Morality

onelongsong

redrock wrote:

I know! I get carried away, but had to put things straight!!!!! All this defining has nothing to do with the morality debate!

but it does. the original post offered religion as a possible basis for morality. we cannot reasonably debate the issue until we agree on the deffinition of religion.

redrock

onelongsong wrote:

but it does. the original post offered religion as a possible basis for morality. we cannot reasonably debate the issue until we agree on the deffinition of religion.

I think we all understand what religion is but maybe to speed things up we can accept the dictionary's definition (wording may vary from dictionary to dictionary but they are all somewhat common). Let's not split the hair in four - we will only be going in circles.

We are only saying that religion (with the generally accepted definition) is only one of the multitude of paths to follow to have moral values. We are not having a debate on religion but on morality in general. Let's not turn this into another 'religion' thread.

cornnifer

redrock wrote:

Theism doesn't mean the worship of the gods. You may believe they exist but you may also not worship them... at least, I think...

**quickly goes to dictionary**

EDIT: Checked... I'm right

Actually, despite what you or your dictionary say, i would argue that you are still wrong. Religion, IMO involves incense, smoke, confession, rote memorization of prayer, pilgrimage, stonings of the devil, or any other REQUIRED behavior or set of behavioral guidelines. i'll agree there is a fine line between faith and religion, but there is, in fact, a line, and it is a line that you and your trusty dictionary fail to acknowledge. Believing in God and even choosing to worship God, does not make one "religious".

redrock

cornnifer wrote:

Actually, despite what you or your dictionary say, i would argue that you are still wrong. Religion, IMO involves incense, smoke, confession, rote memorization of prayer, pilgrimage, stonings of the devil, or any other REQUIRED behavior or set of behavioral guidelines. i'll agree there is a fine line between faith and religion, but there is, in fact, a line, and it is a line that you and your trusty dictionary fail to acknowledge. Believing in God and even choosing to worship God, does not make one "religious".

I was talking about theism and not the difference between faith and religion (which I agree can be different).

But I am no longer responding to any definition posts!! (Promise Helen!!! :D)

Collin

onelongsong wrote:

was that dictionary written by God or man? deffinitions change over the years.
if i say a chic is cool; does that mean she's cold; hot; or someone you like?
the world used to defined as flat. the solar system used to be defined as the sun revolving around the earth. religion used to be the sacrifice of something important to you; given to God.

if that is their deffinition; then my definition is correct because that is my belief or system of belief as contained in your presented deffinition.

If all these concept are interpretable by anyone and anyone can make up definitions as they please why do you say something like this:

onelongsong wrote:

once again i'll tell you that you're confusing church with religion.

Heineken Helen

redrock wrote:

I was talking about theism and not the difference between faith and religion (which I agree can be different).

But I am no longer responding to any definition posts!! (Promise Helen!!! :D)

Ahhhh see what you've gone and done now

I'm starting to remember why I stopped posting here

So if we're going by those definitions... are we saying the original poster who suggested one cannot have morality without religion was going by that one definition of how 'religion is what is within you' and all that????? I think to clarify, we need that poster's definition of religion and THEN we can debate it.

onelongsong

Collin wrote:

If all these concept are interpretable by anyone and anyone can make up definitions as they please why do you say something like this:

i hate to answer a question with a question; but who started these churches? and why so many different "religions"? i can become a minister for $20.00 out of the back of a magazine. i then get all the tax benefits and all that goes with it. i can start a church to honor the return of the GREAT WHITE BUFFALO and thus form a religion. recognised and protected under the constitution. all for $20.00.
now this fits your deffinition perfectly.
is it a a tax dodge? is a quest for power or recognition? it's a religion by law. so where does this leave your argument?

CorporateWhore

mammasan wrote:

Well call me foolish them because I was bothered by it.

Religion has the sole source of morality, yes.

Society pulls its morality from religion, whether society knows it or not.

Everyone in society is not necessarily religious.

Therefore, non-religious people can have morality too. They're influenced by social morality which has been influenced by religious morality.

redrock

Heineken Helen wrote:

Ahhhh see what you've gone and done now

I'm starting to remember why I stopped posting here

So if we're going by those definitions... are we saying the original poster who suggested one cannot have morality without religion was going by that one definition of how 'religion is what is within you' and all that????? I think to clarify, we need that poster's definition of religion and THEN we can debate it.

That was onelongsong's definition. Mammasan didn't define anything, I would have thought she speaks of religion in the way most of us would understand it - worshipping a god and following a doctrine. However, as following a generally accepted religious doctrine (whichever it may be) and living by its standards is only ONE way of living morally and having values, can this debate not continue with just humanity so we don't get bogged down by people who are nitpicking?

Abookamongstthemany

CorporateWhore wrote:

Religion has the sole source of morality, yes.

Society pulls its morality from religion, whether society knows it or not.

Everyone in society is not necessarily religious.

Therefore, non-religious people can have morality too. They're influenced by social morality which has been influenced by religious morality.

Most people know right from wrong without having to check to see what everyone else thinks about it first. People can think for themsleves you know.

redrock

CorporateWhore wrote:

Society pulls its morality from religion, whether society knows it or not.

Oh yeah?????

CorporateWhore

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Most people know right from wrong without having to check to see what everyone else thinks about it first. People can think for themsleves you know.

Wow. That was utter genius.

My point was that your parents/gay couple/foster parent raise you with certain social ethical norms. They norms come from religion, whether you like it or not. It's not that you need to check back in the Bible for every ethical dilemma you encounter - you know the right thing to do based on how you were raised and your conscience.

"The right thing" was planted by social ethical norms which were started by religion.

onelongsong

CorporateWhore wrote:

Wow. That was utter genius.

My point was that your parents/gay couple/foster parent raise you with certain social ethical norms. They norms come from religion, whether you like it or not. It's not that you need to check back in the Bible for every ethical dilemma you encounter - you know the right thing to do based on how you were raised and your conscience.

"The right thing" was planted by social ethical norms which were started by religion.

i can prove you wrong quite easily. an abused child i've worked with had terrible parents. drug users; theives; and whos father is now in prison for murder. what did those parents teach her? she always does the right thing and is a wonderful person and a joy to know.
on the other hand; my parents taught me to do the right thing and be a good person and humanitarian and i do always try to do what's right and help my fellow man when ever i can.
so we have two different teachings and enviornments yet the outcome of those enviornments are the same.
entering a third variation; i know 2 friends from high school whom i grew up with that had wonderful parents who taught them well but they turned out to be terrible people.
so how do these variations fit into your equation?

gemma

CorporateWhore wrote:

"The right thing" was planted by social ethical norms which were started by religion.

No. You are not going back far enough. Religions incorporated (and institutionalized) morality that was already present in human societies before the first god was ever conceived. The very earliest humans knew that you had to take care of each other to survive. That was the beginning of morality.

Abookamongstthemany

CorporateWhore wrote:

Wow. That was utter genius.

My point was that your parents/gay couple/foster parent raise you with certain social ethical norms. They norms come from religion, whether you like it or not. It's not that you need to check back in the Bible for every ethical dilemma you encounter - you know the right thing to do based on how you were raised and your conscience.

"The right thing" was planted by social ethical norms which were started by religion.

For some people those norms come from within. Not everyone bases their thinking on norms. When I was little I disagreed with stuff from the bible because I felt it was wrong such as hell esp for those who were condemned to it for not being christian. And I thought it was wrong to condemn gay people when I didn't see any reason it should be wrong. No one told me to think that way, it was just how I felt. It was far from the norm to go against what the bible said in my grandmother's house or in the region I live in. So who influenced my morality?

redrock

gemma wrote:

No. You are not going back far enough. Religions incorporated (and institutionalized) morality that was already present in human societies before the first god was ever conceived. The very earliest humans knew that you had to take care of each other to survive. That was the beginning of morality.

You beat me to that! Thus entering the debate that morality is a part of human nature....

onelongsong

redrock wrote:

You beat me to that! Thus entering the debate that morality is a part of human nature....

and religions teach that God is a part or at least in everyone; so.............
back to square one.

mammasan

CorporateWhore wrote:

Religion has the sole source of morality, yes.

Society pulls its morality from religion, whether society knows it or not.

Everyone in society is not necessarily religious.

Therefore, non-religious people can have morality too. They're influenced by social morality which has been influenced by religious morality.

Yes religious doctrine does have an influence but it is not the sole influence, hence my statement that religion was not the sole province of morality. All of our understandings of what is write and what is wrong does not stem from religious doctrine. Does religion play a role in it, of course it does, but by no means is religion the foundation of morality.

redrock

onelongsong wrote:

and religions teach that God is a part or at least in everyone; so.............
back to square one.

Not really... Religious 'teaching' means that someone had to come up with the idea first to be able to 'spread the word', ie. external influence of one (or more) opinions. Gemma is talking before any of these external influences, before religion incorporated these basic human traits. You may believe god is in you... great.... a lot of people don't.

Cosmo

CorporateWhore wrote:

Religion has the sole source of morality, yes.

Society pulls its morality from religion, whether society knows it or not.

Everyone in society is not necessarily religious.

Therefore, non-religious people can have morality too. They're influenced by social morality which has been influenced by religious morality.

...
This would work only if the founding statement was correct:
"Religion has the sole source of morality, yes."
That is not a true statement. It is a relative truth... that is, it is your truth and not the absolute truth.