A problem with some religous views

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Therefore, in order to define murder and stealing as "wrong" by our laws, we have to have some standard by which "right" is defined.

[/ QUOTE ]

No we don't. I'm not aware of the need to define a moral standard in our legislative process, outside of constitutionality.

Let's look at federal law: 50+% of representatives vote, 50+% of senators vote, and signed by Prez (ibcrease to 2/3 vote if Prez vetoes). Nope, don't see any need to refer to an absolute moral standard in that law-making process.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it wrong to steal? If laws are in fact made as arbitrarily as you seem to think, then there must be some civilizations in which stealing is an acceptable practice, right? Can you name these cultures?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say the laws were arbitrary. A federal law requires 50% vote of each house and the Prez signature. Do you disagree? Where in there is there a reference to an absolute moral standard for the law to be passed?

The fact that stealing is not allowed in most cultures is irrelevant. I've said before that cultural ethics may arise along similar lines without need for their source to be God. But anyway, some cultures have allowed "stealing" based on the arbitrariness of the people. For example, the Nazis confiscated Jewish possessions in accordance with certain laws, our govt can seize private property and give it to private developers in accordance with eminent domain laws, taxes may be disproportionate to minorities and their wealth thus confiscated and given to other groups, etc. Thus, yes, if the people will it, they can have laws allowing stealing.