[QUOTE=Salami;1155933]This comment concerns me slightly.
It seems that the logical conclusion of this premise is the justification of any act upon another human being. If you are able to convince yourself that ultimately, whatever you do is in some way positive and beneficial to another person then there is no moral restriction on your actions.
Quote:
|
And more importantly, I think it is also a hazardous statement to claim that it "will be accounted to you for righteousness"
|
.
I won't argue this. I should have considered before posting. But, dictated moral restrictions present a problem. If we would all live by the law of agape love, then, that would eliminate the need for dictated moral restrictions.
Quote:
|
And my concern is that by lowering the threshold for being "righteous", from a religious perspective you lower the threshold for what is morally right, and ultimately cheapen virtue.
|
Who knows Salami. It was a good deed, but, you may be right. I may have no idea, and, that is a long list. I just hope that Faith does. And, I am in no way justified to make moral judgments on anyone.
Quote:
|
Righteousness is not, certainly not for a religious person, to be considered a virtue easily attributable to anyone, or even a common and basic one. It is something to be striven towards, a virtue only attributable to those who labour for what is good.
|
What is good bro? What is righteousness? What is Truth? Or, Virtue? There is no moral excellence or perfection in any human being. That is what I believe, and, it is written.
Quote:
|
How could someone tell you that rape is wrong if you are convinced that what you are doing is, regardless of your intentions, being used for the benefit of the victim?
|
How would you feel about being raped? Enough said.