Christian Libertiarianism

It is not 100% subjective. There has been children that have not been brainwashed with religious information, that have grown up in environments that did not receive the glorious moral education that we received from the bible and from the koran. They knew from a young age that getting physically abused was not within their interest and having their property taken was not within their interest, thus a logical foundation for morality is possible. Some semantics of morality can be subjective, for example adultery and lying, depending on the specifics of the situation and the social norms these sorts of morals can be subjective. But murder and theft are not subjective, I would like you to make the case for the subjective nature of murder. Animals have a natural instinct to protect and preserve his own life or protect its own property, which includes himself. One does not need to prove that life is valuable, that is irrelevant. The value of life is subjective and will differ from one person to another, ie some people value their life more than others. But humans will always have a sense of self preservation. If there are cases where humans do not want to preserve their life, that does not change the fact that we can make the claim that man kind has a natural sense of self preservation. ie just because someone wants to kill them self does not mean that every person on the planet does not value his life.

I would like to hear your lengthy rationalization that claims that killing humans is good. I know that you will not manage and if you do it will not be rational, maybe you do not understand the definition of rational. That is another major problem with basing your world view and morality on a magic book, when any doubt is acknowledged regarding the magic book and its teaching. The religious tend to go to the extreme and make such claims as there being no purpose in life and that morality is completely random. Centuries of philosophical exploration and research has already established that there a purpose in life and that there is a clear logical basis for morality.

Conflicts arisen due to resource scarcity are irrelevant to this discussion. I do not need to be an authority to say you are wrong, but I never said that you were wrong. I just asked if you think without the bible man would have no sense of morality and you answer was to ask what authority do i have to say you are wrong. Well that makes no sense.

Why is christian morality meant to come from that passage, where in the bible does it say that Luke 10:27 is the foundation for christian morality? If you want to get in to the authenticity of the bible and the miss interpretations of the texts and the miss translations of the text then we can do that. If you start quoting passages from the magic book as rational arguments in the discussion than i will have no choice but to point out the lack of authenticity of the magic book and the many other problems.

Jack Roberts
It is not 100% subjective... They knew from a young age that getting physically abused was not within their interest and having their property taken was not within their interest, thus a logical foundation for morality is possible...

So if someone arbitrarily places value in his life and personal possessions all of the sudden morality is objective? You have not proven that either life or possessions are intrinsically valuable, only that most people tend to value these things out of self-preservation. Further, you have not proven that someone elses life or possessions are valuable.

I agree that natural orders will emerge out of our collective desire to stay alive, but that does not give any justification for morality, only that we will tend towards morality because it is self-preserving. Again, not because it is rational. If I say that a person has blonde hair (And I'm not lying) I have made an objective statement, if I say that all blonde haired people should be killed I have made a value statement that can not be rationally debated.

Similarly, if I say humans exist I've made an objective statement. If I say all humans are valuable, I've made a value statement that is just as irrational as saying that all blondes must die.

Jack Roberts
I would like to hear your lengthy rationalization that claims that killing humans is good.

Short version: Humans are the source of all pain and misery on the planet. Further, they are destructive of the natural resources of the planet. Kill all humans and Earths natural resources will be preserved, and there will be everlasting peace.

Jack Roberts
The religious tend to go to the extreme and make such claims as there being no purpose in life and that morality is completely random. Centuries of philosophical exploration and research has already established that there a purpose in life and that there is a clear logical basis for morality.

There is clearly no purpose to life, and there is still no logical basis for morality. We exists and it hurts to try to not exist, therefore we preserve our life. Similarly, it is physiologically rewarding (like giving biscuits to a dog) to have certain possessions, therefore we try to preserve our possessions. If we don't preserve other peoples lives or property, ours will likely be put at risk.

If people felt better as they got closer to death, people would not care to preserve their own life. If a person could be gauranteed that their own lives and possessions would be protected, they would not care about other people lives or possessions. Obviously if a person didn't value any possessions, he clearly wouldn't care to preserve them.
History supports this.

Since you're arguing that morality is objective, you'd have to prove to me that in any circumstances the right moral action is still the same. You can not do that, therefore morality is subjective.

Jack Roberts
I just asked if you think without the bible man would have no sense of morality and you answer was to ask what authority do i have to say you are wrong.

My answer was that just because people tend toward moral actions, doesn't mean that morality is objective. If it is subjective, then it really doesn't matter if I believe in Christianity or Scientology. People will gravitate towards values that protect themselves and their possessions and life will go on.

Jack Roberts
If you start quoting passages from the magic book as rational arguments in the discussion than i will have no choice but to point out the lack of authenticity of the magic book and the many other problems.

You told me that the ten commandments were the underlying foundation to Christian morality, I told you that you're wrong. You're trying to argue morality with me between a secular viewpoint and a Christian viewpoint and it's nonsensical. If you want to know what the Christian belief is, I'll tell you to the best of my knowledge, but there's absolutely no point in debating morality between different frameworks.