Does it exist? A code of morals which exist and will exist as long as there is a mankind, reagardless of the morals of people? Laws which are as natual as water and light?

I'm going to stick to moral relativisim until someone can really give me a good argument against it.

"Universal" and "law" do not belong together. There are no set morals. Things we regard as morally wrong, we see animals doing all the time (urinating, copulating, eating each other all in public).

Every society will have different morals. Hell. I have different morals than you. You may think eating meat on Fridays is wrong, but that doesn't mean I do. It comes down to personal opinion and of course there is no universal personal opinion.

That's just on Earth as well, we're not taking in to account the possibility of other planets with other intelligent life forms such as ourselves. Maybe they find killing to be justifiable, and don't even bat an eye towards it.

So no, a set universal law of morality does not exist. Our morals have changed since we first came up with them, and they will change in the future.

Agreed. 1000 years from now, we might think nothing of cannibalism, stealing, killing, or profanity as morally "wrong"....but of course, if it eventually DOES come down to that, then I'd assume that the Apocalypse was coming, or that the next war was screwing everything up big time. >>

Even if moral values and certain rules change, I believe that there will always be a certain set of base values that people will always come back to. For example; stealing, or killing, or raping children is always going to be a bad thing. I kow that there are some twisted minds out there that DON'T think it's wrong, but in a most basic form, we all know that doing those kinds of acts is considered wrong.

But for the most part, I agree with this quote here. XP

Well, saying we all have base values is the same as saying there is universal moral law...dude.

The thing is, these base values are far from universal. Murder, torture and rape have been enthusiastically sanctioned by governments and organisations, often with the full support of their people, since time immemorial.
As Bill said, morals are relative rather than absolute. Most of the freedoms we enjoy today have been gained at the cost of breaking most of our fundamental morals.

In my opinion, though its probably already been said, morals are in the eye of the beholder.

For example, take a baby, raise it from birth with the mindframe that minorities are evil. Now when this child matures, according to his own particular morals, anyone who isnt like him, are immoral. Now this may go against the broad view of socially acceptable morals, but he doesnt know any better. Thus creating another moral paradox in our already screwed up reality.

No such thing as morals.

The concept of morals is much like that of "normal" or "politically correct" They don't really exist, as they are only set by the environment of that social group. There are people who think that eating a person's heart with give them their strength. Some others think that technology is evil, or at least not the way of life. Discussing it merely brings about conflict, which is really what matters to those in charge. Because without conflict, there is no real room for growth.

In the end we, as a free thinking species will eventually decay into a much lesser being. Mostly dirt the way we've been going lately. All because of a difference of moralistic views.

That's stupid and I fully expect you to back it up.

You cannot disprove something like morality, because morality is an idea, and has no connection to the physical world. It exists within the human mind and therefore does not exist.

Smokers are like independant farmers and WWII veterans; you must cherish them, for they won't be around much longer.

Meh, smoking probably won't disappear in the U.S. anytime soon, and it's in the rise in alot of other countries.

(It's actually predicted to be the #1 cause of death by 2020)

That's bullshit and you know it.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005110.html

Doesn't look like it has very far to go mate.

I agree

How does any of that equate to smoking being the leading cause of death by 2020.

Not that in matters. This thread is about UML.