"I did not intend that as a personal insult or to insinuate that you in any way approve of what Hitler did"
I don't believe you. I wasn't born yesterday.
I admit it is difficult to discuss concepts of Natural Law which has been approached by many people from myriad directions. Nor is it always possible to know what any one person truly believed or felt on related issues. Therefore, let me simplify matters for you: I will set down a basic creed to highlight some of my personal principles. This will gainsay ambiguity and argue against your searching the internet for meaningless nit-picking around extraneous and irrelevant points of contention.
1). The principle of survival requires no logical justification. It is self-evident that one may strive to survive and that one ought to as a matter of self interest.
2). Man is a rational creature; and rational creatures survive by rational means. Therefore, the rational creates a moral basis.
3). Survival is bound with security of person and security of property (food, etc.). Therefore, safety is a Natural right...as is protection of property.
4). It is self-evident that the desire for happiness is innate in human nature.
5). Reason shows us that the natural goal of happiness requires freedom of choice.
Therefore, people ought to live together in such a way that these rights are supported by the laws of society. This is basically what the Constitution says. Notice I did not mention "Creator". There was no need. Rational living (moral conduct) exists independently of any and all fantasies and illusions.
All morality is based on reason. Sometimes the reasoning is sound; and sometimes it is adulterated by charlatans and priests. What is important is that I did NOT use "Creator" in this little replication of the Declaration. What does "Creator" add? NOTHING!
When did "Creator" ever guarantee a Constitution? When did "Creator" ever run down a thief or a killer? When did "Creator" ever help the poor, the sick, the afflicted? When did "Creator" ever bind a wound, or hold back the blood, or make a peace? When did Creator swing a judge's gavel or sit on a jury bench to reason out justice? The answer is: NEVER!
Morality is relative. It is created by man. It is created by mystics or by men of sound mind. It is a reasoned morality that acknowledges the reality of human existence; or it is a mystical morality which imposes a fantasy on both the willing and the unwilling. We spent centuries believing in mysticism (even Luther believed in demons). Now it is time to step away from demon based medicine; and it is also time to step away from demon-based morality. We no longer splash blood on nose, toe, and ear to cure disease...or to appease a pompous and insecure God projection. Nor ought we to create moral code based on primitive superstitions. The tribal morality of primitive people is hardly condign to modern man. It is 2004. The mystic moochers must go.
Morality has always been relative--it cannot be otherwise. It must be decided from country to country, from place to place, and from individual to individual. Everywhere it must be determined whether human conduct will answer to the rational or to the mystical.
Reason has common ground where all my meet. But the unicorns of mysticism may have one horn or a million tails. To the superstitious it is all the same... |
