I’d like to congratulate you on having raised three sons. Wow. Although I’m sure it was/is challenging, it has likely been very rewarding as well. From your writing, I assume they’re very fortunate and their success is your success.

I not only think your vaccination analogy a good one (Good vs. Evil in society), but I agree with your position on grounds of social health. I am fond of fiction, particularly classic literature and our conversation reminds me of how fond writers are of using the duality of human nature as a theme. Perhaps like Gollum in Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit (to use two examples of popular fiction that I obviously admire), the murderer at Virginia Tech gradually descended into extreme alienation and became so wilfully isolated, bitter, and resentful that redemption was simply beyond him and just as Gollum schemed to seize the Ring at all costs, Cho schemed his immortality. Both are/were small and mean, but capable of great harm.

Though I agree that there is the capability of what we conventionally term ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’ within all of us, my secularity (to use your well-chosen term) cannot accept where the two are considered forces or spirits or unknowable inspirations. Something I alluded to in a previous post is our tendency to anthropomorphize (and here I mean ourselves generally, not including you specifically). Although this is a convenient and often very effective way to teach and communicate, it has its drawbacks. The fables of Aesop are a famous examples, but I suspect that many of our present-day animal rights activists were brought up watching the animated features of Disney and others, projecting human qualities and sensibilities that animals simply don’t possess, thus allowing the projection of a kind of self-preservation coupled with an innocence we associate with the films’ target audiences. German philosophy anthropomorphized society, deeming it a kind of intellectual entity of its own to be poked and prodded, with its individual members merely fulfilling the organic tasks necessary for the Being’s survival. It was not a stretch to then begin worshipping society instead of God. And this is probably why I hesitate to attach a kind of mysterious quality to Cho’s murderous rampage. We don’t understand why he did it, so we assume it’s due to Evil or Satan or Beelzebub or the Ayatollah of Rock and Rollah when in fact there are probably a variety of very logical reasons why he made such a monstrous choice and committed to it. It’s rather like the religious hypocrite who finds the explanation “Well, I never claimed I’m perfect — but I am forgiven!” awfully convenient when what they lack is simple self-control and a bit of humility.

I am very much in agreement with you re. our freedom to follow (or not) whatever religion we choose. And unlike many who aren’t religious, I agree completely that many of our social and political values have their roots in the Judeo-Christian tradition. May that tradition never die.

bwwahhaaahah

http://signorile2003.blogspot.com/2007/04/is-media-about-to-defame-gays-in-ever.html

I have always viewed things in the way that you put it. Good and evil.. people and people’s use of things are capable of both. I tend to think man’s inclination is toward evil and it takes some work to stifle that and work towards the good.

There’s a part of the Book of Revelation that is little understood.. its the letters to the 7 churches. Some speculate that each letter denotes the condition of the “church” from the beginning to the end.

The last church is scolded for being so comfortable in the little world they find themselves in that , even though they believe in God, they really dont care about it one way or the other… it’s like an accessory. They like their material goods, and dont want the boat rocked. God has other plans though, he’s going to vomit them out of his mouth… (then the End Time happens, the church is no longer to be found on Earth in Revelation after this point.)

This is the letter to the last church:

Rev 3:14

“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write the following

“This is the solemn pronouncement of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the originator of God’s creation ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot! So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I am going to vomit you out of my mouth! Because you say, “I am rich and have acquired great wealth, and need nothing,” but do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked, take my advice and buy gold from me refined by fire so you can become rich! Buy from me white clothing so you can be clothed and your shameful nakedness will not be exposed, and buy eye salve to put on your eyes so you can see! All those I love, I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest and repent! Listen! I am standing at the door and knocking! If anyone hears my voice and opens the door I will come into his home and share a meal with him, and he with me. I will grant the one who conquers permission to sit with me on my throne, just as I too conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. The one who has an ear had better hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’”

There is a very powerful idea that if we didn’t have evil – we could never appreciate the good. If you look at Jewish heroes in the bible – each and every one of them are flawed – they are basically human – not saints. And they pay the price for their sins – Moses never entering the land of Israel – King David, being betrayed by his sons, and never being allowed to build the Temple.

Is there inate goodness in all of us? I hope so, but it needs to be nurtured and fostered. I’ve raised three sons, I can tell you, it is no easy job to ‘civilize’ children. And though many in the west are wonderful good people – I attribute that in part to the fact that they grew up in Judeo-Chirstian societies. They themselves may be athiests, but so much of the culture is full of Christian teachings.
It is similar today to the many children who are not being vacinated against childhood diseases. (don’t get me started on those parents). At the moment they are safe because they are a minority amongst a large population who is innoculated. But if many more parents follow this stupid trend – you will see a rise in measles, mumps and chicken pox again.
The same will happen with the moral fiber of our society – actually it already is.

Believe me, I have a lot of critisizm of religion, I am so thankful to live in a free secular society that allows me my religious freedom.

In my previous post I only said ‘secular’ because it was very clear to me that you are probaby an agnostic – but didn’t want to label you against your wishes. And secular seemed a less loaded word than Athiest.

Seriously, I do appreciate your response. In fact, I appreciate all your thoughtful posts and regret I have neglected to let you know until now.

P.S. I’d like to clarify that while I don’t consider myself a religious person, I’m not really an atheist, either. ‘Agnostic’ is closer, but when I listen to a great piece of music by a genius, I confess that there must be more than just ourselves, that it is mysterious, and I want to know what it is.

And if you don’t want to soil yourself by going to Donkeypunched, anti-idiotarian rottweiler is on the case.

When facing the outside world – we tend to show a united front, we are far from that – many of the issues you mentioned are ones we grapple with daily. Of course all of us know wonderful, moral, good athiests. Those people tend to show us the respect we hope we show them.

But when discussions of faith arise – we find ourselves arguing with those who dismiss us out of hand (yes, Ian, I’m refering to you). It is wonderful to hear from someone like you who respects people of faith, and rightfully so demands respect for your own world view.

Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed the baby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms—everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus… The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall. The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp… He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had just used….

he also compared himself to Jesus Christ. What’s your point?

So, does John Edwards.

Frankly, I don’t believe anyone here has held themselves out as an example of a perfect Christian. Part of that humility thing is acknowledging our human shortcomings and working to overcome them.

Ian, I don’t recall ever writing that because someone is an atheist they have no morals nor any standing to discuss morals, moral agency, etc.

I’ve known lots of moral atheists. They also tend to be self-centered to a fault. And driven predominately by ego. And in a constant, perpetual battle with the world around them. You can discuss morals all you want, but as an avowed atheist, don’t go looking for support on one issue from someone you don’t support nor heed on a million other issues –like the Pope. It’s intellectually dishonest… like the Left being concerned about the troops while undercutting American resolve at home… or Democrats worried about the military being stretched too thin when what they’d like to do to the military is cut them off at the knees.

Wanna talk morals? You need to start from a place that is honest and not just snarky taunts. Good luck getting there.

Of course, Ian.

As K’ung Fu-Tze put it centuries ago, the difference between a wise man and a fool is that the fool thinks he knows everything; the wise man thinks he knows nothing.

If you are a follower of educational theory, Piaget makes it clear that the development of the mind progresses from knowing only the concrete to understanding the concept of the abstract.

Faith is, in its deepest sense, the ability to move beyond solid and into not only accepting, but embracing, uncertainty.

I thought you were a Pope bigot? Why use his quotes now if he is so wrong

Well, I’m in a catch-22 situation: since many here apparently believe that, as an atheist, I have no moral standards, you will no doubt dismiss any moral arguments I make as an atheist. Then if I attempt to argue based on Christian pronouncements on moral issues, I am dismissed because I do not subscribe to Christian beliefs. That said, I do believe that those who profess to be devout Christians ought to be challenged when it appears their beliefs are in conflict with Christian principles. Now, you state that JPII was wrong on his criticism of the Iraq war based on the Just War principle. You refer to Neuhaus but neglect to mention the new Pope’s position which by all appearances is the same as JPII’s:

And like John Paul II, the new pope is a man of peace whose vision for the world does not include wars of the sort lately waged against Iraq.

Is Pope Benedict also wrong on the Iraq war?

In rereading my post to which you’re responding, I would clarify by stating that once someone accepts a religion and its teachings, then it is incumbent upon them to behave accordingly. To me, this means that there is a standard (not necessarily higher, but often so) to which a person of faith must aspire. That standard must be embraced in order to be meaningful and to be reminded of it is, I would think, not to be threatened with a damnation but to be given the hope only bought with redemption. At least, that’s my understanding. God sure is strange.