objective morality" or even "without god anything is permissable".
I am tired of hearing it, so lets talk about it.
What we are talking about here is an objective morality. It really has very little to do with the existence of a god, and more to do with the nature of morality and the future of how we solve problems in a societal context.
If we say that there is an objective morality (as most theists would have us believe), then morality should be a timeless constant.
That simply isn't true. If we look at morality today, we might think this, but as soon as we look back at what was moral hundreds of years ago we can see an enormous shift.
Does this prove anything? Maybe it is just our perception of morality that has changed, and morality itself has been constant while we keep struggling towards it.
No. It isn't.
From where would an objective morality originate?
If morality is objective, then it exists OUTSIDE god and is a universal constant.
IF god didn't make it up, then it is universal and has no origin.
Ok, as little sense as a god made morality makes, this makes less. Morality must be born from somewhere, as it is a set of rules to assist us in living together. Since we haven't always existed, neither could rules for our coexistence have existed forever, so we can dismiss that one.
If it doesn't exist outside god, then he made it up. Just made it up, according to how he thought things would work best.
Now it doesn't matter if you think that his knowledge is the best place to derive such a morality, it still means that it is SUBJECTIVE.
He made it up.
IF he made it up, and then failed to pass on that morality in such a way as to have us clearly understand it as a planetary whole (which he clearly hasn't), then his moral system fails. It fails because if he creates a universal moral code, and then fails to give it to us, but yet still judges us for failure to adhere to it, we can judge HIM to be immoral. And we can no longer trust in any subjective morality that he has created for fear that it too will fall prey to the same logical problems that the very creation of it did. Even leaving that aside, if we forget all the issues with a god created and objective morality, then we still run into the problem of definitions.
Is an objective morality moral?
If there is a set of rules that is to be followed without question (because the very act of questioning it makes it subjective) is it still morality?
It is obedience.
If you merely obey the universal moral code with no thought to the consequences of your actions for others, then you are not moral.
You not ethical.
You are not concerned with suffering.
You are not humane
You are merely a slave.
Obedient and unthinking.
Morality is more than that.
It has to be, and by definition I don't think that anyone would disagree.
So to say that god created morality is to say that morality doesn't exist.
WE decide morality, that is the only way that it can be moral.
That is why our laws change, that is why our morality changes, that is why our norms change.
Because when confronted with a problem, we think about it.
We consider the consequences from a position of concern for ourselves and for others.
And we attempt to move forward in our ability to live together without subjugating the lives of others under the umbrella of OUR morality.
So we change it as we discover the problems with it.
Think of morality like this;
Morality is a subjective conversation that best decides on how to enact the "My rights begin where yours end" tenet.
And remember two things;
Morality can't exist where obedience is the only virtue; and
We must think to survive.