Can there be civility without spirituality? (A Religious Troll Thread, LOL)

reply to post by getreadyalready

I believe they do indeed have religion, but they don't realize it.

Nah, i think it's more of you projecting your world view on those around you. I'm not spiritual, i have no religion, i'm still a well mannered functioning member of society.

I don't hurt or kill other people because my brain tells me I wouldn't want that to happen to me.

Just because some religious text, somewhere, from some time, says a similar thing, has no bearing on me coming to that conclusion myself.

If what you say is true, and there are so many honest to goodness atheists out there, the entire world should have erupted into chaos.

don't you find it egotistical to assume that the only reason people aren't murdering each over in the street and eating their delicious brain goo, is that your idea of religion is somehow magically implanted on them.

Killing or hurting someone else is wrong, regardless of religion, and in a complete vacuum absent of any religion, I believe the human species would thrive just as well as it is, if not better.

Interesting idea though.

reply to post by SunnyDee


I was thinking about that video of the dog that pulls the other dog out of the highway as well. But, we can't know their motivation, so I'm not sure it is helpful, but it is very interesting and worth discussing!

We know a mother water buffalo, and sometimes the whole heard, will fight lions and crocodiles up to a point, but eventually they minimize their losses, and the youngster, or the injured, or the elderly is sacrificed and the herd moves on. It makes sense, logically. The risk/reward scale tips back and forth, and their decision making follows logically.

We also know some animals will eat their own young. Maybe it is due to a vitamin or nutrient deficiency from the pregnancy, or maybe the male does it to put the female back into heat, or maybe the resources at the time are low and it seems more logical to consume those babies and let the breeding female have a better chance of survival instead of letting her and the cubs all die together. The risk/reward scale and logic seems to make sense in all of those instances.

Humans don't seem to act upon that risk/reward scale. The whole pro-life/pro-choice debate is proof of that. There are those that would vote to sacrifice a mother to save a baby? We know the mother is fertile, and contributing to society on some level, but we don't even know if the baby will survive, and if it does, we don't know whether it will be better or worse for society than the mother. We also know the mother can make more babies, but we don't know if the baby will have that ability. So, logically, why would we so often choose a baby over a mother? Animals don't do that.

As for your cat video, and that dog video, those are very interesting, but I'd really like to know if the cat was just curious, or if it ended up eating the other cat, or if it truly did care and mourn for its friend. I have seen animals mourn, so it is a possibility.

Also, who is to say that some animals don't develop their own spirituality? I have often said that I think my dog, Dozer, earned a soul. He was loved by so many people, and he connected easily, and when he died, people from 100s of miles away that I hadn't spoken to in years decided to call and say something. Maybe some animals can also have a spiritual connection?

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


But you have only said, "it is right" or "it is wrong." How? Why?

You said "I don't hurt or kill other people because my brain tells me I wouldn't want that to happen to me." Which is the religious concept of the Golden Rule which existed long before you existed, so how do you know you came to that conclusion on your own? I say it was indoctrinated into you by society or parents.

Can you use logic, risk/reward behavior, or game theory, to reach the same conclusion? The notion of right and wrong is a religious notion in my opinion. You can't just state something is right or wrong without referring to a societal norm based in religion. If you can, then I am all ears. That is the purpose of my thread.

Killing or hurting someone else is wrong, regardless of religion, and in a complete vacuum absent of any religion, I believe the human species would thrive just as well as it is, if not better.

Someone said the same thing earlier, and I agree completely..... on a physical level. There would be more competition for resources, more selective breeding, we would be bigger, and stronger, and more immune to disease, and physically we would have evolved much further. We damage our own genetic pool with things like empathy. By protecting our weakest members of society, we bring the whole society down on a purely physical level.

But, we have evolved due to notions of humanity. We have developed things like vaccines and medicines, and nursing homes, and prosthetics due to a need that arose as a result of protecting our weak and infirmed.

So, I can't honestly say which is better or worse, but things would definitely be drastically different without the spiritual influence. I suspect we would be much closer to our ape cousins.

reply to post by getreadyalready

yep, to all you said. I think animals work mostly by instinct, but that does not mean they don't have a soul. Our pets are proof of that for sure, and really most animals if we were to watch them. Look at elephants. They visit their dead, and basically cry for days at the death of a family member.

I don't think we humans are that far off from them, our instincts are keeping us alive too. The social contract mentioned earlier by someone is another human thing.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
OK, it seems the term "religion" is the big hang up here. Especially "organized religion." I'm not seeing any responses where people truly believe there is absolutely nothing spiritual in existence. It is too late to edit my OP, but what if we take those words completely out and add a new question.

Is there any person that believes in a 100% carnal and finite existence? No piece of them is shared in any way before or after this physical existence. If there is such a person, and they still have morals, or a conscience, where does it come from? If it comes from society or parents, then it likely springs from religious concepts. That is why I brought pure logic into the discussion. If you rule out everything you learned from societal norms, then how do you justify a conscience or morality? It would have to be based in some reward system or tangible benefit. So, how do you justify having a conscience without referring to ingrained religious beliefs?

I'm bored of this now. I'm going to go eat some babies because I don't believe in spirituality.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I think I understand your question.

It seems you are speaking to conscience (and its activities of predicting guilt, remorse, regret, etc.) and without which you suspect an extreme form of "He who dies with the most toys, wins" would be expected to exist.

If I am right, can the question be restated to be asking if conscience is a spiritual impetus to mental activity?

Long ago, being considered for a (Christian) religious order, I was asked by a panel of other religious, "Hypothetically, if you were shown bones from a tomb which, to your satisfaction, were scientifically proven to be those of Jesus, How would that impact your faith?"

It was an easy answer for me, "I would, instantly, consider myself a Jew-- because my experiences have me convinced of the reality and truth of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and I would await the promised Messiah."

With that as a start-- that is, that my spiritual experiences find a reasonable and consistent explanation in the teachings of the Judeo-Christian beliefs-- I have come to suspect that:

Conscience and love are the two common/ordinary and extreme indicators of the existence of the soul; and that the existence of the soul is the chief proof of the spiritual essence of mankind.

If I am right (a big IF), then the behaviors of persons against conscience and/or against love most often points to a biological and/or emotional fault, that is, the mental processing of the soul's activity goes wrong. For most people, teaching and experience inform both the conscience and the heart, but for those it cannot, we call "psychotic."

That I suspect that, leads into a rejection of the "believe or else" parties/factions within various religions. For example, Whether a person's mind can grasp it or not, their soul remains active and valuable because it, not their mental ability to apprehend their own soul's activity, is a person's essence.

reply to post by Frira


Awesome post!

I think this...

Conscience and love are the two common/ordinary and extreme indicators of the existence of the soul; and that the existence of the soul is the chief proof of the spiritual essence of mankind.

... is really one of the core concepts of my argument. I don't believe those things exist in a purely logical, spiritless existence.

However, my answer would be entirely opposite of yours in response to this...

I was asked by a panel of other religious, "Hypothetically, if you were shown bones from a tomb which, to your satisfaction, were scientifically proven to be those of Jesus, How would that impact your faith?"

It wouldn't change my belief one iota. I fully believe that Jesus existed, taught what he taught, died like he died. I don't believe he was God, and I don't believe he should be worshiped, and I don't believe he is the only way to heaven as he says in at least two passages.

I believe he was one incarnation of God, and there have been many, many others, by many, many names. I believe there is only a singular god that pervades all religions and communicates in a variety of ways and manifests in a variety of beings including each of us. So, discovering Jesus' bones would be very interesting to me, but it wouldn't change a thing. It wouldn't even change my view of the resurrection, because I believe that was mostly parable anyway.

My belief system most closely resembles Deism. There is a creator, it is a singular creator, it is known by many names, but they all refer to the same being. That being can be observed in nature in things like the golden ratio and intelligent design, but it does not actively meddle or intervene in our everyday lives.

Thanks for your post, it was a very good post on the side of spirituality! Much appreciated!

Reading through all of the posts, and my own responses, I am reminded of this tidbit from a link in the OP regarding Sociopaths...

Other Related Qualities:

1. Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
2. Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
3. Authoritarian
4. Secretive
5. Paranoid
6. Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
7. Conventional appearance
8. Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
9. Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim's life
10.Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
11. Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
12. Incapable of real human attachment to another
13. Unable to feel remorse or guilt
14. Extreme narcissism and grandiose
15. May state readily that their goal is to rule the world

So.... many of us on ATS are "#5 paranoid." It seems many of us in this thread are #1, #2, and #3. It seems this thread is proof that I might be #10 and #11 !!! I don't know about the rest of you, but #14 sometimes apply to me as well, and also seems to apply to a lot of successful people. #15 seems a little over the top, I have never stated that as a goal, but I have to admit, I do think I could do a better job at it than the current PTB, LOL!

Many folks on ATS have said politics and capitalism attract sociopathic types of people. Some of those 15 things above describe many successful business people, politicians, and authorities in general. I don't think that means they are all sociopaths, but it is interesting.

Now, the reason I bring it up........... I think the true dividing line is in the areas of "#13 remorse/guilt," #12 a real human attachment to another." Those things seem to me, to have a basis in a human connection, a soul, a spirituality. Empathy and Conscience. And it seems those 2 areas alone can override all of the other tendencies. To me, it speaks volumes about the power of spirituality. If the simple things of a human attachment that results in empathy, conscience, guilt, and remorse can be more important than all of the other tendencies, then it proves our spirituality is our defining quality.

reply to post by getreadyalready


so now we have this question. Are we all sociopathic in nature and some are better than others at dealing with it, or are some people born with those tendencies and some not?

I will agree with you to the point of when I reason if I should do "X" or not, how I think God would react to my decision is always in the thought process. (as well as how my actions would affect others)

Quite a deep though thread for a Friday. I think I need a beer.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by supine

 

I agree. There is a huge difference in "organized religion." In my opinion that is a big business and has nothing to do with spirituality.

Based on what stereo-type?

Rural Texas, a tiny 50 year old mission church. Thirty persons on any given Sunday sitting in the pews and one thirty-ish priest who they cannot pay enough for him to live on. The priest left his nice middle class parish and modest home in the suburbs to live in a manufactured home isolated on the edge of a cow pasture which he rented from the local undertaker. He moonlights at a retail store in the day and waits tables in town at night to make ends meet.

When one of the fifty persons on the church roles is sick, he is there. When dying, he is there. When the wife has been caught in an affair, he is there. He marries them and buries them. He counsels, consoles and grieves. He teaches classes, attends boring luncheons, and occasionally is asked to bless the start of a city council meeting or open the county fair.

At home, he studies the latest theological journals at night, and gets up before dawn and prays. He spends every Saturday writing a sermon as if someone's soul just might depend upon him getting it right. He sits in meetings where parishioners dream about having an active youth group, paving the gravel parking lot, fixing the air conditioning, and sewing new vestments. He spends days driving to the city trying to obtain resources so their dreams might come true.

He responds to his superiors request for reports, explaining how the drought has impacted many of his agricultural members, so plate offerings are down, and asks for $100.00 to help pay the church electric bill for that month-- again. Twice a week, he visits the two local nursing homes, knowing that several of those will never remember he was there or even understand a word he says to them, but suspecting they get bathed and dressed by the staff only because he comes.

Yeah, Damn those oppressive, power hungry, organized religions!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I believe all people that are acting with empathy, compassion, love, humanity, and sympathy have a spiritual aspect to their psyche whether they admit it or not.

But what is your evidence?

And what aspect of spirituality is keeping you from raping woman? Is it a threatened punishment? A promised reward? Explain the spiritual thought that keeps you from totally violating and abusing other people. Because my spirituality is not what keeps me from being a giant prick.

But, how can you take their word for it, when their actions don't support it?

Their actions don't support it only in your mind, because you have the strong opinion that a person without spirituality is a person without morals. But you have yet to make the connection between morals and spirituality (for me, anyway). Hopefully, if you answer the above question, I'll understand better.

They might say they have no spirituality, but then donate money to a charity, or go visit someone in a nursing home. Why? There isn't any good, logical, self-serving reason to do those things without spirituality.

YES THERE IS. There is a good, logical, self-serving reason to help people. It makes me feel good. And feel good about myself. Why? Because I like it. It's self-satisfying! I'm contributing to society and the world. I'm making a difference. Moving forward, progressing. It's human nature to want to move forward. Evolution is the perfect evidence for that. I feel good about 'throwing away money or wasting time with an unproductive member of society' in hopes of helping them to also progress. Toward what? I don't know. Humanity. We don't know. It's something in us that drives us. It's being human...

#1, it is absolutely impossible to define god.

OK. So, we can't define this thing, or even call it a 'thing', but you know it exists, have experienced it and cannot possibly tell me what it is. I don't think I can comment on that.

What I do know, and what I suppose makes me a gnostic theist, is that something spiritual, beyond my comprehension exists. I am a part of it, and it is a part of me. Everyone around me is also a part of it, and they are a part of me. We all share something on a level beyond the physical realm, but it is something we can experience even if we can't define it.

I would argue that you don't KNOW this, but you believe it. But if you feel you KNOW it, then you are a gnostic theist. My beliefs are very similar to yours, as you know, but I definitely don't KNOW it and I don't agree that you know it. Simply because, just as we really know nothing about "time" or other dimensions, we also know very little about ourselves, our brains and our potential. What science 'knows' about the physical body and the brain's power may be severely limited, due to our level of technical progression at this time. Consider telekinesis, "energy" and magnetism. There may be a LOT more to be learned about our interactions with this world and nature. Considering this, isn't it possible that the experience of "god" in your life is simply an extension of yourself and your thoughts... or maybe something that science is not yet aware of?

It's certainly a possibility that the experiences you've had with 'god' are actually your personal interpretation of a scientific stimuli in your brain, body or mind. having no spiritual connection whatsoever. But it's also possible that it's something you call 'god'.

For me, I don't really feel a need to define or understand it.

Clearly. But if I were going to live my life in a manner SO contrary to my nature (as you seem to be), I would certainly want to have a good understanding of what this 'thing' is and be able to articulate it to even convince myself not to rape and pillage.

I feel comfortable knowing it exists, and knowing that I need to use my time here to better my own inner being to a point that I can better connect with god.

I need to use my time here to better my own inner being, too. But that is its own reward for me. Making myself a better person.

I'll catch up more later. But for now...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Why wouldn't it be ok to be a terrible person without a spirituality involved?

Being a "terrible person" as you put it, is acting without regard to other people or their feelings. Being 100% selfish. And humans aren't. In other words, you're equating spirituality with unselfishness. And it's not black and white. Human beings do operate out of selfishness, but not entirely. We also operate out of compassion and selflessness.

I was taught as a small child that people are born bad, sinful, imperfect and undeserving... and have to redeem their wicked souls. That's beginning to surface as I read your posts. Do you carry that belief? That we are born short of the glory of god? That we are 'less than' and need improvement? Because it took me years to extricate that crap from my heart.

I don't understand how someone can justify a "good" behavior without spirituality.

And why do we have to 'justify' good behavior again? I think it's time you justify bad behavior. Because I have the belief that people are generally good and will come to the aid of their fellow man, NOT because of spirituality, but because we are human and relate to each other.

reply to post by SunnyDee


Cats do that. This is cat behavior, he's 'kneading' - he's not trying to resuscitate the dead cat.


.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

And what aspect of spirituality is keeping you from raping woman? Is it a threatened punishment? A promised reward? Explain the spiritual thought that keeps you from totally violating and abusing other people. Because my spirituality is not what keeps me from being a giant prick.

It definitely is not a threatened punishment. I believe I could outwit the police, and I don't believe in a hell. I do believe in a spiritual death where we run out of opportunities to do right and evolve, but it isn't a reward vs. punishment in my mind.

So, to answer your question, it is the aspect where I believe I have a purpose here. I believe my soul/spirit chose this existence for me to work on some aspect of bettering myself at a spiritual level. I believe I have this lifetime as an opportunity to attack my weaknesses head on. So, if my urges tell me to go in one direction, I often pray, or consider the teachings of the many religions, or maybe even share my desires with my wife, or brother, or friend, and work through it to decide for myself what is making me spiritually better, or spiritually worse. If a law, or a cultural norm doesn't seem in line with natural law, then sometimes I ignore it, as long as there aren't repercussions for myself or another. At other times, I realize things that might seem normal animalistic behavior are damaging to myself or another, and I work to overcome and conquer those.

So, we've been down this road before, maybe it is God, maybe it is a spiritual connection to one another, and maybe it is just a human development, but I believe it is significantly different than what other animals feel, and I believe it is intentional, and I believe this lifetime is an opportunity to explore, conquer, and polish my own soul so that I may evolve.

There may be a LOT more to be learned about our interactions with this world and nature. Considering this, isn't it possible that the experience of "god" in your life is simply an extension of yourself and your thoughts... or maybe something that science is not yet aware of?

Yes, a spiritual extension of myself.

I believe there is a "spark" of life. Technically my liver is "alive" according to science. The cells of my taste buds are alive. They can exist independent of me. Fungi are alive. BUT, humans have a "spark." It is a soul. I believe I have personally seen people without souls. I think the Bible even talks about people without souls in the end days. I have seen animals that I believed do have a soul. I think a soul is a piece of God, that chooses a physical existence in one embodiment or another in order to achieve some spiritual purpose. I also had this answer rammed into my head in response to a prayer, and some blasphemy as my son was struggling for life as an infant. I don't believe all of my thoughts are my own, because I often disagree with the answers I get from prayer. I truly believe that we are all getting specifically what we asked for, before we ever entered this body.

So, my inner conversations, and my experience of "god" could be coming from deep inside my own psyche, but that doesn't mean they are not also spiritual and supernatural, because I am a piece of that spiritual and supernatural world.

I was taught as a small child that people are born bad, sinful, imperfect and undeserving... and have to redeem their wicked souls. That's beginning to surface as I read your posts. Do you carry that belief? That we are born short of the glory of god? That we are 'less than' and need improvement? Because it took me years to extricate that crap from my heart.

Yes, but not sinful or "bad," just imperfect. I believe we have a choice whether or not we are born, and if we choose to come to this physical realm it is usually with some goal in mind for bettering our souls or experiencing this life in one way or another. I believe some people might come here with the intention of suffering. Maybe they need to really experience suffering, heartache, and hopelessness to fulfill an emptiness in their soul. I don't believe we all necessarily come here for good, but I believe we all have a choice, and we come here with a goal in mind for our spiritual development.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
.

reply to post by SunnyDee

 

Cats do that. This is cat behavior, he's 'kneading' - he's not trying to resuscitate the dead cat.


.

edit on 10/28/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)

Yes, cats do that, kneading, but I don't think that cat was just trying to find a good sleeping position, it was trying to wake up it's friend. Anyway that is what I believe is going on in the video.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
So, to answer your question, it is the aspect where I believe I have a purpose here. I believe my soul/spirit chose this existence for me to work on some aspect of bettering myself at a spiritual level. I believe I have this lifetime as an opportunity to attack my weaknesses head on. So, if my urges tell me to go in one direction, I often pray, or consider the teachings of the many religions, or maybe even share my desires with my wife, or brother, or friend, and work through it to decide for myself what is making me spiritually better, or spiritually worse.

If YOU (the very core of who you are) have the desire to be spiritually better, is that the spiritual 'you' or the physical one? And what's hard to understand about ME wanting just to be a better person in the world, without regard to spirit? If YOU believe all these things, and YOU want to be better, spiritually, why can't someone just want to be better NON-spiritually?

YOU, the person making decisions about your life, want to be better. YOU have decided that spirituality is a useful thing in your life. Why? Why would you even WANT spirituality if you knew that you could use it to better yourself? Who is that person who decides that spirituality is a good idea? Surely he's not a sociopath. Not many of them crave spirituality. He is a human being, and he wants to be better, so he studies spirituality, hoping it will make him better. That's a human being, not a sociopath.

If we live and exist in both a physical and spiritual realm, why is the physical person SO much different (selfish, greedy, uncaring) from a non-spiritual one? Spirituality is ONE way of achieving betterment, but there's more to life than spirituality.

Just because you can't fathom having morals without spirituality, doesn't mean that you're right. And I REALLY think you're wrong on this one. Especially as a pronouncement about all people. I'm sure there are those whose religion keeps them on the straight and narrow, but my morals come from me, not from religion or spirituality.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I think we are closer to agreeing than you might imagine. The "core" of me is a spiritual core. The physical me is an animal. I feel as though I am driving this body, or it is driving me. If I want to become better physically, I work out, eat right, take my vitamins, take my vaccinations, get some sun, but not tooooo much sun, etc., etc. If I want to be better spiritually, I have to take time for inner reflection, deep conversation, examination of my core beliefs and paradigms. I truly believe it takes both approaches, fully integrated to reach our potential. Things such as "discipline" can be learned from either approach.

If we live and exist in both a physical and spiritual realm, why is the physical person SO much different (selfish, greedy, uncaring) from a non-spiritual one? Spirituality is ONE way of achieving betterment, but there's more to life than spirituality.

Here I agree as well. The reason I think the physical being is selfish, greedy, and uncaring, is because it seems to be that way in the animal world, and it seems our natural urges as humans are such. Freud's "Id" is that way. Children are that way to a certain extent. Spoiled children and adults sometimes stay that way. Prisons are full, divorce is rampant, war is rampant, violence is rampant. Most economics theories are based on the principle that our core desires steer us in a selfish manner. Many theories, such as game theory, steer us to that belief. The only thing I see countering all of that is spirituality.

We live a dual life of competing interests it seems. I think this competing interest is very important for our development. It isn't supposed to be easy. We are supposed to be led astray, and learn inner reflection, and learn how to connect with our brothers and sisters, and we are supposed to strive to tap into that universal energy and knowledge source. We are supposed to learn to let go of some control interests and trust in faith or god or our fellow man in some way. We are supposed to look beyond our flesh and find something more.

You think that something more exists within us naturally, and so do I. But I think it can be described as god, and you don't. It seems like a small matter of semantics, but it is a raging global concern? This is my reason for the debate. I believe we are all seeking similar enlightenment but calling it different things and warring over an issue that doesn't exist. I find it hard to believe anybody is completely without spirituality, no matter what they might call it.

If I am wrong, then I would like to be shown a motivation paradigm for doing good that isn't based in some spiritual connection or social norm that originated in religion. Even the fact that you feel good for doing something nice is evidence to me of 2 things. It is evidence that game theory is correct and anything we do, we do for a personal reward so there is no truly selfless act, and it is also evidence that some innate spirituality rewards us for acting selflessly. It isn't based in logic, it is based in emotion, and emotion equals spirituality.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
... emotion equals spirituality.

And this is where we disagree. If a person was never introduced to religion or spirituality, they would still have emotions. Emotions are part of being human.

I won't speculate on animals much, because I don't know them as well as I know myself, but my animals sure seem to have emotions, and I don't think they're on some inner spiritual journey or having conversations with god. I think rabbits are pretty much the height of their spiritual journey... although I could be wrong. I mean,

reply to post by getreadyalready
Boy! I hope your wrong. If people had spirituality and then added to it morals anything could be called moral. Take for instance the best way to be spiritual. All you have to do is be thoughtful, in fact people are spiritual and never mention it simply because the act is natural! PS I dont want to visit your church.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


You could be right. I think some animals have emotion. Your guru does look like a deep thinker with that concerned eyebrow pose, LOL!

A very select few psychopaths are without emotion, and it is considered a mental illness, and as such it appears to be a physical ailment.

Religion, and cultural norms and laws have been around for so very long, that it is difficult to ascertain what we were born with and what we have learned. Is empathy an instinct or a learned behavior? If that could be determined with some surety, then my opinion could be swayed a little one way or another.

I think it is evidenced selfishly in one way. Even the most spiritual among us still grieve. Why? It must be selfish in nature, we are grieving for our own loss, not for the loved one that passed away, because we believe they have gone to a better place. I think grieving is evidence of weak faith or selfish tendencies, and I am guilty of it myself.

Something new in my life. I never had much empathy for child abuse victims. I mean, it was always terrible, I always disliked it, and thought it was a terrible shame, but I never felt it deeply until I had my own children. Now, every instance of child abuse just hurts me to my core. I know it is a learned empathy, because it wasn't there until I experienced and learned the ways of my own children. Their desire to be loved and accepted, and their trust, and their innocent expressions, and now, with those experiences inside me, when I see a child mistreated, it physically hurts me deeply!

So, from that, I can surmise that at least some forms of empathy are learned behavior.

Originally posted by libertybgordeal11
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Boy! I hope your wrong. If people had spirituality and then added to it morals anything could be called moral. Take for instance the best way to be spiritual. All you have to do is be thoughtful, in fact people are spiritual and never mention it simply because the act is natural! PS I dont want to visit your church.

Ahh, booo! I don't have a church just yet, but I am considering it, LOL! I attended mostly Nazarene Churches growing up, and I take my kids to a Baptist Church down the road from me here. The Pastor comes over about one night a month, and we have a discussion similar to the one here, LOL! For him, I always try to pin him down to Jesus' words stating, "No one gets to the Father, but through me." It is the singular thing keeping me from being a Christian. I do not believe any religion should be isolationist. I think everyone has an opportunity to reach enlightenment or heaven or whatever.

But, if I ever do start a church, you might want to check it out!! It will be interesting and fun and accepting of all folks, even those that disagree with me, and we will have lively debates!!