Well done Kevin.
"There may be no difference in our positions...
You must mean your position as opposed to that of republicans. I have not yet stated a position although I am working on it. I have only asked the question.
"…my point that the morality of an individual at a moment in time is different from the morality of a society."
An individual, group of individuals, and society at large have different references from which to view an aspect of morality. So the morality becomes some referent. The moral term 'deceit', for example, is a clear enough concept. I will define it as: The intent to mislead another by an utterance or by conduct.
Depending on the frame of reference we may label the deception as good or bad, or relatively not as bad in some circumstances as in others. For example, I would say good job if you led me to believe I would benefit from capturing your night while your strategy was to get my queen. Deception in this case is good.
So, even though we have a sound basis for agreeing to a moral idea according to our example 'deceit', there is another level that must be accessed to determine rightness and wrongness.
"Everyone has slightly different takes on where the 'moral line' between good and bad is..."
Everyone has information and experience upon which to form an opinion. However, we should be able to agree that being fully informed qualifies an opinion and having a rounded understanding of the experience is essential in bringing the information forward. If a person does not have information or is incapable of adequately interpreting it, their 'take' has less or even no merit in determining the value of a 'line of morality.'
"Surely, a society would neither require a wheelchair-bound person to shovel the snow, nor force a poor person unable to perform to pay for that service."
If the citizen is able to understand the legislation and comply with it then the requirement should be met. Otherwise, we go back to the drafting table… which we frequently do as we find bugs in the system.
I am not prepared to take the following leap. You have not established the value in melding everyone's moral code into one super-ordinate morality. You just stated that it is the American way. Actually the American way is to determine a foundation based on principle(s). These principles have been established and agreed to as having beneficial value to all who live under them.
"So, the right and wrong behavior being legislated does so with consideration to the varying moral codes of its individuals and the overall compassion/tolerance of that society. When there are those who attempt to take their individual moral codes and impose them on others, they have completely missed the point of America. America was founded on this basis of tolerance, which is really no more than a flexible society moral codes that adjusts over time for its citizens and circumstances.
These principles are the moral code that drives legislation that is with consideration/compassion and tolerance of individuals in society. These principles exist in the aether as does my earlier example of 'deceit', however the context is defined as the society of America and the individuals that inhabit America.
"Let me instead call good and bad by the alternates 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable', to avoid having the discussion fall down any individual moral rat holes…
That isn't necessary for me but I am happy to agree if it works for you.
"However, my contention is that these bounds shift over time, location, and circumstance."
I figure we have both read Huckleberry Finn. I would return to the notion of reference. Huckleberry, demonstrated that he had a unique view of slavery that the culture he lived in had problems with. Circumstances change, perspectives change along with them as new information is acquired and our abilities as a technical society change. However, we reference the same ideas of morality to form these individual codes you speak of.
I'll stop for today even though, I don't believe we've even begun to crack this egg. And, I am still not clear on what it is specifically that you are laying in the lap of Republicans. |
