Oh the folly of chastity belts.

[LARAGORN]

Destroying a town and all its population because of one man, isnt right, but people are still reading about it and saying to this day it is ok.

[emeraldfool]

If someone is causing suffering to other human beings, then them being ok with it does not make it right.  It's sadistic, and it's wrong, even during the period in history we're talking about, and I see no fault in saying so.

Yes, it's sadistic and wrong by today's standards. But my point is those 'standards' change with the times. Your mother or father or guardian teaches you right from wrong at an early age. As do their parents. Your perception of what is right is heavily influenced by your environment.

In fact, with the right drugs and behavioral conditioning, I could easily strip away your morals and shape you how I see fit...

[zanzibar]

If someone is causing suffering to other human beings, then them being ok with it does not make it right.  It's sadistic, and it's wrong, even during the period in history we're talking about, and I see no fault in saying so.

Yes, it's sadistic and wrong by today's standards. But my point is those 'standards' change with the times. Your mother or father or guardian teaches you right from wrong at an early age. As do their parents. Your perception of what is right is heavily influenced by your environment.

In fact, with the right drugs and behavioral conditioning, I could easily strip away your morals and shape you how I see fit...

Yes, I'm sure all those women who were burned at the stake for being witches would agree with you whole heartedly.  Everyone at the time thought that such activities were entirely moral.

Getting away from that point, I never said that there weren't people at the time who saw such activities as acceptable.  Obviously some people thought it was acceptable because there were people doing such things.

[Kiirani]

Lol, being common is the very definition of what makes something right.

No, being common is what makes something right in the eyes of the majority. Quite unfortunate for the minority who, because of common opinion, now lose their birthright of deciding right and wrong for themselves.

That said, I take your point to be* that 'right' is subjective. My personal definition of 'right' may differ greatly from yours. Personal right becomes a wrong, in my opinion, when it's being forced upon others in any shape or form. That includes burning at the stake, and various other things done to people over the course of history.

So, while I might burn someone at the stake because I suppose them to be  a witch, I believe that I am doing the right thing. Being that I'm forcing *my* right thing onto someone else, it is wrong.

Of course, if I were to burn myself at the stake because I was a witch and that was my right thing to do, that's right. However "wrong" it may be in other's eyes.

In other words, nothing wrong with consensual chastity belts. ^_^

* I in no way claim to actually know what your point is, this is just how I interpret it.

[Nurahk]

It was a different time and hygene wasn't exactly amazing back then, anyways.

I agree that it was wrong but what Emerald is getting at is that in hundreds of years things we do that we believe are right may look wrong in the eyes of future people.


Long live the modern chastity belt

[Kiirani]

Oh that is just awesome!


Where can I buy one? I can buy one, right?!

[zanzibar]

The password is luuuv.

[emeraldfool]

It was a different time and hygene wasn't exactly amazing back then, anyways.

I agree that it was wrong but what Emerald is getting at is that in hundreds of years things we do that we believe are right may look wrong in the eyes of future people.

Exactly. And not only that, but if I pump you full of enough drugs, or tamper with your brain in the right way, I could make you think it was 'right' to kill your own mother.



Anyway, I would wear a chastity belt over a thong anyday...

[Kiirani]

Exactly. And not only that, but if I pump you full of enough drugs, or tamper with your brain in the right way, I could make you think it was 'right' to kill your own mother.

That doesn't make killing right, it makes killing right in the mind of the killer.

[zanzibar]

Exactly. And not only that, but if I pump you full of enough drugs, or tamper with your brain in the right way, I could make you think it was 'right' to kill your own mother.

Do you, emeraldfool, PERSONALLY BELIEVE that forcing women to wear chastity belts is ethical?

Do you, emeraldfool, PERSONALLY BELIEVE that it is ethical to cause suffering to others?

[Nurahk]

That's completely unrelated to what he is talking about, Zanzibar.

The question you should ask is:

Did people back then personally believe that ...

Because that is what Emerald is getting at.  The concept of right is an ever changing one.  Capital punishment is "right" in some places and "wrong" in others.  Women being objects was "right" in the past.

What is "right" is dependant on culture.  Many things that are done in the middle east and are believed to be "right" there are considered "wrong" here.

[zanzibar]

That's completely unrelated to what he is talking about, Zanzibar.

The question you should ask is:

Did people back then personally believe that ...

Because that is what Emerald is getting at.  The concept of right is an ever changing one.  Capital punishment is "right" in some places and "wrong" in others.  Women being objects was "right" in the past.

What is "right" is dependant on culture.  Many things that are done in the middle east and are believed to be "right" there are considered "wrong" here.

Ultimately, you can say that morals are entirely relative and have no physical basis of reality and therefore can't be prescribed by science; they are entirely social in nature.

However, don't misrepresent the facts.  Black slaves didn't believe in slavery, even when it was widely accepted.  Women didn't appreciate being burned at the stake as witches, even when it was widely accepted.  Moderates don't wish to suffer the evils of fundamentalist governments, even in the cases where moderates are indeed the minority.

I would further argue that there is a certain common ground among all these different situations that connects them together to say that there is something universal that tells us that such victims are victims of injustice and immorality.  But such isn't a materialist position and therefore it's open to criticism.

[emeraldfool]

Exactly. And not only that, but if I pump you full of enough drugs, or tamper with your brain in the right way, I could make you think it was 'right' to kill your own mother.

That doesn't make killing right, it makes killing right in the mind of the killer.

True. I'm just showing how little morals really mean. Humans, as a species, were designed to hunt and mate. Morals, or what is 'right', is purely a result of society, culture, and your growth environment.

However, don't misrepresent the facts.  Black slaves didn't believe in slavery, even when it was widely accepted.  Women didn't appreciate being burned at the stake as witches, even when it was widely accepted.  Moderates don't wish to suffer the evils of fundamentalist governments, even in the cases where moderates are indeed the minority.

That's true. But that's not what we're talking about. Nobody wants to be a slave, or be burned at the stake; just like nowadays, nobody wants to be hung for being a terrorist or a serial killer.

Are you saying that terrorism and serial murders are a good thing?

No, because currently, in our society, terrorism and serial-killing is defined as 'wrong'. Just like witches were in the earlier days.

This is what we're trying to tell you; everything you believe as 'right' has been taught to you by your parents of this century. You could never understand what it was like to live in that time.

[LARAGORN]

That's completely unrelated to what he is talking about, Zanzibar.

The question you should ask is:

Did people back then personally believe that ...

Because that is what Emerald is getting at.  The concept of right is an ever changing one.  Capital punishment is "right" in some places and "wrong" in others.  Women being objects was "right" in the past.

What is "right" is dependant on culture.  Many things that are done in the middle east and are believed to be "right" there are considered "wrong" here.

Ultimately, you can say that morals are entirely relative and have no physical basis of reality and therefore can't be prescribed by science; they are entirely social in nature.

However, don't misrepresent the facts.  Black slaves didn't believe in slavery, even when it was widely accepted.  Women didn't appreciate being burned at the stake as witches, even when it was widely accepted.  Moderates don't wish to suffer the evils of fundamentalist governments, even in the cases where moderates are indeed the minority.

I would further argue that there is a certain common ground among all these different situations that connects them together to say that there is something universal that tells us that such victims are victims of injustice and immorality.  But such isn't a materialist position and therefore it's open to criticism.

   However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land.  You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.  You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.  (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.  (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

Aperantly slavery is ok

[emeraldfool]

Back when the bible was written, yes. That's actually a pretty good example of what I'm talking about. The Good Book...