On the verge of leaving religion behind as "poison", but where does morality come from then?

reply to post by halfoldman

But, I also feel that without the holy scriptures (like the Bible, Koran or Bagavad-Gita) we would have no morality.

Are you kidding?

I often find people hold me in high regard in my life. I have workers, relatives, friends and family that for some reason always hold a special place for me. It confused me for a long time until lately I've started to pick up on why.

I have the ability to speak bluntly whether or not the listener wants to hear it, or indeed listen to it. My council, I provide to many free of charge only in hopes to help people in my life find what it best for them, to make decent choices and be successful in their endeavours.

I've gotten a lot of feedback from it.

Heck, before recent, I didn't even realize I was doing anything. I knew I offered my opinion here and there, I lent a helping hand when I could... But I never really thought I was doing anything. But from what I gather I suppose I did.

Many people find this in someone, an elder, a friend, perhaps even someone younger. Someone to help them guide and lead by example.

Maybe you just need to find someone like this. I know myself I have people like this, and I am someone like this to others as I mentioned.

This is where morality comes from. From our individual, everyday lives. We reflect on our actions and determine what are good and bad choices. What benefits us and benefits others.

We don't need words, books, lies. We only look at the truth in action.

If you are under the impression you need god to have morals, it is actually a very scary doctrine that you have accepted. No one should need a man's written word, describing "holy moral code" to have or understand morals.

I presume in the past, it was the actual leaders by action who these morals were written by, or written in the name of, even if it was signed "god".

ChuckNasty
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Why is slavery bad? What if their family owes me money. I should be allowed to force their children into servitude to repay my debt. There isn't even bad karma involved with that. Slavery is against a law, not human morality. If it wasn't against a law, we'd do it. We are limited by law and not a moral...

Religious books had rules on when a person can get-it-on. Why is it bad if their bodies are ready? Nature says it's good right? Heck, why can't I get it on with relatives. ...That one is sick, you got me there...just read the rules in certain books...that is some jacked stuff. A +1 towards the pepper. Really, the old scriptures are messed up in this area. Human morals DID step it up a bit and make it a law. Don't think Islam has a limit...will research more.

Drugs are bad? Only by definition AND law. Legal drugs and illegal drugs are a law and zero human morality. We allow certain drugs because they are legal. Is every legal drug good - heck no. Is every illegal drug bad - heck no. For a person to accept drugs are bad is due to a law and not morals.

2 more for the pepper. I'll even YouTube it.

Why is slavery bad? because it removes the right of self determination, the thing that seperates us from an animal.
Morally speaking, that is bad.
All morals can be argued though
Why is murder bad? it removes people from the population in a already strained ecosystem. it frees up resources, money, land, etc
Why is stealing bad? it stimulates economics by having the victim repurchase their stuff, and allows for lesser fortunate people to have the stuff at a discount
Why is..etc. see where I am going?
Morality is a sense of understanding about yourself in society and what you wish society to be. It is both a personal principled stance, and a community understanding.
What do I personally lose if I kill a stranger? nothing..actually I may gain a wallet.
So morality there, if your a sociopath anyhow, is at the very least a principled stance of civil society and order.

So, then we come to the drugs bit again, and morally it may be not so bad, but with it having an effect on society, and morals being little more than society principles on one hand, then yes, drugs (illegal) are bad.
Why? because they are illegal..and who then in a society where it is illegal brings in the drugs? criminals..not just the casual guy selling a bag, but real gangster type mobsters that will murder entire familys who get in the way of their enterprise, purchasing off police, kidnapping, bombings, etc...see mexico.
If someone looks at the brutal image the illegal drug trafficking has caused, it is at its very core morally objectionable, and someone jacking themselves up in some alley is only tossing money at that whole situation


Eat the peppers!

reply to post by SaturnFX


What states there is a right for ones self determination?

As for the illegal drugs, laws make them illegal and not morals. Those same laws allow the moral lacking gangsters to profit. The moral thing is to remove what empowers them for the good of the masses...legalize it. Those with proper morals won't abuse drugs to a point that it effects their family.

2 more real ones and I eat the pepper.

Edit. The drugs thing is also used to make the church profitable. You'll hear those pastors preach about drugs being sinful. If we allow drugs, they won't have that power anymore. That moral is from the church...look what pushed for and funded prohibition in the US.

ChuckNasty

winofiend
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

I have always known right from wrong. I have not always acted in accordance with that knowledge, but I have known it.

I'll call BS on that first part. To say Always implies forever have. Sooooo, you never got your behind smacked because you were doing something wrong? You always give money to those is real need? You never did a malice thing out of anger?

100% BS.

Ok, well lets not use the word always. Lets use, "as far as I can remember". As far as I can remember, I knew the difference between right and wrong.

Knowing the difference does not imply acting on that knowledge, either. You are now applying a new set of rules in order to justify your stance. I have already said that I didn't always act on that knowledge. And sometimes I even acted against it. Oh I was a little prick at times.

But perhaps it is due to my parents that I was able to know right from wrong as opposed to having it beaten into me. It certainly had nothing to do with the school I attended, which ultimately taught me to despise religion as the oppressive and abusive culture of control that it is.

So, you can decide that you know how my mind works and how my morals were set in place. And I can simply accept that you are in no position to know such things, and are basing your opinion on your own personal development.

And we can go back and forth till the cows come home, as it's subjective. but I know myself. And if I know I did not require religion, or beating 'good into me', to form the morals that I adhere to today, almost 42 years later, then I know that others may likely have been in that position also. I don't tend to group the entire human species in the same category based on my own personal traits.

Spare the rod and spoil the child, just wreaks of how it sounds in my mind, and does not instill good ethics or morality. Ethics, by the way. may be what you are thinking of as that is something that changes depending on the environment and fits in with punuishment as a means to 'teach' it.

reply to post by winofiend


I'm not saying one way is better than the other, but the extremes are. Doesn't matter if you are religious or not, people will be people.

My main point is that morals are based on a religious point of view. The morals of the people in the middle east are night and day different than the people not from there. The morals in the far east are almost alien to those in the western world.

Religion started the thought in our heads of what is right and wrong. (Was going to use seeded, but didn't want to offend Catholics)

ChuckNasty
Edit. Since we ALL are born with right and wrong there is no injustice in the world? People have to be told what is right and wrong. Those people doing the telling are usually led by a nation/group that is based on a religious foundation.

Don't see many atheist feed the children movements...nor see many cloth the poor foundations. Those are usually left to the religious 'freaks' that people shun.

edit on 14-9-2013 by ChuckNasty because: as above

Well, it would be hard to get away from having religion in my ancestry given that religion has infiltrated almost every culture on the planet that has not remained isolated. So bingo, have a cigar. But now, do I even know my lineage? Not so much. Do I embrace their religious fervour simply because they are in my blood line? Certainly not. The sins of the father, again, as with the slavery debt...

So injustice exists, therefore people are born without the understanding of right and wrong? And not that people, with the knowledge of right and wrong, choose to act against it? Free will, and all that? Bad people do bad things, therefore we are all inherently bad unless we are taught good. I completely disagree.

I am the first person to accept that some people are just born broken. I've said this as long as I have been on these forums. And some people cannot be fixed. And you know, no amount of beating them, or reading them scripture, will change that either. You cannot fix some people.

How many people have you killed this week, you know, just being a naturally bad human? If it weren't for the law, you'd be out there killing people? Or raping? seeing as slaves are a guilty pleasure that is denied you by the law, surely these other acts, which are illegal, would also be of no inherent concern to you?

The usual term for someone like that is a sociopath.. I consider them broken, also. And you can't beat good into them. Nor give them a bible and say "Learn how to be good!" but you can make them, force them, to act within the confines of the law - like we do with those around us who think slavery is a good thing, just illegal.

And while I am largely put off by religion, the individuals who may follow it, are not inherently devoid of morals or the ability to be good by virtue of birth, either. Some of them they act selflessly. Not always, sometimes it's just the 'thing to do' as part of a charity. Appearance is everything to some people.

How many doctors have spent decades becoming proficient in what they do, only to pack up and move to a third world country and work for free to help the less fortunate people? I can name a few.

Sometimes a good person becomes religious... and not the other way around.

I can't speak for anyone you know, or who you may encounter, but I know that *I* am not unique.

reply to post by halfoldman


First ... congratulations on having an open mind enough to question what you've been indoctrinated with. If only everyone would be so open.

That being said .. don't go too far in the other direction and close your mind off to what is good in the different religions and philosophies.

In other words .. don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Since you asked for advice ... that's mine.

Look through the different faiths and beliefs and keep what is good and sound. If you can't understand the rest, try to look at it from different angles. If it still doesn't make sense, then put it aside and move on. There ARE good things that can be found in Christianity and Buddhism and Hinduism and the Wiccan way of life, etc etc etc. Example - Buddhist 'middle way'. Awesome. Example - Wiccan 'Harm Ye None'. Awesome. Example - Christian 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'. Awesome.

Anyways .. that's my advice. Keep the good. Toss the silly.
Your moral compass will be just fine.

tothetenthpower

abeverage
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Tenth, I am curious do you believe an afterlife is possible given your belief?

The afterlife also does not require God

~Tenth

The answer I was hoping for.

I grew up part time in an Atheist household, but they also believed in the light bulb analogy where as I believed it could be a learning environment or a testing simulation.

reply to post by abeverage


I believe that I don't know the answer, so I won't pretend I do. To me there is life after death and there is something that we do not understand about that. I don't really think we can understand. Atheism, although entirely likely, is too depressing for me to seriously contemplate in an absolute way.

reply to post by halfoldman

Either way, we don't seem to have a positive attitude to our species or origin.

It's a very common tactic. Take our ancient history for example. The idea that aliens built the pyramids also relies on the fact that humans weren't good enough, smart enough or able enough to create such wondrous masterpieces. It takes away from our collective self esteem as a species to decide that something else, other than humans aided and guided our cultural and biological evolution.

It's just as common in our current population. You hear it all the time " well we can't do anything, I'm just the little guy."

That sort of mentality, the lack of self confidence, the lack of motivation creates an atmosphere of apathy, where the very manipulative can push their agenda through. They also do it over the course of very long periods of time, keeping the others fighting among each other.

~Tenth

tothetenthpower
reply to post by abeverage

 

I believe that I don't know the answer, so I won't pretend I do. To me there is life after death and there is something that we do not understand about that. I don't really think we can understand. Atheism, although entirely likely, is too depressing for me to seriously contemplate in an absolute way.

While I do not mind being agnostic, I could never seem to embrace Atheism.

ChuckNasty
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

What states there is a right for ones self determination?

As for the illegal drugs, laws make them illegal and not morals. Those same laws allow the moral lacking gangsters to profit. The moral thing is to remove what empowers them for the good of the masses...legalize it. Those with proper morals won't abuse drugs to a point that it effects their family.

2 more real ones and I eat the pepper.

Edit. The drugs thing is also used to make the church profitable. You'll hear those pastors preach about drugs being sinful. If we allow drugs, they won't have that power anymore. That moral is from the church...look what pushed for and funded prohibition in the US.

edit on 14-9-2013 by ChuckNasty because: drugs

But your suggesting that because your morality doesn't encompass it, it is therefore invalid as a moral standpoint.
If I say that doing heavy illegal drugs is immoral due to the damage it causes the person, their family, the community, and the world, then it is my personal valid moral standpoint.
If you see thieving as not immoral, that's fine, but that doesn't mean stealing is somehow classified objectively as not relevant to morality...its your perspective.

I could find eating meat immoral due to kinship with the animals, that is a perfectly fine moral stance not based in any religion (although in some religions, there are dietary restrictions).

Morality is a personal decision on what you find acceptable with a bit of philosophical backing towards that acceptability. It does not require a book

Therefore, to me (and many others):
Slavery is immoral
Eating a dog is immoral
Eating monkeys are immoral
Eating Dolphins are immoral
-opening- a gambling establishment is immoral
Walmart business practices are immoral
None of the above, as far as I know, are written in religious books suggesting it as immoral. Certainly not part of any influence I have encountered.

Eating a ghost pepper is not immoral, so enjoy

abeverage

tothetenthpower
reply to post by abeverage

 

I believe that I don't know the answer, so I won't pretend I do. To me there is life after death and there is something that we do not understand about that. I don't really think we can understand. Atheism, although entirely likely, is too depressing for me to seriously contemplate in an absolute way.

While I do not mind being agnostic, I could never seem to embrace Atheism.

So, you don't know if there is or isn't a deity (agnostic = no knowledge), therefore what..you believe in one? (atheism simply means belief or nonbelief in a deity or deities).

tothetenthpower
reply to post by abeverage

 

I believe that I don't know the answer, so I won't pretend I do. To me there is life after death and there is something that we do not understand about that. I don't really think we can understand. Atheism, although entirely likely, is too depressing for me to seriously contemplate in an absolute way.

Why?
Atheism isn't a belief, it is simply an observation. it is not a claim there is no god(s), it simply is a stance that evidence has yet to be presented for one, therefore no reason to believe in one.
There may be a god, there may be hundreds, or none at all, or something so out of definition of what we can understand as a deity that it would be difficult to reconcile our religious understanding of a deity to the truth, etc.

Nothing is depressing about atheism..actually, it would be more depressing to be a supposed gnostic whom knew of a deity and all its attributes, that it was actually described by a religion, enjoyed blood sacrifices, got angry when you had naughty thoughts, etc...that to me is far more depressing. it reduces the possibilities and wonders to little more than a big bully ghostman

Gnostics annoy me...their "knowledge" of supernatural things, their boxing in based on their magical knowledge, etc...blah (gnostic theist or atheist alike..both annoy me..show me proof of your claim or shaddup)

A lot of people hate on atheism because they confuse it with gnostics...there is no difference between a gnostic atheist demanding there is no god, and a gnostic theist demanding he knows for sure that (insert religion here) god is the one true god and all others are hellbound unless they convert.

SaturnFX

ChuckNasty
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

What states there is a right for ones self determination?

As for the illegal drugs, laws make them illegal and not morals. Those same laws allow the moral lacking gangsters to profit. The moral thing is to remove what empowers them for the good of the masses...legalize it. Those with proper morals won't abuse drugs to a point that it effects their family.

2 more real ones and I eat the pepper.

Edit. The drugs thing is also used to make the church profitable. You'll hear those pastors preach about drugs being sinful. If we allow drugs, they won't have that power anymore. That moral is from the church...look what pushed for and funded prohibition in the US.

edit on 14-9-2013 by ChuckNasty because: drugs

But your suggesting that because your morality doesn't encompass it, it is therefore invalid as a moral standpoint.
If I say that doing heavy illegal drugs is immoral due to the damage it causes the person, their family, the community, and the world, then it is my personal valid moral standpoint.
If you see thieving as not immoral, that's fine, but that doesn't mean stealing is somehow classified objectively as not relevant to morality...its your perspective.

I could find eating meat immoral due to kinship with the animals, that is a perfectly fine moral stance not based in any religion (although in some religions, there are dietary restrictions).

Morality is a personal decision on what you find acceptable with a bit of philosophical backing towards that acceptability. It does not require a book

Therefore, to me (and many others):
Slavery is immoral
Eating a dog is immoral
Eating monkeys are immoral
Eating Dolphins are immoral
-opening- a gambling establishment is immoral
Walmart business practices are immoral
None of the above, as far as I know, are written in religious books suggesting it as immoral. Certainly not part of any influence I have encountered.

Eating a ghost pepper is not immoral, so enjoy

Now you are just being silly.
Prohibited foods - religious based.
Restating Slavery is Immoral without reason or proof why..
Walmart business model and the way they treat employees is against the Catholics deadly sins. Pretty sure that is in a book somewhere.

reply to post by ChuckNasty


You said "why is slavery immoral, what if their family owes you money?".

Nobody's "family" owes you anything. If someone borrows money from you and can't pay it back, that exact person is responsible, not people who didn't actually make the deal with you. Each man responsible for his own faults, not the innocent having to take on that responsibility - that is injustice.

This is easy for me to answer;

- Do as you would be done by.

My Mother used to read me The Waterbabies when I was a child, and there is a character called Mrs Doasyouwouldbedoneby.

I've never forgotten the name as to me it speaks volumes.

The difference is this book is a genuine fable, *coughs*

Edit: I would provide a link to the book, but have no idea what half the icons are :-|

reply to post by OpenEars123

You forget that the message of Mrs "Do as you would be done by" was reinforced by the follow up from Mrs "Be done by as you did."
Without that support, there would have been no reason for the waterbabies to listen to her.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Yes indeed I forget, the last time I heard the story was nearly 40 years ago :-)

I just liked the name and what I thought it stood for, ie treat others how you would like to be treated yourself.

Funnily enough I was just thinking about reading it again for nostalgia sake.

It was also a terribly politically incorrect book too I understand?

My father still has the same book that my Grandmother had as a child, which is the same book that was read to me. I believe it's over a 100 years old now :-O Might be worth a few quid!

*opens new tab for eBay*

Edit: Oops apologies OP, I only just realised how off topic this post is.. It does refer to my 1st post though!
My family copy of this book is worth £400 btw, although I wouldn't sell it! :-D

reply to post by arpgme


Holy crud! How does one think I'm for slavery?

BTW, I'm not for all religion and that everybody must go by one. I just choose to believe in one because I can.

We are all products of a religious background whether you believe or not. Our morals came from religion. If people can't understand came from, or beginning, or developed from..then I feel sorry for them.

Would we function in current society without religion? Yes, most do it now.

SaturnFX

abeverage

tothetenthpower
reply to post by abeverage

 

I believe that I don't know the answer, so I won't pretend I do. To me there is life after death and there is something that we do not understand about that. I don't really think we can understand. Atheism, although entirely likely, is too depressing for me to seriously contemplate in an absolute way.

While I do not mind being agnostic, I could never seem to embrace Atheism.

So, you don't know if there is or isn't a deity (agnostic = no knowledge), therefore what..you believe in one? (atheism simply means belief or nonbelief in a deity or deities).

Atheism:
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

Agnostic:
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I am a skeptic but I leave room for doubt that there could be a Creator/Designer hence being agnostic.