--Beth, Pseudo usenet cop Merlin MTB, BikeE AT, RANS gliss, Trek R200, Kickbike Owned by Kavik (Samoyed Boy) and Toklat (Keeshond Boy) Anchorage, Alaska
----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 7:56 PM Subject: RE: Bad Faith - TNR Article > I was going along agreeing with everything this article had to say until: > > "Many cultural conservatives equate secularism with relativism, and they > genuinely believe that religion is the only source of morality. I think > that's theoretically simplistic and empirically absurd--I doubt atheists and > agnostics lie, cheat, steal, or fly airplanes into skyscrapers any more than > anyone else." > > Since the writer hedges his accusations against "cultural conservatives," > (saying "many" instead of "all"), it's hard to argue that point, though I > think it's a bit of a generalization. However, when he says: "I doubt > atheists and agnostics lie, cheat, steal, or fly airplanes into skyscrapers > any more than anyone else. ...," he is not arguing that atheists believe in > morality. At best he's saying that most atheists behave in a manner > consistent with generally accepted moral and ethical codes. I think he is saying that athiests aren't any less moral than cultural conservatives. And I agree - atheism and morality are not mututally exclusive conditions. > Many, many people whom I've debated moral relativism with have often times > said, "I don't lie or cheat or steal, but that doesn't mean that it wouldn't > be morally permissible for another person to lie, cheat or steal." A person > can avow moral relativism while still maintaining a moral code. "morally permissable"? I have no idea what that means. However, there have been times in my life where I have lied in order to save someone elses feelings. It was a matter of weighing the morality of really hurting someone for no gain other than being honest, or telling them a lie. I chose the lie as the lesser of the two evils. It doesn't mean that its better than not telling the lie and not hurting someones feelings - I would prefer not to tell the lie but someone elses feelings to me are more important than my preference to tell the truth. If your pregnant wife asks you if her ass is getting bigger, and you say "no,honey, I love your ass" even though it is getting bigger is that a terrible, immoral thing to do. Do religious people never lie? cheat? steal? sin? Of course they do. Lucky for them, in many religions you can confess or atone and have your sins go away in the eyes of god. Me, I have to live with mine forever. The worst thing I ever did is still with me like it was yesterday, and I will always feel terrible about it. > It is also a logical jump to conclude: Person A doesn't say statement X, > therefore that person believes proposition Y. Silence by Bush, for example, > on the morality of atheists doesn't mean he doesn't believe atheists are > moral. He may believe that, but it's also possible that the question has > never occurred to him. It might be nice if he used language more like Tony > Blair's, but to condemn him for his silence is as disingenuous as putting > words in his mouth. I would agree with you, although I suspect (suspect being the key word) that Bush thinks one needs religion to be moral. > Having gone out on that precipice, the author does save himself at the end > by correcting the flaw of an actual Bush statement and drawing an accurate > conclusion, but this still doesn't mean the writer hasn't unfairly labeled > Bush as a person who views atheists as immoral. Bush could very well > believe that many atheists, if not all, are moral, because they are human. > Since most conservatives believe that basic morals are innate, then no > conservative would be surprised at finding a moral atheist. Bush could very > well believe that moral teachings, as he's praised, do not teach morality so > much as it refines the culture's moral code and acts as a counter balance to > those who would teach moral relativism. > > The general thrust of the author's article is laudable. Our elected and > appointed officials statements on faith should be examined and questioned, > but I quibble with some of his logic. > > H. > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Hall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 4:09 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Bad Faith - TNR Article > > > The New Republic has an interesting article on religion and some thoughts on > Bush/Ashcroft statements. > > http://www.thenewrepublic.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020325&s=trb032502 > > jon > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
