The Christian Vanguard

I've always been uncomfortable with Divine Command Theory as a moral theory. Reading David Oderberg's Moral Theory  has really helped me understand why. The way I used to express my concern was that DCT never really told us anything about how we should live. It just kind of says that what is right or wrong for us is whatever God tells us, and so we ought to obey. Why God commands a thing may be a separate issue (maybe it is rooted in his divine nature and so flows necessarily from that, or maybe we're complete voluntarists). And what use is just saying "God says it" when we ask ourselves what the right course of action is, when God may not have addressed the issue?  Oderberg recognizes that ethics are a body of knowledge and like any other kind of science should be available to everyone by some kind of method that is repeatable and produces repeatable results. DCT, could produce real knowledge, but it couldn't be accessible to others if God has not comman

There is the view that ones gender is whatever you feel. I've heard this view in my schools philosophy club, and you can see it in the popular media here . But the criteria that gender is whatever you feel is too vague. Of course, those LGBT advocates want to say that if you feel like a boy or if you feel like a girl then that is your gender (or any other sort of gender according to these people, since according to them it's like infinite). But what kind of feeling is the feeling of "boy" or "girl"? We know there are feelings like anger, happiness, pain, anxiety, and boredom. But they don't say "My gender is boredom because I feel bored." (Well, I have heard one of their advocates say that being a rock is a gender, so maybe I shouldn't put this pass them, but I think a more serious advocate would say that's not possible) No, the type of feeling one has as being a boy or girl is a different kind of feeling as being angry. But the defin