Oh, the fickle power of morality. No matter how dedicated we are to a principal, we can nevertheless at any time decide to ignore it. And there are usually frighteningly few repercussions. When immoral acts are not illegal, it is so easy to get away with them. All you have to do is let yourself off the hook. And then its' even easier the next time.
To describe an action I perform which I know at the time to be immoral, I use the word "sin." It is the only time that I feel it appropriate to use such a damning (literally) term. It needs to be strong to hopefully have an effect and slow the downward spiral.
I rarely, if ever, apply it to others, because I don't know others' mental states. The same action performed by two different people could be a sin for one and not the other. Some actions are objectively morally wrong, but they are only sins if the actor realizes that at the time.
Sin is breaking a promise to yourself. No one truly knows it occurred but you.
Some repercussions:
* Children and the morally undeveloped cannot sin. I am fine with this; They are motivated by force, authority, and impulse. To sin one needs to be motivated by morality.
* I take "original sin" to refer to our natural capacity to commit sin.
* A sin can be a trivial action (e.g. eating a candy bar). If you do something you resolved not to do, I think it's a sin, regardless of its impact. Your motivation may be practical (losing weight), but your duty to keep your promises is moral.
* Most of this is just assertion, not argumentation. I'm describing how I use the word, not how everyone else does.
Sin: A free action which the actor knows to be morally wrong at the time it is performed.
