, the Bible shouldn't be followed word for word today. It was written thousands of years ago for a different context.

    I believe a useful analogy would be saying that all art should use the sculpture techniques employed by the ancient Greeks. Some of those techniques are still used today, many of them aren't (they've been superseded by better methods), but those techniques were still part of the evolution of artistic techniques which has produced those esthetic innovations that we enjoy today.

    1. Druid Dude profile image59
      Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There is more written there. If you can't see it, then that would explain the reading problem. Maybe glasses would help. I hear Joe Smith has a fine pair. Maybe he'l let you borrow them. Be careful...he's a mormon, you know.

      1. livelonger profile image88
        livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't have a reading problem. I've read it, and drawn my own conclusions. Notice the "I think" and "I believe" that precede my statements.

  5. XxMr.TripsxX profile image79
    XxMr.TripsxXposted 4 years ago

    I follow my own moral code derived from my own personal experiences and how I think things should best be handled. I don't care if it's illegal and I don't follow a religious code. I do what I know is right

  6. profile image0
    ScottHoughposted 4 years ago

    I think that the structure of the English language and the words available to us shape our moral code more than we might think. The Bible is sort of the origin of Modern English. I do concede that the prevailing thought of the time it was written would have influenced the syntax and diction of the The King James Version. But still, the Bible sort of defines the universe of English thought.

    You want the worst atrocities you can imagine? Read the Bible.

    You want comedy? Read the Bible.

    You want passion and drama and love and hate and mercy and freaked-out crazy stories? Read the Bible.

    It's all in there. That's what makes it Good.

  7. profile image0
    ScottHoughposted 4 years ago

    I'm on dial-up so I can't see the video sad

  8. MelissaBarrett profile image60
    MelissaBarrettposted 4 years ago

    Other than the more obscure points (like dietary restrictions etc) most religions essentially teach the same morals. Conversely, these go along with the basics of laws for most countries.  In addition most of these "morals" also coincide with behaviors that are beneficial for pack animals... i.e. "normal instinctual behavior" (read behavior that falls within psychological norms)

    Basically, IMO morals are built into human DNA.  That's not to say that the bible or other religions aren't helpful to those who are struggling with maintaining normal behavior.  On the other hand those individuals are also prone to misunderstanding normal behavior and therefore more susceptible to mistaking zealotry as acceptable social behavior.

    1. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know if I entirely agree with you re: morals being genetic. I see human beings as being social animals who readily adapt to new values and behaviors if they're adopted by the group. I see cultures in which really despicable, (what I would call) antisocial behaviors are the norm, and others where it's the complete opposite. Sometimes all it takes is strong leadership to sway things one way or another.

      I agree with your point about zealotry. But even that is something that's often socially conditioned.

  9. Druid Dude profile image59
    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago

    Your morals, your conscience, are the Law of God written inside of you. That is where it al is written. On your soul.

    1. profile image0
      Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Consciousness is a product of the brain. Studies on split brain patients have shown that consciousness resides in the left hemisphere for the majority of people. Because consciousness is a product of the brain you can't bring it with you after death, so if you do have a soul, it'll have no consciousness. No memories or awareness of the past or present.
      Plus if it was as you say it wouldn't explain the differences in personality after brain injuries.
      It'll all written on the brian.

      1. Druid Dude profile image59
        Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I said conscience. That thing which if you ain't got one, then you are a socio-path. A time bomb waiting to explode disguised as a normal human, minus the feeling of emotion. READ

        1. profile image0
          Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Same thing. You consciousness controls you sub-conscious. Without it you'd do what ever you wanted, just like a socio-path. I can read, I can't spell but I can read.

          1. Druid Dude profile image59
            Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            not so, consciousness has to do with awareness. Someone can lose all consciousness, and their sub-conscious sub-routines can continue. Vegetative State. But, you are getting warm. Just ask your BRIAN!)

            1. profile image0
              Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Oh dear, you have no idea what a sub-conscious is do you. It has nothing to do with sub-routines. Open a book and then get back to me.

              1. Druid Dude profile image59
                Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Your sub-conscious is responsible for your life support functions. I have a degre in healthcare. It also contains the dreams and hallucinations/delusions, self imposed and otherwise. But, it also takes care of al those little things like breathing, heart rate, blood presure, procesing urine and feces, (the last, you seem to do quite wel, mind you!) JUST KIDDING! Your conscience is not entirely held in your sub-conscious. You are, at all times aware of what you, personaly consider to be wrong or right, and thee determinations, it is being found, are not all through upbringing alone. Some are inherent as evidenced by studies done on infants and toddlers.

                1. profile image0
                  Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  The conscious mind regulates the desires of the subconscious. My subconscious most like wants to run around naked, but my conscious mind says that not a good I idea outside. Sound familiar?

                  1. Druid Dude profile image59
                    Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    How childlike. If you played your cards right, someone would probably pay you to take them off...some might even pay you to keep em on. You still don't know what conscience is. A socio-path has full consciousness,  but not a lick of conscience. Sometimes your mind also tells you something is a good idea, when it really isn't. Your mind can lie, and so can your eyes.

  10. calynbana profile image84
    calynbanaposted 4 years ago

    I think our moral code comes from ourselves. We can read the Bible and think about our morals in a different way perhaps, but I think deep down we all have the desire to do what is good for us and for our society. You can see this demonstrated a lot with kids when they come out of their egocentric stage.

    The thing is we are influenced by society and by people around us and I think that our moral codes get a little rewritten. For example look at the way western society treats sexuality.

    For this reason I think a lot of people could benefit from reading the documents of the Bible and the morals found within.

    1. jdflom profile image78
      jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I agree with you to a point. Notably that morals come from within.

      What I kind of disagree with is that while there are some moral things in the bible, there are plenty of amoral things as well. I do think that being aware of what's in the bible is important, but I don't think the bible is true nor relevant to modern society.

      What I do find interesting is your take on western society influencing morals so that they are re-written. On that subject, I perhaps agree with you somewhat, but want to take a deeper look at it... Can you explain more as to your thoughts and opinions on your example of the morals of sexuality? I want to get a clear idea of what you mean by it.

      1. calynbana profile image84
        calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Of course there were amoral things in the Bible, especially according to our standards. It wasn't a very moral time period, it was a time of prostitution, rape, slavery, murder and pilaging. I guess not so different than now, except that the authors of the documents did not sugar coat anything where now our reporters like to put a little spin on the news they are reporting. tongue However the immoral things that occur in the Bible do cancel out the morals the authors are trying to establish.

        Well think of the last fifty years. It used to be taboo to even dress scantily, you would be shunned or ridiculed. The view was that the body should be covered modestly (I know modesty is relative but there was a general standard). Women recognized that by dressing in this manner that they were showing that they respected themselves. They were also respecting the men around them. Not all men want to have a couple double ds in their faces to be oggling. Many do not want that temptation or even to have certain sexual thoughts to cross their mind. I do not understand the male mind but from guy friends have told me it is frustrating for them to be in this situation.

        Now sexuality is encouraged in all ways. (I watched a little girl maybe eight trying on a dress yesterday and her mother stuffed the chest area to give the kid boobs). Women dress to impress (who I do not know) and believe me those clothes are not comfortable. Men dress with their pants practically falling off a style that has a sexual history as well.

        Now the taboo is not accepting how people express their sexuality. For example the pride parade and homosexual debates. I must say here that I have no problem with people who are homosexual, my own brother is exploring. My problems lie with homosexuals who happen to be people. I worded that strangely so allow me to explain.

        I believe that before anything else that people are people, you are not your job, you are not your belief system and you are most definitely not defined soley by your sexuality. (A friend of mine had a man come up to him and say "Hi, I am gay." and my friend said that is great but aren't you a little more than that?

        However events like the pride parades put sexuality above everything else. People act provocatively, barely wear anything and complain that their behaviour needs to be accepted.

        This is becoming true of sex trade work and brothels as well. The behaviour is detrimental to the workers, to society and makes for a very family unfriendly atmosphere. (Ever try explaining to kids why there is a sign that says naked women dancing on you is okay?)

        Now people are more concerned about being able to do as they please without bein discriminated against, what I feel is lost is the fact that it is not the people that are the problem, it is the public sexual behaviour.

        This is the norm now though, so even though many kids start saying ewww why are you showing off your boobies, it soon turns into what bra can I get to triple my breast size?

        I don't know how much sense I made here, I hope I didn't come across to judgemental these are just my thoughts on sexuality right now. I really believe sexuality belongs somewhere private, not somewhere on display where kids can see.

        1. Cagsil profile image61
          Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I would agree with you that sexuality should be limited in a manner, just because of human nature itself. There should be a limit on what is revealed in public.

          However, one's sexuality isn't one of those things which should be limited in any manner. If a person wants to stand and announce the fact that they are gay, then it's their individual right to do so. It's a freedom of speech thing. Infringing upon that right isn't allowed by anyone or government.

          Government shouldn't even be involved at all. A person reserves the right to be who they choose to be and live however they want to, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. For anyone who wishes to dictate to those people, wake up and learn your role in society.

          How to dress? I would expect this to be taught from parent to child. But, since it is coming up in discussion, this just points out what I have been saying for a long time now...parents have failed their children. More moreso than others.

          The fact that kids walk around with their pants down around their butt is absurd and it looks completely ridiculous. Women who are unable to present a reasonable amount of cleavage are just showing they lack understanding of their own life and speaks volumes about their upbringing.

          The irony here is that over 80% of America is religious in some way shape or form, so that doesn't speak to highly of those parents.

          1. calynbana profile image84
            calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Haha I agree with you entirely here Cagsil.

            I just want to clarify one thing in case it came across badly, of course people's sexuality should not be limited, I just think it should be like any other behaviour, reserved for the correct time and place. There is no harm in announcing homosexuality, but it is very different to be grinding in public on a subway or something. I actually witnessed it. It was awkward. tongue

            I definitely agree that parents are failing their kids, but so is our education system. I am quite worried about where todays kids are heading, I mean kids are resiliant but they have a lot to overcome at this point :s

            1. Cagsil profile image61
              Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Again, good to know.
              Grinding? I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. If you're talking about to gays/lesbians kissing in public? Then I suggest you accept it.

              Public display of affection should be reasonable. wink
              The Education system is failing them because their parents are not doing what is in the best interest of society and holding politicians accountable for the lack of funding for Education of citizens.
              I am not so much worried about where todays kids are headed. I know where they are headed. But, that makes it all more important that those who do accomplish things give back to others, to demonstrate and lead by example, for those who don't know how to.

              Thus, just one of the things I find myself doing almost everyday. Educating people.

              1. calynbana profile image84
                calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Umm grinding is the rubbing of the groin against a similar region on another person. In the case I was referring to it was guy and girl who was wearing totally see through tights. That is a little more than I am willing to accept as reasonable PDA lol

                1. calynbana profile image84
                  calynbanaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh with no underwear by the way...you could clearly see her everything. I noticed because they were standing right in front of where I was sitting. So my head happened to be exactly level with the where the action was...I didn't know where to look. lol

                2. Cagsil profile image61
                  Cagsilposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  lol

        2. jdflom profile image78
          jdflomposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          calynbana: I was gone all day, so I am just catching up now. I appreciate you sharing all that and being honest. smile

          You brought up a lot of good issues and I definitely understand where you are coming from.

          I'm a bit more socially liberal in that I just don't mind how people express themselves as long as they aren't hurting anyone. In the case with gays, they aren't hurting anyone; but in the case with the mother stuffing the bra of an 8 year old, that's gotta be psychologically damaging.

  11. Captain Redbeard profile image60
    Captain Redbeardposted 4 years ago

    That would depend on the culture you live in. There are parts of the world where the bible hasn't been exposed so therefore it couldn't possibly be responsable for the moral guidings of that people group. Certanly though there are cultures that take a majority of their moral code from the bible. America used to be one of them.

    1. Brandon Tart profile image62
      Brandon Tartposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No - we did not get our moral code from the Bible.  Paul the Apostle even made this clear when he wrote "even the Gentiles instinctively follow the Law by nature."  He said this because it has always been abundantly clear that there was a Law written upon the heart and mind of mortal man.  We call this the "conscience."  From Latin - Con (with) science (knowledge).  That knowledge we have is of how we ought to perform, or behave.  Note.  In the beginning was the WORD - right?  The Greek word for what John wrote, John 1:1 is Logos.  In the beginning was the LOGOS - or - Logic.  Man has alway had the capacity to act in such an image as one of LOGOS... reason is so often overlooked by believers that we inadvertently make ourselves look idiotic.  However, the non-believing camp won't know this information, so - I care not - but to behave rationally, logically and in such a way as that is to live your life as one who is a great deal more like God than one who merely, "believes the Bible."  Many people, sadly, do not know what they believe, because in the end, as in their beginning, they continued to stay right there - Without knowing either way.  Morality, in truth - IS DEAD.  Even God via his Avatar, Christ, made that man of exceptions to the rule, the exception, second, he provided us with a reminder of our inherent capacity for Logical thinking and living so that we could live life, have life, and that - MORE ABUNDANTLY.  Take cheer, my friend, morality is yours to decide within the confines of where the lack thereof might impinge upon the joy, freedom and liberty of others.  Simply love, and you will fulfill the LAW.  Morality is not an end in and of itself.

      1. Druid Dude profile image59
        Druid Dudeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Thank you, again Brandon. You back up a lot of what I'm saying. That's pretty cool. Peace

        1. Brandon Tart profile image62
          Brandon Tartposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          ok - yeah - just backed up and read some of your feed-in...  gotcha man.  And, yes - the soul is abundant with knowledge of where you are overstepping.  I wonder, brother - How could Abraham ("the father of the faith") have gotten any moral codes from a codex called a book in a day when there were none?  I don't think he was going to the land that God was to show him by anything other than what his soul/conscience told him.  That is, since Bible simply means - "book."  Man, I have been on both sides (belief and unbelief) - and for that matter, I took a look at some of your topics...  try to get some to consider that DMT, mushrooms and the like, are merely ways to get the brain's synapses to grasp things like the LOGOS - Glad to have crossed paths in this forum....  I am back on Hubpages now after about a year away.  I will be looking into your hubs more in depth in the days to come....  til then, gathering traffic.  Cheers!   137

          1. Captain Redbeard profile image60
            Captain Redbeardposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            roll this is the reason I left hubpages. We said the same thing dude. You just failed to see it.

 
working