"OMG YOU CAN'T HAVE THOOOSE IN A PUBLIC PLACE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

contracts that are not enforceable are literally BANNED by definition. They have no legal power to them

they are not conrtacts

"OMG this dollar bill has the word GOD ON IT HALP I am being Opressed by this dollar bill"

thus - morals are subjective.

because the sovereign power will not allow for the punishment of their breakers

hell, even laws are subjective at this point although those are the one area which fucking shouldnt be

The existence of differing moral codes does not disprove objective morality

do you read back what you type before hitting return? the fact that there could even be differing moral codes means theyre subjective

Are you retarded?

do you know what subjective means?

Objective morality means that there is one definitively correct set of morals regardless of whether everyone believes it or not

Yes, and everyone has some of that.

"Its immoral for the man tm to tell me what to do."

Some actions seem to speak against the universe, yet all are permissible in reality, we can separate ourselves from the wolves

and where do your fictional definitively correct set of morals come from?

Most believers of obejective morality believe they come from god

oh good lord

or it can just be what works in this reality

but hose are functionally equivalent tbh

Our actions set the boundaries of what we accept our children to endure, we invite the future

which god in particular?

Is there something you arent getting through your thick skull? I am not arguing for the position just explaining the difference between a puritan and libertine perspective

You are clearly missing my point

No, your point makes no sense.

if you want to say "this is how some people think" that's fine, but to try to actually suggest theres a set of objective morals is ridiculous, because you're proving them to be subjective in the exact same sentence

By your definition of puritan everyone is a puritan because everybody has things they believe are objectively moral.

I can't find an objective reason not to kill, steal and murder, only with a view to the future does it make sense

you could argue that morality is in fact, a social construct 😉

R-Tao - because those things make it hard to work together with others.

and usually Working Together with someone is a higher net benefit than not working together with others.

Surely. We now have a challenge being in a larger country, where it's hard to escape alongside those you wish to share reality with, we expect the government to step in to shape the conditions

nah not even in a larger country just on an individual level.

Say you have a chicken and bob has a cow

you can either kill bob and take his cow

or you can trade some of your extra eggs with bob and have some of his extra milk.

@system11 you seem to still not know what obective morality even means

option 1 means in the long term..you now have to take care of both a cow and a chicken.

more work.

I might be wrong, but we only have these concerns because long established rule of law and morality have been let slip. And we refuse to kick offenders into the next realm.

@system11 most humans living today belive in objective morals (or at least purport to based on religion polling)