These prove what I said. Morals and Ethics evolve over time within groups. As I have said many times - it is perfectly "moral and ethical" to a headhunter, for him to eat an enemy. That is the way it evolved there.
Actual morality never changes. What secular people claim as morals does because it has no actual standards. It can do anything because it is tied to nothing. I have already granted moral apprehension changes when morality is disconnected from any actual foundation. However morality that does have a actual foundation in reality does not change. What secular people do has nothing to do with actual morality and is untethered from anything actually true so yes it can distort, go backwards, forwards, disappear all together, or become over bearing. It will however never be actually moral truth. Biblical morals codes can remain constant because their source remains constant and objective. Your last sentence proves your morality is moral. You say (and it is the honest truth) that morals developed from arbitrary opinion make murder absolutely wrong, or absolutely right based on what culture you grow up in. Forgetting that that is the most dysfunctional moral model possible it proves every single thing I have said about the faults of your moral world view. It by necessity produces suffering and misery and is just as right or wrong as any other arbitrary moral code. That is an abhorrent world view and also proof it can't be used to make any truthful moral judgment about God or anything else.
These "groups" are now becoming global - and as such the nations are negotiating what is acceptable, to belong to the new "group." These will become the new standards of Moral and ethical actions.
That is a legal description not a moral description. We are discussing the latter not the former.
All "morals and ethics," are what is agreed to be such, within a particular group, - and these change over time.
No that is how laws are determined. Legality and morality are independent issues. Even under legal restraint you, I, and everyone actualizes moral decision that laws may not allow for. I am not discussing what the foundation for a statute is. I am discussing why murder is wrong is a truthful statement. Things that are legal are not always moral, things that are illegal are sometimes moral. I do not care about debating the arbitrary whims of human derived institutions. I care about debating what is true.
It is "moral/ethical," or "unethical," to the group that agrees to believe it is such.
No it is not. If everyone agreed that murder is good and God said murder is wrong. Then murder is wrong and everyone on earth is immoral. You have redefined morality as ethics, and they are very different or can be most of the time.
For instance all of the religions of Abraham have believed at one time or another that it is "moral and ethical" to torture and murder people for nothing other then having a different religion.
No they have not. There is not one verse in the NT that allows that for any reason what so ever. It in fact prohibits it. There are some OT stories that require a little context to illustrate it but God never authorized a general (or open ended) dictate to harm people who did not believe. For example the Canaanites were killed because they were sacrificing their own children and raiding Israel at harvest time every year. They were not killed because they believed something different. I will not defend anything Islam claims. God gave the most precious thing he had in order to save people who held every belief possible. I have no desire to debate this. I will prove my point after having supplied thousands of words, historical and theological contexts, etc... and it will not fit your narrative so you will deny it. There is no point as we have done similar things with that exact result many times.
This is why we need an evolving world view, and world wide discussion and exchange of ideas. If we had just stopped with the moral/ethical ideas of the ancient Hebrew, we would be in deep do-do. Torture and murder for religion would be rampant.
You just justified the moral correctness of head hunters chopping off heads by your standard. Here you insist the standard that allows for head hunting, heart removal, and the systematic murder of life in the womb is the one that produces more justice than the one that would have and has prohibited these same events. Amazing. The only need for evolution is if you currently have a deficiency. There is no deficiency with Christian morality. There is quite a deficiency with man's willingness to acknowledge it and employ it. Now if you can get a more obedient human through evolution then maybe, but we will never obey a moral system no matter how perfectly it evolves. Murder was claimed to be wrong 5000 years ago, and we have been killings each other in far larger numbers ever since. The Christian US was morally superior in 98% of the statistical data than the far more secular US in the last 50 years. If that is evolution you can keep it. We have gone from a desire to kill a member of another clan, to a desire to kill another group of people, and have finally evolved to being prepared to annihilate every human on earth and the moral insanity to have almost done so several times. whatever direction we are going in is the wrong one.
"In my view" Hitler is wrong because I belong to, and believe, a group that evolved the idea that murder is wrong. If I were brought up as an ancient Hebrew - then obviously I would believe that mass murder is OK.
However you would have to sit by and allow Hitler to have systematically annihilated the entire Jewish race and take over the free world. Because in your system he was just as morally valid as you are. You would have to abandon your moral foundations completely in order to find a methodology to fight against and kill him and the forces who followed him. That is another perfect example of the immorality or your morality. Mine allows for another and more just society to claim Hitler was violating objective wrongs and that stopping him even at the cost of killing was justifiable. You would have allowed the deaths and enslavement of billons in your views. I and people like me used Christian values to save those billons. Yet you condemn the latter, and support the former. All I have to do is keep talking to an atheist and they three things will always occur.
1. You will always create paradoxes and self contradictions because you deny the existence of half of reality.
2. You will always eventually hang your self given enough rope (as you have done so with that last claim among several).
3. You will employ any means necessary to refuse admitting you are dangling from the noose you tied your self.
You have constructed better and more emphatic examples of the complete failure of your moral system than I could have.
ALL moral/ethical systems are evolved preference.
You missed by far the most important aspect of moral foundations on which everything depends. Moral foundations fail when they either do not exist or reside with their adherents. If foxes made up morality no hens would exist. If USSR party members made up morality no freedom would exist. If Hitler made up reality no Jews would exist. If you made up reality life in the womb could be systematically destroyed at will. If children made up morality the world would be made of candy and puppy's and parent would be in jail. The only way a fallible being can have infallible moral standards is if they come from outside their race. The human race has never, will never, and can never produce any government, law book, or culture that is just and good, because an imperfect source cannot possibly produce a perfect anything. We being far from perfect will produce nothing but far from perfect things until we eventually destroy ourselves.
Under my system torturing a little child is actually wrong.
Under yours there is nothing wrong with killing a child in the womb, and torturing a child is nothing more than acting unfashionably.
I, God, and most Christians will accept that you have the right to believe that.
We deny that you have the right to actualize that but that is not my concern in a debate. I will not allow you to claim that is a moral or better system than mine.
Before you act all offended pay attention to the fact I said it was consistent with your system. I actually believe you think torturing a child is actually and objectively wrong as almost every one else does. That belief however is inconsistent with your contrived system. You and most people smuggle in the things of God as needed or desired but do your best to exclude their only source. An atheist can be as moral as any theist, he just can't account for found his acting moral in any Godless system.
