Are you religious? Or pious?

[trish]

though the metaphysics you refer to doesn't resonate well with my instrument, the heart of your message, yodajazz, reverberates nicely with mine.

[hippifried]

Well... If I could define love, you'd never see me because I would have already written the book & be sailing on my personal luxury liner surrounded by all the love money can buy.

My take on religious rules about love & sex goes something like this:
If there were such a thing as an omnicient creator of the universe, it makes no sense that such a critter would be the slightest bit interested in making rules about mating rituals. It just seems that adding to the human neuroses would be counter productive, & that such a being shouldn't be neurotic itself. As far as anyone knows, human monogamy is a social & cultural construct & fairly new in our history. If this was an edict from God, one would think it should have been written into the genome. That doesn't appear to be the case since such a large portion of the population hasn't gotten the memo.


The code:

The universal code of human interaction, commonly known as "the Golden Rule", is the basis for all morals & ethics. Treat others as you would prefer to be treated by others is a simple concept that, when followed, allows us to live in close proximity to other people. We're social animals. The code is neutral, & works whether one approaches it from a purely egoistic, altruistic, or combined point of view. It's universal & understood by all cultures. It might even be hardwired like an instinct. Most people follow the code most of the time, & everyone knows when they're in violation. When someone continuously violates it, we call them criminals or crazy, & look for ways to remove them from the general population.

Think about it. When the code is violated, everybody knows, despite all the dancing around with long winded justifications or lame excuses. The code tells us the difference between right & wrong. If it doesn't relate to the code, it's just an arbitrary rule & has no moral authority. All the great preachers & philosophers upon whose teachings religious sects are based, preached the code. There's been lots of embellishments & added arbitrary rules, & there's a raft of arguments about them. There's really no argument (outside the one for "Manifest Destiny") that being an asshole & violating the code is the right thing to do.


Oh & Trish: The least you could do is mount a camera on the headboard to capture those morning sessions. Or at least leave the curtains open so you don't keep blocking my view from accross the street. It's cold out here too, so I wouldn't be averse to you inviting me in to spy on you from that shadow in the corner of your bedroom. I'll bring the hot toddies.

[yodajazz]

If we are talking about the moral code from religions, then sex is important. It is important to steer males to remain faithful in a family unit. Too many men might run wild but morality tells them what's 'the right thing to do'. I just think that it is not as important to promote traditional relationships as it was 1500 years ago.

I think that 'do unto others' comes into play in relationships in regards to cheating. That does hurt a lot of people.

I believe in God becuase the unverse is ruled by laws. But I can understand people being skeptical of religous doctrine.

I happen to believe that 'asshole' behavior usually comes back to hurt the person, whether one atributes it to God or not.

[hippifried]

The code isn't religious. Morality isn't religious. Morality predates all religions. Religious morality is merely memetic. It's a power grab. The power of the shaman over the superstitious predates the rise of kings. Kings were originally the designated human sacrifices. Things change, but not our nature. We're still driven by the 2 base instincts of survival & propagation.

It is the nature of the male of the species to spread his seed as far & wide as possible. This predates not only civilization, but the knowlege of paternity. It's the nature of the female to mate with whichever male has the attributes that attract her, regardless of whatever ritualistic rules anyone has told her to follow. This predates the knowlege of paternity & the rise of shamanistic rules. If the universe is ruled by laws, & I can agree with that from what I've seen personally although my conclusions differ, then why do religious & social mores insist that we rebuke them? It just doesn't jive. Sexual fidelity is a manmade arbitrary rule. It's been repeated so often that we now expect the promise of fidelity with all sexual encounters unless prior arrangements are made, & there's arbitrary laws against that too.

I ain't buying it. I don't see where monogamy is natural at all for our species. It started out as a form of slavery after the discovery of paternity. Maybe even before. Women have been treated as chattel all over the world until just the last century or so. Marriage is still treated as a transfer of ownership, even if the ownership is mutual. I'll give credence to religious morality & piety when I see religions get out of the slavery business. Infidelity only hurts people because they refuse to accept the freedom of those they claim they love. You can't lose what you don't own. If the promise of fidelity is sincere & mutual, then it goes beyond a social arbitrary rule passed down through the memes of tradition. Only then can the promise be tied to following the code & surpass the the idea of ownership.

The code is the only moral authority. If it doesn't fit the code, it's not a moral issue. Of the Ten Commandments, only 3 are covered by the code. And they're written into every codified law in the world. The 3 are: Thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not steal, & thou shalt not bear false witness. All the rest is arbitrary or impossible to follow. The code is the only rule that's universal, & it doesn't matter which shaman said what about what he/she claims to be the revealed word of God.

[yodajazz]

I don’t disagree with what you say. I just think there is a bigger reality to things than your statements. The ‘code’ can be separated from religion as ethics, but religion can not be separated from the code as morality. Religion gives people not only a code which aids immediate survival, but a connection to things outside of their immediate view. This goes beyond their own natural lives. Survival and propagation are greatly helped by social contracts by large groups of people who do not have any other bonds besides that. Religion generally gives people a social contract to treat others fairly, with kindness and charity. Even though the same religion might be used brand outsiders, as heathen, infidels, etc, one shouldn’t ignore the positive contributions to society. For example with the Catholic religion, a few priests have done damage to some individuals. But on the other hand the Catholic Charities social service organization has help probably hundreds of thousands of people over the years. I say the problem is not so much with the religion, but with people using parts of it for political or personal gain.

As for rules about fidelity, I certainly agree that the natural man would be happy to spread his seed far and wide. But this is a case where social survival is more important than natural instincts. Societies where men are expected to have single mate have prospered. It seems to be a good environment to raise children. In fact, men being free to sleep with a multiple women, reduces the incentive to provide for the children they produce. The natural state of humans helps individual survival, but once there are sufficient numbers of people to insure survival, social contracts help more people to survive and prosper. But if you feel that sexual fidelity is no necessary for humans, and can convince multiple women to go along with you, I will not judge you. That’s because I choose to honor the Christian value which says not to judge people (harshly).

In today’s world, couples in relationship increase freedom in many ways. For example the partner may be there to provide for them in a change of career or extended illness. Two incomes provides more options. In case of children, while one partner is taking care of the children one can be out making money. If all goes well those children can help the family unit when they grow larger or reach adulthood.

In ideal world it would be great if “the promise of fidelity” would last forever but it doesn’t. I don’t think there is anybody that has not been severely tempted by a sweet young thing as their mate grows older and they have been with their mate in their most unpolished states for great periods of time. Religious vows and divorce laws help provide for social stability.

Lastly as for the Ten Commandments there are different versions. But I would view the commandment to ‘honor thy father and mother’, to be part of ‘the code’ and very practical. Also it says “not to covet” which includes desiring things which don’t bleand to you, and is also the same as being greedy is a part of ‘the code’ also.

So as to the orginal question of the thread: I consider myself to be a religious person. I think religion can help people to organize the processes of theuniverse and life in their minds. It help people to prioritize which values are important for their well being in their every day lives.

[hippifried]

Bigger reality? Hmmm... I was always under the impression that reality is reality no matter what.

How do you separate the code from morality or ethics? Why would you want to? The code works whether you look at it from an egoistic or altruistic standpoint. Religion only affects the code when used as a tool to justify violating it. Same for any ideology. When used in that way, said religion or ideology becomes a violation of the code & therefore immoral in & of themselves. The code is the social contract that lets us live in close proximity to each other. I personally think it's hardwired as an instinct. As social critters, if people didn't follow the code as a norm, we might not have even survived as a species let alone prospered like we have.

Whether or not someone prefers monogamous relationships is not an issue of morality. The only issue of morality involved is whether or not the parties involved understand the vows they make & stick to them. Formulated vows don't work because nobody can expect others to blindly follow their personal ideals completely, & make no mistake, we're talking about personal ideals. If this was a perfect ideal, we wouldn't need marriage laws which are over 90% rules for disolution of the contract. I won't argue whether monogamy has helped or hindered human prosperity. I'll have to think on that a while. However, I do believe that having too many arbitrary rules with draconian enforcement stifles any society.

The current "nuclear family" ideal is a recent construct. Just in the last half century or so. Dick & Jane along with Leave it to Beaver crammed it down everybody's throat until we started to believe that this meme was a true depiction of the norm. In reality, prior to WWII, the ideal norm was an extended family the kids surrounded by parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, & cousins.

Lastly as for the Ten Commandments there are different versions. But I would view the commandment to ‘honor thy father and mother’, to be part of ‘the code’ and very practical. Also it says “not to covet” which includes desiring things which don’t bleand to you, and is also the same as being greedy is a part of ‘the code’ also.

What if they're assholes? Fertilizing an egg doesn't make one honorable. You honor someone because they earn your respect. It has to be voluntary. Kids look up to those adults that are closest to them whether they deserve it or not.

Nobody can control which ideas pop into their head. you control your reactions to them, but not the thoughts themselves. Everybody covets. The rule is impossible to follow. The rule against theft, which is part of the code, covers the reaction to coveteousness. Greed only violates the code if you expect something different from others. If you're going to be greedy, don't beg.

I think religion can help people to organize the processes of theuniverse and life in their minds. It help people to prioritize which values are important for their well being in their every day lives.

Whatever floats your boat. There's no rule anywhere that one can't hold themselves to a higher standard than what's written. It only becomes a moral issue, by virtue of being a violation of the code, when the arbitrary rules get forced on others.

[El Nino]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...48042993700360

[El Nino]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...48042993700360