What is justice?What is Right or Wrong Morally?

[Deus Regem]

So NSG I what to know all of the different views on morals and justice. Personally though I don't believe in justice only military strength. And on the question of right or wrong, I don't believe in that either.
Well ,enough with my boring sentences and ask yourself and comment on these questions:
What is justice?
What one believes is right
What is Right or Wrong Morally?
everything and nothing since morals are based upon one's own views
How do you tell something is right or wrong?
By how one was raised and by the culture or belief one has
What are morals?
google search came up with this noun
plural noun: morals
1.
a lesson, especially one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience.
"the moral of this story was that one must see the beauty in what one has"
Similar:
lesson
message
meaning
significance
signification
import
point
precept
teaching
2.
a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.
"the corruption of public morals"
How are laws binding?
by power (military, economic, or political power)
What is freedom?
The decision to do what one wants.

[Dominioan]

So NSG I what to know all of the different views on morals and justice. Personally though I don't believe in justice only military strength. And on the question of right or wrong, I don't believe in that either.
Well ,enough with my boring sentences and ask yourself and comment on these questions:
What is justice?
What is Right or Wrong Morally?
How do you tell something is right or wrong?
What are morals?
How are laws binding?
What is freedom?

All of them depend on the person and your own views, different people think differently

[Page]

My code is to do no harm to anyone else and to help people when I can. I do not believe in retribution, only restorative justice. I do not think all laws should be obeyed.

[Nuroblav]

This sums it up perfectly:

All of them depend on the person and your own views, different people think differently

What is right and wrong/morals/whatever depend on who you ask. Really it's down to the individual to consider what is right and wrong as there is no factual right and wrong.

[ArranVidLand]

Q: What is justice?
My Answer: I think justice is when the fairest outcome has been achieved when the involved Parties are analyzed over a dispute. Personally I am annoyed with the amount of bureaucracy that is present in some current judicial systems like the UK system, USA system and Italian system. For example, there was recently a case in the UK where The Government wanted to deport many people who were living in the UK back to Jamaica because of the serious criminal history of the people, however the Court brought out The Human Rights Act I think and said that some of the people won't be allowed to be deported because they didn't have an access to a lawyer because of a problem with phone O2 connection or something like that. As a result, only some of the people were deported but most of them had to stay behind in the UK. Another case that happened recently in Italy is that Salvini (I don't agree with his political views by the way) wanted to turn around many boats that had migrants in them, I think he wanted them to go to other European countries because he feared that the nature of the migrants wasn't known so some of them could be a threat. However, the Court overruled his decision and said that he would be jailed for around 16 years or something like that if he went through his action. So in the Italian and UK cases I have mentioned above, this is what is sticky about the whole thing...there's a danger of judicial systems becoming political and not fully fair and unbiased. A similar thing happened in the recent Trump impeachment incident, you had a biased mainly Democrat House of Representatives who therefore managed to impeach him, and you had a biased mainly Republican Senate which managed to keep him in and hence not remove him. Justice needs to be unbiased and not politically compromised and perhaps only the laws should be considered, emotions shouldn't play too much of a part in a legal decision. Sometimes having monarchs like the world had in the past, or dictators, can make justice quickly and without less lengthy bureaucracy getting in the way, and I like that to an extent, but obviously the monarchs or dictators shouldn't give verdicts that are cruel or harmful to the person/people. I don't think The UN's Declaration of Human Rights Charter is fully right because it has all these set of rules yet it doesn't fairly punish people who break those rules. For example, Tony Blair (his wrongdoing in Iraq), George W Bush (his wrongdoing in Iraq), Barack Obama (his wrongdoing in Libya), David Cameron (his wrongdoing in Libya), Nicolas Sarkozy (his wrongdoing in Libya) have all broken The UN Declaration of Human Rights Charter and perhaps many international laws but none of them have been held to proper account and have been allowed a pass by The International Top Judges, this is not justice.

Q: What is right or wrong morally?
A: I think something is morally right when it causes less physical and/or mental harm to a person/animal than something which is morally wrong. I know that there are people who follow religions so for them the right morals might come from what is said to be right in special books/scriptures e.g. The Vedas, Torah, Bible, Qu'ran and that wrong morals could be classed as sins but I'm non-religious so I just form my own opinions of what's morally right and morally wrong.

Q: How do you tell something is right or wrong?
A: I always put myself in the situation to see whether something is right or wrong. For example, if I was evaluating a case where somebody was going to be either be sent to prison or have the death penalty and I knew their whole life story before they committed their crime, I would put myself in their shoes and see whether I would want to have the death penalty on me or be sent to prison for life. Hence that's why I'm anti-death penalty, even though I do understand that there are criminals who will have a more fearsome mind than me so some would argue would need the death penalty but I disagree, all criminals are human and they have mothers, fathers, perhaps kids of their own who love them, so sending them to have the death penalty is wrong. I do the same thought process which makes me think Abortion is wrong in most cases. I think Abortion should only be done when the mother's life is at risk...in order to come to this conclusion, I put myself in the mother's shoes and think about how I would feel if my foetus was physically deformed or if I was raped etc. Personally, if my foetus was physically deformed or if I was raped, I would still give birth to the baby and I would still look after the baby hence why I think abortions for foetuses which are physically deformed or abortions for rape are wrong. However, if there was a high chance that I was going to die because of the foetus in my womb then I may take the difficult decision to abort the baby hence why I think abortions for mothers that are at risk of dying is right. I also use the best available scientific information at my disposal to decide whether something is right or wrong, obviously in most cases if it fits with the science then I think it's right, although there are the rare cases that science can't explain hence going along with the science in those cases may not be the correct thing to do.

Q: What are morals?
A: I think morals are the ethical, listed principles a person has. For example, if a Christian is devoutly following the Ten Commandments then some of his/her morals would be: killing is wrong, stealing is wrong, his/her parents should be respected, coveting his/her neighbour's goods and wife are wrong.

Q: How are laws binding?
A: I think that not all laws are good laws, there are some that are unfair laws. Of course in the past, perhaps there were even more unfair laws. So I don't think all laws should be abided by if some of them are unfair. If there was a law which I thought was wrong then I wouldn't follow that law and perhaps I wouldn't care if I was threatened by the police for being charged for a crime because I was breaking that law because I think that my personal moral standards come above the law of the land if I think the particular law concerned is not a good law. I think laws are binding when the many judges who are at a hearing agree that the particular law concerned is morally sound to them and doesn't make them upset. But if the particular law concerned does make them upset or think that it's unfair on the person or people involved then they would change the law and it becomes non-binding. This is what happened in the recent UK prorogation case, for hundreds of years political prorogation cases were thought of as a separate issue than an issue for The Supreme Court. However, a few months ago, Lady Hale and her fellow judges (they're called 'Justices') perhaps personally thought that the recent political prorogation case, which involved Boris Johnson's Government, was unfair to the House of Commons and the country (in their view) so they made an unprecedented take on it and decided the political prorogation was unlawful, hence they had "shifted the (legal) goalposts" as one politician or reporter put it, and the current political prorogation laws became unbinding to an extent, there was more flexibility in the laws and new law was perhaps made.

Q: What is freedom?
A: I think freedom means that the person is allowed to do whatever they want to do with no Government or no other person suppressing or stopping him/her. For example, cameras looking at people in public are, in my opinion, restricting the freedom of the people to do whatever they want. There is also a limited freedom, in my opinion, which is when somebody is allowed to do whatever they want to do as long as they abide by all the laws of the land.

[Ethel mermania]

What I think is fair and just, and applies even to myownself.

[The New California Republic]

So NSG I what to know all of the different views on morals and justice. Personally though I don't believe in justice only military strength. And on the question of right or wrong, I don't believe in that either.
Well ,enough with my boring sentences and ask yourself and comment on these questions:
What is justice?
What is Right or Wrong Morally?
How do you tell something is right or wrong?
What are morals?
How are laws binding?
What is freedom?

What is your opinion?

[Ethel mermania]

So NSG I what to know all of the different views on morals and justice. Personally though I don't believe in justice only military strength. And on the question of right or wrong, I don't believe in that either.
Well ,enough with my boring sentences and ask yourself and comment on these questions:
What is justice?
What is Right or Wrong Morally?
How do you tell something is right or wrong?
What are morals?
How are laws binding?
What is freedom?

What is your opinion?

I see Freud really is writing tour posts

[The New California Republic]

What is your opinion?

I see Freud really is writing tour posts

Tell me about your mother.

[Ethel mermania]

I see Freud really is writing tour posts

Tell me about your mother.

A wonderful woman, I could never fit in her shoes.... it hurts my feet sooooo much

<===== cries.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I would define justice as that which is fair to everyone, that which results from following the universal will.

[The New California Republic]

Tell me about your mother.

A wonderful woman, I could never fit in her shoes.... it hurts my feet sooooo much

<===== cries.

---

But on a serious note, the OP could really do with some padding out, if the thread author hasn't run off that is...

[Ethel mermania]

A wonderful woman, I could never fit in her shoes.... it hurts my feet sooooo much

<===== cries.

---

But on a serious note, the OP could really do with some padding out, if the thread author hasn't run off that is...

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

[Deus Regem]

---

But on a serious note, the OP could really do with some padding out, if the thread author hasn't run off that is...

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

OP?

[United Muscovite Nations]

---

But on a serious note, the OP could really do with some padding out, if the thread author hasn't run off that is...

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

He did give his opinion.

[Ethel mermania]

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

He did give his opinion.

Right, he believes might is right. I guess we will have to beat his true opinion out of him

[Ethel mermania]

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

OP?

Either original post, or original poster.

[Czechostan]

I would define justice as that which is fair to everyone, that which results from following the universal will.

What is the "universal will"? Because quite clearly, different people believe different things are just and have wills that come into conflict.

[Australian rePublic]

Justice is a very difficult topic I've thought a lot about. There are some grey areas where I don't know

[United Muscovite Nations]

I would define justice as that which is fair to everyone, that which results from following the universal will.

What is the "universal will"? Because quite clearly, different people believe different things are just and have wills that come into conflict.

I define universal will as that will which all people would be satisfied with if it is followed, not necessarily that they most want. That is, the will which allows for the fulfillment of as all people.

[Andsed]

What is right and wrong and what qualifies as justice is an hard question to answer. It is a question to which pretty much everyone will have a different answer. It is easy to give some general answer like ¨if something hurts people for no good reason, it is wrong.¨ But then you have to answer what qualifies as a ¨good reason.¨ Basically in my opinion there is no 100% correct answer to this question. There are answers that are ¨more correct¨ than others for sure, but trying to create some 100% objective standard to measure morality is a fools errand. What people consider moral and immoral is just to subjective and differing to do so.

[The New California Republic]

Your question was fair. The OP is suppose to give their opinion to help avoid sidebars like this.

He did give his opinion.

Yeah, after we asked.

[Page]

The thing about moral relativism is that it has to be acknowledged, but we don't have to surrender to it just because it's the nature of things. The universe doesn't judge, it doesn't care about fairness, it just is. Even a genocide is, on a cosmic scale, just objects moving in space. But we can act as if there are some objective morals when it comes to the preservation of human well-being.

[Ethel mermania]

He did give his opinion.

Yeah, after we asked.

So no "might is right beating" to get the answer we want?

[The New California Republic]

Yeah, after we asked.

So no "might is right beating" to get the answer we want?

I mean tbh the answers he gave were pretty vague anyway, so even more rounded answers would be a start.