Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it is because we look to secular laws to set a balanced, fair, and socially acceptable way to live. Right and wrong is based on natural laws not myths.
I think it is because we look to secular laws to set a balanced, fair, and socially acceptable way to live. Right and wrong is based on natural laws not myths.
Natural laws? What exactly is a "natural law" when it comes to morality?
Natural laws? What exactly is a "natural law" when it comes to morality?
The term is used in relation to Humanism often, but can relate to a wide range of philosophies. The Stanford Encyclopedia defines natural law and morality as, ‘Natural law theory’ is a label that has been applied to theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and theories of religious moralityâ€.
Natural laws? What exactly is a "natural law" when it comes to morality?
What's NOT a natural law? Do we need a constructed, orchestrated and point-form overlay to stop us from killing soemone just for fun or greed? Only the simplistic or the Church's administrators would ever suggest that we need to be guided every step of the way.
I know; let's all just take to stabbing and mutilating each other. (We hard-core atheists have those urges all the time, you know... Unlike, for instance, that highly religious major who shot those innocents at the Army base recently...) Even the cave men didn't do that; they were smart enough to realize the direct and obvious dire consequences of such gross and errant mis-behavior. A little thing like stealing from the drugstore is so widespread nowadays because it's not seen as having any real consequences. Not true, of course.
But to blame all society's ills on some mysterious lack of moral religious fiber, as defined and taught by ardent and strict disciplinarian Sunday School matrons, is to vastly and dangerously oversimply. Or perhaps it's "overstupify"....
We don't need the construct. Well, not all of us, at any rate. Some of us have (and use...) our own innate, "natural" intellligence upon which we constantly rely, knowing it's not perfect, but it's also all we've got.
BTW, I wonder how the Chinese, the Aussie Aboriginals, the Apaches, the Japanese or the Norsemen managed to survive without Christian moral discipline....
Ya know, what's interesting about it is that, on surface, there is nothing wrong with Christian moral values. There is honestly nothing wrong with temperance, chastity, truthfulness, generosity, benevolence, charity and so on. The problem is that they tend to add things on to those virtues and then wish to place those same things upon others, especially through the legislative process. Know that I am speaking of the evangelical and fundamentalist types of Christians. I am well aware that all-Christians are not the same. If they spent more time concerntrating on exhibiting those things in their own lives rather than worrying about what I and others are doing, they might find non-believers would leave them alone and even get along with them.
Good point rifleman on how other cultures seemd to do just fine without the Christian moral code! I tried to rep you, but it wouldn't let me.
Do we need a constructed, orchestrated and point-form overlay to stop us from killing soemone just for fun or greed?
Do you need to know fractions, addition and square roots to be a Math major?
same here. you can't advance until you have the proper training and knowledge. that's like allowing Martha Stewart to change out your car's transmission. it's not goin to work.
Quote:
Only the simplistic or the Church's administrators would ever suggest that we need to be guided every step of the way.
For the record, a lot of preachers see having a church as a cash cow. the term "church" means 'to gather'. So You have reckless people in ALL religions, even Atheistism has it's share of fools.
Quote:
But to blame all society's ills on some mysterious lack of moral religious fiber, as defined and taught by ardent and strict disciplinarian Sunday School matrons, is to vastly and dangerously oversimply. Or perhaps it's "overstupify"....
We don't need the construct. Well, not all of us, at any rate. Some of us have (and use...) our own innate, "natural" intellligence upon which we constantly rely, knowing it's not perfect, but it's also all we've got.
BTW, I wonder how the Chinese, the Aussie Aboriginals, the Apaches, the Japanese or the Norsemen managed to survive without Christian moral discipline....
If you aready know in your heart that you don't want to accept the truth. why make ridiculous statements like this? are you baiting?
The point is you don't need a specific, detailed set of"Acceptable and Unacceptable" behaviors, complete with punishments or the threat of godly retribution, especially those pre-defined by some group with such obvious bias and objectives.
Martha Stewart could be taught to do transmissions. No problem. She'd probably produce a real clean product, courtesy of her uncluttered logical mindset.
Remember now, OJ, I used to be a devout Christian. Wonder what happened..... Came to my senses, is my best guess. Saw the real truth, and rejected all that other stuff. Your "truth", but obviously it didn't stand up to honest review.
One follows laws set and agreed upon by the majority of the population while the other follows laws written in a book.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.