The lines between right and wrong used to be so clearly drawn before. Those lines were often drawn by religious leaders who sometimes manufactured morality to facilitate their own needs and prejudices.

With the church having lost some of its hold on the reins of morality, what helps YOU to decide what is right and wrong?

And would you say that some of the moral debates of this era are more an issue of personal judgment calls as opposed to right or wrong?

What inspires YOU to determine whether a choice is a personal judgment call as opposed to right or wrong?

you decide,according to objective principles!
If you are wrong,life will let you know.

For me, the Bible (not a church or a preacher) is a guide to morality, although it is silent in regards to some issues.

"With the church having lost some of its hold on the reins of morality"

5 majors religions, all with flaws.

A selfish, entitlement society, influenced by media, run by the elite 10% of the planet.

Parents who don't parent

Adults who don't except that there are consequences for their actions & inactions.



But hey..let's blame the Church.
Damn murdering terrorists that they are * Sarcasm *

right and wrong are just words, they mean different things to everyone... the church just uses them to gain control of people, to influence their actions into what the church deems best...

What inspires your assessment of what is right and what is wrong moe?

What inspires your assessment of what is right or what is wrong sassy?

personal beliefs, past lessons, the law...

Cool

I usually just flip.. a quarter.. hell.. I have a 50 50 chance ..of doing the right thing... and depending on the circumstances the wrong thing could be the right thing..

thats kind of misleading, on my part... all right and wrong to me is based on making my life better/easier, not much else...

I dont want to misunderstand you so.let me ask...

Is your assessment of right and wrong soley based on.the benefits that it brings to your life?

For me it's also the bible and the morals and values that have been taught to me.

When I listen to a preacher I think about it if my guts says something else I will study the context and then ask questions to the person who preached it.
I have learnt don't just follow the group, ask questions.

pretty much... isn't it that way for everyone? if you save a puppy, does it not bring you some kind of joy? same with giving a homeless person a dollar... seems that every choice on right and wrong has something to do with your life and how it impacts it...

Inner guidance.

the Creator decided

for me to know, I have to study his word, which I do have to get back to more regularly for sure

Well I think a motive behind an action and a fringe benefit after the action are 2 different things. I may rescue a stranger as some have done with the motive of giving them a shot at life but the fringe benefit of that act may be joy on my part or i may even receive a gift from the person I saved but that wasnt my motive

"motive" has to do with right and wrong decisions to begin with...
is it right or wrong to save everyone you can, regardless? would you rescue Hitler or a KKK member? if rescuing this person puts you in extreme danger, would you still?

whenever anyone does what they think is right, they feel better about themselves, and the opposite is true when someone does something they feel is wrong... so i will stand by my statement...

That's an oversimplification.
"Religion" drew its morality from the community in which it developed and evolved.

Right and wrong used to be so clearly drawn before because life and social life was far more focused on man vs. nature and group survival above man vs. man and intragroup survival.

Practicality drove morality before evolving into intercultural interaction.

People weren't running around without morality until religion came along to make them be moral.


It's not an on and off switch.
There isn't a moral alive today that wasn't influenced both by biology as well as religion.

"Church" lost its hold on enforcement of morality, and as a moral authority.
That's about it.
Might as well say typewriters lost their hold on the layout of keyboards.

Other than that most of every day right and wrong was drilled into me since birth by my parents, who had it drilled into them by their parents, and so on back forever.
At best there is some elasticity for interpretation to current social trends and interaction.

Very extremely rarely do I have any kind of moral dilemma where I have to deeply cogitate for days with weary brow upon right and wrong and broad morality to come up with a solution I can live with, overcoming or ignoring any and all immediate emotional impulses based on childhood training.

At best I come face to face with problems where there is no clear cut absolute "good" answer where my socialized from childhood morality indoctrination and I at best have to choose from the least of 2 evils.


No.
I would say that a lot of personal judgment calls and opinion are called moral debates in order to lend them credibility and attempt to manipulate the perception that the people making them are an authority. In many cases to try and get money or votes or patronage from others.
IMO that's very different than the wording in the question.

Most moral debates of this era that are actually moral debates are an issue of new technology. e.g. forging babies without the need for men or women, artificial semen, artificial eggs, artificial womb. Cloning, postnatal aborting of pretty much brain dead encephalitic babies for organ donation to keep other babies alive, artificial machine intelligence as doctors.


The consequences of that choice and my willingness to accept or be responsible for those consequences.

Haven't read the thread but i'm sure the answer is women