Debate it all you want, morality will NEVER be objective.
A friend of mine had the opportunity to bang a cute 21 year old chick who was all over him. She was an old friend of his who he ran into at a Wendy's fast food restaurant. He kept denying her advances, citing the fact that he has a girlfriend. She convinced him to go to her car and when he got there, instead of getting in the car and doing all kinds of fun things with her, he said goodbye and got in his car and left.
I said, "what the fuck is wrong with you?"
He told me he's got morals and he doesn't want to cheat on his girlfriend.
I said (cold reading), "if you have such high morals, then why do you regret not fucking her so much?"
"Shit, you're right man, I do regret it."
I then scolded him on real regret. When he's 50 or 60 years old and looks back on his life, this is one of the things he will regret. If he cheated on his girlfriend and she never found out, would he regret that? Fuck no.
In fact, he told me she cheated on him once and he took her back.
Some will undoubtedly call me immoral. Who cares. Your morals are different from mine. A moral is a judgement, not a fact. It is an opinion. Morals are subjective.
I consider sending children to religious schools immoral. Seriously, it's borderline child abuse. But those same people would condemn my lascivious actions.
My point is that I'm not going through life denying myself things that would make me happy because of misguided self rightousness. I'm not going to be the one, at 60 years old wishing I'd have done things differently.
Don't let youth be wasted on the young. Act now while you can.
If nothing is morally wrong, the claim is equivalent to claiming we have no rights, since immorality is simply the violation of rights. The claim we have no rights is the claim that it is not rightful to assert any rights. But such a claim is a logical contradiction, because making such a claim is not rightful if no one has the right to make it. Since the claim that "no one has rights" results in a logical contradiction, the claim is false. Therefore, someone must have rights, because someone must have the right to make assertions or arguments concerning what rights are or are not valid.
ReplyDeleteEven more succinctly: If we have no rights, then we have no right to do anything at all. So we would then have no right to claim we have no rights. Therefore, we must at least have the right to deny the validity of rights, but if we do, then it is false that we have no rights. It also follows that if there are rights, there are rights that can be violated which means morality exists.