I have heard on this forum that ones moral values shouldn't be used to criminalize behavior deemed immoral. There are obscenity laws that forbid billboard advertisers from using nude models and that television be restricted as well but the standards are challenged constantly.

Many have expressed that they do not want to live by some moral standards but seem, for whatever reason, unable to articulate a set of moral standards of their own. This represents a conundrum when asked to produce those values or share them. It seems that some actually believe that a lack of moral standards is equivalent to having standards or they make them up as they go and are seemingly based on something that cannot be shared.

So I ask the forum what do you base moral values on? Is it religious conviction? Science? Biology? History? Made up as you go? Go with the flow? What, if anything, should we base our moral values on collectively? Anything in particular or nothing in general?

__________________
United We Stand.

Made up as you go - IMO, would be the most accurate in your examples.

Moral ethics are relative...to both geography and more so as a society changes through time.

Those are your standards then? You have not offered an additional source.Moral ethics have a set of values as a place of reference like the Ten Commandments for some. Others it could be Mein Kampf. I am still unsure what, if anything, your Moral Values are based on from your post.This is the kind of vague response that I wasn't seeking. It seems as if the lack of response to the question is due to a great number of forum contibutors who may lack Moral Values being based on anything as well but made up sort of willy nilly, seemingly.

__________________
United We Stand.

That's intelectually dishonest, as the only response you're really looking for is "the ten commandments". You'll argue and deride any response other than that...

No, the lack of response is due to the fact that everyone here knows your game plan, and everyone's pretty much tired of your bullshit...

__________________
Obama's New "57 State Patriotic Pin":




Sayeth John Drake - 10/13/08: "OK, you're right, I admit to LYING"

I think what you're looking for, Kenetic, is that most people don't derive their values directly from any external source.

As iam indicated somewhat jauntily, most people form their values internally based on their experiences, knowledge, reason, and feelings.

There you have it.

This could actually make for interesting discussion if people ignore kinetic's obvious agenda of proselytizing.

I think that iam's response is a good start, but I would amend it to say that most people's moral compass is based on "nurture". That is to say, people, for the most part, learn their moral compass from the moral compasses of those around them. This explains why practices such as slavery, human sacrifice, and pedophilia were considered perfectly acceptable in some societies and are currently reviled in most.

This idea also includes religious talismans, such as the one kinetic hopes to pigeon-hole the conversation into - the ten commandments. People don't have an epiphany one day during puberty and say "Wow - that Moses was onto something!" Instead, people who base their values on a religious talisman do so because they have learned to do so from people around them.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I was referring to how moral standards are made...not mine personally.

How would you describe the process by which these talismen are first accepted?

Moral values are based partly on human instinct and environmental influence. They were eventually adopted by religion.

__________________
Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.

- George Orwell, 1984

You might have a charismatic leader with a great deal of influence (i.e. Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, etc) introduce them as holy. Or, alternatively, you might have a charismatic leader draw them up himself, and allow the people's respect of him to validate them. This happens a lot, IMO, with adherence to the US constitution.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

moral standards are like I said - relative.
I think they derive mostly from....

(not necessarily in order)

1) Geography - clearly moral standards are quite different in urban areas than rural. In larger cities there is alot more people, therefore alot more diverse morals/ethics etc.
2) Parents - without a doubt the most effective compass, or ineffective respectfully. People with low morals and poor ethics without exception have at least one "enabler" - someone who never believes they do anything wrong, or excuse their poor behavior.
3) Immediate environment, both in their neighborhood and their school. Obviously someone growing up in an area of high crime/low productivity - is less likely to have proper ethics.
4) Religion - and I DID place this last. Religion sets moral rules for very few people, most people who attend church most certainly do not limit their behavior to the Bible.

As a rule of thumb, I consider that to be moral, which doesn't impede on the legitimate rights of my fellow human beings.

I certainly don't require any gray bearded shamans or witchdoctors to define the difference between right and wrong for me.

Instinct

__________________
http://www.traditionalvalues.org/

It seems that many so-called moral values are simply created ad-hoc to reflect the fears of those creating them at the time. We often hear about these "moral values", especially by conservative politicians who seem to think that they have a 'lock" on them.

God is the definer of what is right and wrong. That is the way to know what is moral or immoral.

Another thing to note is that there are things where there is no right or wrong answer, God has no bone to pick with any answer to the question. Ex. A persons favorite color. There is no right or wrong answer to that. God has no problem with just about any answer that a person gives to that.

I fear in our day and age that people have begun to believe that there is no such thing as right or wrong, they believe that everything is just different but not necessarily wrong. That is a false and potentially dangerous opinion to take. It could lead to acceptance of things that are wrong. Also, as I said, it is false. One could never really say that "murder is not wrong but just different" and be telling the truth. It is true that there have been false morals that really were lies taught to people in the past (like those of Nazi Germany as one example) but that doesn't mean that we should throw out the true morals. I fear that people are focusing so much on counterfit morals that they don't recognise the true ones.

__________________
Serious Quotes:


Funny But True Quotes
Those who argue for complete secularism are funny. They see what government does and then argue that we don't need it to start with prayer.