Why does our society promote immorallity ?

[Buzzer]

Even the instructions from insurance companies on reporting a collision or other event say: "Do not admit it was your fault, even if it was.".
Nothing is deemed immoral about this lack of accepting responsibiliy, but, suggest a nude or clothing optional facility.....and what a "storm" is raised.

[Buzzer]

Even the instructions from insurance companies on reporting a collision or other event say: "Do not admit it was your fault, even if it was.".
Nothing is deemed immoral about this lack of accepting responsibiliy, but, suggest a nude or clothing optional facility.....and what a "storm" is raised.

[Jochanaan]

I forget who said, "The only thing necessary for evil to win is for good men to do nothing." It seems much easier to hurt than to help, to destroy than to create, to inflict disease than to heal--even for those of us who genuinely desire to do good. Without constant vigilance, it is almost inevitable that the world will become more evil.

[Bob S.]

In third grade, my teacher taught me to be "immoral."

I took a quiz or a test back and either noticed that one of the answers was wrong that she counted as right or that she didn't add it up right, in my favor. I brought it to her attention and she told me that if an error happens in your favor, do not mention it. Now, back to trying to forget that horrible year (she was my least favorite teacher).

Bob S.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buzzer:
[qb] Even the instructions from insurance companies on reporting a collision or other event say: "Do not admit it was your fault, even if it was.".
Nothing is deemed immoral about this lack of accepting responsibiliy, but, suggest a nude or clothing optional facility.....and what a "storm" is raised. [/qb]

---

It isn't a lack of accepting responsibility. They are telling you not to speak about the incident until it can be done under a controlled situation. That is a huge difference and what makes you qualified to decide what is moral and immoral for this society?

[Peter Stokes]

Surely all of us, as members of "society", have equal rights and responsibilities to have a view on what's moral or otherwise. On the whole our laws and our generally accepted moral values stem from the Judaeo/Christian inheritance which in turn is based on the contents of the Ten Commandments*.

(But all of that, of course, has been tempered by localised constitutions and legal practices)

peter

* How come there are ten commandments but only seven deadly sins? Does that mean that breaking three of the commandments only counts a misdemeanour?

[Gary Naturist]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Buzzer:
[qb] Even the instructions from insurance companies on reporting a collision or other event say: "Do not admit it was your fault, even if it was.".
[/qb]

---

The reason that insurance companies give these instructions is to protect their insured. It's the same advice that a lawyer would give -- i.e. "Don't confess immediately".

Who is at fault is not always obvious. For example: You are driving a car and you jam your brakes on unexpectedly in the middle of a block because you realize that you forgot something important at home. The car behind hits you. You feel guilty for hitting the brakes so abruptly, and you say that the accident was your fault. Well, both the insurance company and the police will say that it's the other driver's fault, because he is required to be able to stop regardless of what the car in front does.

You're only guilty if the law or the insurance companies (after negotiations) say you are.

Gary

[Buzzer]

I wasn't "deciding" what was imoral. I was just expressing my opinion and asking a question.

[missouriboy]

Buzzer, I'll take a stab at suggesting one answer to your question, though there are probably many, many more.

"Skip-a-Rope. Skip-a-Rope."

"Cheat on your taxes, don't be a Fool."
"Now what was that they said about the Golden Rule?"

When a governing regime becomes so overbearing and oppressive that many people are forced to cheat just for survival, it quickly becomes more and more acceptable for the whole populace to let other basic morals slide, too.

My mention of taxes is only one example. There are many others, of course... Easy divorce. Free sex. Easy credit. Welfare as an "entitlement" instead of temporary aid. Unmarried cohabitation as the rule rather than the exception. On and on and on. It ultimately leads to the destruction of a society, and a new one has to be built from the ashes.

I'm not sure if that's the gist of your question, but if it is, that's one answer.

[Ren]

Missouriboy, I actually think the unmaried cohabitation thing is a necessity. Remember, a lot in society has evolved toward intellectual mobility via more attendees of college, etc. This creates a varied populace that then has more to choose from after high school than getting married and having kids. On the whole, people are getting married later. And in the case of cohabitation, that is a huge commitment. In repressed society (ie. pre-sexual revolution), people were forced to accept situations based on societal or familial pressure before they really knew what living with someone was like. Divorce rate is high among those generations, perhaps because of this. Divined morality does not necessarily equate to spiritual happiness. I have two friends who have been dating for eight years and just now live together. And they fight a lot. I couldn't imagine what would've happened had they married first.

As for tax evasion, only the wealthy can get away with that. We have a mayoral candidate locally who evaded her taxes some forty times and nothing has or will happen to her legally.

I think immorality could derive from a sense of invincibility in a power situation, be it fame and politics or on a smaller scale the power take in a relationship.

I don't use the Bible to determine what is right, since that text is so easily misinterpreted and abused. I just go with a sense of what is just.

[missouriboy]

OH! Buzzer, I don't know how I forgot... the biggest one of all: Abortion on Demand for non-medical reasons! If the murder of innocent unborn humans is not immoral, then NOTHING is.

[Ren]

Missouriboy: if an unborn fetus cannot survive on its own, it is technically a parasite. It becomes more than that during late term when it could conceivably survive. I'm not necessarily saying I go along with this idea, but in a scientific/detached way, this is true. But we cannot attach our own emotion to someone else's decisions.

How is it moral that one's biased opinion on the subject can be used to keep someone down? We need education earlier for many of the disadvantaged. Not providing those who need the information with it, makes those in the know immoral for not fixing a problem.

[Guest]

And of course those to the right are the ones usually associated with being against abortion and those same folks have been doing their best to do away with sex education and substitute only lessons on abstinance even though the former has a track record of sucess and the latter has a record of higher pregnancy rates.

The sex ed classes did include abstinance as part of their curriculum BTW.

In other words those who want to prevent abortion are causing those abortion rates to climb.

[Frank R]

I have first hand knowledge that a great many people cheat on their taxes but just because a lot of people do it does make it right.

To be fair however, the tax law is so complex no one truly understands it. I remember an estate tax case that made it to the US Supreme Court. The nine justices wrote five (5!) different opinions as what the law said.

I have two major complaints about tax law.

First, I have to pay income taxes on the welfare taxes I pay (i.e. - Social (in)Security).

Second, the governments taxes most heavily those things it does not like - Liquor, Tobacco and Marriage.