A lot of religions address the topic of absolute morality. Do you believe that it exists? Are there some acts that are immoral regardless of any circumstances? Or does morality depend on circumstances? Do your beliefs on these acts come from any religious/philosophical background?

There is, but first you must find it...

I believe that their are meany shades of gray, and that their is nothing for wich some circumstance can't justify.

no some free thinkers are dangerous.

I am sure there is.....unfortunatly I think where not there yet at all

the reason why, it will not please everybody. Perhpas no one.

Why, we have freewill.....well about about your neighbours freedom..geeez

People want the easy ride

Wich kid likes to be told share, wich kid likes to be told anything.....they just want what they want...with no reguards to others

I dont see adult any different unfortunatly. And as long as we are that way. I dont forsee a universal moral


It may sound pessimistic, no ,more realistic. I may be an idealist at heart, but I still have eyes that see

But hey. who knows....We all could be surprise one day

There is no such thing as universal morality. The idea that one exists is the first step in the justification of turning others beliefs to your own.

i believe one person could achieve absolute morality... I'm striving for it right now... IT'S HARD!

you lost me there......would you care to explain


I just wanted to say too, that I think there is a big difference between moral conduct and beliefs.

for me anyways moral has nothing to do with beliefs or faith...It does because religion teaches some, but someone does not need to have faith in any religion to have good moral values.

Before you answer "yes", consider this:

During the cold war, US and UK officials were being taken hostage in in the middle east. The US and Uk refused to cooperate with the criminals, so they killed the hostages and took a new batch. One day, the criminals took soviet officials hostage, and made demands. The soviets got family members of the criminals, killed them, and sent them to the criminals piece by piece. The hostages were released and no more soviet officials were kidnapped.

You may think that the soviets were immoral... but were they? in the case of the soviets, only a couple of innocent people died. After that, no more soviets were taken hostage, and no more innocent people died because of it. In the US and the UKs case, they didnt want to kill innocent people, and they didnt want to negociate with the criminals, and therefor more officials were kidnapped, and in the end, more were killed.

I understand what you mean Stellar.....but the problem lies in the kidnapping in the first place. Personnaly I dont think it is really a good moral conduct to do that.

thats what happens...as long as people dont accept everybody's free will, beliefs. Things like that will happen. Then people will resort to these kind of extremes to make their point of not being crossed.

The way I see it, it is a vicious circle... If we look deeper into your story...why did the middle east kidnapped in the first place. Probably they felt treaten one way or another and they took that action to have their needs met. And why did the other people treatened them in the first place....dunno...survival..because they too felt treatened or whaterver reasons.

The fact is....is that I have barely never heard of these things happening because it was for sheer pleasure. Usualy it is out of survival. And those who do it for pleasure are considered sick anywhere on earth and are delt with accordingly.

Paraphrased: In struggles between men there is no good or evil, only different perceptions of good. Sorry, I can't remember who said it.

Every society has its own ideal morality. It reflects the past experience, current desires, and future wishes of the people living within it. It is the result of the lives these people have lead up till this point.

Projecting this morality on others, therefore, becomes problematical. While a great many experiences are commonly shared by all humans, reactions and consequences vary greatly, and what produces outrage in one society might only be worth a distasteful sneer in another. This is simply the affect of differing viewpoints on morality.

The problem, then, occurs when one begins to think that there is only one moral standard for all of humanity. Logically, the belief that there is only one universal morality is followed by a desire and attempt to achieve it. In and of itself, this is not a problem. The problem arises when one begins to think that, because one is moral, all those who do not believe as you do must be immoral. It becomes a reason to classify others as less-than-what-we-are. In extreme cases, it justifies violence in the name of morality. At a minimum, it becomes divisive.

Situaltional ethics plays a major part in morality. What might be right in one situation, might be wrong in another. Each situation has it's own sense of morality. Finding a common ground between them all is what would lead to an absolute morality.