Ezerharden
Regular Member
Thankfully a few people had morals when this topic was voted on a few years ago. I guess that will soon change as well.
I find that "morals" are much like "ethics" in the fact that they are both "situational" in nature. Which is more "moral", following a religious definition or abiding by the rule of respect for individual freedoms? Many would (and have) argued that carrying a device created to kill is an immoral act as it violates "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Not the best example but the best I can come up with after being up almost 24 hours. Guess what I am getting at is just because someone doesn't believe what you believe doesn't make their belief any less valid.
"Everyone's pain is valid to themselves"