Thread: Parent's Rights, where do you stand?

Originally Posted by Nick2.1

Not unwillingness, if you are unwilling to discipline your kids in anyway, then in my opinion you aren't strong enough to be a parent. Social acceptability is what I'm looking for. Some people don't think it's ok, but I don't think it is any of their business. I don't condone abuse at all, there is a fine line you can cross when trying to raise you kids with that method. If you want to raise your child with verbal rather than physical discipline, that is up to you, but I believe that it should be acceptable either way.

Ah, okay. Sorry then. I thought you were saying that kids' bad behavior nowadays is specifically a result of parents who won't spank or hit their kids. I do agree that discipline in general obviously has a lot to do with it; there is certainly no shortage of evidence that kids' behavioral problems only get worse when their parents are unwilling to discipline them at all.

Originally Posted by gwahir

Moral relativism is its name, and it's garbage. Almost no contemporary ethical philosophers still subscribe to it.

Wha? Really? I don't really keep up with what's in vogue among ethical philosophers... could you back this claim up somehow? It seems to me that the fundamental premise of moral relativism is pretty ironclad. I'm very surprised to hear that it's become passé. There is no God or universal metaphysical law out there saying "murder is wrong", it's just something that societies decide to agree on for obvious reasons. If you don't agree with moral relativism, where do you think that objective moral truth comes from? You must believe that there is some form of moral truth that exists outside of, and independent from, humans. What is it? It is a god or spiritual entity? Is it some invisible law woven into the fabric of the universe?