What is morality? Where does it come from?

Last night on Hardball Chris had Reps Miller (FL) and Moran (VA). Miller got all in Moran's face saying that Moran was immoral because he refused to say "under God" in the pledge of allegiance. It turned out it wasn't even Moran, but MacDermott (WA, I think).

What is morality? I say a set of values. Not necessarily Christian, but a consistent set of personal values.

Is it moral to bear false witness of Michael Shiavo to save Terri's life? Is it moral to be a hypocrit?

I am a fan of Robert Fulghum Sr who does humorous anecdotal essays - most famous, "Everything I Need to Know I learned in Kindergarten" - he is a Universalist preacher and very open minded. When I read that book I realized my values are based on 2 Christian tenets - Judge not, lest ye be judged and do unto others as you'd have done unto you.

To each his own, I say

It doesn't come from others.

I'd say morality is both an internal and external code of generally accepted values in a society. Morality can intersect with law (murder, theft, fraud, perjury) but it often does not. It's grounded in a common set of assumptions and beliefs about how one should live.

While some moral tenets are enshrined in law, it does not logically follow that all should be. It's not right to be an asshole, but it's pissing on the majesty of the law for it to be illegal.

The essence of morality is decency.

Is that thing that prevents people from harming others for pleasure.

They don't come from god or a dead criminal man-god. They come from our interactions with others and reflect the best way to not harm others. It is the best way people can come up with. Drop it into religion and it takes on a holy tone to it but it's more basic than that. It's just a mechanism to prevent mass murders.

That or it's based on what is fair treatment for all based on how one wants to be treated.

I can't respond to your last statement BUT I'll put it is the words I used when i was a foot soldier before the election. Does it pass the SMELL test?. Nothing * has done has past the smell test including 9-11 and the invasion.You KNOW truth in your gut(soul).Truth and your personal morality are parallel, or you feel the discomfort.

Laws are loosely based on morals and ethics. But that's where lawyers come in and find a way to get around the law, but no one cares about ethics and morals except the right wing when demand everyone but them to follow their version of morals and ethics.

The part that hurts when it's hit, and can externalize to the extent that it recognizes that someone else can get hurt when THEY'RE hit.

And then not wanting anyone to get hurt.

The most honest discussion of morality ever to appear on celluloid.

(for that person at least).

From my point of view, there are two types (or sources) of principles (although I give each of my principles the weight that is called for in the specific circumstances): principles arriving more or less directly from the nature of the world around us; and those arising from culture (in the broadest sense and to include what are often called subcultures). Now, there are certainly some cultural principles that are more appealing (at least) than others -- and there are some "cultural" principles that are widely held across cultures and times.

In terms of our circumstances, morality is (for many, if not most, purposes) what the RW "machine" says morality is... And the machine tends to use that "definition" which is most helpful to them at the time -- often without being too precise about the particulars. Rather, the machine tends to put forward stuff like "this is wrong", or "this is unChristian", or "this is murder", (etc) without opening the door too wide to other arguments based on whatever "moral" fundament is the supposed basis for their "moral" judgment (or even admitting that it is a judgment). It is a process of manipulating people to believe, think and act in the way that the machine wishes them to (at the moment -- circumstances change).

And it is generally pointless to attempt to take some principle that the other team is spouting off about and to try to point out all the implications of this principle and how they are not acting in accordance with this principle in an honest, sincere, complete and consistent manner. (Not that one should give up on this -- I'm just sayin'.)

For they wish to dictate not only what "principles" are and which "principle" is (or "principles" are) involved in some instance, but to dictate what the appropriate practise of these "principles" is in any and all cases -- without any regard for any other considerations (such as consistency, etc).

Almost all of them (with the possible "exception" of herbivores) are predators. They kill and eat other animals, but I am not aware of any which kill for sport. We do both. Your pet has a visceral understanding of the "Golden Rule" or one of its many permutations. Some of it is intuition and some is learned...our dogs needed only a very few exposures to the wrath of our kitty to figure out they better not get too agressive.

Anyway, according to "natural law", whatever that is, killing is not intrinsically bad or evil, let alone "sinful" (which is a totally artificial construct.)

I don't think one can be of high moral standing if he or she bases that standing on a list of behaviors which has been provided by others.

The other individual across from me is both the temptation to murder and the commandment "You must not murder."

That is all.

If electricity comes from electrons, it must be that morality comes for morons. (Well, at least the type of "morality" preached by the moron in the religious right.)