Is it consistent to think that something is morally wrong but

>>9256262
>Is it consistent to think that something is morally wrong but that it should also be legally right
...yes
your example seems to be about the reverse tho
also i don't think you mean 'constitutionally'

>>9256262
>Baby's first philosophical dilemma

>>9256262
adding conditions to morality only shows that the individual axioms, like stealing is bad, are impure and do not suffice as moral tenements. you just have to learn what the root of morality is so it can be all encompassing while still maintaining itself down through the infinite possible scenarios.

>>9256355
>not being a nonfoundationalist

>>9256363
what is that?

>>9256367
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-foundationalism

>>9256372
you wouldn't rather explain and have a lil chitty chatty?

> Abortion is morally wrong, or at the very least, not a moral good.
> Abortion should be legal, because by making it illegal you force it underground you simply add useless suffering to the already existing moral wrong.

>>9256375
if you're a nonfoundationalist you don't believe in the need for a foundation like "the root of morality"

>>9256345
>>9256327

Sorry yes the inverse.

Morally right, legally wrong.

File: source.gif (1MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x500px

>>9256394

I realized I fucked up the thread.

>>9256393
ah, well, without a base do you just organically deal with moral problems as they come? is there the possibility of having a consistent moral system as a nonfoundationalist?

>>9256262
>- I believe that stealing a loaf of bread from a supermarket for your starving child is not morally wrong

How the fuck is that NOT morally wrong? You are taking advantage of people's labor without giving anything back in return. Besides there are charities and government assistance for that kind of thing. What about the farmer who plants the wheat, or the workers who pick it, or the factory workers who pack it and ship it, and the supermarket employees who stock it? Chances are many of them are working to feed families as well.

>>9256408
this reminds me of that equity vs equality pic where they're literally trying to get a free show instead of buying fucking tickets.

>>9256408

Yes, but he is not cutting into their salaries, he is cutting into the profit margin of the pig disgusting capitalist scum who deserves nothing but the rope.

>>9256399
>do you just organically deal with moral problems as they come
I think that's what most people do in practice.
>is there the possibility of having a consistent moral system as a nonfoundationalist
I don't see how it would be less possible then for a foundationalist.

>>9256416
>anti-capitalist
>thinks theft is wrong
>thinks people should have salaries

>>9256420
i would argue that most people are inconsistent in their organic dealings with moral problems.
it would be more difficult because you don't have a system without a foundation. forgive me if i misunderstand, but i would doubt a nonfoundationalist would have a moral system to begin with as a system itself is a foundation. it sounds more like some kind of anarchy,

>>9256408

Should I just starve if I have no food?

>>9256434
>it would be more difficult
That's possible. Consistency isn't the *most* important metric for morality though.
>i would doubt a nonfoundationalist would have a moral system
I took system to mean the sum of moral practice or something like that as otherwise if you take system to mean foundation it would as impossible to have a consistent system as a nonconsistent system.

>>9256457
is the act of starvation morally wrong?

>>9256465

No but given a choice between dying and doing something morally wrong, why would you choose death?

>>9256416

But those "capitalist scum" is what allows those supermarkets to sell all that food so cheaply and conveniently. All those "scum" employees are people who are trying to earn their wages just like everyone else. If they make more it's because they put in more work, more time and more expertise, and are thus more valuable than a common laborer.

>>9256462
i suppose the system representation makes sense, otherwise nonfoundational would be next to meaningless i suppose, but in terms of consistency, i would agree that it's not the most important, but it is something that would follow from the most important condition of a moral foundation, which would be that the origin of the moral would be true. after that you get what i said above, something applicable to every moral instance. if it weren't consistent, say two robberies that are practically the same having a consistent moral judgement made on them would be important, since without that consistency, it would imply a problem in the system and perhaps the truth of the foundational moral axiom.

>>9256474
is it your choice to make when the action is morally wrong? why would you even bother considering morality if you're placing your needs before others? doesn't that go against communism as well?

File: 1489844929210s.jpg (2KB, 125x119px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x119px

>>9256482
>If they make more it's because they put in more work, more time and more expertise

>>9256497

I don't know where communism came in to this, but in communism I wouldn't be starving either.

File: IMG_0008.jpg (34KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x512px

>>9256511
>i wouldn't be starving

File: tumblr_inline_nuowcfrRxO1t7jsuw_540.jpg (26KB, 291x395px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 291x395px

>>9256511
Well in my hypothetical system where I get 100 trillion dollars and unlimited sex slaves I wouldn't be starving either.

>>9256833
Thank you, Max, dearest of all my friends.
Clear out this rabble

You're thinking too abstractly. No police man is going to beat a starving kid for stealing a loaf of bread. Subjective moral principles like this are already hidden 'between the lines' of every constitution, otherwise it wouldn't be able to function as a concrete political text (it would be more like a mathematic or logical text).

>>9256897
Don't be so sure about that buddy. You think there weren't concentration camp guards who killed children for stealing food?

>>9256262
Even though you meant the opposite, OP, this question works in this order, too. For instance, I know people who think abortion is morally wrong, but still believe it should be legal.

>>9256897

Didn't some brave bystander shoot a man in Walmart for taking some baby food and diapers? No charges filed against this hero either.

>>9256904
Concentration camps are far from constitutional societies. Prisoners in both contemporary institutions and concentration camps are legally stripped of at least a portion of their rights.

>>9256915
Bystanders aren't defenders of the constitution in the way policemen are, and the lack of charges filed is a property of the specific case and not a universal principle of legal justice.