Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (54714)	8/16/2002 10:29:49 AM
From: J. C. Dithers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Because you think that the absolute authority of religion should rule and that debate among humans about what is best for humanity is irrelevant? I'm going to do a stream-of-consciousness exercise this morning to imagine a future time when science is able to prove definitively that there is no God ... period. Thus, religions lose all of their claim to moral authority. (I am aided in this exercise by the unexpected and quite sudden battering of the Catholic church's claim to moral authority). I would find myself adrift in the sea of "morality." Why have I been making such an issue about homosexuality? What difference does it make if people of the same gender prefer doing it to each other? As long as it doesn't touch me in any way ... who cares? Teen age promiscuous sex is epidemic. We may have to do something about it. It is all just biology, a matter of hormones and testosterone. There is no right or wrong to it, as we are only animals, albeit highly intelligent ones, but still captives of our instincts. We should make sure every teenager has condoms and birth control pills. At least that way we can stop the flood of unwanted pregnancies. Pass 'em out. We have a real problem on our hands with a global population explosion. We have to put the brakes on it. Our obligations are to the living. Abortion needs to made readily available everywhere and at no cost. Drug use is a personal choice. Users have every right to that choice. I have to respect their rights if I expect them to respect mine. Warring on drugs is a stupid waste. What right do I have to deny others their pleasures? Self-denial makes no sense. We only have this one life, and pursuit of happiness is everyone's right. The only rational test is, does someone else's choice impinge upon my choices or my rights? If not, it's none of my business. A lot of people want to kill themselves. So what, that doesn't affect me. And on and on it goes. I have to learn to be a "humanist," because that is all that is left to be. I have to understand what "dignity" means, because that seems to be the key to distinguishing my species from the rest of the animal kingdom, where creatures routinely kill and eat each other. There is nothing special in my nature as a human, except what I can intellectually contrive, as with my "dignity." I don't have a "soul." I will not be held accountable in any way for my actions or behaviors, except by my fellow humans. Whatever I do that escapes their attention is a matter between I, myself, and me ... if I am comfortable with it, and it makes me happy, it is the thing to do. There are no other consequences. Everyone else around me is living their life by the same standards. This is a barren and frightening prospect to me, Karen. So yes, I want to hold on to the "absolute authority of religion" as a speed regulator and a constant. I think it is possible to distinguish among religions those whose effects on behavior are constructive, from those that are destructive. Some of the "rules" of a religion seem silly to me, like not eating meat on Friday. Yet, it's worth a dozen silly, but harmless rules, to get one like "Thou Shalt Not Kill," a commandment which comes with the highest moral authority and the force of the consequences in more than just this life for breaking it. None of us will ever know in this life whether religions are true, whether belief in God is true, or whether they themselves are human contrivances. But I despair to think what life on earth might descend to in their absence. No, I do not think that debate by humans about what is best for humanity can take their place.