This is something I've always thought about and observed, how many previously immoral and unethical behaviors are being accepted today, mainly by our youth. Just to clarify, I'm 19 and in college in the USA. This thread mainly refers to American youth because it's the only country I've had experience with.

Just for starters, drinking, drugs, fast driving, rebellious attitude and behaviors, cursing, pornography, sex, and many more, are being more and more accepted and adopted by our youth. (Check out post #7 for clarification). If your'e, say, 30, I'm sure your'e aware your youth wasn't this corrupt. Sure, they did all this, but nowhere near as bad as I'm seeing today. From the media to walking down the street, such actions and immoral behavior, thoughts, and attitudes can be observed. I've talked to some of these people, and they honestly think it's ok to be like this. I even know someone who wholeheartedly believes it's ok to steal, as long as they don't know the person. I'm sure you know worse people.

So what will the USA be like when these youth have reached their 30's? What will they teach their children? How will those children compare to their parents? I doubt this nation's steady spiral into immoral behavior will stop with our youth's children. Of course, many people don't even realize this, and are just "going with the flow."

What are your opinions on this matter? Is there anything that can be done? Don't be afraid to post!

I, along with many others feel the same way you do, and are sincerely concerned about the declining morals and ethics of today's youth. I think that there are several reasons for it. I feel that one of the major causes is the media, movies today promote these attitudes as being normal. We are also living in a society where biological family living in the same house is in the minority, divorce and/or single parenting seems to be the norm. A lot of times kids are left to fend for themselves because their parent(s)/guardian(s) are working and there is no leadership or discipline in the household.

I feel that our society is drifting away from morality because we are drifting away from church. I am one of 6 children who was raised in a Christian family. My father worked and my mother stayed at home and took care of us children. Every one of those children has grown up to be an upstanding citizen. Four of us, including myself has honorably served their country in the military. Two of us had positions in the White House while serving. I am not saying by any means that this is a perfect family, but we did have loving Christian parents who raised us, and it shows today.

I kind of want to shy away from bring religion into this discussion, but I am a Christian and find it hard not to. But over the last 10 years or so, there have been several Bible based movements who are attempting to reverse this trend of decreasing morality. One of them is the Right from Wrong campaign from Josh McDowell, and the other is the Battlecry campaign. These movements are attempting to bring America's youth back into a relationship with Christ.

I did struggle with replying to your post, and I hope that I did not come on too strong. But this is how I feel.

Nah, you didn't come on strong at all. in fact, my parents are Christians too. But you don't have to be a Christian to realize what I have stated in the first post. I also happen to agree with everything you said . Thank you very much for posting.

Primary cause of the situation that you started this thread on can be summed up into 2 words. "Moral Relativism" .

Moral Relativism

It is this concept that has caused the decline of this society more than anything (at least from a secular p.o.v.).
Many on this site know my stance on faith, so I'll only give those views if asked.

Seafox14

From what I understand, moral relativity basically means that morals are based on culture, background, time-frame, etc. and that a universal moral system is impossible, because everyone is different. This leads to the acceptance of previously immoral things because "it's ok for them, why not me?" Very good find, I will remember and refer to this whenever I discuss this again. And you can give more in-depth views on this if you like, I don't mind .

Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers.
Author: Socrates

So I guess if Socrates observed it, and made a quote regarding it. It's not exactly a "new" trend. The hippies of the the 60's were supposed to be the absolute moral degradation of American society as we knew it. We survived. The children that Socrates observed did not destroy civilization did it? Civilization goes on.

Drinking is immoral? Drugs?? Americans now spend a staggering $200 billion a year on prescription drugs, and that figure is growing at a rate of about 12 percent a year (down from a high of 18 percent in 1999). I think the Drug industry might take umbrage to that concept. Fast driving???? Huh? Rebellious attitude and behaviour? Last I looked thats what this country was founded upon? As well as First Amendment advocates saying this is a right Cursing?? That one will have problems with the First Amendment advocates too...Pornography?? That one I will not argue is a moral dilemma.Sex??Do you mean pornographic sex or sex in general? If you mean pornographic then you are repeating yourself. If you refer to sex in general then I do believe you will raise the ire of quite a few people when you start regulating bedrooms of married people and other consenting adults. and many more???? I am curious where the list ends as to whats not immoral.

Since morality is a purely mortal human judgement call, I prefer not to judge others lest they judge me. Otherwise I am sure one of my judgements would be construed as immoral. I have this thing for driving fast when safe and possible and does not impede or put others at risk.

Be (Philosophical Differences) Safe

Da Animal

First, when I said drugs, I was refering to illegal drugs like marijuana, cocaine, etc. Drinking, especially underage, is immoral because it puts you and other people at risk. Not to mention it harms your body. Youth's obsession with fast driving is dangerous and against the law (when they go above the speed limit). Rebellious attitude and behavior refers to how many youth talk to and treat their parents, teachers, and other authority figures. Cursing, especially when aimed at someone, is rude and unnecessary. Sex in the form of pornography is wrong because sex is a private act between 2 people and not for anyone else to see. Sex, I am refering to adultery and anything else that is not between 2 married people. Many more refers to other behaviors like a lack of caring towards other people, and unsolicited violence. Of course, there are MANY nice people. Many of these references to immoral behavior is based on a religious fortified standpoint. If you don't have that, then you probably won't relate very well.

Just because the 60's era didn't bring about the downfall of the USA, doesn't mean that it was ok or acceptable. Personally, I'd rather this nation not go through that again. But thank you for your opinion, I appreciate it .

alot of our generations issues actually stem from a backlash against the "moral majority" in the 1980's. most parents didnt like being told how to raise their children or live their lives.

Although it ignores Nietzsche's important critique of moral relativism and its consequences (Beyond Good and Evil, for example) a far better discussion of "moral relativism" can be found at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/

Regards,
John

You are quite welcome. The major point I was trying to make is that statements made with generalizations about morality can be twisted so far out of shape by either side so as to distort the original context of the rhetoric.

I'll enjoy watching this discussion...

Be (conversation) Safe

Da Bleepin AniMod, Animal

Well I see other things.
Like the DRESS of todays people.

Give 20 years ago and you didnt see these tiny swimsuits on beaches.

I cant believe anybody would even think of going on a beach topless or in a thong but some just think its okay. Look at europe....Its even on their TV's!

Cussing is pathetic now days.

Kids cant even make a sentence because they think cussing is cool because all the idiots at hollywood do it.

Cussing shows lack of knowledge.

And no using hell and dam# is no different.

It turns me off when I hear somebody cuss. So many other words that could be used to describe something instead its just #$%$ this and #$%# that.

The Bible says kids would get more rebellious as the end times came near.

All the junk you see today is lack of parenting.

Thats right its the PARENTS.

They let them do this stuff. I have seen some sad parents who are total idiots who wont even punish or tell kids what to do whether right or wrong because "they dont want to impose their judgement on them"....

Their ought to be parenting books handed out at the hospital at birth with "parenting does and dont's for total idiots."

And yes sex before marriage. No morals now days among many. They have sex and then are so sad when "surprise(not really)" they get pregnant.

Then they just dont no what to do....

They(more like usually the young girl) has to drop out of school or struggle through it. It can ruin their lives.

They need teachers, they need GOOD parents.

Parents now work work work.

Both parents. It seems the days of the Dad working and the Wife raising the kids is gone. But not all...

Now both work and guess who raises the kids? Guess where they spend most of their time.

IN DAY CARE/SCHOOL

Other kids kinda raise them. They do what the other kids do.

Family time is very important. This also goes hand in hand with all this. You dont teach your kids whats right and wrong they are bound to get in trouble from the people who know what is. Like the law.

This is true, parents today want to be friends with their children. Children need parents, not friends, they get enough friends at school and in the nieghborhood. You should not expect the school system to raise your kids for you, it's bad enough they only do a half assed job of educating them, don't put more on them.

Very good opinions everyone! I'm glad to see the majority of people agree, at least to some degree. Don't be afraid to post if you disagree! But don't forget to say why.

Animal, I have to agree with you. I am glad you posted that quote from Socrates; the when I read the first post of this thread, my first thought was of a foggy memory of a bit of text written by a Sumerian describing how the youth of the day was lacking education, morals, and responsibility.


solaris32, interesting topic!

Though certain elements of our society do seem to have digressed in terms of conventional morality, we have certainly gained in many areas as well. Social growth is often slow, painful, and certainly non-linear. But then, you and I are lucky that we haven't lived in an era when things were in fact bad, so let’s put it into perspective.

When people talk about how much better the "good ol' days" were, I often wonder which days those were, exactly. Were they back in the 50's when open racism existed everywhere? Were these wonderful days further back still, when children were forced to work on factory floors? How about back when slavery was widespread? Good times, moral days? How about the 1850's in the Western US...between killing and displacing countless natives, do you imagine that things were healthy and moral in frontier towns...whore houses, gunfights over gambling debts, violence exceeding anything we experience today. Are those the days you long for? Oh, I know…how about the witch burnings of the early puritans or the inquisitions in the middle ages?

And you think swearing, rebellious teens "texting" on their cell phones during class marks the beginning of the "end of days?"

I would argue that in fact right now we are experiencing social growing pains. We have cast off the shackles of many forms of early repression; but we aren't sure exactly how to deal with our new freedoms. Some embrace the "wind" but are in effect experimenting as they go; others try to cling to and even reinstate some of the "social control mechanisms" of the past.

Animal made some very good responses to your original post, so I will continue with your rebuttal:



1. Does the current legal status of a drug determine its moral standing? How many lives are shattered by the legal drug: alcohol? On the other side of the coin, marijuana can be used to ease the suffering of cancer patience. Making it illegal even for that purpose is equivalent to creating suffering...to cause pain and suffering is immoral, no?

2. Underage drinking: I can't think of another besides the US that sets the drinking age at 21. So even the term "underage" is relative. Is the rest of the world "immoral" for allowing 19 year olds to drink legally?

3. In large doses, yes. In moderation, both beer and wine have shown health benefits.

4. Youth's obsession with fast driving is a new thing? How about the 60's...muscle cars and cheap gas? Gee, no fast-drivin' kids back then!

5. Rebellious attitude is nothing new either. Sometimes it is simply a matter of immaturity; most kids with that sort of "rebellious" nature grow out of it.

6. Pornography, to me, might constitute immorality in the sense that it can so heavily damage the lives of the individuals who partake in its creation.

7. I would also consider adultery in monogamous relationships to be immoral, again because in the end such behavior cannot but harm someone involved. But then, consenting adults, in my opinion, must have open communication in their relationships and in that way "lay the ground rules" for the nature of their relationship. In other words, two "swingers" who agree to the nature of their relationship ahead of time are not committing adultery by stepping out. Since their actions are consensual, it is therefore not immoral as such. On the other hand, if a couple was committed to monogamy and one partner chose to have relations with someone else, that would be adultery; it would be immoral, since it would harm the unwitting partner.

8. The ongoing theme here, methinks, is that your "religious fortified" viewpoint of morality is based on the idea that there are set behaviors in which morality is pre-ordained; the situation, the history, and the ramifications of the given behavior are besides the point. To me there are many variables that have to be included in any analysis of morality. I suppose that's where the "relative" bit comes in, at least, in my opinion. I view the world as far too complex for clear cut answers when it comes to human social interaction.

9. You might not have liked those "stinking hippies" ...but the 60's brought with it much needed social change. The oppressed fought oppression; our nation confronted racism and sexism, breaking the repressive molds of the past and moving toward and era where there is equality...not that we are there yet...but it was an important start. The civil rights movement is not something I would ever wish away.

Seafox, I know you've often spoken against moral relativism. But how often have churches changed their views on things? From the obvious, such as the policy that killing heathens and heretics was a positive thing to do; the use of torture to force conversion; and let's not forget centuries of holy war. Or move to more recent times, where, for example, the Catholic Church supported Mussolini's fascist Italy (Hitler fashioned his national socialist movement in Germany after Mussolini's in Italy). Somehow, Jesus doesn't strike me as someone who would have supported fascism. Yet at the time, the church thought it was "right" to do so.

Time and time again churches, both Catholic and Protestant, change their positions in a decidedly "relativistic" way. If churches weren't "relativistic," they'd still be burning people for practicing "witchcraft" today!

Its what the Bible says localpawned.

"the Catholic Church supported Mussolini's fascist Italy"

I want to add the catholics worship marry not Jesus. They dont even worship the true God Jesus Christ.




Its not quite the drinking its the "getting drunk" thats wrong.

I would like to share my opinion on a couple of recent posts. I did copy and past the appropraite quotes so please forgive me.

"When people talk about how much better the "good ol' days" were, I often wonder which days those were, exactly. Were they back in the 50's when open racism existed everywhere? Were these wonderful days further back still, when children were forced to work on factory floors? How about back when slavery was widespread? Good times, moral days? How about the 1850's in the Western US...between killing and displacing countless natives, do you imagine that things were healthy and moral in frontier towns...whore houses, gunfights over gambling debts, violence exceeding anything we experience today. Are those the days you long for? Oh, I know…how about the witch burnings of the early puritans or the inquisitions in the middle ages?"

Every generation since creation has had their problems, it is the nature of us humans, but I think that it is also in our nature to forget or block out some bad experiences in our life, so just about and generation has it's "good ol' days"


"7. I would also consider adultery in monogamous relationships to be immoral, again because in the end such behavior cannot but harm someone involved. But then, consenting adults, in my opinion, must have open communication in their relationships and in that way "lay the ground rules" for the nature of their relationship. In other words, two "swingers" who agree to the nature of their relationship ahead of time are not committing adultery by stepping out. Since their actions are consensual, it is therefore not immoral as such. On the other hand, if a couple was committed to monogamy and one partner chose to have relations with someone else, that would be adultery; it would be immoral, since it would harm the unwitting partner.

I have stated before that I am a Christian, and my posts will reflect my beliefs. As stated in the Ten Commandments, adultry in any form is immoral. A marriage is to be between one man and one woman, period. I have been married to the same wonderful woman for almost 27 years, Granted it has not always been easy, but it has always been worth it. We have had our problems, but as long as we keep God first in our lives, He will help us to work things out. Being in the military for the last 32 years, I have traveled all over the world and have had many chances to cheat on my wife, but I never have. The relationship, and trust that we have built over the years is too important to me than anything.

8. The ongoing theme here, methinks, is that your "religious fortified" viewpoint of morality is based on the idea that there are set behaviors in which morality is pre-ordained; the situation, the history, and the ramifications of the given behavior are besides the point. To me there are many variables that have to be included in any analysis of morality. I suppose that's where the "relative" bit comes in, at least, in my opinion. I view the world as far too complex for clear cut answers when it comes to human social interaction."

The Bible cleary states what morality is. Do I think that everyone can meet the standards of what the Bible states? No. We are all humans and we all have our shortcomings, but we also have a forgiving creator who loved us enough to send His only Son to die on the cross for each of us.

The opposing side has made some very good points, especially loacalpwned. But everyone has been posting great, keep it up people!

"I want to add the catholics worship marry not Jesus. They dont even worship the true God Jesus Christ."

This is flat out wrong, and certainly cannot be supported either by the facts of history or by a reading of Catholic dogma. The only excuse for believing this sort of rubbish is either an all-too-ready acceptance of pulpit propaganda or ignorance. I am sure most serious Catholics would be insulted by these remarks.
Regards,
John

I was thinking the same thing. CGM, as I understand it, Catholics do not worship Mary; they ask for her blessing in the exact same way you'd ask a friend or family member to pray for you. At least, that's how it's been explained to me.

It appears to me that the (relatively) recent growth of evangelicalism has brought with it an attempt at re-defining religious terminology. For example, many "born agains," when asked which church they belong to, will simply reply: "I am a Christian." Eventually, when you dig deeply enough, they will tell you they are some specific branch of Protestant Christianity. The point is, the word "Christian" is being re-defined to refer only to a very small, specific group of a much larger religion. Many young people who have been swept up by the evangelical movement are ignorant of the deeper historical roots of their religion; they simply don't know better.

Here's a graph of the history of the branches of Christianity (from Wiki):



Getting back on track:



What if one does not adhere to Christianity? I believe morality transcends any one religious point of view. I believe it must, as we are a pluralistic nation.

"The Roman Catholic Church teaches many doctrines that are in disagreement with what the Bible declares. These include apostolic succession, worship of saints or Mary, prayer to saints or Mary, the pope / papacy, infant baptism, transubstantiation, plenary indulgences, the sacramental system, and purgatory. While Catholics claim Scriptural support for these concepts, none of these teachings have any solid foundation in the clear teaching of Scripture. These concepts are based on Catholic tradition, not the Word of God. In fact, they all clearly contradict Biblical principles."

http://www.gotquestions.org/catholicism.html

I was a bit wrong according to what I have read. I did say it out of what I had been told and out of ignorance.

I knew they did believe in Jesus but was always told or I thought by what I was told that they only worshiped marry and other apostles.

Locally Pawned, As I have stated many times before, the forced conversion ( i. e. the Inquisition, Crusades into the holy land, Salem Witch Hunts), are all examples of what happens when faithful Christians get complacent and stop watching out for false teaching creeping into the church. The man made doctrines that drove these atrocities was a perversion of scripture (i.e. taking just a few verses out of context which is favorite ploy of Satan).

Now getting back on topic. Much of western civilization's moral code has been based on the bible. as time progresses, the tendency to turn ones back on God and follow what they think is right has resulted in the rise of things like moral relativism, secular humanism, and the secular progressive movements that all state that there is no absolute moral standard. This trend is nothing new. It happened to the Israelites soon after getting into the promised land. It happened several times to the church and still continues to this day. If this trend continues it will eventually lead to chaos and anarchy (though this is not a fast process).


Seafox14

So apparently taking just a few verses of the Bible out of context is a favourite ploy of Satan; however, I fail to see how these verses can be taken out of context.

Exodus
35:1 Moses assembled the whole community of the Israelites and said to them, “These are the things that the Lord has commanded you to do. 35:2 In six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there must be a holy day for you, a Sabbath of complete rest to the Lord. Anyone who does work on it will be put to death.

Leviticus
25:44 As for your male and female slaves who may belong to you – you may buy male and female slaves from the nations all around you. 25:45 Also you may buy slaves from the children of the foreigners who reside with you, and from their families that are with you, whom they have fathered in your land, they may become your property. 25:46 You may give them as inheritance to your children after you to possess as property. You may enslave them perpetually.

"While Catholics claim Scriptural support for these concepts, none of these teachings have any solid foundation in the clear teaching of Scripture. These concepts are based on Catholic tradition, not the Word of God. In fact, they all clearly contradict Biblical principles."

The first sentence seems to say that Catholics, much as do many Christian sects, do claim that their religious beliefs can be justified by an interpretation of the Bible. That is why they are classified, I suppose, as Christians. It then disputes their interpretation because it fails the test of "clear teaching'---certainly a phrase that is an oxymoron if ever there was one. What is meant by "clear teaching" is really "those traditions and interpretations that I adhere to" (otherwise knows as Biblical principles).

I think anyone would be hard pressed not to own up to the fact that his particular interpretation of scriptural text was not, in some manner, influenced by tradition in the form of early patristic writings (we may even include Paul's writings in this group) or in later interpretations (the great thinkers of the Protestant Reformation come to mind here).

And thank you Budapest for finding that quotation from Leviticus. It seems
that "Much of western civilization's moral code has been based on the bible" has some recent and notable exceptions. Fortunately not ALL of civilised moral code is strickly based on the Bible.

Regards,
John

Well I just hope you understand where I was coming from when I said that. Being raised in a Christian religion home and we go to a Pentacostal church.

Its just what I had thought. I have a uncle? who is catholic but he never talks about his religion.

Those quotes from the Bible are interesting. Many things are said in the Bible that we don't do today, such as men having long hair, and it is now taboo to have more than one wife/husband (USA). But we seem to be getting a tad off topic. This thread is about what I believe to be declining morals in America's youth. Have fun

Once again an excellent Topic reduced to Religious Rhetoric.

What is the most disturbing phenomena about all of the issues solaris32 raised is the age at which they are occuring. Oral sex parties involving 10-12 year olds. Drinking (socially, not with one's parents) and becoming drunk at the same age. Pornography on the internet for a 9 year old to witness. Rebellion on behalf of small children towards those who show them respect (and such action having little consequence on their lives).

The activity is really not all that horrible, it is the timeframe in which it occurs, developmentally speaking. Children are being forced to make choices and decisions they are not prepared to make. IMO, this is the reason that things appear to be in a downward spiral. We are regressing. Instead of fostering healthy mental, physical, and emotional growth for our young ones, we are allowing them to stunt such growth. I think we can all relate to the idea that the older you get, the better equipped you are to handle these personal choices, and make the right choice for your situation. Children cannot understand their situation (and neither can many adults) as a mature human being because they lack the knowledge of consequence and alternative.

Choice/cause and consequence/effect is a truth that will outlive us all. I can say that as a youth I had a much inferior grasp of this truth compared to now. And some choices have consequences that last for life. Another 65 years dealing with an STD because a child (10 years old) disobeyed their parents, got drunk at a party, and decided to try something they saw on the internet with 3 other kids; on of whome had tried it before with the wrong person!

I feel pity for them and their ignorance, because we have all suffered from our ignorance.

bg04

I agree completely with blue&gold04, it seems like kids are making the wrong decisions earlier and earlier. I feel that the media has a lot to do with this. With some of the music that is out there for the kids to listen to and a lot of the movies that they see, even what is on prime time tv, really sends them the wrong message. The prevelant message seems to be "If it feels good, do it!" These children are not emotionally mature enough to handle it.

These children need to have good role models in their lives, and with today's fractured families that is not happening.

The big question is, What do we do about it? These children are the leaders of tomorrow and we need to lead them in the right direction.

My point is that what we perceive as a moral truth is dependent on our internal perceptions. Therefore, because society changes over time, people change with it, and the consensus of what constitutes morality inherently changes as well.

Even if some moral truth existed outside of human beings, there'd be no way to know since we can't perceive that which is outside of human experience. What an individual believes to be a truth is a only a truth from his or her perspective. When it comes to faith-based morality, there is no discernable difference between what one believes to be true and what is (what ever that might be!) since the distinction between the two is derived by an internal process.

On the other hand, the relativistic morality you detest so much is based on observation. For example, one can deduce from direct observation that human suffering is increased by slavery. Thus, slavery is immoral.

One of the problems is that for many people, once any absolute basis for morality is taken away, then they (falsely) conclude that all moral values are therefore equal, or a matter of "opinion." Now you can have opinions and change them will-nilly much like you can change a tie in the morning before going to work- - -and as we all know, everyone is entitled to his own opinions. Upshot: no one has to take responsibility (and this is the ironic part) for their choices and actions.

Now if parents are unable intellectually, or from laziness unwilling, to think through the justification of moral choices, then they cannot teach their children right from wrong, since they themselves are unsure about it.
Couple this avoidance of responsibility with the general decline in educational standards (standards, remember, which also cannot be justified absolutely), and it is no wonder that their children are morally abandoned and must attempt to figure things out for themselves without any real preparation and understanding.
Regards,
John

I think that a lot of this started when Madeline Murry O'Hare had the Bible and prayer taken out of the schools!

I'd like to question the basic assumption here: that it has changed.

Drugs, tobacco drinking: The only thing that has changed here is that we have a clearer understanding of the health consequences and danger and with studies and the obssessivness of modern society have documented it so we know the extent of it. Thanks to our technology we see it in the media and that lead to us talking about it.

Sex: This hasn't changed. Teens and kids have been having sex for millennia. What might have changed is that the older generations people have less sex.

Pornography: It has been around for over a century. The only thing that has changed is its availability thanks to the internet.

Fast driving: Again, just the availability of fast cars. I'm sure there were adrenaline junkies racing horses a hundred years ago.


As for all the 30 year old saints. I wonder if it isn't more a question of not talking about it so as not to set a bad example.

I'ts not how often they do it that has me the most concerned, it's how readily and increasingly it is being accepted. There may be just as many, or even less, kids doing drugs today as compared to 30 years ago, the problem is that it's much more accepted today by the main populace than it ever it was, I believe.

I would also agree that drug use, if not actually increasing, is much more accepted today by the main populace. However, I would disagree that this represents any sort of problem. I think it is a growing acceptance of the fact that there is no logical reason to differentiate between legal drugs such as alcohol and illegal drugs such as cannabis.

Normally I stay away from posting in these topics since my "liberal view "is somewhat contrary to what is generally accepted.

I do agree that moral standards in general deteriorate as a whole. I see what kids are doing these days, simply because of the fact the world is getting smaller. I can only compare with how I feel and live and ( more importantly ) have lived. 35 years ago there was still respect. I would not dream to do things which now a days are generally accepted as being normal. I have two sons (17 and 13 ) and they are raised according to the standards my parents thought me. Yes, I am oldfashioned, but a the same time I don't want to close my eyes for what is outthere. I have teached my children to be courteous to their peers, have made them go the dancing lessons ( old style) and learned them how to eat with a knife AND a fork.. Put them in a restaurant and they will know thir way with the collections of knives and forks displayed on the table. Yes, I was lucky enough to be able to give that to them. The most important thing what I gave them though was moral standards.

Due to the above they feel somewhat lonely in todays world since they are an exception amongst their own. I allways was there for them. Tried to explain what is going on the real world including items related to "sex drugs and rock and roll ". I took them to a drugs clinic and showed them what would happen. I took them to a some sort of Betty Ford clinic and showed them what alcohol would do. They were scared out of their minds..

It is my feeling that parents can not keep up with the developments and they rather dig a deep enough hole and put their head in it rather than looking around and and having expain all of that what is happening.
I also lack emotion in todays world, it is all soooo flat You only see anger and wew all know which ramnifications that could have.

Back to my liberal view.. I live in a country where drugs- and sexindustry are looked upon with a liberal view. Having said that police is still very strict on people trading in those industries. I'd rather have my son(s) experiment in house with drugs than I have to pick them up somewhere from a dark alley. I was quite early with telling them "the story about the birds and bees " so they know what could happen and will happen. The eldest one is going on a holidays with a bunch of his friends, guess what he received as a present from his daddy when he left ..

Be open about it, it is out there and if you don't watch out it will bite you in the heel or cut your hair...

People don't talk about acceptable stuff. It's when people start loosing interest in drugs and stop talking about it that it is becoming acceptable. For example: the only time anybody discusses using fork and knife is when somebody is using them wrong.

Everybody is talking about drugs all the time. It hasn't gotten any more acceptable, rather the opposite. Even lesser stuff like cigarettes and alcohol is getting less acceptable. A few hundred years ago absolutely everybody drank alcohol because it killed common diseases found in water. Nowadays teetotalers are getting more common. Smoking in America is down to almost 20% from 45% in the 60's. Cocaine use is down to 5% from 14% in the 80's.

EDIT: Isn't an immoral ethic an oxymoron?

Oh dear, at the risk of sounding rude, I honestly don't think the "problems started when the Bible and prayer were taken out of school".

For me, at least, it's as so many others have already said - the problem often stems from the parents. Too tired, too over-burdened, too scared, too something to put all the hard and endless work necessary into raising a child.

I wanted to cheer when I read Fozzie's latest post as he and so many others here seem to understand perfectly that the only 'easy' thing about raising a child is having the wee bundle. Being a parent was - and is - such fun for me, but also the hardest work I ever, ever imagined.

Teaching out children 'social graces', how to be happy, how to be wary - and a million over things - can be exhausting but if we don't do it, who will?

And although I'm sure no insult is intended re 'religion is needed', millions of us with no conventional 'religious beliefs' actually do raise happy, well-adjusted wonderful kids - gentle smile!

I hear this statement a lot, and I always find it ironic, because there is no doubt in my mind that if the reverse were true, if the Koran was taught in classrooms and schools had midday kneeling prayers, Christians would be breaking down the doors of city hall demanding separation of Church and State.

Of course prayer or bible reading itself is not banned from schools, it just can't be led by the administration. You can't favor one religion over another in a publicly funded institution, it's simply not equitable.

So now and than I feel that I am the only thing between my kids and them returning to the stone age.. I am a single parent and eventhough I love my kids to death so now and than I am ready to stick them behind wallpaper and move to another continent..

Seriously, actually you can't blaim them it is every piece of information they have access to being internet TV or anything else. It is our gicen task to raise them with propper standards and prepare them for a life..

Actually, we Christians would only be against your scenario if it included forced participation. I think it should be allowed just as Christian prayer should be. Remember the First Amendment gives us freedom of religious expression. It does not mandate freedom from religious expression (i.e. separation of church and state). I would also point out that the so often cited phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the constitution. It was in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson. That letter was written out of concern that Government be kept out of the church.

Very interesting statements people, I'm having fun reading them .

I'm not going to argue semantics over what separation of church and state is or was originally intended as, suffice to say that it's best for all that the government neither suspends religious freedom nor mandates or supports one religious organization over another. There's no doubt in my mind the founders believed that state running the church = bad, and church running the state = bad.

So far as in the schools, if the teacher is leading prayer then for all intents and purposes it's mandated participation, just as it would be for the pledge of allegiance. You can argue that the students don't have to participate, but that's simply not practical at the primary school level. You can't tell elementary students if you're not religious you can do whatever you'd like while the rest of the class is praying. Either those kids will become a disturbance in the classroom, or they could become alienated from their peers and possibly join in with the prayers simply to fit in with the class, which I'm sure would not go over with their parents who are not Christian.

I agree that religion should not be banned from the schools or from government. I don't believe "In God We Trust" should be removed from our currency or from our government building emblems. If students wish to read their bibles or lead prayers during their lunches, have Bible clubs as after-school activities, that's all fine. In those respects there's no infringement of the law, and the students who don't wish to involve themselves in those religious activities don't have to. But in no way can the administration directly sponsor these activities to the student body as a whole. Otherwise it's simply not fair to the student body.

Well said, arcman!

Oh, one thing I forgot to mention in regard to this section. By "we Christians" I'm presuming you mean yourself and those like you who can think and behave rationally (I give you the benefit of the doubt here, I certainly hope you are! ) I also consider myself a rational-minded Christian, although as of late my views have become shall we say more "progressive" than a typical conservative Christian. Getting back to the point, I believe you when you say you wouldn't necessarily have a problem with alternative prayers in the classroom.

However I do not give the same benefit for some of the loudspeakers in the religious right, such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. Pundits like these would bust more than a few blood vessels if they heard of school sponsored muslim prayers in the classroom, I have no doubt.

I want to say on forehand that there is absolutely no pun intended here...

What I fail to understand is why discussions like these, which are touching the grounds of moral ethics in general, allways end up discussions about Christianity as a whole. DSTM asked the same question and nobody actually replied on that.

I do see a connection between immoral ethics and Christianity but not to an extend as it is discussed here. I am curious why nobody is digging deeper on the question why this has come so far? More importantly what can we do about it to avoid further deteriation.

Again no pun intended

Well said Fozzie.I am asking the Moderators,who do a wonderful job,if they could pay a little more attention to this.These topics nearly allways end up about religion.What about all the Members who have no interest in religion.If Members can't help themselves,by all means start a Topic on religion,and go for it.Unless it absolutely necessary in a post to touch on Religion,and it's relevant to the Topic being discussed,I can accept that.I am a Christian,but getting it Day after Day thrust down ones neck is starting to wear thin.We can discuss just about any Subject in Speakeasy.All I'm asking is to keep to the original Topic intended.
There is absolutely no offence meant to any Member by this post.

In any discussion regarding ethics, religion is bound to be brought up. This is due to the fact that for many people the two are closely related. Many religious people believe that ethics comes from religion, and that without religion there can be no ethics. Of course people who hold this view also tend to believe that there can be no ethics without their particular flavour of religion. In the context of a forum such as this one it will inevitably become a discussion of christianity, with the usual catholic/protestant/evangelical antagonisms. While such discussions may not be to everyone's liking I do not believe that they are necessarily off topic.

I do agree that to some extend religion is bound to be brought up however if you go through the posts I am lacking some sorts of reality of life, eventhough for those religion is reality of life and attach a whole lot if not everything to it.

I want to stay away from being judgemental on religeous issues since I am the last person to have an opinion on that. It is my belief live and let live. If religion is something which makes you feel good even better but I was hoping to a more less abstract type of discussion here

I am of the opinion that if you get posts with no reference to the Topic at hand then the post is "off base" as they say.

"I am asking the Moderators, who do a wonderful job, if they could pay a little more attention to this."

Because the Speakeasy was designed to be an open forum for discussion, the moderating staff only intervene when Forum rules are infringed upon. As in real-life discussions about controversial subjects, as in a Socratic dialogue, the topic can take on (as it were) a life of its own--- ideas and opinions may cause it to follow a different path than the original point of departure might have suggested. Another way of saying the same thing: the nature of this particular forum makes nothing "off topic."

To ask Moderators to arbitrate here puts them, certainly, in an awkward position, since they would be forced to make necessarily arbitrary judgements which others might consider infringements on the free expression of ideas, and they would be open to the charge of being "thought police."

Regards,
John
Global Moderator