Everyone on earth would see it as so. There would be no rejection.
Christians talk about absolute morals. If I don't see that as true and I have a completely different set of morals, how can there be an absolute moral?
There are only two thing in this world that I've come to understand would be (a) wisdom and (b) truth.
Everything else is just a perception.
Ego would still reject it. Ego can reject truth as it stands now.
Yes, they do and when they do, many reflect themselves back on themselves and fail to see their own actions. Absolute morals is a falsehood. The highest moral standard isn't achievable. It cannot be done. Why? Humans are not perfect. Anyone who thinks it can, then doesn't understand individual rights. I wrote about the absolute highest moral standard and rights vs morals.
Actually, there's a universal moral code every citizen of the world could independently live by and if more people did then the world would be a much safer place.
Integrity is a value, not a moral. Try again.
Integrity is the description with which actions are to be of.
Actions are moral or immoral. An immoral action will speak to having no integrity. Integrity represents utmost honesty. An honest action is always moral.
Values are just like morals, in that they are still going to differ from person to person. Still nothing universal.
Really? Wisdom is universal. It is recognized when read or heard.
Really? I mean seriously?
Is that your ego talking? Or did you just tell me that you have no integrity?
It's either that, or you don't know what the word means. A person of integrity is going to be the most honest person they can be. Are you telling me this isn't UNIVERSAL throughout all of humankind? The more people living with integrity is better than it not happening.
I look at it this way- Integrity, understand it, you'll live honestly, living honestly, brings out love for self, which in turns allows love for others.
Every person only needs to learn that word, live it and prosper from a peaceful life.
For me, stoning a person is morally incorrect. For some else, stoning someone is a moral act.
How are any of the two universal, if there is a variance of what is correct and what is not?
Integrity would be an unwavering fortitude, based on what morals I have.
Integrity is a value.
What is this moral code based on? If you do not believe in a God, creator, or any sort of deity, on what exactly do you base these universal morals of which you speak?
A person's actions are the only thing that can be classified as being moral or immoral. If you understand the human morality concept, then you would have learned that it's nothing more than a description of actions which should be conscience based.
For an individual to hear their own conscience, they are required to see beyond themselves(seeing past one's own ego), which requires a higher level of awareness about self. It also requires a better understanding of yourself and the world around you.
A person's character is defined by what he does or doesn't do and why he did or didn't do something. How your actions or that of anyone else is specific measured against the morality concept. If it does match, then your actions are not of conscience.
The primary character trait a person needs to understand is integrity. After which, everything else falls into place.
by janesix4 years ago
I say we are born knowing right from wrong. People KNOW they are doing something wrong, and yet choose to do it anyway.Our moral compass is a gift from God.Morals are inborn in my opinion.Discuss.
by Grace Marguerite Williams2 years ago
advancement couple with the increased education and enlightenment of people, will organized religion hopefully become a relic of the past?
by SpanStar5 years ago
Having declared ourselves as free thinking righteous believers (meaning we understand the concept of a right and wrong).* Would curtailing shock jock radio announcer's verbal expressions over the airway be immoral?*...
by Dgerrimea7 years ago
Assume for the purposes of this discussion that something like causal determinism is correct. Nothing is fated to happen, but everything will happen because of a prior cause, and as such everything is inevitable.Does...
by Captain Redbeard5 years ago
Richard Dawkins poses the theory that studying the bible for its literature content is a great thing. However we should not follow its teachings. He feels that ones moral standards should not come from this book or any...
by nicomp really8 years ago
If this is indeed a forum for the free exchange of Religion and Beliefs, then atomswifey deserves a sincere apology from each "free thinker" and atheist who attacked her and her opinions. Every godless...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.