Morality derives not of religion.

[wolf560]

So what’s the moral; power without accountability is the greatest of evils, it doesn’t matter what politics they use, nor if it’s the state, religion or crazed dictators, give people too much power and they will abuse it....

Agreed-
Absolute Power corrupts Absolutely

[Attila]

Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off". "Basically, people who don't want to be Australians, and they don't want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then they can basically clear off,"

So Australians should be like aborigines then!

Well to me multiculture simply facilitates my right to e.g. live in spain, be ‘me’ and go to a café which sells full English breakfast etc, or if I were a muslim, to live in Britain and eat halal meat. what it doesn’t do is allow e.g. I was watching mr dawkins debate with a muslim who said ‘you make your women dress like prostitutes’ to wit dawkins replied, ‘I don’t make them dress like anything, they dress themselves’. it should be that simple, and perhaps if the state and other bodies kept their noses out of it, it would be.

I don’t think the state should be telling me nor others what kind of personality they have, how they live or behave respectively, however I do agree that it works both ways; if a foreign [or subculture/political force] culture does demand we act like so then they can bugger off.

I spoke with a muslim woman who agreed with wearing the burqa, but that is a choice, the reason why she even considers it is not.

[DJ Droood]

If Merkel is taking a 'sottovoce' angle towards Muslims then I would have to agree with the statements as any immigrant needs to learn the customs and language of their new country. If they cannot do that, then why did they go there to begin with?

I tend to agree with the sentiment..I think newcomers to any land should adopt the language and customs of that land...luckily for the newcomer to Germany, a post-war custom is liberal democracy and freedom to practice one's religion (or none at all) and free expression (they could visit Berlin for an example of that), so nobody should feel too confined. But the "trend" in Europe lately has been banning things..burquas, mosques...I think it is easy for extremists to hijack a defense of liberal values (and I think you know what I mean by liberal values..not the current trite political labels)

Liberalism—both as a political current and an intellectual tradition—is mostly a modern phenomenon that started in the 17th century, although some liberal philosophical ideas had precursors in classical antiquity. The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius praised "the idea of a polity administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed".[49] Scholars have also recognized a number of principles familiar to contemporary liberals in the works of several Sophists and in the Funeral Oration by Pericles.[50] Liberal philosophy symbolizes an extensive intellectual tradition that has examined and popularized some of the most important and controversial principles of the modern world. Its immense scholarly and academic output has been characterized as containing "richness and diversity," but that diversity often has meant that liberalism comes in different formulations and presents a challenge to anyone looking for a clear definition.[51]

wiki

"What applies here is the constitution, not sharia."

Merkel said Germany needed imams "educated in Germany and who have their social roots here" and concluded: "Our culture is based on Christian and Jewish values and has been for hundreds of years, not to say thousands."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE69553220101006

Merkel is a typical politician..she gets it half-right, or more accurately, manages to get it half-wrong. I don't know much about German law, but I doubt it is is built on "judeo-Christian" anything. She just sounds ignorant of her own national history and law here...I can only think she is trying to fish in the voting pool of the extremists.

To someone who appreciates democratic principles and freedom, what is the difference between Sharia and "Judeao-Christian values"? Germany, like the rest of Western Europe, is a secular, democratic country marked by about as much freedom as one can expect in a Nation state. Is it possible to defend those values without falling into a trap set by mosque-banning extremists?

[Frog]

Gosh and Crikey... Godwin's Law invoked on page 1!
Anyways... couple of thoughts on this.

Because a Giant Hand hasn't appeared (or indeed a noodly appendage if you're into Pastafarianism) does not automatically define that no deity has "got involved" (I agree that it doesn't say it did either) - however, I have experienced situations when I have wished for something to happen and it has (which was nice).
Both God existing and God not existing are both ultimately faith based theories IMO.

An interesting thought I had on moral compasses would be having intercourse with immediate relatives - science has confirmed that this can be contributory to health issues etc. This then causes the issue - is it science that has made this close breeding unhealthy or is it a "cosmic warning" to get out and spread ones seed around?




However, I do think there's one sideline issue around the comment of buying the Full English abroad. Typically it has been my experience that you can only buy said breakfast in an area which has a high British influence; not unlike stepping into areas such as Wembley, Southall and Chinatown in London, where the asian influence is incredibly strong for a specific culture and one can buy the food stuffs preferred by that culture.

Frog

[wolf560]

Just for the record....

My thoughts are that Deity(ies) sit back and watch with much amusement at our attempts to discern the "morality of the Gods" as it applies to us here on Earth.

I have no problem with people of any culture wanting to have a "little piece of home" in the new country where they reside. What I do not agree with is any attempt to re-write the laws or customs of a country in their favor.

Sharia Law belongs in the screwed up places where it is still practiced, and not on the streets of any civilized country. Sharia Law was probably fine 1400 years ago but the need for it has long since passed.

A little bit of background on me; I witnessed a rape trial in the mountains of Pakistan that was arbitrated by Sharia Law and the court of the town.
According to Sharia Law the following was all "legal";
1. The lawyers did not need law degrees, the town agreed they were competent
2. The judge did not need a law degree, being an Elder was enough
3. The victim was not allowed to be heard, five male eye witnesses were needed
4. The accused was allowed to refute anything offered by the victim because he was male
5. The victim was found guilty of "seditiously tempting the man into lawful sex"
6. The victim was to be ousted from the town for her "disgrace"
7. The family was already planning her "honor killing"(I don't know if they succeeded)

The Pakistan President Musharrif stepped in and sent in troops to intervene... I do not know if the woman survived, and the President Musharrif was later taken out of power over this incident. He removed over 2,000 inappropriately appointed judges and lawyers throughout Pakistan and was vilified over it.

There is no place for Sharia Law in a modern society where everyone is equal under the eyes of the law and society. Sharia Law was used in the 1980's to behead a Saudi Princess found to have had sex outside of her marriage.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,915918,00.html

[DJ Droood]

What I do not agree with is any attempt to re-write the laws or customs of a country in their favor.

But I suppose that happens anyway, over generations, in a breathing, democratic process, or just through adopting ideas that people like. I think "re-writing" is the key..not forcing or threatening or blackmailing...it is now my custom to have a falafel once a week or so for lunch...thanks, Lebanon!

I think we here in NA are in a different position than Europe...we came over, took what we wanted from the locals, and immigrants have been arriving ever since, with their customs and values, and influencing laws..I think a democratic system works, and that the best ideas come forward.

There is no place for Sharia Law in a modern society where everyone is equal under the eyes of the law and society.

Agreed...but there are lots of theocratics with names like Sarah and Christine and Bill who point to the bible as "god's law" and think it should be the law of the land. Like my son keeps pointing out to me, oppose extremists, not just extremists with brown skin. (and i am certainly not insinuating that you are doing that, but it is a danger for all of us...gotta watch your bedfellows)..I think we might be more sensitive to threats that seem foreign or odd, but grow used to the threats we grew up with.

[wolf560]

... that happens anyway, over generations... I think "re-writing" is the key.. we here in NA came over, took what we wanted from the locals, and immigrants have been arriving ever since, with their customs and values, and influencing laws.. there are lots of theocratics with names like Sarah and Christine and Bill who point to the bible as "god's law" and think it should be the law of the land.

Agreed.... too many point to the Bible as something reliable despite the fact that it has changed radically over time. They believe it is the "One Truth" (sub. "God's Law" or whatever) and hold it up as if it is some "magic talisman" against which all the worlds evilness may be countered.. I further agree that we Americans have overrun a vibrant nation 300 years ago ourselves and almost eliminated it entirely.

[Attila]

wolf560

The Pakistan President Musharrif stepped in and sent in troops to intervene... I do not know if the woman survived, and the President Musharrif was later taken out of power over this incident. He removed over 2,000 inappropriately appointed judges and lawyers throughout Pakistan and was vilified over it.
There is no place for Sharia Law in a modern society where everyone is equal under the eyes of the law and society. Sharia Law was used in the 1980's to behead a Saudi Princess found to have had sex outside of her marriage.

Wow, that’s just incredible. I totally agree with what you are saying here perhaps this applies?…

Principle; ‘tolerance to accept the intolerant is not tolerance’

Seams simple enough to me!

So if e.g. we allowed people to come here and impose Shariah law, our tolerance would be creating a culture of intolerance, therefore we must not allow that to happen in order to facilitate what it is to be tolerant. The dilemma is that if you let a mass migration occur where the majority of people in our nation are Islamic, then they could impose that upon us! This is why I say mass immigration is bad but some immigration is good.

Someone should have thought of this when the Christian missionaries first came here . ~ although that wasn’t an immigration but a cultural and lawful change none the less.

Apart from all that my basis is that financial influences aside [people only coming here to become wealthier], if left alone mass immigration wouldn’t happen. The problem is when the state and big business buts its nose in so as to get cheap labour or to grow the economy etc. most people don’t want to leave their homes and families to live abroad, if they do it is there freedom to do so, just let it happen naturally and cultures will blend naturally [druidic wisdom surely?!]. you get phases of mass immigration then phases of blending, perhaps we are just moving into the latter phase.

DJ Droood

The thing with america is that it has largely been an anglo-saxon culture kinda like a big Britain to some degree, I am unsure if it will all go so swimmingly when you have a majority [or large enough minority] of another culture trying to impose itself. Fortunately the other mass cultures are European too and not particularly different, but I don’t think we can really say america is particularly more multicultural than Britain, it just does a good job of converting everyone to its anglo-saxon culture.

[DJ Droood]

Well I don't want to turn your thread on morality into a thread on immigration Attila, other than to say that there seems to be an impulse to take a snapshot out of the album and say "Look, this is the way it used to be like and the way it should be now!", and it could either be a time when *all* the faces in an elementary school were white ( ) or everyone was equally screwed up by the same poisonous religious teacings (1950's family values.)...and I doubt if these things..a pure Anglo-Saxon culture or "Leave It To Beaver" families ever really existed anyway. Things change and evolve...those that oppose it want a stagnant pond.

I would say, however, that I think NA and Europe are "different"...North America has a culture built on immigration (including lots and lots of French and Spanish), and the late-comers don't really have a moral right to tell the next wave they don't belong. I do however, think the newcomers should respect the culture of the country they are arriving in, and learn the language. Is it a radically rightist thing to expect people living in Germany to speak German or England to speak English? I don't think so.

And at any rate, "Judeo-Christian values" have preached for hundreds of years that sex is a sin, and women are dirty and bad, so when the culture responds by dropping the birthrate to 1.6, instead of the 2.0 it takes to maintain itself..shouldn't "Judeo-Christians" be rejoicing at their victory? Their death cult is working!

[wolf560]

To the point of "Judeo-Christian values"....

Yeah, this is seen in modern day as being something of substance and that the two cultures are backing each other up against the rest of the world.

In reality, not so much.......

I could cite hundred (maybe thousands) of instances where "Christians" hunted down Jews, Muslims, Druids, Cathars, Templars, Witches, Midwives, and just about any other group that was not exactly what the Christians of that day thought they should be. Add to the slaughter all the lesser cultures technologically or culturally to the long list of those whose died facing Christianization.

There is of course only one modern group that has the same bloody history globally-
The Muslims of course starting in the 7th century.

Morality derives of a sense of right and wrong that goes beyond the needs of individual and comprises a sense of community. That community of course can be corrupted as well all depending upon what that community's goals are. So if a community such as Port Royal Jamaica 150 years ago, those goals were raiding Spanish shipping.... their sense of 'right and wrong' would of course be different from ours.

[Attila]

DJ Droood

We can debate other morals if anyone so wishes, its just that it’s a current topic and I fear where it will potentially go.

I take it you are essentially saying that Judeo-Christian values arent natural and people don’t want to live by them if given the freedom, to which I agree.

I would say, however, that I think NA and Europe are "different".

A little yes, but not massively. Its strange I was watching an English couple on overhauling [american custom car tv show] and suddenly they seamed really English, a matter of context I suppose. One doesn’t know we are this or that, we all think we are the norm ~ which we ‘all’ are.

..North America has a culture built on immigration (including lots and lots of French and Spanish), and the late-comers don't really have a moral right to tell the next wave they don't belong. I do however, think the newcomers should respect the culture of the country they are arriving in, and learn the language. Is it a radically rightist thing to expect people living in Germany to speak German or England to speak English? I don't think so.

English policy is moving towards getting immigrants to speak the native tongue, when in rome… I suppose. I don’t think it is a problem to expect that but to make people do this or that and act like so, that is not a free world Imho. I wonder what all those English living in spain, france and the greek islands etc, would say if they were told not to speak English, my guess is they wouldn’t like it and would move to more tolerant nations. You then potentially end up with nationalism and countries of a single culture [in the main] , along with all the problems that has brought in the past.

It seams strange to me for e.g. Australians and Americans who conquered native peoples and destroyed them and their cultures [to a large degree], to then demand that their particular brand of immigrant is the standard? We Europeans are not so different either, the map has changed dramatically over time as has the languages ~ much of which is Latin based from their roman conquerors, are we then not demanding that people speak a foreign language?

Anyhow it all seams very transient, baseless and vacuous to me, so all I am saying is that no-one should be making demands either way.

wolf560

I agree, if we go down the path of making people act like so, then how long before we druids are vilified again? I think our secular and liberal modern values have already superseded Judeo-Christian ones, lets keep going in the right direction eh.

[wolf560]

Wolf560[/color]
I agree, if we go down the path of making people act like so, then how long before we druids are vilified again?

Yup Yup Yup
Been there, done that, and didnt get a t-shirt (LOL)...
Those rascally Wiccans years ago made me out to be some kind of evil Pagan...

[DJ Droood]

Wolf560[/color]
I agree, if we go down the path of making people act like so, then how long before we druids are vilified again?

Yup Yup Yup
Been there, done that, and didnt get a t-shirt (LOL)...
Those rascally Wiccans years ago made me out to be some kind of evil Pagan...

hey, maybe all the "I don't call myself a druid", "you're not a druid", "nobody can be a druid" business is like an evolutionary survival strategy for when they come looking for us.

[wolf560]

Sort of a "the Druid went thatta way"...???

[DJ Droood]

Sort of a "the Druid went thatta way"...???

An inverse "Spartacus"...."I'm not a druid".."No, I'm not a druid!", "No it isn't me..I'm not a druid!"

[Attila]

Wolf

Those rascally Wiccans years ago made me out to be some kind of evil Pagan...

I thought wiccans were pagan though I don’t know much about it [or care lols], I chat to one at another forum and we usually agree on most stuff, though he didn’t seam to take kindly to my anti Spinoza’s ’all things are in god’ formula [the p = p thing], so I guess they got some kind of monotheism with sun and moon attributes or something.

DJ Droood

hey, maybe all the "I don't call myself a druid", "you're not a druid", "nobody can be a druid" business is like an evolutionary survival strategy for when they come looking for us.

Ha good one yes. Though I think this has been tried before hence the torture of supposed pagans and witches, the methods of finding out usually ended in death lols. Also if one wears a white robe then that’s classifying oneself ~ at least to them. ..or if you go to forums like this etc, they always find ways to get you. We have to do as much as possible that such times don’t come back Imho, which is why I challenge everyone’s philosophy so harshly.

An inverse "Spartacus"...."I'm not a druid".."No, I'm not a druid!", "No it isn't me..I'm not a druid!"

Hahaha, I kinda like phillips statement about druidry becoming official, where he noted that Churchill, the archbish’ of C and the queen were/are druids, it’s a bit like saying to the romans that they are Spartacus too.

[wolf560]

I thought wiccans were pagan... I guess they got some kind of monotheism with sun and moon attributes or something.

The Wiccans I ran into were very immature and still had the "my broom is larger than your broom syndrome". They were very Duo-Theistic and although many practiced with grace the few loud ones made it clear that their deities were superior. I guess in hindsight what they really had was a "my Deity is better than your deity syndrome".... kinda sad really...

Hahaha, I kinda like phillips statement about druidry becoming official, where he noted that Churchill, the archbish’ of C and the queen were/are druids,...

Yes, the Ancient Order of Druids which was probably more of a fraternal club rather like the Masons instead of a spiritual movement such as a lot of the Druidic movements of today.

[Dendrias]

Basis2;
Can you think of a single moral which does derive from the ‘god’/s’? ~ throughout time it has been man with much contemplation upon societal effect, who has devised our ethics, standards and morals.

You asked the question, but is was not before one of wolf560's posts, that the borders of the discussion were set. Because, if you ask any kind of "good christian", then he will, of course, answer that there is a huge amount of laws, morals, ethics that is directly not from a god, but from God himself. A "good jew" will answer the same and turn off his light on saturdays. I'm not familiar with islam ... but would guess the answer would be the same. You can't delete pork and alcohol from your menu solely depending on Muhammed's law - it must be Allah's law.

So Your question would be: "Can You think of a single moral which does derive from a god - in a way that is accepted by me?" Because the second question of Your Basis2 is limiting, if not answering Your question. I'm not quite sure whether or not this kind of asking can be correct, because behind what seems to be a question, a statement lurks which leaves no possibility of being answered differently from how You did.

[Attila]

So Your question would be: "Can You think of a single moral which does derive from a god - in a way that is accepted by me?"

Not at all, I think the question remains as it stands, man decides these things. If god [if he even exists] told us what to do then he could just pop down here and say hi, that alone would be enough to know that god exists. That he has not done that is a clear indication that either he does not exist or that he thinks we should work things out for ourselves.

Whenever I contemplate on ideas I feel there is an element of discussion with the other side, but it is always very wisely done offering possible ways to think about things etc, and is never a direct intervention.

More specifically the question was to denote a given morel which could not be determined by earthly means ~ by just thinking about an issue and solving it. To which you may offer up an example of a moral which one couldn’t work out just with a little thought.

[Dendrias]

man decides these things.

If god [if he even exists] told us what to do then he could just pop down here and say hi, that alone would be enough to know that god exists. That he has not done that is a clear indication that either he does not exist or that he thinks we should work things out for ourselves.

[advocatus diaboli]That is, let me take this stance, open to discussion, if You take into account and trust in the stories where the judeo-christian god indeed came down and handed to Moshe not only commandments two times, but also a set of laws. Divine interventions can be read about and up to this day are believed in by loads of christians. My cousin talks to god every day at least once. If that is not a god popping up on demand I don't know who is.
It is Your implication alone that denies everybody to bring that into this discussion.

moral which could not be determined by earthly means

Given the way modern people behave and people in ancient times have behaved, I could name some:
respecting your parents - who could think of that when you look at account from ancient Egypt to modern times
no to kill fellow humans seems to be impossible when you look at ... but You know what I will be saying. Some cultures make differences between what is human and what is not. Who has invented the overall moral that it is no good to do so (except in war)? It wasn't Seneca nor Cicero. Both might have let a daughter or son have died.
love your neighbour ... well, well! Neighbours kill each other over mowing the grass on sundays or punch each other over barking dogs! Ask an American to pay for a general health-insurance, and you will see what happens to "love your neighor" or "divide your bread"! Whose idea was it to love the neighbour or any stranger as one would love oneself? It was no Celtic chieftain I know of, nor any Greek nobleman. Mayan farmer - I'm not sure.
Earthly means seem very desperate in determining this morals, each and every single day.

I might be oversimplifying, but to deny a course of discussion its right by not accepting certain answers, rightaway ... that's limiting the question to what You intend to be the answer. [/advocatus diaboli]