NationStates Jolt Archive

In the end, personal morality is a matter of black and white. There is a place where you draw the line and won't cross it (or maybe you don't have a line and have become so in line with the Forces of Darkness(TM) that you only stop your daily routine of drowning puppies long enough to beat-up small children for their Halloween candy).
Anyways, based on about 5 minutes of thought, I have decided that most moral matters fall into one of three categories: Murder (or other grievious injury), Theft, and Sex.
My lines are drawn at killing in a situation where there is no threat to anyone, taking/downloading something I haven't payed for, and utilizing other people's material in order to get cheap laughs (now if someone is paying me for those laughs, then I'm flexible). However, being asexual, I really don't have any need for sexual boundries, but I suppose I would set them at animals and the unwilling.
So, where do you draw the line?

Murder : Well I wouldn't kill anyone unless they were endangering my safety or that of my loved ones or they were endangering the lives of 1 or more innocent strangers.

Theft : Ideally I know I shouldn't steal anything but the internet makes it too easy. I'd never actually steal anything where it would put the owner in financial hardship. Unless they were evil

Sex : For others, as long as they are mature, consenting adults, anything goes. Me personally, I'm a straight guy in a long-term relationship and that's where I'm staying.

Edit : Cool topic.

*sticks up a sign which says "Dragons Bay's morals"*

I draw my line right here!!

:D

Murder: Never.

Theft: I'd do my absolute best to never resort to it, but I can't claim that I might not resort to it were I desperately enough in need.

Sex: Only when I'm married.

Personal morality, eh? Okey dokey.

Murder: Only if I or another innocent bystander were in danger. Also, if I was in the military any enemy combatant is dead if they don’t kill me first.

Theft: Never

Sex: Only when I'm married

Ditto.

I don't care what anyone does, its their own personal business.

I don't care what anyone does, its their own personal business.

This is about lines that you personally wouldn’t cross, I believe.

Assuming I could get away with it without legal reprocussion:

Murder: I couldn't kill someone who I believed to be completely innocent. If I had solid evidence that they were guilty of something, I could kill them. In many cases, given the opportunity, I would kill them. This is not amoral for me, quite the opposite. My morality dictates that allowing the wicked to 'get away with it' is repugnant and requires immediate correction.

Theft: I don't want other people's stuff. Not only for the usual reasons, but I don't like getting things that I haven't earned.

Sex: Rape is the absolute line. Rape is concrete evil and unforgivable. I don't really care what people do on a censensual basis.

Murder: I abhor violence except in self-defense. I don't think killing in self-defense (or in the defense of others) qualifies as murder, but if it does, that's where I draw the line.

Theft: I wouldn't steal anything that is being used by someone. Even though I don't believe in the right to own something you don't use, I nonetheless wouldn't steal something that wasn't being used by anyone. I'm not sure if it's a legal issue or something else, though.

Sex: If I were in a monogamous relationship, I wouldn't have sex with anyone else. If someone were in a monogamous relationship, I wouldn't have sex with them. If someone was a minor, I wouldn't have sex with them. Otherwise, as long as it's consensual, I'm fine with it.

This is about lines that you personally wouldn’t cross, I believe.
well then.

Murder: only during wartime or if I had to to survive.

Theft: done it before, its just not my style. Unless its music. I don't have issues with stealing that. If there is a band I want to support, I buy their stuff. If I don't want to support the band but am making a cd for a gift or something, then I just download the track.

Sex: I like girls, and time frame doesn't bother me (she just needs to be within two years of my age)

Morality is inherently subjective. I dont see that there is any possible way of having 'definite moral boundaries'. When I was younger i had different moral positions to those I hold now and furthermore, I expect my opinions to change in the future as well. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or misinformed.

Anything thats a 'win win' solution for both parties. :)

Murder: If it was in defense of my life or someone else's, I would see it as being justified. Otherwise, no.

Theft: It's not ok to steal from people I like at any time. It's only ok to steal from people I don't know if I have no other choice, like if I'm starving or something. It's always ok to steal from people I hate.

Sex: Only consensually, in a long term monogamous relationship for me. I love my ladyfriend, however, we aren't ready yet, we haven't been together long enough. When we have though, basically whenever she says so. Anything else I wouldn't do, though I don't really care what others do, as long as it's consensual. Rape is a crime that comes close to being, and maybe is, as bad as murder. And there's no such thing as raping in self-defence.

My moral boundry follows one very simple idea;

If it doesn't harm me and mine, there's no problem with it.

Edit: It does have a corollary, though.

That is, if it's distasteful or unpleasant, it is not necessarily harmful. I abhor drinking, alchohol, all forms of narcotics. But I would never do anything but campaign for greater freedoms in those regards.

Murder: Never, under no circumstances whatsoever. Physical harm only if there really is no other option at all.

Theft: Depends. If it really hurts the person I'm stealing from (that is to say if that person even so much as notices it), I would consider it wrong. Downloading music from a band I never heard of or if I know I only want this one track, the rest of the album is crap, I don't have a problem with that. I found a number of interesting bands that way and then went out and bought albums I would never have bought otherwise.
Also, if I had no other option, I wouldn't consider stealing food theft.

Sex: No animal, no minors, and generally only consenting adults. Otherwise, no boundaries whatsoever.

Murder: the only person that should be able to decide when to end a life is the person living it. So I would be willing to assist with euthanasia/suicide if the person requesting this help is rational. It would not kill someone against their will. I consider an embryo/foetus up to the development of a neural net as something that is not yet living a life, so I would support the decision of the mother if she decided to abort. I support the termination of comatose/vegetative/demented persons if they made a livingwill during their concious life requesting it.

Theft: that depends on how you define theft. The Disney Robin Hood style is justifiable IMO, though in our western society with its welfare programs this is not really relevant anymore.

Sex: between consenting adults in private places. What those adults do there with eachother is none of my business.

I try to operate on a principle of moral reciprocity. Do unto others as they would do unto you. So be generous to the generous, cruel to the cruel. But unlike the golden rule, take initiative.

Murder: Only when the act would benefit the world more than harm it

Theft: Only when the act would benefit me more than it would harm me.

Sex: Only when the act would benefit me more than harm me.

Murder: Only in self-defence of myself or others and only if I'm unable to deescalate the situation and only if I'm unable to maim the person. Maiming only if I'm unable to injure the person, injuring only if I can't hurt the person, and hurt only if I'm unable to just detain the person.

Theft: In German there's a saying: "Not kennt kein Gebot." It means "Need knows no Commandment." Theft would only be an option if I were starving and the person I was stealing from could afford it.

Sex: With my girlfriend. I'd personally draw the line at having sex with other men, animals, and minors. I thought I could draw the line of only having sex with the girl I was dating, but I fell in love with someone else once and ended the other relationship. I can't swear that I would never do something like that again, though I felt that I did do something wrong.

I try to operate on a principle of moral reciprocity. Do unto others as they would do unto you. So be generous to the generous, cruel to the cruel. But unlike the golden rule, take initiative.
But wouldn't you become cruel by being cruel to someone cruel? And wouldn't that require others to be cruel to you?

Murder: Only in self-defense and defense of loved ones.

Theft: Except for music(which I would define as a gray area, since both sides have legitimate points), only if it ensures mine or a loved one's survival.

Sex: Only if the girl(I'm a human female loving kinda guy.) I would be having it with is a loved one(girlfriend or spouse), is willing and she is within two years of my age.

The Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule pretty well cover rules.

Pity so many are turned off by the Bible that they reject them. Pretend that they are the work of a modern author whom you admire. Then try them out in your mind.

The Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule pretty well cover rules.

Pity so many are turned off by the Bible that they reject them. Pretend that they are the work of a modern author whom you admire. Then try them out in your mind.
If I can't covet my neighbor's ox, can I covet his laptop? :p
(Just kidding)
The problem with the ten commandments is that they have some that only apply to religion. And what's the point of only following six or seven of the ten?

I try to operate on a principle of moral reciprocity. Do unto others as they would do unto you. So be generous to the generous, cruel to the cruel. But unlike the golden rule, take initiative.
I'm with Laerod on this. My own principal is treat people as you'd have them treat you. Try not to hurt anyone.

My moral stance on the issues is: -

Murder: Never, if it's self defence then just use reasonable force. If I did kill someone it would be an accident and hence not murder.

Theft: Never, theivery is just greed and I abhor greed in people.

Sex: Yes please. Obviously only with consenting adult females. I'd never pay for it either (apart from taxi fare, meal and a few drinks of course).

In the end, personal morality is a matter of black and white.

Why? On some days I might be willing to do something, on other days not. I base my decision on my emotion state and on past experience, both of which change from minute to minute (although past experience changes only by addition).

Why? On some days I might be willing to do something, on other days not. I base my decision on my emotion state and on past experience, both of which change from minute to minute (although past experience changes only by addition).
You mean to say on some days you might murder someone, or might want to have sex with a chicken?
When he says draw the line, it's at what you would not do ever. Your morals should not change from day to day, unlike what breakfast cereal you want to eat.

Murder: Never. Its been said already, but if my life were threatened i would use "reasonable force" you can temporarily incapacitate someone without killing them. And if i wasnt capable of doing that i'd probably end up dead anyway, even if i did try to kill them.

Theft: Never. I download mp3s.. but i'm also the kind of person who deletes any that arent good and generally buys the CDs of the good bands i discover through downloads... So i dont see it anymore as theft than recording a tape off the radio. People downloading for the sake of getting all their music for free at the expense of the artists is a different matter entirely.

Sex: Personally: hot kinky sex with sexy adult females will do me.
As for what i think for other people: No kids, nothing without consent, and no dishonesty. If you have an open relationship then go for it, if the donkey is a willing participant than just dont tell me about it, if you like to tie up people and whip them senseless then its fine if they are willing, if you want unprotected sex, and the other person is willing, dont tell them you're on birth control if you're not and dont tell them you're STI free if you're not.

Can't define my moral boundary from a quick glint.

Why? On some days I might be willing to do something, on other days not. I base my decision on my emotion state and on past experience, both of which change from minute to minute (although past experience changes only by addition).
If your moral absolutes change with the wind, then you really don't have any morals at all do you?

There are more and more asexual people on here! Is it something in the water where you come from?

Killing: My line's a bit vague here. Normally I'd be against killing unless it was to facilitate a greater good, or to save lives - but I can see myself doing a revenge murder.

Theft: Anything?

Sex: Well, I'm against contraceptives… that should tell you all you need to know.

Killing: Never.
Theft: Never.
Sex: When I am married, and ONLY with said spouse.

Muder: No way! I am against all forms of violence, and I include rape, mosestation and other forms of sexual abuse, verbal abuse and bullying as violence. But having said that I do not condem those who, for example, fought against the Nazis.

Theft: This is a slightly more tricky one. If I was a poor begger who was in danger of dying I would steal medicine and I could not condem anyone else in the same prediciment from stealing as well. If theft is always wrong is it wrong therefore to steal a slave (as they are/were considered mearly as property) and then liberate them.

Sex: With whips, chains, big throbbing things, electrodes...who cares...its sex. Sex is sex, if were talking love well thats different. I love my computer but that doesn't mean I want to cover it in cream and lick it clean. I tend to see love and sex as to different things, but maybe thats because iam a silly little virigin nerd with no hope in hell.

That's easy to answer. I don't have definate moral boundaries.

Every incident is unique-case.

Although I would generally try to evaluate these things on a case by case basis these are my general guidelines:

Murder: Violence is horrible and shouldn't be used apart from in defence or myself or others (although I doubt I could be much help if it came to it). Murder is always wrong but killing someone in self defence is not murder. Even thought it is wrong I am probably capable of it unfortunately :(.

Theft: Fine for necessity as long as it does not put others in a very bad situation. It is always wrong for greed.

Sex: Only with a concenting adult that I loved (so probaby in a long term relationship). Not S and M because of the mental and physical violence contained in it. I wouldn't have a moral problem with doing any other act, if it grossed me out or something eg. defication/urination then I would't do it but that is different isn't it?

murder: when nessicary, such as to keep the population healthy and to remove social problems. murder outside of fromgovernment purpose is almost never good. never kill an animals, plant, or any organism unless you use all of it or have good cause(this includes humans, humans are animals)
theft: never. everything should belong to the government.
sexuality: whatever is suited to the species for evolution. for us, it's only between male and female. the rest is destructive. kill other supporters.

EDIT: i should add that i'm for polygamism, even though i wouldn't practice it myself.

Murder: Only when used as a means to avert or avent harm to an innocent. I.e. self defense, protecting a loved one from assault, punishing someone who committed rape, etc.

Theft: Always depends on the circumstances. I won't go into a store and steal. I won't take things from others. I will, however, pirate software, music, movies, etc. I'll even take things from the company I work for (pencils, blank CDs, etc). For the most part, I think it boils down to whom I'm harming and the degree of harm. Stealing from a large, abstract entity such as a company and having it amount to only a trivial amount does not pose a problem for my morality.

Sex: Anything goes between people who are capable of rational, mature consent. I'm pretty tame, though, in general.

In the end, personal morality is a matter of black and white. There is a place where you draw the line and won't cross it (or maybe you don't have a line and have become so in line with the Forces of Darkness(TM) that you only stop your daily routine of drowning puppies long enough to beat-up small children for their Halloween candy).
Anyways, based on about 5 minutes of thought, I have decided that most moral matters fall into one of three categories: Murder (or other grievious injury), Theft, and Sex.
My lines are drawn at killing in a situation where there is no threat to anyone, taking/downloading something I haven't payed for, and utilizing other people's material in order to get cheap laughs (now if someone is paying me for those laughs, then I'm flexible). However, being asexual, I really don't have any need for sexual boundries, but I suppose I would set them at animals and the unwilling.
So, where do you draw the line?
Most people I'm sure have responded in more or less the same fashion, making it clear that they don't approve of 'murder' except in self defense or at all, telling us that rape or sex outside of marriage is evil, and that theft can't be condoned but it happens anyway. Interestingly, people are still trying to tell us that morals are subjective. How quaint.

Life is the root of all value. To claim it is anything else is to deny the most basic aspect of our and every other animals' nature: we want to stay alive. I measure my values and the moral judgements they require against the standard of my [or the other dude's, in some cases] life and act accordingly. Anything that damages my life or property as a direct consequence, then I'm likely to think it's 'wrong.'

Thus; murder is most obviously wrong because I'm committing the error of not allowing the other person to live to the same standard or in this case even in the same realityas I allow for myself. Murder in self defense is justified for the reverse reason.

Theft is wrong in every instance because it represents the theft of life. Any property a person holds, whether gained from work or gifts [leaving aside property gained by theft or fraud] is the product of how this person has lived his life, and it should not be taken under any circumstances.

Sex between two or more people who want to have it is beyond the interest of morality, it only becomes an issue when a damage to life or values is involved. The line here is usually pretty obvious.

Anyways, based on about 5 minutes of thought, I have decided that most moral matters fall into one of three categories: Murder (or other grievious injury), Theft, and Sex.
My lines are drawn at killing in a situation where there is no threat to anyone, taking/downloading something I haven't payed for, and utilizing other people's material in order to get cheap laughs (now if someone is paying me for those laughs, then I'm flexible). However, being asexual, I really don't have any need for sexual boundries, but I suppose I would set them at animals and the unwilling.
So, where do you draw the line?

For me:

Murder: Never. The only time I would kill another human being is if it was the only possible way to save another human being.

Theft: Never.

Sex: Intercourse only with a person I am in a committed relationship with, who I am in love with, and who I intend to spend the rest of my life with.


For others (as in, this is what I would legislate):

Murder: Never. Self-defence only.

Theft: Never, but I wouldn't prosecute someone who was stealing food or clothing because they had none.

Sex: If all parties are capable of informed consent and have given it, whatever.

But wouldn't you become cruel by being cruel to someone cruel? And wouldn't that require others to be cruel to you?
That kind of meditation is what I find I like about the rule. I would maintain that it escapes it. One could argue that by being cruel to the cruel, I diminish them and become more just. I would maintain that being honest to the honest, kind to the kind, cruel to the cruel (not that this comes up outside of thought experiments, it's a pretty good life in Seattle), etc, in reality, I'm not moral at all. Neither good nor evil. It's a heuristic that allows me to abdicate responsablity for potetially unsolvable ethical riddles, and yet guarantees the good will be enriched and the bad diminished in a manner commensurate to our capacity to realize our respective will. So I'd be amoral, but I could be sure that while I might not necessarily make the world better all the time, I would sometimes, and I'd never make it worse. It has a certain zen aspect to it.

I think it's superior to the Golden Rule in that, some people are unrepentent assholes and the world can't always be trusted to deal with them.

In the end, personal morality is a matter of black and white. There is a place where you draw the line and won't cross it (or maybe you don't have a line and have become so in line with the Forces of Darkness(TM) that you only stop your daily routine of drowning puppies long enough to beat-up small children for their Halloween candy).
Anyways, based on about 5 minutes of thought, I have decided that most moral matters fall into one of three categories: Murder (or other grievious injury), Theft, and Sex.
My lines are drawn at killing in a situation where there is no threat to anyone, taking/downloading something I haven't payed for, and utilizing other people's material in order to get cheap laughs (now if someone is paying me for those laughs, then I'm flexible). However, being asexual, I really don't have any need for sexual boundries, but I suppose I would set them at animals and the unwilling.
So, where do you draw the line?
Where do I draw the line? For me, personally?

murder: since life is the basis of everything else that is human, murder cannot under any circumstances be justified. an accident is a horrible thing, but if that is indeed all that happened then that's that really.

Theft: Basically, this is wrong until it begins to support life. Just because someone else has lots of money and food, doesnt mean that they worked for it. Additionally, I know that I would have exhausted every other option possible short of death before attempting to steal anything. In the case of something like music, I download it and then end up buying cds by artists I like and deleting files by artists I don't. Basically, I'm buying music i wouldn't have bought and therefore I'm really not stealing it. I dont share files either.

Sex: With my hopefully someday wife, within marriage. Marriage is a lifelong commitment and therefore I will be completely monogamous. If she consents to it and it doesnt involve harm or anything particularly disgusting, then it's fine. If the whole finding a wife and getting married thing doesnt work out, I'll probably become a priest and take vows of celibacy.

I don't kill people, and I don't break promises/oaths.

That's about it.

I have no morality. I do what will benefit me. If it's too much of a pain to successfully steal or kill then I won't, that's too much hassle and too much risk.

I use my conciense to guide me.

Guidance for my legislative body:
Murder: Not unless one can prove beyond reasonable doubt that they needed some killin. Any discussion beyond that requires a definition of murder.

Theft: Not unless it somehow benefits my government. Perhaps a theft tax?

Sex: Creating more workers can only boost my available labor pool. Keep it up! As far as recreational sex, that will also be taxable. Better make it worth it.

My personal moral boundaries are almost infinitely more closed than what I think is acceptable for other people. In fact, for the most part I don't apply my morals to anything people do. As in, I may think something is wrong, or would never do it personally, but it's not my right to judge other people. For the most part, there are things that I do honestly condemn (mainly things that are harming for harms sake, like female circumcision).

However, sticking to the topic at hand, my personal moral boundaries:

Murder: I really don't know if I could ever murder someone. I would never just walk up to someone and decide to kill them, and I would like to think I would never kill anyone for treating me ill in some fashion. However, in a heat-of-the-moment situation, if I or someone I cared about was attacked for example, I may or may not find myself able to kill someone or stop myself from killing someone. It's fairly impossible to predict how you would react in such a situation until you've experienced something similar. It's also possible that a murder of someone I love would warp me into wanting revenge, perhaps enough to kill someone. But as I am now, I would never kill anyone.

Theft: No. I have no reason to steal, and no want to.

Sex: I don't want to. I just really don't. Though I might do it for someone I really love, and if I make that decision I'm fairly open (with limits). This doesn't at all reflect my view on what I think other people can do, in that case if all parties are willing...