In previous times 'marrying out' that is for a Quaker to marry a non Quaker was considered to be wrong and such a person may have been 'disowned'.
quakers
quakers
See linked related question for one answer. I guess most Quakers morals are similar to most other folk who place a high value on integrity and speaking and acting honestly.
See linked related question for one answer. I guess most Quakers morals are similar to most other folk who place a high value on integrity and speaking and acting honestly.
See linked related question for one answer. I guess most Quakers morals are similar to most other folk who place a high value on integrity and speaking and acting honestly.
"Wrong" can be considered an adjective that describes something that is not correct or morally right.
The Quakers were one of the first groups to argue that slavery was morally wrong. They were vocal in their opposition to slavery from as early as the 17th century, condemning it on religious and ethical grounds. Their beliefs eventually led to the founding of the first anti-slavery societies and played a significant role in shaping public opinion on the issue.
It's considered gambling and therefore morally wrong.
It is morally wrong to discriminate against others based on their race or ethnicity.
Yes, slavery is universally considered morally wrong as it violates human rights, dignity, and equality. It involves the forced exploitation and dehumanization of individuals based on race, ethnicity, or other factors, which is fundamentally at odds with ethics and morality.
yes, there is. Some would argue that the taking of life (killing someone) is morally wrong. A counter-argument might be if in self-defence, the taking of a life might be morally right, since it preserves another's life. However, this does not contradict the point that the taking of a life is still morally wrong. Indeed, the taking of a life can be both morally right and morally wrong.
There are no longer laws making adultery illegal, while it is still considered morally wrong.