re: #18 LudwigVanQuixote

An interesting point about morality.

Lowbrow people will tell you not to do something because you will get punished if you are caught.

Moral people tell you not to do something because it is wrong.

And no I am not saying that same sex civil unions are wrong. The state has absolutely no right to tell people who they can or can not marry if you are talking about adults.

I am talking about something that Charles picked up on.

When we were kids in school and we would see some presentation from the police or whatever other low brow authority figure, the message was always submit or suffer the consequences. It was never, don’t do this because it is wrong to do.

IF the only reason you have to not do something is that you feel you will get caught, then of course you might try it if you think you can get away with it.
TO make your “moral” arguments based on the notion of blind obedience, rather than to an appeal to an actual rightness and wrongness of things is to abandon notions of right and wrong all together.

If someone actually thinks that the only reason not to bang your four footed friends is because it is illegal, they have no concept of any other reason not to do so.

To say it that is less bizarre and inflammatory, the lowbrow reason to not steal a wallet is that you might get in trouble.

A better reason is to feel empathy for the owner of the wallet and not wish to hurt him.

A lowbrow reason not to cheat on your wife might be that you have to face a messy divorce.

A highbrow reason might be not to hurt her and an even higher reason might be that you honor your vows and would not so defile yourself.

The Religious Right proves in a very deep way that for all of their talk about morality, they have no concept of it in a meaningful way.

Good point, but speaking about higher reason can cause trouble with the relativists, so cops and teachers tend to play it safe with the lowbrow reasons.