Sociological Thoughts

Yeah so, I don't really know how I got body armor ads up there, but I think it's cool anyway.

Anyway, I wanted to take the time in this post to address things that were in my head from last night sociology class. For the most part, I think sociology is common sense, for example, things like, "We change our behavior based on other peoples reactions to it." If I were to pass gas loudly in public, people would make faces or get mad at me and that would indicate to me that passing gas loudly in public is not the best thing to do. I therefore refrain from doing so again... common sense stuff right?

The things that don't seem to make as much sense are these; "there are no absolutes", "right and wrong are relative to the culture that defines them", "Even murder, child rape and stealing have their respectful place in certain societies."
Is this true?? Of course I know it is false, but I would like to get more involved in it than just saying "that's wrong."
Let's address murder, shall we? Killing is not necessarily murder although murder is killing. If I were to kill in self defense, the law would be on my side (for now). When I brought this up, my professors first response was to brig up the disarming tactics used in martial arts such as Judo. (for the story of judo) He claimed that in the country where judo originated, killing in self defense was considered murder and the citizens used Judo to disarm and subdue an attacker. He therefore conceded that maybe all killing was really murder. I quickly brought up the fact that most westerners do not know Judo and therefore often have no other reliable means of self defense other than using deadly weapons.

If I were to kill out of jealousy or hate, that would be murder. Killing enemy combatants in wartime is not murder, killing civilians is. "So what about armed civilians?" my teacher is a tricky guy. My question is, do the civilians become combatants when they are armed? Is it therefore justified when they are killed? This is tricky business.

It seemed as if the issue was being slightly skirted. "Is killing out of jealousy or hate or whatever universally murder?" This question was largely unanswered. For myself, I cannot think of an exception to this rule.

As for child rape, the practice of arranged marriages was the reason child rape is not universally wrong. Arranged marriages are the cultural norm for some cultures and therefore, child rape must be accepted as well. This is the reasoning of my sociology professor. Respectfully, I must disagree. I feel I need not explain the reasons for this.

Stealing... is stealing wrong when one steals to survive? Or to feed a hungry child? Even the Bible makes an exception for this rule. In the book of Proverbs it states that we are not to punish the man who steals to feed himself or (I would assume) somebody else; however, they are expected to repay whatever was stolen when they are able to do so.
The Bible is not relevant to (according to my professor) 2/3 of the worlds population so what it has to say is not sociologically relevant... I would disagree with that. Here is why... briefly.
The Bible has a lot to say about good and bad, right and wrong, truth and lies, and much more. Would one be so bold as to say that any one of those things the Bible describes as right or wrong is... well, wrong? What makes them so sure? Are you right in saying there is no right or wrong... or are you wrong?

This has turned into more of a rant than I meant for it to be... but I hope you get what I'm trying to get at.

At the epitome of sociology there seems to be a theory that everything is relative... nothing is absolute. Can you think of one thing that is a universal truth for all societies? it is hard when one is to rule out things such as murder, rape, stealing, and even terrorism. According to sociologists, terrorism is an accepted way of doing things in certain places and it is therefore right to those who accept is (no way).

I might continue this later... then again, I might not.