G
Guest
Guest
So I took this from a previous thread of mine that went off topic. Two quotes stand out at me, and are as follows:
and
In my view, morals are a very subjective thing. It is subjective based on faith systems, and it is subjective based on different societies. I would think that a certain moral code would develop based on the growth and type of society that housed it, and perhaps even vice versa, kind of a chicken and egg type thing.
In response to Veritas's quote above, I would suggest he perhaps might be wrong about that. In the Christian viewpoint, he is after the ultimate reward, wich does not come until after death. In the agnostic but more specifically the atheist viewpoint, there is no afterlife, there is no heaven or hell. There is no eternal punishment but neither is there eternal reward.
That being said, to the agnostic or atheist, the only life there is, is the one he is living in here and now. Because of this, he is more likely to live a moral life within the confines of the society he lives in, as nobody wants to spend your only crack at existance in an 8'x10' jail cell.
Myself, I'm a hard working tax paying citizen of Canada. My criminal record check is clean, I don't do drugs, I haven't had a cigarette in a year and a half, I rarley if ever drink, and the only relationships i've had with women were monagamous and without only carnal intent (meaning for the purpose of a meaningful relationship, which was ended after long term incompatibilities were found). And I live this way without subscribing (at the moment) to any faith system.
There are many of faiths that use an opposite logic. Many believe that as long as they believe in jesus and pray to jesus,for example, that they will be saved, because mankind are inherant sinners and that is why jesus died for them, on the cross. This may or may not be true, and i'm sure a few of you may want to correct me on that matter, but I make the statement from personal observation.
Of course, what I say here isn't true in every case, or in most cases. I'll check that to say that very few people I know well live immoral lives, in my perspective, and I know people of many faiths.
People of many faiths, yes. That is common to where i'm sure most of the people on this board live. In north america, there are many, many people of different religious and ethnic backgrounds, that is the nature of the place we live. Everybody who has a different faith has a different take on things, based on what their faith says. Getting back to Gabby's comment on secular law, it is important in a multicultural society to subscribe to a secular law, to benefit the populous. The secular law can support many of the things that are common to todays society and most faiths, such as thou shalt not kill, steal, etc., and if it is in your faith to kill, too bad!!! Any moral code above and beyond that can be followed and subscribed to by the variouis faiths. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors possesions, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt have no other gods before me, all of these things can and should be carreid out within your faith without affecting anyone else, especially the last one. Coveting and lying are considered immoral by the secular perspective anyways, it just makes good sense in a civilized society.
Being as it is, my final comment is that all religion aside, it is the people who make up our society, and the society should be governed by and for those people. Above and beyond the basic governance are your faith based moral codes, wich have to do with the afterlife and your belief therein. This items are so much higher in importance than earthly concerns they should be held separate and to your own faith.
Veritas said:If all were for example, agnostics, there would still not be peace in the world. I suggest that it would be even worse than it is now. There would not even be a sense of morals to keep us from killing eachother.
and
Gabby'slittleangel said:Secular law once based on God's law, has become confused and is unrighteous.
In my view, morals are a very subjective thing. It is subjective based on faith systems, and it is subjective based on different societies. I would think that a certain moral code would develop based on the growth and type of society that housed it, and perhaps even vice versa, kind of a chicken and egg type thing.
In response to Veritas's quote above, I would suggest he perhaps might be wrong about that. In the Christian viewpoint, he is after the ultimate reward, wich does not come until after death. In the agnostic but more specifically the atheist viewpoint, there is no afterlife, there is no heaven or hell. There is no eternal punishment but neither is there eternal reward.
That being said, to the agnostic or atheist, the only life there is, is the one he is living in here and now. Because of this, he is more likely to live a moral life within the confines of the society he lives in, as nobody wants to spend your only crack at existance in an 8'x10' jail cell.
Myself, I'm a hard working tax paying citizen of Canada. My criminal record check is clean, I don't do drugs, I haven't had a cigarette in a year and a half, I rarley if ever drink, and the only relationships i've had with women were monagamous and without only carnal intent (meaning for the purpose of a meaningful relationship, which was ended after long term incompatibilities were found). And I live this way without subscribing (at the moment) to any faith system.
There are many of faiths that use an opposite logic. Many believe that as long as they believe in jesus and pray to jesus,for example, that they will be saved, because mankind are inherant sinners and that is why jesus died for them, on the cross. This may or may not be true, and i'm sure a few of you may want to correct me on that matter, but I make the statement from personal observation.
Of course, what I say here isn't true in every case, or in most cases. I'll check that to say that very few people I know well live immoral lives, in my perspective, and I know people of many faiths.
People of many faiths, yes. That is common to where i'm sure most of the people on this board live. In north america, there are many, many people of different religious and ethnic backgrounds, that is the nature of the place we live. Everybody who has a different faith has a different take on things, based on what their faith says. Getting back to Gabby's comment on secular law, it is important in a multicultural society to subscribe to a secular law, to benefit the populous. The secular law can support many of the things that are common to todays society and most faiths, such as thou shalt not kill, steal, etc., and if it is in your faith to kill, too bad!!! Any moral code above and beyond that can be followed and subscribed to by the variouis faiths. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors possesions, thou shalt not bear false witness, thou shalt have no other gods before me, all of these things can and should be carreid out within your faith without affecting anyone else, especially the last one. Coveting and lying are considered immoral by the secular perspective anyways, it just makes good sense in a civilized society.
Being as it is, my final comment is that all religion aside, it is the people who make up our society, and the society should be governed by and for those people. Above and beyond the basic governance are your faith based moral codes, wich have to do with the afterlife and your belief therein. This items are so much higher in importance than earthly concerns they should be held separate and to your own faith.