evolved i mean can't you be moral and i hate the installer can you be moral and and an atheist at the same time of course you can yes i think you can you can but i think there's a reason for that i think that. there is a god and that he wrote his law in our hearts and so we're born with an innate knowledge of what's right or wrong but i wouldn't i wouldn't predict that from an evolutionary position jason what do you think is an evolved animal we don't put we don't put dogs in prisons to light someone they don't know what's right or from wrong. yet and that's and that's a good point dogs also can't fly to the moon dogs can't you know develop develop legal systems an ethical system and social justice framework. yet again video and cable will differ on this is that religious religion is the most maybe. going to say the understanding is religion is the most common expression of cultural relativism what we have is from a legit framework we say i have my book and i have my interpretation of my book and that therefore and that is absolute truth that others should adhere to i mean that's why

standard and so however i like the fact the christianity does have a moral standard has a moral yes a right this is right or wrong where is atheism i don't see where moral standards would come from there's no general moral but i mean the right way was come from you know lawrence can't you be more involved i mean can't you be moral and i hate the installer can you be moral and an atheist at the same time of course you can yes i think that you can you can but i think there's a reason for that i think that there is a god and that he wrote his law in our hearts and so we're born with an innate knowledge of what's right or wrong but i wouldn't i wouldn't predict that from an evolutionary position jason what do you think is an evolved animal we don't put we don't put our dogs in prisons to light someone they don't know what's right or from wrong. yet and that's and that's a good point dogs also can't fly to the moon dogs can't you know develop develop legal systems unethical system and social justice framework. yet again very soon cable will differ on is that religious religion is the mos

graham called the irs action morally wrong and unethical. but the groups did not lose their tax exempt status. the founder of focus of the family, james dobson, said he also faced discrimination when he sought tax exempt status for a new ministry. his request was also eventually granted. >>> a breakthrough in cloning human embryos is raising new ethical concerns. employing the same technique used to clone animals, scientists at oregon health and science university for the first time were able to remove stem cells from a cloned human embryo. those cells could be used to treat certain diseases. boston cardinal sean o'malley, the head of the u.s. conference of catholic bishop's pro-life committee, was critical of the research, saying it treated human beings as "products." >>> minnesota has joined the growing number of states that recognize same-sex marriage. it is the third state to do so in the past month, following rhode island and delaware. same-sex marriage is now legal in 12 states and the disict of columbia. >>> next week in dallas, the n

reverend, we were talking about this moral framework and we talk about the moral framework the coalition built in virginia through a lot of hard work and organizing of different constituencies to get this policy changed. are you having success getting people from across the aisle to join in this or is this just a liberal movement at this point? >> well, the current legislature is so extreme, but in the streets we are, because what we've done over the last few years, we built a coalition, rooted in the notion of the common good and rooted in the moral principles of how do you treat the least of these. you know, if you look at the scriptures, more is said about how we treat the poor than any other subject. we've seen blacks and whites and labor and people of faith and civil rights come together. we have 147 organizations along with 100 branches of naacp and we're taking a comprehensive view. we have to change the way in which we approach public policy. there's some things that are bigger than democrat and republican and who has a majority. it's this common good, the general welfare, establ

if there's a moral obligation, determine where that obligation comes from and look down the mor moral it does, we have to attack. any who argues toppling that government, they don't have an answer and they need one. >> everything you said, you can have a moral obligation and everything you said be completely true. you shouldn't just rush into a country and topple a government. i don't know anybody talking about toppling the government. >> obama did today. he promised he would. >> we're talking about what kind of minimal activity could we do to try to mitigate this situation. i don't think we're talking about necessarily sending grounds troops in. >> the biggest question mark, who are the opposition fighters and what's this composition? there are people we like and people we don't know, frankly. >> that's why i was saying the circumstances now lend themselves to tucker's argument more than a year and half ago. now, this is basically the spanish civil war of the middle east. you have bad guys fighting bad guys. it's a sunni shia problem. there was a time we could have had a no-fly zone

when something is over punished we feel morally revolted.we understand both are quite is a we feel like we can't trust that sense of moral repulsion? to some degree that is the standard. that's how the threshold is met. let's take a few more questions. thank you. >> i wanted to thank the panel for coming today and giving us the benefit of their experience. i wanted to ask judge chin, in a civil context, when a plaintiff comes and brings a case that has an issue that seems fairly relevant but it's probably bringing the case in order to punish the defendant, either monetarily by dragging him through a trial or if it's an enterprising law firm that is fishing for a class-action suit, how do you do with an individual trying to use the system to get revenge? >> well, litigants use this is all the time to try to get revenge. in the civil context there are frivolous lawsuits that are brought, ma and you have to deal with them on a case-by-case basis. something is patently frivolous and brought simply to annoy, hopefully the court will step in and d

that is not how we judge the morality of a society. >> let me go back to william otis. i sort of side with alan here. my concern about death penalty coming from a country where we don't have it is that dna evidence in particular that's come out in the last few years has already shown that a number of people on death row did not commit the crimes for which they were being detailed to be executed. so putting aside this particular case, on the wider issue of the death penalty, it's been proven to be extremely fallible and for that reason surely it doesn't have any purpose in a modern moral society as you may put it. >> let me make a couple of answers to that. india, the world's largest democracy, with well-developed law, and japan, also a modern democracy, both have and use the death penalty. the united states of course has had the death penalty from its inception. our three most revered presidents, washington, lincoln and fdr, all supported and used the death penalty. president obama supports the death penalty in extreme cases. chuck schumer, the liberal democratic senato

i saw how willing people were to let go of their moral authority.ut at the same time i saw the vulnerability of the prosecutor. you know, he was a u.s. attorney, he was the united states attorney, he represents the united states of america, he's got the whole power of the united states government behind him and he was terrified. he felt vulnerable to the notion of citizens using their conscience in exercising their civic duties. >> bill moyers: in fairness to him i read his statement. he said respect for the law is the bedrock of the civilized society. >> tim dechristopher: yeah, but the bedrock of the rule of law is the conscience of the community and the values of our citizenry. and i think that that's where he missed it, you know. because at the same time he said the rule of law's the bedrock of our society, not acts of civil disobedience. he failed to understand that acts of civil disobedience are what have shaped the rule of law in this country and how it's been acts of civil disobedience that have made the rule of law line up with the values o

if you don't have religion, you don't have any kind of morality is so wrong. >> john: i'm sure mr. hitler, a very religious man would disagree with that. it is true, the notion that logic itself is inherently moral if you follow the right course of events. how do you define the difference between religion and faith? >> well, religion obviously is a human construction. it is an organized institutional expression of what people believe and how they get together to do it. and faith is an individual commitment. the examples that are given to us in history like the example of thomas who you remember, would have been more blessed if he had believed without evidence

the internet is driving a change in moral values in this country, bill. i think when you ask about things that we all care about like are you lying to congress or some broader issues, they didn't ask those questions. i would really like to see, given your reporting over the last few weeks where we are standing on those things morally. >> study done by sociologist to see why americans feel their country is going down the drain in that area. absolutely. >> bill: when we come right back, the nation's colleges don't want conservative speakers at graduation. we will prove that with laura ingraham after these messages. bill bill thanks for staying with us. i'm boiler in the week in revise from angle segment tonight. interesting story about liberal bias in liberal education. by newspaper article on bill o'reilly.com right now spots "los angeles times" story that says only four, four republicans have been invited as commencement this se top 100 universities. unbelievable. joining us now from washington with analysis, ms. laura ingraham. so, it's like 6 to 1 and i

the root way to do that is morality. moral people obviously don't rape, pilfer and steal. >> right here, the midst of angola, i have seen change. because the seed of the favor of god -- >> warden cain's approach to morality works on two levels. one, spiritual and religious. the other, engaging employment opportunities. church is optional. work is not. >> i've been editing really for about a month now. and been with ls productions about nine months. >> perhaps the most unusual example of innovation at angola is the tv station. the only big house production company in the united states. >> one, between, three. >> before we do a shoot, we have to kind of step back and kind of ask, if an outside company was doing it, what would you ask? >> choose your behavior, choose your consequence. i chose angola by the lifestyle i was living. i'm not going to lay down, just roll over. i want my life to mean something. and it can, even though that i'm in prison. >> every member of the tv station but one is serving a life sentence. >> wel

this honest demonstration seemed to give a new moral dimension to architecture.ne of the first buildings in which this new honesty of expression had been attempted was the louvre's east front, dating back from the 17th century-- 1667 to 1674-- but it remained a model of architecture throughout the 18th century. it was designed by charles perrault, the scientist. perrault made the outline of his building almost rectangular. the long facade is almost flat. so is the outline. there's no piling up, no modeling. the architectural emphasis is on the linking elements, the freestanding runs of columns. the building became known, not surprisingly, as the louvre colonnade. perrault was determined that his columns should not be decorative elements, but as, he thought, in ancient greek architecture, the supports of the building-- strong structural supports. he introduced engineering of a very high order into his design. the columns are threaded through with bars of iron, which are linked to crossbars in the ceiling and anchored into the walls behind. here is the initial idea

he said targeted killings by drones raise "serious moral questions."n his speech, the president also renewed his pledge to try to close the guantanamo bay detention center. in recent weeks, some faith-based groups have been ramping up protests in support of the more than one hundred guantanamo detainees who are on hunger strikes. >>> faith-based groups are mounting a massive mobilization to help victims of this week's devastating tornadoes. as many as 13,000 homes in oklahoma were destroyed in the storms that also killed 24 people. in the immediate wake of the tornadoes, clergy around the world called for special praye. in the affected areas, local churches became shelters and relief centers. congregations from around the country are now organizing teams of volunteers to help with cleanup. and as long term needs are assessed, faith-based aid groups are soliciting donations. we have a list of some of those groups on our website. >>> some evangelical groups said they would no longer participate in the boy scouts after the organization voted this week to

the internet is driving a change in moral values in this country, bill.n you ask about things that we all care about like are you lying to congress or some broader issues, they didn't ask those questions. i would really like to see, given your reporting over the last few weeks where we are standing on those things morally. >> study done by sociologist to see why americans feel their country is going down the drain in that area. absolutely. >> bill: when we come right back, the nation's colleges don't want conservative speakers at graduation. we will prove that with laura ingraham after these messages. you hurt my feelings, todd. i did? when visa signature asked everybody what upgraded experiences really mattered... you suggested luxury car service instd of "strength training with patrick willis." come on todd! flap them chicken wings. [ grunts ] well, i travel a lot and umm... [ male announcer ] at visa signature, every upgradedxperience comes from listening to our cardholders. visa signature. your idea of what a card should be. visa signature. ♪ chances

i am not going to stand here and -- isshort, what i hope to do make the moral case for free enterprise. and in this effort i speak only for myself. and i ask only for your consideration. , my faith and understanding is very personal and far from complete. it began when my dad died. i was 16. it was tough on our family. it was tough on me. i was raised catholic, went to catholic school, served as an altar boy. i thought i had it figured out. when something like that happens to you, it makes you question everything. at a young age, i started a search for answers. i read everything i could get my hands on. hagel, aristotle and aquinas, and everything you can imagine in between. in fact, you may have heard i enjoyed the work of a certain female author whose books are monuments to the idea that men and women should be true to their passions even in the face of social pressure to conform. it is true. i was. and i remain a huge fan of the "twilight" saga. [laughter] that actually is a joke. after i was elected to congress, i was young. i had to wrestle with many issues, as a representative an

this is more a matter of ethics and morals. oftentimes the other side of boycotts is to raise consciousness about an issue. many other boycotts, the goal has been partly to have this economic impact, but often times to let american know that they have a connection to a moral issue. an example of that might be the united farmworkers boycott, which is very popular beacon in the late 1960s and the next decades thereafter. in 1971 there was an article "the newor estimated more than 17 million americans were acting in solidarity with this boycott. and i think the idea of the boycott was so much to harm the grape and lettuce growers in california, but to raise awareness about the problems of micro-laborers were facing was very, very bad work conditions, unhealthy conditions and to get americans to be concerned about something that most people when you go into a grocery store, near great or lettuce looks beautiful. you don't think about connections between you and the people who grew those in the pesticides that may be harming them an

what we are saying in the press and what we are seeing behind closed doors is the lack of ethics and morals. in our constitution and when you are professional we must do the right thing. now most people does not like to speak about ethics and morals because they think it's not part of business. but let me state to you having been trained by some very type of authorities that deal with the highest standards including the united states army it is loopholes right to do the right thing and you can't do it unless you have ethics and morals. you commissioners if you don't take the right actions quickly you are some of you all are great you've done a lot but you will fall flat on your face. the community is watching. thank you very much >> thank you, mr. robert woods. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. >> i've been working in the community for sometime and it basically goes back to 1982. i've been in the point working with the various community leaders. i've seen the community grow and prosper and i've also see the community that it is in the state it's in right now. but we have a lot of proble

sink for wealth not a creation of wealth and in the derivatives area with fannie and freddie with the moral hazard of dalzell and so forth we created an unstable system that only stabilizing capitalism but you don't blame capitalism for the fact that we've destroyed the incentive structures that with effectively socialize the risk that's not got the will to grab and socialize with georgia so none of this is. this is called comfort if you're unemployed isn't it well that's absolutely right and i was a little. strange when people talk about this idea that there's some pure capitalism because really capitalism from its inception had always been very much a state run business i mean it's basically from you know you starting from going back to the american history. of the state has always been very much involved in helping of capitalism and even before the recent bailout i mean the great. american industrial success of the computer industry would have existed had it not been for government it was a government investment in the mainframe computers that gave us the computer industry it was governm

saint for wealth not a creation of wealth and in the derivative area with fannie and freddie with a moral hazard of basel and so forth we created an unstable system that would be stabilizing capitalism but you don't blame capitalism for the fact that we've destroyed the senate structures that with effectively socialize the risk that's not capitol hill to grab and socialize with george's and none of this is that although this is called come. if you're unemployed isn't it well that's absolutely right and i'm also a little. strange when people talk about this idea that there's some pure capitalism because really capitalism from its inception had always been very much a state run business i mean it's basically from you know you starting from going back to the american history. of the state has always been very much involved in helping out capitalism and even before the recent bailout i mean the great. american industrial success of the computer industry would have existed had it not been for government it was a government investment in the mainframe computers that gave us the computer industr

nationalized banks of other countries or less stable than ours i mean there are all of them it's a moral hazard problem you've got to recognize that if you're going to let people take risks they have to bear the consequences when they're wrong and every attempt to eliminate that to make sure will take risk and then nothing will go well what about limiting risks with this this and limiting risk with. what about the banks fred keep going what about the banks. the banks down at the banks would not have a problem if the other banks of the would be stupid banks and stupid people of any institution well wall street the moral hazard problem but get on straight fannie and freddie of giving them good. wall street so figure now for a whatever's up there doing all that a handful of people and yeah while the one percent of their people are not angels it depends on the institutional framework you created we created a system designed to fail and it failed but it was not a capital case the george i want to go here i want to give george the last word he says with because it looks like capitalism is work

, and that's a sign of deficient moral behavior. something wrong with you. if you experience moral injury and if you walk away as if it doesn't bother you. the legal system pays special attention to in this book because vengeance really speaks to an emotional experience, of getting even, of knowing that you can find the person who has done harm and you judged him to say we have to settle the score. payback is due. it's so essential that we forfeited this one would join the world of enlightenment and the social contract, and we said that the government will take over the responsibility of prosecuting and punishing crime. the question in this book is, well, is the government doing that? why are people walking around saying that we live in a world of injustice if, in fact, the legal system is doing its job? why isn't that the legal system gives us an opportunity, gives victims and opportunity to stimulate, given the emotional relief of having the satisfaction, the true sense of vengeful satisfaction that i stand confronting you and i n

there is moral cowardice when people deserve to be punished. there is nothing moral about it.e make it seem like there's a virtue and everyone is so comfortable talking about what christ would do. we don't have a clue. people are so smug. i say in the book we shouldn't speak for jesus. we don't know. he never had a daughter raped in may murdered and they never had his wife killed and never went through the holocaust era genocide. we don't know what he would say and by the way good christians ts untry believe we should retaliate against the taliban. i don't know percentage basis oh no turn the other cheek. 9/11, hopefully they won't do it again, we are turning a cheek. that is christ's sermon on the amount and that is the book of and that a member christian saying as a christian nation we can't respond. but that is morally unbearable. that is impossible to do. that's the kind of facial gymnastics that you can't ask anyone to do. it's just simply to turn the other cheek. in response to your really great question, those other stories are equally heroic beaches they show restraint

leftism as an upside-down moral world. i say this with sadness because a lot of people who subscribe to our decent people which incidentally is unique to us. we constantly understand there are good people w differ. i have never heard a prominent leftist say conservatives are good people, people who believe that same-sex marriage is wrong and we should continue to keep the mail/female marriage we don't do this from 8, they have sincere beliefs in this regard. they can't say that because if we are not demonized then we can't be fought. we are fought by demonization, sexist in tolerance homophobic racist and bigoted is what we are and that is how they prevailed. we are not babbling ideas, we are battling bad people. we think they are wrong, they think we are bad. >> host: you write about left-wing takeover of universities and give as an example the university of california san diego and you disorganization at the university. >> guest: by the way this is from heather macdonald at the manhattan institute. coin. >> host: vice ch

it was moral anguish that he was going through. listen, every soldier, every cop who's faced with a decision to make, a life or death, does the best he or she can. they limit civilian casualties. that offended me. i think this policy has worked. and perhaps we can fine-tune it and we can put more emphasis on clandestine activity. to me, i don't think the president really addressed that in the speech. i think he was coming at it with more of a moral tone. i think it was misplaced. entirely within the department of defense? i can't comment on that. i think it's worked fairly well up until now. i'll leave it at that. and i just know in the white house, the effort that goes in and wherever these decisions are made, as to limit civilian casualties in the history of the world. >> mark, a lot of civilian casualties, i was struck by the fact that of the four americans killed weren't the actual targets. the president expresses this distaste for drone strikes. and yet, he has had more drone strikes than any other president, what is going on

morality is practical.f we can talk about the mental illness in all of us, how we all participate in not winner-take- all scenario, that is the winner taking all in a very abhorrence way. i want people to see that we're all brothers and sisters. understand that, it can get pretty fun. tavis: is there space to continue to make blockbuster movies? >> i think these trees are blockbuster. -- truths are blockbusters. tavis: the book is called "life's operating manual." the author is director tom shadyac. clyde to have you on this program. >> great to be -- glad to have you on this program. >> great to be here. tavis: as always, keep the faith. >> for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at pbs.org. tavis: hi, i'm tavis smiley. join me next time of thehe future country's middle class. that is next time, we will see then. >> there is a saying that dr. king had that said there is always the right time to do the right thing. i try to live my life every day by doing the right thing. we know that we ar

you can't expect the church to have the same approach to the very important moral questions as someonesecular institution. >> the presupposition is that the church -- if the church would just accept the morals of the society everything would be fine. and end sexual abuse. >> what i hear the professor saying is if the only time we talk about sex in any way, ethics, morality, practice, is in response to aberration, deviant behavior, if that's what drives the conversation then the outcomes are going to be -- [ overlapping speakers >> because if we didn't treat this as a tmz story and we were to drill down -- if it wasn't boys fit was girl, women which is happening all the time, we wouldn't be having this conversation. part of what i'm trying to suggest here is not about anyone compromising their fundamental faith commuitments. i'm not trying to push my own liberalism onto your particular congregation. >> you can make that point in a minute. >> i'm going to have an argument with you on christian grounds. not on the grounds of me being secular quote unquote. but a way we can have a conversa

>> tell me where he has lost that morality. shown moral leadership, deported more fathers and mothers than any other president in the history or the use of drone strikes. those are legitimate to have but to suggest implication of moral leadership because some scandal has happened while he has been president that he has not been tied to and appropriately respond to, we're grasping at straws here. >> jamie: what do you think we're getting morally from this president? >> a president derives his power from his policies and he has failed us. we talk about morality, people expect, especially those who serve our country and who died for our country. those people deserve the kind of respect and credibility from their leader that they have given to the country. the president is losing his credibility. people don't believe this president when he talks about benghazi, when he is indifferent to the targeting of the americans by the irs or the targeting of the press. this is not what we expect from a president. as long as the president ago