My views may sometimes be widely rejected but the truth behind such views live to see those who accept them through, serving as a guiding principle.
Many of us live within several layers of morality, shaped by our upbringing, education, religion, philosophy and our sense of understanding of personal relationships.
Morality in itself is a weaker vessel and perhaps that explains why we have laws to govern human activities even though we may have several forms of morality hovering over our heads.
The weakness in morality and the reason why we cannot wholly depend on morality to guide us in certain times is the fact that, morality is arguably subject.
Just as I mentioned above, a lot of things define morality for people—meaning, what may be moral to you, may be immoral to me, and this actually leaves us with a weaker vessel of control.
Over the last few days, we’ve seen several seks tapes, videos and photos of people having been leaked, which have puzzled the conscience of many of us. And I have read/heard people using the morality argument to pathetically justify these leaks.
Looking at these leaks with the subjective lenses of morality may mean that, those who did these awful things should have no regrets—as they have not been immoral, according to their own standards. Remember, morality is subjective—to some greater extent.
So the argument that you cannot leak indecent photos and videos of an ex-partner on the grounds of morality is pretty weak and without strict laws to prohibit people from doing this, some people may in fact assume they have a “RIGHT” to leak such things.
The way we’ve so far looked at morality as being subjective and somewhat shaped by an individual’s own mind also permits that, some people may see these actions as perfectly fine—nothing immoral about them.
But then, there is a bigger catch on morality. There is something called objective morality which does not conform to the rules of subjectivity.
No reasonable person can stand up to argue that raping of a child in any part of the world is not immoral, no matter where such a person’s sense of morality germinates from. This is what objective morality is; certain things are plainly WRONG—no matter where and who is looking at it.
Therefore, the issue of intentionally or recklessly leaking indecent photos of anybody who has trusted you, shared anything with you in confidence or engaged in any activity you ought to know should remain private does not rest on subjective morality—rather, objective morality.
I dare not equate leaking such materials to the raping of a child, but they are not different when it comes to the sort of morality that should be used in their measure. If you cannot say, raping a child is morally right under any circumstance; then you cannot also say, doing such damage to another human being comes within the concept of subjective morality.
Since objective morality takes judge of such conducts, if you are looking for the ONLY right time to do this without breaching morality, then the only time is when you are a PSYCHOPATH.
The argument of morality being subjective and therefore it may be moral for people to leak such materials of other people should end. Because not every action falls within subjective morality—there are those that are governed by objective morality and this is one of them.
Unless you are a certified psychopath, there is no way you can defend such actions using morality.
Some leaks are largely motivated by economics, nothing to do with moral compass. Parties involved sometimes collude to leak tapes as a means of bolstering their plummeting fame – celebrities. No such thing as bad publicity, they say. In that regard, a lot of factors come into interplay to determine the rationale behind such leakages.
The whole leakage of these tapes is becoming too much nowadays and to me, those who do that are really evil. How can you do that to someone you once told you love? Evil men