No Religion, No Morals?

[CSwriter1]

Taimoor2, responded to the idea of no more religion, with concern for our morality. The book "The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer, gives some scientific reasons for our morality. To start with, we are social animals, as are primates. Because social animals depend on each other for survival, their survial depends on their social position. This makes morality a biological condition.

The above means, if a Christian president decides to attack a small country on false pretenses, good Christians will support all the attrocities of war against people who are only human like you and I, for social reasons! Those who love power, love what the President is going, and being identified with the winning team, putting our nation at great risk. For them the winning team has God on their side. They will also avoid all reality of war, except the facts that make them feel good. Excuse me- not all Christians did this, but with the reelection of Bush, clearly too many of them did.

Look at your bible. The south used the bible to justify slavery. Read Leviticus 25:1-55

Some Christians use the bible to justify war and ignoring poverty, and others use the bible to protest war and provide charity. The old testament God is a war god, this God is little different from Zeus, before understanding the principles of democracy. Also check out Calvinism and Puritans and what this has to do with capitalism. This opposing Catholism which is more forgiving and charitable.

Clearly Moslems are also divided on this issue of the killing of God's enemies and not killing them. And Aztecs sure were not peaceful people without blood on their hands!

Socrates and all philosophers behind democracy, have taught ethics/morality can be learned. The highest morality comes out of good reasoning, and the worst morality comes out of superstition. Which do you think is best for humanity? In the United States for until 1958, we had liberal education, that was about preparing individuals for good reasoning and life in a self governing country.

[vicente]

Buddhism on Morality:

"Morality can only be imposed from without when we are asleep. Morality is nothing but a deep suppression. We can not do anything while asleep,...we can only suppress. Through morality we become false,...we will not be a person, but simply a just a pseudo entity. That is to say, only a dishonest person clings to morality.

A moral person is concerned with ideals,...how we should be, what we should be, how to be convenient to society,...and thus inconvenient to ourself.

The preachers have convinced the whole world that "we are sinners". This is good for them, because unless we are convinced, their profession cannot continue. Religion is built on us being sinners, on our inferiority complex, thus creating an inferior humanity.

Love is not concerned with our so-called morals, our social formalities, etc. Love is neither concerned with immorality, it makes no difference between a thief and a saint. Immorality comes from the disturbed mind of morality. Love is amoral. Morality and concepts concerning moral behavior are irrelevant for love.

Morality is basically condemning. We are never the ideal so we are condemned. Every morality is guilt-creating. Love does not condemn.

Of necessity, every morality creates hypocracy. Hypocracy will remain with morality, for it is part of it, like a shadow. This will look paradoxical because moralists are the men who condemn hypocracy the most, and yet they are the creators of it.

Hypocracy cannot disappear from the earth unless morality disappears. They exist together as two sides of the same coin. Morality gives us the ideal and we are not the idea; that is why the ideal is given to us. Then we start feeling that we are wrong, and that this wrongness is natural, it is given to us, we are born with it, born with sin. We cannot transform it, only suppress it,...that is easy.

But what can we do. We can create a false face; we can pretend to be something we are not. This saves us; allows religion to save us. Then we can move more easily and conveniently in society. Inwardly we have to suppress the real because the unreal can only be imposed only if the real is suppressed. So our reality goes on moving downward into the unconscious and our unreality becomes our conscious. Our unreal part becomes more dominant and the real recedes back.

We condemn the real and we enforce the unreal, because the unreal is going to be helpful in an unreal society and the unreal is going to be convenient. Where everyone is false, the real is not going to be convenient. And thus, in the vicious cycle, we train our children to be false". Rajneesh Chandra Mohan

[CSwriter1]

"A moral person is concerned with ideals,...how we should be, what we should be, how to be convenient to society,...and thus inconvenient to ourself." Oh yes, I agree with this statement. Isn't it fun?!

"The preachers have convinced the whole world that "we are sinners". This is good for them, because unless we are convinced, their profession cannot continue. Religion is built on us being sinners, on our inferiority complex, thus creating an inferior humanity." We don't all have to accept this definition of sin, nor any religion. I perfer a definition of sin that Socrates might agree with. In this case, being born in a state of sin, would simple mean lacking consciousness and needing to learn everything. This is what makes the game fun.