<< 4. There is no such thing as a rock solid moral code, religious or otherwise. All ancient moral codes have been modified to conform to modern social norms and secular laws. >>
What do you call for a Morality based on UNCHANGING MORAL PRICIPLES and VALUES? Are not the UNCHANGING MORAL PRICIPLES and VALUES valid in all societies? Are not the UNCHANGING MORAL PRICIPLES and VALUES valid in all ages? Are not the UNCHANGING MORAL PRICIPLES and VALUES like basic human beings' need? Just curios! Cip -----Original Message----- [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Santosh Helekar, Sent: 14 July 2006 08:47 In my last post in this thread I had made a humble request to not be subjected to gratuitous name-calling, derisive remarks and prejudiced assumptions meant to portray me as morally and intellectually inferior to members who are affiliated with some religious and other groups. I am very sorry to note that this simple plea of mine was not heeded. It is really disappointing to see someone refusing to show a fellow human being the simple courtesy of honoring a humble request made in good faith. My simple questions remain unanswered, once again. What I have to face, instead, is an even more pronounced display of viciousness and hostility. I have no idea why anybody would behave in this manner merely because of simple disagreements. However, ignoring these negative emotions, yet again, I restate my humble request to not resort to them in any future responses in this thread. Because my views on the issue of religion and morality have been completely, and perhaps, deliberately, misrepresented by M. Goveia on Goanet, I will briefly reiterate them. Then I will conclude by responding to the very few specific M. Goveia statements that do not include grossly biased and aggressive distortions of my views. My position on morality and religion is already well known to people who have cared to read, without intentionally or unintentionally misuderstanding, what I have written on Goanet on this topic over the last decade. Briefly and simply stated, my position is the following: 1. Morality is a fundamental part of human nature with a sound biological and evolutionary basis. 2. Religion does not confer it on a fundamentally immoral human being. Religion is neither necessary nor sufficient in this respect. In other words, religious people can be immoral, and the non-religious can be moral. Evidence indicates that both are equally prone to immoral and criminal behavior. 3. There is both good and bad in all religions. There is also good and bad in the absence of religion. They are just like any other field of human activity. They do not deserve any kind of special treatment. 4. There is no such thing as a rock solid moral code, religious or otherwise. All ancient moral codes have been modified to conform to modern social norms and secular laws. 5. The notion that there is some kind of practical or theoretical difference between a religious group member and a non-religious individual in terms of the nature of their morality is pure nonsense. 6. All harmful religious and non-religious practices ought to be exposed and, whenever possible, eradicated. 7. One has to be tolerant towards all innocuous religious and non-religious practices. Some of them might even deserve our respect. Mario Goveia wrote: > > Can you cite who has "associated" you with Hitler, > including exactly what they said? > In your last post you, M. Goveia, have associated me with Adolph Hitler. Your post is accessible at http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2006-July/045413.html The specific sentence of yours can be quoted as: "[Only if one pretends to, like the Mafia, and your favorite but bogus example of a Christian, Adolph Hitler.]" Goanetters who do not have any unnecessary hostility towards me, let me assure you that Adolph Hitler was never my favorite example of a Christian. > > Can you cite who has portrayed you as morally and > intellectually inferior to anyone, including exactly > what they said? > You, M. Goveia, have repeatedly tried to portray me as morally and intellectually inferior in the same post as above. Here is the link again: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2006-July/045413.html One of several examples of this is the following quote: "[One has to belong to an organization to appreciate losing credibility within it or the more serious consequences of being excluded from the group or publicly censured by the group's leadership. The closest example for you to perhaps understand what it means to lose credibility on a forum such as Goanet is by alluding to religion as "mob or herd mentality" while insinuating that you have a superior moral code based simply on the self-serving hubris that you are, "...able to acquire knowledge and wisdom by reading and thinking deeply and rationally for himself/herself." Yeah, right. If so, how come we see so little from you of that delusion in this thread or on this topic?]" Unbiaed and impartial Goanetters who have no hostility towards me would grant that I am capable of reading and thinking for myself, and I do not suffer from delusions. They would also grant that I have no less credibility than an average Goanetter, and that I, like any average Goanetter, does not lose credibility merely because of some biased detractor of mine says so. I will respond separately to other comments of M. Goveia after ascertaining that they do not contain any grossly biased and aggressive distortions of my views. Cheers, Santosh _______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org _______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
