If the present civilisation does not acquire some stable moral fondations ("bases morales stables", Fr.), its existence will hardly be more assured than that of the civilisations that have preceeded it, and which have fallen (or collapse, or failed).

There is a radical dualism between the empirical nature of man and its moral nature.

The precept to worship God 'in spirit and in truth' recommand to worship him as an inward and moral force, without physical attributes and with no relation to fears and egoist wishes.

The moral improvement demands an evolution leading to a higher consciousness.

We can, following the exemple of Kant, consider the moral development and improvement of men, as the supreme goal of human evolution.

How can we say nobody's perfect if there is no perfect to compare to? Perfection implies that there really is a right and wrong way to be. And what type of perfection is the best type? Moral perfection? Aesthetic? Physiological? Mental?

While moral rules may be propounded by authority the fact that these were so propounded would not validate them.

We don't want to start settling for moral victories, but that was a moral victory for us. We went toe-to-toe with them for 79 minutes, and I'm real proud of the girls.

Moral truth, resting entirely upon the ascertained consequences of actions, supposes a process of observation and reasoning.

The problem is we need much more moral content.