My morals aren't superior its the way I see morality as a whole ,and not that it is superior per se its just on a different level. And the candy bar example is saying wouldn't stealing a candy bar if it were the last thing left to eat on Earth be equally as immoral as murdering?MarkE wrote:Thank god too. If everyone viewed everything like that we'd be in anarchy. Strangely enough, that seems to be something you wouldn't mind.
If it was the last thing left on earth then are you saying you would kill for it?
You have a different set of morals and it doesn't make them any better, or smarter, or more advanced. You can't understand morality, it's not math, it's a feeling.
There are always little loopholes for someone to have separate morals from others. Morals are completely subjective, and i'm only trying to understand where you're coming from. You could kill someone without moral obligation not to? Or could you not steal based on your morals?
I would never kill a person because it is wrong to me, but it isn't wrong action in general and I don't think it should be illegalized simply because someone or even a group of people thinks that it is wrong action. I don't think that stealing is wrong action in all cases to me, but it is still illegal no matter the circumstances.
Regardless of one person or a group of people's moral perspective on a topic it shouldn't necessarily be legally dealt with in the same way, that is oligarchy.
I hope you see what I'm trying to say.