You haven't defined what a moral obligation is so this discussion wont get very far because everyone will have a slightly different definition. Anyway, no, you don't have a moral obligation to follow some laws. Things like smoking marijuana are certainly not amoral, even if one might argue it's not the smartest plan of action. Though there are laws that you do like not to murder or steal or commit adultery. Loosely the moral laws of humanity can be defined as the 10 Commandments (excluding things like, "I am the Lord thy God". Which is why I say loosely). Whether or not you argue that they are divinely inspired/created, generally to follow the 10 Commandments is to be a moral person.
1. You shall have no other gods before me 2. You shall not make for yourself an idol 3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God 4. Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy 5. Honor your father and your mother 6. You shall not murder 7. You shall not commit adultery 8. You shall not steal 9. You shall not lie 10. You shall not covet The first four seem to be irrelevant, because they are just about only believing in one god and that crap and I find 9 and 10 to be pointless. 5. Honor your father and your mother 6. You shall not murder 7. You shall not commit adultery 8. You shall not steal Therefore, I find that only 4 of the ten commandments can really be used by an everyday average joe to determine if he is moral or not.
Really? Do you mean like having sex outside the relationship or just having much sex. Because if it's the latter I feel it's pretty irrelevant to moral. And also Kara following the moral guidance of a 2000 year old book is not the smartest idea in modern times.
Well the definition of adultery is Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse. So pretty much cheating on your spouse.
Amorality is the absence of, or opposition to, morality and ethics. It means either that something is morally neutral, which I would argue that smoking marijuana is, or that morality is a flawed construct. According to you.
Well yes, it all comes down to your opinion on the matter. Really that's all morals are if you think about it because what someone thinks is moral can differ from another person.
Why did you cut out lying? And I specifically said the religious ones should be considered irrelevant, so I don't see why your post was at all needed. Mis-typed. I meant is not immoral. Of course people who dutifully follow the 10 Commandments are moral people. What, are you to argue that people who follow them are immoral?
Eh I,ve broken most of the ten commandments except for Murder,Adultery, and stealing (Well not anything worth stealing anyway - it was more of a joke steal then actual stealing ) But you don't need the 10 commandments to be a moral person, most of the rules are common sense anyway, I mean seriously unless you grow up in some area, where your brainwashed or your mentally ill, Who thinks it's alright to just kill for no reason at all ?, Or steal, Or Cheat, and so on and so forth.
"Do You Have a Morale[sic] Obligation to Obey the Law?" No. This implies that law is the ultimate moral form. If it's true today it would've been true back when chattel slavery was legal etc. ad infinitum. Just like (organised) religious people who ignore something in their holy texts because it contradicts their morality. Any time anyone tries to convince you that there is an ultimate morality, you've been had. In fact, I think people have an obligation NOT to obey the law when it contradicts their morals. It's called civil disobedience.
Example? Lying as a general rule of thumb is not a good idea. Deception is not always the right thing to do.
