To: 2MAR$ who wrote (27140 ) 6/14/2012 8:08:40 PM From: one_less 1 Recommendation Respond to And some rightly think this would be innately in the realization of that which is good for you is good for another & what you would not like done to you , so you would try to refrain from doing to others . Does this make sense, Yes, all of your responses to that post were well thought out and sensible. Not saying your positions aren’t arguable but that wasn’t my point. then if it does why would this have to have some divine interlocutor enforcing it ? I’ve always thought enforcement of morality was a lost cause, since morality is rooted in principled beliefs which have been internalized, and in choice. Enforcement is more likely to engender resentment and rebellion than respect for the principle. Attempts at raw enforcement of morality have always seemed to me to be counterproductive. When it comes to the role of divinity, I've always thought of it as more of a guiding and encouraging role. Correction paired with guidance can be effective in loving relationships I suppose, like parent to child or even via the justice system; although I don’t have much confidence in the latter. Correction by natural consequences and constructive guidance via the wisdom of others is a more amenable situation for adults IMO, and so there is a proper place and use for ancient scriptures like those texts (proverbs and such) that were posted recently . If Religious authorities were able to keep that focus... you know, 'ministering unto the needs of others,' I doubt there would be so much contention over the issue. When you have young institutionalized preachers coming out of some degree program, what do you expect? I don't expect wisdom, I expect tyranny. The attraction of power and controlling others gets in the way of doing much good. When that becomes the status quo, the religious community(s) begin to look more like the NFL than divine emissaries.
