I don't do anything based on christian teachings or any other religion because again.. i think they are all man made things used to separate us. None of them are right IMO. Because i feel this way i don't use religion to justify anything i do. Ever.

Right and wrong is absolutely set in stone. Make a list of things you don't want someone to do to you. Use that list when interacting with everyone else.

Don't want your mother or daughter raped? Don't rape anyone's mother or daughter. Don't want to be told "we don't want your kind in our store". Don't tell someone in your store "we don't want your kind in here".

And when someone is behaving in a manner that goes against your list. Don't just stand there. Say something. Get involved. Let them know that what they are doing is not okay. If enough people stand up against the bullies and the monsters eventually we wont have to deal with them.

Others may use religion as a means to twist and skew right and wrong... But i don't.


Respecting Hitlers freedom is an example of when an open mind has opened so far that the brain falls out. Hitler lost his freedom when he started murdering people. You dont pull Hitler aside and say "well... he was just doing what he wanted and we should respect that and let him keep killing people". You invade his conquered territory and fight everything between him and you until hes caught dead or both. Now.. if Hitler was over in Europe trying to corner the vegetable market... then yeah... he should have been left alone. It was the whole ethnic cleansing thing that pissed everyone off.

 I honestly had no idea that "Redneck" was a politically correct term that some people found endearing. I personally would feel to be as offessive as Cracker, Gringo, Whitey, Honkey, Wetback, Nigger, Indian Giver, Dyke, Faggot, Porch Monkey, Sand Nigger, White Trash, Wop, Chink, Beaner, Camel Jockey, Coon, Guido, Half Breed, Jap, Kraut, Polack, Spic, Squaw, Tar baby, and on and on. 

When did "Redneck" become a nice term.

Also, I have to say, I know it's important to use correct terms or the point of a discussion can get lost, however does anyone else get annoyed with how some people just nit-pick the hell out of "how" you said something instead of actually discussing the topic at hand. 

I find my wife and I will do this with each other sometimes, by the end of the fight, all we are fighting about is what EXACTLY one of us said during the fight and the actually topic of the fight has been lost. 

I bet you that if you took a Nazi's mother. Put her in a camp. Starved her and humiliated her and then murdered her in a gas chamber... his opinion about it being okay to do that would change.

Thats because he knows that its not right. Its only right when it doesn't affect him. The moment that the shoe is on the other foot though... Different story.

What you fail to understand is that no one believes its okay to do something wrong. A few monsters in charge and droves who were not brave enough to speak up is all it took to create Nazi Germany.

I only know a hand full of muslims and i can tell you 100% that they don't think its okay to stone women to death. I know a few Christians also and they aren't planning abortion clinic bombings.

A few monsters who claim to be muslim and a few monsters who claim to be christian are responsible for these things.


Here you describe a murderer. He killed people including a cop. There is no study to be done here about what he is. He is a murderer. We have laws against murder and he is now in jail for his crime.

He may think that he is a good person. He may believe that it was the cops fault. But he is obviously not good and it was obviously not the cops fault.

Anyone siding with this guy is either dumb or a murderer themselves. Same with a racist.

You may like to tell yourself that your ideas of right and wrong aren't based on religious ideas because you don't subscribe to that faith, but that doesn't change where most of those moral opinions that our society accept as correct came from. And it doesn't change the fact that what is right and wrong is a cultural opinion.

As for hitler, you keep taking everything out of context to try to change the point. No one is defending his actions. The point is about anyone having the right to hold to what ever ideas they want. and lets remember, the original issue was about a guy not wanting to sell his services to a group, not kill that group.

You are completely wrong. killing his mother may make him change his beliefs of what is acceptable, but it doesn't mean he always really knew it was wrong. Lets look at it another way. It used to be widely acceptable to take multiple wives. some cultures still practice polygamy. Western culture now says multiple wives is immoral. in our nation, it is common opinion that adultery is wrong. In europe government leaders are commonly seen with both their wife and mistress. Morality is ultimately an opinion.



And I know some christians that are very true to their faith, are very godly and moral people, but truly think interracial relationships are an abomination. And they whole heartedly believe their religion supers their opinion.


I gave you an extreme example. But the point is the researcher found that at their core everyone thinks they are good people and their opinions are truly right.

39 even though I agree, no business has a right to be run with a prejudice (like the guy in the OP), I have to side with the other side on the subject of morality, ethics is based on your culture and nothing else. There is no universal RIGHT and WRONG. A few hundred years ago there was nothing wrong with slavery. You could have asked the most just person at the time and they would have said "nothing wrong with that" today except for possibly the most deluded person everyone would characterize it as wrong.


let me ask you this, if we took a North American's mother killed her like a cow and put her through the grinder to make burgers would the American's opinion change? In some Hindu sects all animal life is seen as equal, be it man, cow or spider and that is why they are strict vegeterians/vegans. But in our culture today that is not the case and so most of us don't see eating a hamburger as evil. The same with your example. Nazis saw the Aryan race as superior to other humans, yes they would not see an Aryan in a gas chamber as acceptable but a Jew or all the other people thrown in there are not the same thing

Note: I like my beef and pork and Chicken and.......and personaly have no issues eating meat. I also don't see the difference between any human individuals no matter what race/religion/social status/sex/nationality.... they are classified as. Please don't take the stuff above as my opinion.

This logic makes the extermination of the Jews okay during Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany said it was okay so its okay?

A few minutes ago or a few thousands years ago there has ALWAYS been something wrong with slavery. Just because those with power say something is okay doesn't make it okay. Slavery was perfectly fine for those who were the slavers and not the slaves.

Give someone food. <-- No possible way to make this a wrong act.

Take someones food. <-- Everything about this is wrong.

"Shoe on the other foot" is a great way to gauge whether something is right or wrong.

Today we are at war in places around the world where we drop bombs that kill innocent people. When i say we i mean the United States. Supposedly the leaders of the free world. We are a long way from slaughtering Indians as we head west but not far enough that we can call ourselves innocent.

Is it wrong to be at war in Iraq? Absolutely. Can we justify it to ourselves to make it okay? Sure we can. That doesn't mean the justification is right. When you break it down to what it is im sure everyone can agree its wrong to drop a bomb on a random building where hundreds of people are at just because we want to kill 1 person that may or may not be in it.


Your first example moves from human to animal so IMO its not the same subject. Since you asked... Is there a difference? Some would say no others yes. Big Papa mentioned crushing puppies and serving them as steak as a "we wouldnt/shouldnt do that" statement. What about crushing cows and serving them as steak? Even those who say "its okay to eat meat" draw imaginary lines about which animals are okay to eat. Cows but not cats, fish but not dogs, deer but not horses. It really is a hypocritical stance/situation we find ourselves in.

How many of us have been on a highway and looked over at a truck stacked with cows on their way to slaughter and thought "this just isn't right". Maybe that feeling is because we have automated the process where these animals literally are born/live and die inside machines. Their soul purpose and reason for being born is so they can be eaten by us. Maybe in a few hundred years the idea of eating any animal will be a repulsive part of our history but for right now its part of our diet. We eat animals for sustenance (and so do they). Do i think its okay that we slaughter millions of animals for burgers every year? No, i doubt anyone agrees that its a "right" thing to do. Do i eat burgers? Yes. Slaughtering animals is a means to an end but that doesn't make it right.

Right and Wrong are static entities. Something that is right is always right. Something that is wrong is always wrong. As we (humanity) advances as a species we become more intelligent and it becomes easier to understand the difference between right and wrong.

Here i sit writing this KNOWING its not okay to kill animals for food but this feeling isn't enough to stop me from eating meat. With Cigarettes i knew they were poison but i started smoking anyway. At no point did i think "this is okay" but i did it anyway because i wanted to. Whether its eating meat, inhaling poison or enslaving people... right and wrong are clearly defined and its up to us to decide which side we find ourselves on.


I eat meat also. My boss doesn't. Has nothing to do with health and certainly not religion. He stopped eating meat the moment he decided/realized that killing animals for food is wrong. I came to that same realization years ago but i eat meat anyway.

I was not justifying it, like you I am a creature of modern NA, obviously I see both of those as wrong. That is not the point, the point is that at different times and different places what people consider right or wrong changes. Which is what you fail to realise. I am not god it is not to me to decide what is right or wrong, I was pointing out that if you asked those people at that point in time their answer would have been different.


what you fail to realize is that ethics always has an “us/them” aspect to it. You say cows are not human while we are and so Nazi/Jew, master/slave is humans and so a different subject, but the subject is ethics after all, the reason you see a difference is because you defined, in this context, us to be human and them cow so there is a difference in your eyes, but to the Hindu above he would describe us as animal and a carrot as plant so the same rules don’t apply to carrots but do to cows so his us is a lot wider. While to a Nazi us was the Aryan race and so the same rules did not hold for them Jews (or anyone else thrown in the gas chambers, since it was not only Jews) and to the people a few centuries ago there was a difference between a slave owner and a slave and so the same rules did not apply to both of them.


My personal opinion, us=animal and them=plants is just as “wrong”. Why is killing a cow bad but killing a carrot any more OK? The simple reality is that in order to have life death must exist (especially with animal life). I can choose to have a cow die for me so that I can eat and live or a potato or a carrot or many other vegetables. Yes not all plant/animal products require death, (I can eat an apple but the tree survives, I can cut some leaves of mint to eat but the mint plant survives, I can have a glass of milk or an egg…..) but then most of those imply some form of torture, so not really any better.

I am not failing to realize it. I get it. It used to be okay to kill a slave if he broke his leg and people were okay with that.

What i am saying is that just because something is socially acceptable it doesn't make it right. Forget about what society says... Put yourself in those shoes. Do you want to be a slave? Would you be happy being a slave? I doubt it. So don't make someone else your slave. Very simple. Do you want to be raped? Murdered? Have your child molested? Be stolen from? Very simple.

Just because we are at war doesn't make raping okay even if it is the conquered population we are raping. Just because all of the other soldiers are doing it doesn't make it okay.

My stance is that right and wrong are static things and there is no gray area. We create "reasons" for doing wrong things and we convince ourselves they are necessary but that doesn't make it right.


I didn't mention ethics. I mentioned right and wrong. I admit that i think slaughtering cows is wrong and IMO pretty monstrous when you see the actual process. I have justified my eating of meat by saying "i like it" "i need it" etc. That doesn't make it right.


LOL whats funny is i used to think about this years ago when i started reading about Buddhism. There are a few plants that are not okay to eat according to them. It's much easier for me to slaughter bananas because they don't have eyes that look at me or scream out in pain when they are killed.

but who are we to say what is right. That is the point you are missing.

Guy X says A is good, Y says A is bad and Z calls A neutral

which one of them is right? Obviously you will pick the guy that agrees with you on the morality of A and obviously the two other people will disagree with you. As people does it matter? like you point out "just because something is socially acceptable it doesn't make it right" so it does not matter how many people agree in absolute terms. That is the issue you say A is _____ and assume because that is what you believe that it must be so.



yes, but that is the issue. The same is true for wrong and you are still in the middle. So all that depends on what you start out with. Let's pretend for a minut there is a God and God says A is wrong (just to have the absolute you are looking for) how do you know you don't think A is right because you created reasons to make it right. How about the opposite God sais A is right but you created reasons to consider it wrong?




So you are evil like a Nazi and a slave owner, so why should we listen to you about what is good and bad?