Define moral and morality first.

Without everyone agreeing on the definition, no arguments will be worth reading.

The concept that morals are subject to social acceptability is very wrong. Certain behaviors are always immoral. For example what could possibly make rape moral?

morality not skewed by outside influence (such as religion or government) is based on survival of the species. humans do better when cooperating than when "i'm-all-right-jack"-ing (off).

g

Evil/Bad/Immoral is that which Increases SUFFERING! This knowledge is part of every mammal.. my dog knows when he plays too ruff and hurts me! He licks the spot he bit too hard..

It’s innate. We don’t need a book. Psycho paths are MISSING a part of nature just as if they were deaf/blind, etc.

If you live in a fucked up world and you still have kids — you are INCREASING SUFFERING! It’s a little abstract than sudden pain BUT still BAD

I believe morality is essentially whether or not something harms another person (and to what degree it harms them). Obviously, killing, raping, molesting, and beating another person directly harms them and the majority of people would agree that these things are immoral.

Other things that might harm a person such as stealing, lying, infidelity, dishonesty, and recklessness can harm other people to a varying degree though not always. If someone breaks into my home and steals everything of value and wrecks the place, I'm harmed both financially and probably psychologically. If a starving man steals a sandwich from a wealthy person... though illegal, I would say that it's not morally wrong. Some people might disagree with me.

But there are many things that are subjective to a person or group. I find racism or discrimination toward gay people to be morally wrong, yet both are widespread in this country (and other countries), so obviously a lot of people disagree with me.

I think humans will be debating morality for as long as there are enough humans on this planet to debate morality. And I don't think anyone will ever agree on a concrete answer.

My morality comes from treating others how I want to be treated.

Having read this I could adopt your belief of morality, where it came from, and what it really is. Caring about the pain and suffering of others in our world says it all. Acceptable behavior is a societal structure and it changes with advancement, but we should want the best for man and beast.

When you say 'behaviors that are acceptable', it begs the question 'acceptable to whom?' Everyone? Most people? 80%? 70%? What constitutes society? In smaller segments of society, you'll find behaviors that are acceptable, even applauded, that would almost certainly be deemed immoral by larger portions of the population at large. While in a very large society there may be segments that believe things are acceptable that are polar opposites of each other.
Defining mortality may be one of the most difficult things humans have ever attempted as it seems no one has ever done it successfully.

All animals that live in packs or groups have rules of behaviour. Chimps that have spent lives in captivity can never be released into a truly wild situation as they would be killed for failing to follow the rules, if not killed then driven off which amounts to the same thing. Rescuers make groups of Chimps that can be released together so that they all follow the same set of rules of behaviour.
Morality is fluid, what is considered normal acceptable behaviour in one century is not in another, what is considered lewd or outside of moral behaviour in one decade is not in a future decade. Only a century or two ago the House of Lords in England debated the age of consent it was 12/13 (the document used both) and raising it to 16 this was in 1861. Girls as young at 12/13 were prostitutes. Now any person having sex with a child is a criminal. In Victorian England the manner of dress and behaviour of women was highly controlled, if they saw what was going on today heads would collectively explode.

Previously homosexuality was a criminal offense, then a mental health issue, and now is (by some) seen as just a part of the wide variety of humans that exist. Some cultures were there long before white cultures worked out this idea. I believe Ancient Greek and Roman cultures viewed it quite differently to how their countries rule it now.

Unfortunately many countries allow the cults to define morality and therefore laws to maintain it are influenced by a text written by a bunch of men many centuries ago and thus follow a morality that reflects the views of the men of that time. Some of the more recent cults while they might use a more recent morality were again written by men of the time and their views of morality. Thus no cult text should be used to define morality.

I got interesting in Wicca at one point simply because of the reed, "An it harm none do what you will" Basically if what you are doing is not going to harm someone else then it is your choice. From the xtian's cult we have "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"

Someone below posted a poem that is also really good.

The only qualification I use for morality is whether it harms others or not.
As for opinions from culture, religion, politics they're all irrelevant.

Your first and last paragraph convey perfectly human morality, there’s no need to introduce religion into the morality question at all, it’s completely superfluous. Morality predates religion and only detracts and distorts from true morality by adding in dictats, taboos and prejudices which all run counter to human empathy and love for our fellow living creatures. Any religious stricture which causes pain, hurt and division within families and brands people as deviant cannot be considered moral.

I look at life and love as manifesting inseparably. Morality for me os internal, inborn and self-regulating. What affirms and perpetuates life and love is moral. What suppressed and destroys life and love is immoral. It makes the old, more subjective good vs. evil principle clearer as well.