Should fighting sports be legal? Are they moral?

[Mr. Muto]

I did put up a valid point that some things are wrong and some things are right.

This is ethics. To see whether something is correct or not.

When someone tries to change the unchangeable laws or morality with imaginary scenarios to justify themselves, then it is wrong.

Especially when people who hurt people say they are guiltless because of “rights,”

A right is something held by ethics to belong to the people,

There are many things our government has legalized today in our state and country that are the complete opposite of ethical or even ethically justified.

Ethics does not change. People change and they warp the laws of good and evil to justify themselves with whatever they do.

Under whatever circumstances, this is wrong.

 

[McBell]

And, ethics are objective...

you keep repeating this bold empty claim as though repeating it will somehow make come true...

 

[Mr. Muto]

I made several points about why its true.

Some things are wrong. And some things are correct. That does not change.

 

[McBell]

I made several points about why its true.

You have declared it true and why you think it is true.
You have not shown ethics to be objective.
You have merely declared them to be.

Some things are wrong. And some things are correct. That does not change.

I agree.
It is when you get into the specifics of what is right and wrong that things change.

Slavery is a prime example of an ethics change.

 

[Mr. Muto]

Slavery was abuse and cruelty against another race of man. Against ethics.

And if I, despite my many points reasoning why ethics is objective have not convinced you, you tell me why it is subjective.

 

[Brickjectivity]

@Brickjectivity To answer your question, you can talk and you can play sports but when sports involve legit all out fighting even with rules, and endorsing violence in a place in society, then it is wrong.

Assault, punching someone is illegal in contemporary society. And yet, even if a boxer legit DIES in a fight, the other fighter is held guiltless. That is a complete hypocrisy of the law.

We can debate it sometime in a debate section. In the interfaith section we are in danger of our posts being removed if we correct each other. Anywhere that isn't marked 'Debate' there is a problem with correcting someone else. Its part of the special Dir rules.

 

[McBell]

Slavery was abuse and cruelty against another race of man. Against ethics.

I agree.
Interesting that YHWH did not condemn it...

And if I, despite my many points reasoning why ethics is objective have not convinced you, you tell me why it is subjective.

You have not shown ethics or morality to be objective.
You have simply declared it so.

 

[Mr. Muto]

Well I didn’t know. I’m sorry for that mistake.

 

[Mr. Muto]

But tell me before we end this why is ethics subjective

 

[McBell]

Well I didn’t know. I’m sorry for that mistake.

If you are wanting to debate it, I would recommend starting a new thread in a debate area and perhaps linking this one to it

 

[Mr. Muto]

Let’s do it.

 

[McBell]

A link to the debate thread:

Ethics: Objective or Subjective

I am assuming the position that ethics is objective.

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am comfortable standing up for what IS right. Ethics is OBJECTIVE.


And as i have said before many times, simply because one wants to do something, that does not mean it is justified.

Prove it. How can you prove that ethics is objective?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Slavery was abuse and cruelty against another race of man. Against ethics.

And if I, despite my many points reasoning why ethics is objective have not convinced you, you tell me why it is subjective.

The God of the Bible is pro-slavery.

 

[SalixIncendium]

**MOVED TO RELIGIOUS DEBATES**​

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I disagree. The Bible condemns all types of not self-defense violence.

Is that why it calls for the stoning of adulturers, killing of gay people who engage in sex, genocide / infanticide in conquering campaigns of aggression,...?

And fighting for sport is not self defense

Turn that around for a second.
In order to be able to defend yourself in an act of self-defense, you are going to need some fighting skills.
How are you going to gain fighting skills if you do not practice martial arts?

In order to be able to succesfully defend yourself (or loved ones), you are going to need some fighting skills.

Just because people like fighting like animals does not justify it ethically.

Here's a funny question....

How are you going to make them stop?
You ask them nicely. They say "no".

Now what? And remember your own words: violence is only permissable in acts of self-defense.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Throwing hands with or without consent, if you’ll see my Original explanation is completely unacceptable.

We are supposed to be reasonable civilized beings. Not indulging in and enjoying senseless violence like animals.

Why do you think animals enjoy senseless violence?

I don't remember lions or whatever hunting / fighting for sports.
It seems to me that when animals engage in violence, it has a goal: hunting for food, defending themselves / their group,..

Fighting for sport and entertainment seems to be something rather exclusively human.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But just because it is with consent does not justify it ethically

Try and justify that statement with an actual argument instead of a mere bare declaration / assertion.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Violence is for the animals. We are people. Not just as sons of God, but by nature we are supposed to be above the animals, not copying them or doing worse things than those unreasonable creatures.

While I'm confident this has been pointed out already, I'm compelled to remind you that people are animals. To think we are somehow above other species with regard to morals and importance is, in my opinion, nothing short of ego driven arrogance.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I want to clear some things up:

1. Ethics is an OBJECTIVE thing. The Bible spells out ethics, it IS where ethics came from.

No, it's not.

God is the Father of morality. It is an objective thing.

No.

2. The Bible condemns ALL violence with the exclusion of self defense with life I believe. I don’t know. But I do know Jesus Christ said,

“If someone slaps you, turn the other cheek,”

Executing homosexuals who have sex, stoning adulturers, stoning disobedient children, engaging in infanticide / genocide during campaigns of aggression of conquest, being allowed to beat slaves as long as they don't die "within a day or two"....

Where is the "self defense" there?

3. Consent or simply wanting to do something does not make it ethically correct.

Depends.

If I thought it was right or justifiable to kill someone, is that ethical?

Depends.

Morals and ethics are very situational. What is moral / ethical in one context might not be in another.
Morals and ethics are not black and white.

Classic example would by telling lies.

An immoral lie: you find a wallet with 100 bucks in it. You take the 100 bucks and return the rest to the owner and when he asks you if there was money in it, you say "no".

In contrast: you live in nazi-occupied France and are aware of what nazi's do with jewish people. You know that a family is hiding out in a barn accross the street. Gestapo comes at your door and asks if you know where the jewish family is hiding. You lie and say "no", knowing that telling the truth would be a death sentence of that family as well as the people that allow them to hide there.

Morality is not black and white. It is very situational and many a time, things need to be a looked at and evaluated on a case by case basis.
So sweeping statements like the above are problematic at best.

In the same way, even when fighters get into the ring to hurt the other and themselves, it is still not ethically justified.

You are still simply "declaring" this.
Try making an actual moral argument to justify this declaration.