To set up as a standard of public morality a notion which can neither be defined nor conceived is to open the door to every kind of tyranny.
Every judgement of conscience, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, is obligatory, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always sins.
I think the research evidence on the benefits of early childhood programs for the local economy is extremely strong. However, the moral and political choice is still up to us, as citizens and as voters.
Sometimes, in order to follow our moral compass and/or our hearts, we have to make unpopular decisions or stand up for what we believe in.
In short, I'm not sure that the abortion problem can be solved by legislation. I think it can only be solved through moral persuasion.
With any story I write, I could actually write it from three or four different perspectives, which would end with a completely different moral at the end.
I never fixed a story. I didn't make judgments, I let the listener make judgments. When I got to the end of the story, if it had a moral, I let the listener find it.
I have to give moral support to my supporters. If I'm not going to fight anymore, that might hurt the feelings of my supporters. They are fighting for democracy. They are fighting for the rule of law.
Quite casually I wander into my plot, poke around with my characters for a while, then amble off, leaving no moral proved and no reader improved.
Ethics are not necessarily to do with being law-abiding. I am very interested in the moral path, doing the right thing.
In such a society as ours the only possible chance for change, for mobility, for political, economic, and moral flow lies in the tactics of guerrilla warfare, in the use of fictions, of language.
You have to pick the stories that you want to be involved with and the end game is you'd like to be a part of a hit. But I think your moral obligation is to follow your own heart.
The world needs to see Christians burning, not with self-righteous fury at the sliding morals in our country, but with passion for God.
Joining the military is not to be taken lightly. You're putting every part of yourself at risk, not just your body but your moral and spiritual centre.
One might rationally argue that individual human beings should be free choose what moral behavior they approve of, and which they don't, subject to the constraints of the law.
We are accountable for our actions as we exercise our moral agency. If we understand this principle and make righteous choices, our lives will be blessed.
I think 'The Giver' is such a moral book, so filled with important truths, that I couldn't believe anyone would want to suppress it, to keep it from kids.
Nothing is more private than a woman's body; it is her physical, emotional, and moral citadel. She cannot be free at all if she is not free to decide for herself, in private, what to do with her body.
It is almost impossible to imagine that any one could be so insensible to the high morality of Mr. Mill's character as to suggest to him any course of conduct that was not entirely upright and consistent.
There has to be some kind of order and some moral code. I don't know how people can function without a belief in a deity.
Kids aren't political, but around 10 years old, they are beginning to develop the moral grounding that might later, in their teens, develop into their first real political perspectives.
