I obviously dont believe this but?

Morality, like belief, preference, emotion etc. isn't DECIDED upon, it's felt. It's not a matter of what your morality 'should' be, because there is no 'should'. There simply is what is, and what isn't.

Most morality DERIVES from what is best for the tribe. That's how morality formed, and that's why it's subjective based on the needs of whatever tribe/society/nation you're discussing.

If you decide that morality dictates that you eliminate part of the population in order for the world to thrive, that's your morality whether or not I agree with it. It doesn't matter to YOU whether I think it should be your morality, it is what it is and there's nothing I can do about it except try to change your worldview and hope that you adopt MY morality instead.

Understand?

1. Because humans have adopted a strategy of cooperation for survival which, judging by our development of technology and civilizations, has been fantastically successful. Your success as an individual today depends on the cooperation of others. If you lose that cooperation, if we all did, would humans really be better off? I don't think so. We'd all be in hunter-gatherer groups, or alone on farms making and creating everything we need to survive with only our family to depend on. If you don't care about what is good for humanity and/or society, you are welcome to go off and live by yourself and be totally self sufficient off the land - and some people do. But if you stay in society you ought to at least recognize the debt you owe to everyone around you.

2. Your hypothetical isn't actually "best" for humanity though. Eliminating millions of innocent people, and taking out such a huge chunk of the human gene pool does not help humanity as a species. So, I (and others) would disagree with your "morality" and it would come to a head. Morality is subjective, people do disagree with what is right and wrong, and sometimes that disagreement can lead to violence. And sometimes what people agree is morally ok is condemned by later generations and/or other countries or cultures. This is evident in human history.

I've noticed that it's mostly Christian right-wingers who say the world would be better off if the entire Middle East were nuked into a sheet of glass. Tell me about the eternal, objective divine morality that lets them believe that.

The limit is that each individual does not get to act on his own private moral beliefs, not without being subject to social restrictions anyway. Remember the fundamentalist Mormon guy who had dozens of people killed for opposing his authority? He believed he was doing the work of God by getting rid of God's opposition. Secular authority stopped him.

Remember that your personal "morality" is also constrained by "social morality" embodied in teh various legal codes that would not allow such murder, for you are killing others. That is inherently immoral except in self-defense.

Blessings on your Journey!

Animals have different sets of laws than men do. This indicates an creator of law! Now due to the seed of the serpent/caveman at work in our genome these sets have blurred together. JESUS BLESS YOU david stotler

I just see it as people are busy bodies. Gotto do something when they've uncoachpotatoed themselves.