46% of Mississippi Republicans think interracial marriage should be banned

[sapphi_snake]

pizzahut451 said:

sapphi_snake said:

snakenobi said:

NinjaguyDan said:

NOBODY has the right to tell you, me or anyone! who they can or cannot love.

correct

 

but some rules have to be laid down

 

and rules are laid down according to the majority

Rules should be laid down according to ration. The majority certainly doesn't think rationally, hence why they aren't allowed (or shouldn't be allowed) to vote on civil rights.

Its funny to see a person who doesnt believe that morals are God given talking about rationality...self contradiction in its finest lol. if you think that morals are man made than you cant use rationality because going by that logic, rationlaity is also man made, and thus cant be bad or good, because it diffrents from person to person. What is rational to one person, is irrational to another. You cant have one without the other. You cant beleive in rationality if you dont believe in objective morality.

What's irrational about not considering that morals have anything to do with a fantasy being? The imaginary deity that you worship is not in any way objective, the Bible is perfect proof of that. Someone's whim's are obviously a bad reason to take morals into account.

And rationality is a certain way of thinking that implies certain things, therefore something rational will be absolute (situations like you described are only possible if either the people commit logical errors due to whatever circumstances). Morals aren't objective because more often then not they're not founded in rationality and logic, but rather on premises regarding superstition. Morals are determined by the cultural context in which they're born in (historical perion, geographical location), so you'll have have morals born in specific areas due to specific circumstances of those areas. While the moral rule may make sense in the cultural context in which it was born in, it would seem illogical to someone from another culture.

Morals are also conservative in nature, so you'll have situations where the premises that lead to the borth of a certain moral rule change (due to new information, technological advancements etc.), thus making the moral rule irrelevant and illogical within the new cultural context, yet the moral rule will persist due to the conservative population that will continue to inforce it, even if the moral rule will cause harm at this point. Christian morality is a good example of this.

Religions are false superstitions, therefore any moral based on a religion will start off from faulty premises, and will only incidentally be logical (sometimes this happens), but most often it will be illogical.

Also, we were talking about civil rights and American society, so I was talking about a particular context, not humanity in general when I made that comment to NinjaguyDan. The US, as well as all Western countries, are founded on certain principles that do not (and should not) permit the opression of minorities.