Those who don’t take it up by 18 probably never will.

Those deeply offended by the accurate use of the word “indoctrination” should pause to honestly ask themselves if they would still be as convinced of their faith if they hadn’t heard about religion until they were an adult.

both smoking and religion.


Although I do still crave a cigarette every now and then.

well, decent cigars lol. My doc doesn't complain and it keeps the monkey in check for a while. And a lot cheaper than cartons of cigs were.

...and occasionally I do crave a nicotine bump. Religion? Nope.

COINCIDENCE!!11!??

Intolerance, exclusivity as just not right. My mother was raised staunch Southern Baptist. However, when she lived in Japan in the mid 50's and came to love the Japanese, she had to reject her church's teachings that only Christians could go to heaven. She realized that a God of love would love them, too, and not reject them.

Similarly, some Christians will notice that in scripture, the members of the movement freely discuss reincarnation as if it were an understood fact. I read that 25% of Christians believe in reincarnation, which goes against all the churchy PR that faith, grace, forgiveness, whatever is what Jesus taught. As it turns out, Jesus's parables teach reincarnation and karma, so that 25% felt the right way, despite dogma.

I was raised by two Catholic parents, attended 12 years of Catholic school, and still attend mass every week.

I hope, however, that I am open to learning from other faiths and from those who do not believe in god or gods.

And (in the end) I hope that I am held accountable not so much by my beliefs, but by my actions that result from those beliefs.

Always a pleasure to share a discussion with you

Wishing you well and peace.

Tim

When someone is looking over your shoulder such as say a boss, parent, teacher, significant other, etc., most people are going to adhere to that person's moral code because if they don't they will be held accountable.

The true measure of morality is can a person do the right thing if nobody is looking over their shoulder and forcing them to be accountable.

Virtually all organized religions have some sort of accountability looking over their shoulder constantly and ultimately judging their actions against a moral code given to them by someone else.

So the question I have is how moral is a person really if they need to be handed a moral code along with a system of accountability?

Only atheists have free will. All theists have a deity looking over their shoulder.

Yet still gets to judge their creation basted on a system of tests for which the outcome was already predetermined.

First of all, I agree with everything you said:

When someone is looking over your shoulder such as say a boss, parent, teacher, significant other, etc., most people are going to adhere to that person's moral code because if they don't they will be held accountable.

The true measure of morality is can a person do the right thing if nobody is looking over their shoulder and forcing them to be accountable.

Virtually all organized religions have some sort of accountability looking over their shoulder constantly and ultimately judging their actions against a moral code given to them by someone else.




As to your question: How moral is a person really if they need to be handed a moral code along with a system of accountability? I can share my own thoughts and perspective.

Since I was raised Catholic, you are correct that I was taught a certain moral code that has a prescribed system of accountability. But I was also taught that I should love and help others, especially those in most need of help. So the question for me then becomes, am I helping others because I'm afraid of punishment if I don't, or am I helping them because I love them. Not because I'm supposed to love them, but because I do.

I realize that (by their nature) analogies are imperfect, but if I may offer the following comparison. When I was young, and my parents told me to do something, if I didn't do it there was a very good chance that I would be punished. So many times I did what I was supposed to do because I didn't want to get sent to my room, yelled at, etc. And there was also the possibility that if I behaved myself, I would be rewarded - maybe they would take me out for ice cream or some other treat. So my actions were very selfish: I wanted to avoid punishment and be rewarded.

But eventually, I realized that I wanted to do right by my parents because I loved them.

So while it is true that I belong to a faith that handed me a moral code along with a system of accountability, if I choose to do "good things" just to avoid punishment and/or reap rewards, then I don't believe that I am living a moral life. Instead, I should try my best to help others because it is right and kind to do so - not because of what I might avoid or what I might get out of it.

Therefore, I believe that if there is a god, then she/he/it wants me to live a moral life simply because it is the right thing to do.

Thank you again for the opportunity for discussion - it's always a pleasure.

Wishing you well and peace.

Tim

For the atheist there is no sort of accountability you mentioned. Any moral code needs to be self-administered.

I should think it’s hard for a religionist to conceive of doing the right thing purely for the sake of doing the right thing so long as they have the unverifiable accountability you mentioned always applied.

For instance, how would you really know you are capable of doing the right thing when nobody is watching when your faith dictates someone always is watching?

I guess the answer would be that there is no way for me to prove that I am acting in a moral way or that I am a moral person...and perhaps you are correct that I would not be capable of doing the right thing if I did not believe in god.

Thank you again for taking the time to respond to my post and for the opportunity to discuss these issues with you.

As always, wishing you well and peace.

Tim

I suspect you would be no different without the unverifiable accountability just like the vast majority of other religionists.

The lesson is that metaphysical entity looking over your shoulder keeping you on the straight and narrow is completely unnecessary, but without the perspective of never being without it you can’t really understand what it’s like. Especially since the fear of being without it has been indoctrinated into you since birth.

Still, I hope that I can live a good and productive life, even with the burden of religion.

Thank you again - peace to you

Tim

Between Protestant and Catholic. I can only attribute that to how stifling their Creed is.

Once they couldn't cover up their sex crimes as effectively, and their bigotry got laid bare, guess what - decent people called it quits.

Almost as much fun as getting audited by the IRS.

Back in the days when they had lots of parishioners, our church had several masses on Sunday. I would go to the early show just to get it over with. It usually ran about 40 minutes.

At 10, they had High Mass. This was the full production with the Monsignor giving the sermon and the choir providing the soundtrack. It would often run more than an hour. You couldn't pay me to go to that one.

Also attended a Catholic wedding ceremony of a family member.

And here I thought the Lutheran church services I grew up in were dreary and boring.

...imagine how utterly bereft of meaning for a kid that was.

There was a time when I wanted to be an Altar boy. The only window for joining was in the third grade. To pass the test, one had to learn a bunch of Latin phrases. I failed.

The very next year they dropped the Latin and went all English, but by then it was too late. I look back now and am eternally grateful that I missed the cut.

...that was a close call. You were lucky.

I went to a Catholic school. All three of my siblings went to the same Catholic school. None of us are practicing Catholics today.

Looking back on it, I would say Catholic school was the single greatest factor contributing to both my atheism and anti-theism.

Why would you then follow any "rule of law" realizing that you may have been created by science from parents anywhere in the world? Do "mind" sciences shape your personal morality?

That alone would be a pretty good reason to follow the rules.

----------

Separately, though, there is one basis for morality that has nothing to do with any god or holy book.

Treat people the way that you want to be treated (many have said it, including Jesus, but their endorsement isn't needed).

If we ignore this rule, then there is needless suffering.

To some, that doesn't matter.

To decent human beings, it does.

group activisim like protesting and/or persuasion of others to take a different direction than one that may lead to "needless suffering"? Does it mean one is indifferent to what issues are debated by large groups about what would lead to "needless" suffering. Is suffering ever justifiable or just a consequence of what is eventually done? I'm remembering a lecture and discussion of the nature of what is "good" in a Humanities class, hence my questions about how one comes to a judgment about morality and ethical behavior.

If one has no belief system on which to base following the "rules," is it only the consequences of disobedience to all or any specific rules that determine what is right or wrong - an indifference to other than one's own judgment. I've not much studied what is scientifically and humanly rational and/or logical toward an end of self-survival as a sentient human being, so I'm trying to determine what makes people tick who claim to have no religious beliefs regarding what is good and bad?

Is that really what you're asking me?

...if you harm someone it's bad.

Hammurabi figured this out almost 3000 years ago. No sky daddy needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

Atheism is the lack of belief in proposed deities - nothing more. It doesn't address civil government, social structure, or rules.

...is your belief in the supernatural.

You're just a psychopath on a leash.

Even psychopaths are capable of reasoning why it’s a good idea to avoid harming others. If someone convinces themselves the only thing keeping them on the straight and narrow is the unverifiable promise of reward and punishment from their imaginary friend, what happens when they have a bad day and realize their sky daddy isn’t real?

An excellent way to sum it all up.
Short and to the point.

Everyone derives their morality from somewhere. Some derive it from reason, and some derive it from stone age doctrine that still provides instructions on how to sell your children into slavery and the proper way to beat your wife.

Anyone can be an anarchist by believing any system of control should be dismantled if it doesn't continuously justify itself. Not a bad idea really.

The idea that atheists aren't, or can't be truly moral is just claptrap promoted by religionists who need a system of control not bound by critical thinking. There's no shortage of religionists who most certainly feel no constraint by any rule of law other than the one that was faxed by the almighty and even then only a very narrowminded interpretation. Some of them are even members of the US Congress and every state house has them. They were put there by other narrowminded people who feel the same way.

I feel that the mistake Catholic schools make is that they are trying to make Saints. It's like trying to make Olympic athletes out of a group of kids. Almost all will fall short. Some may retain an active interest in sports, but most will end up on the couch in front of the TV.

and left it long ago. Now I am a Buddhist, which is not a religion, but a non-theistic practice. The practice of meditation and training the mind not to be seduced by desire nor afflicted and disturbed by negative emotions, such as anger, envy, ill-will.

I could never go back to Christianity. It has such silly beliefs, such as virgin birth. Or Jesus escaping earth's gravity to ascend into heaven, wherever that is. Christianity seems to be more about spiritual materialism to enhance the ego and accumulate wealth.

Buddhism teaches to use your mind, logic, and reasoning to figure out an ethical morality to be happy and content. The question gthat I keep asking is why isn't it enough to just be a good person with a kind and loving heart, and generous nature?

It most certainly is a religion and defines a number metaphysical deities no less silly than a zombie who came from a child impregnated by a poltergeist.

although some foolish deluded people treat it as if it were a religion. Unfortunately, Buddhism has its share of false gurus and people practicing spiritual materialism, which is where people use religion and spirituality to enhance their egos. Vajrayana Buddhism does postulate "yiddams" or deities, but I assure you there are no blue men with 6 arms or green women. Yiddams, at least to me, are symbols of qualities that I would like to manifest, such as compassion and wisdom. Vajrayana Buddhism is just one form of Buddhism.

Buddhism is also very widely viewed as a religion both by its adherents and those who are not as well as in pretty much every dictionary and encyclopedic reference in wide circulation. If you want to narrowly define that word in a way that doesn’t fit, then you certainly may do so, but I’m not sure how many will agree with you.

While it’s certainly possible to define yourself as a non-religious Buddhist, the same can be said for Christians.

For starters, Buddhism is non-theistic, never discusses god(s). It is concerned only with how to be happy and not suffer. Buddha's very first teaching after enlightenment was the 4 Noble Truth about the cause of suffering, its possible cessation, and the path that leads to the cessation of suffering. The very first form of Buddhism was Hinayana, which is concerned with ethical morality as the path to happiness.

Buddhism is also a philosophy about the epistomology of how do we know what we know, and a psychology of how the mind works.

In the Dharmapada, Buddha instructs us NOT to believe in holy scripture, or some authority figure's claims about a god, or our community's traditions, but to use our very own mind to reason for ourselves, and to practice loving kindness and generous point of view.

I suggest that you at least be open-minded and entertain the possibility that Buddhism is a philosophy and psychology, rather than a theistic religion. Buddhist literature on how the mind works is well worth reading, and you can judge for yourself.

I don't see any deities in the original. I don't see any indoctrination to believe in made up shit. My complaint is with the RCC.

is also silly illogical beliefs, cults that prey on naive and uneducated people for profit, and with spiritual materialism, of which the RCC is its best example.

Nit-theistic, but still a religion. And it still has problematic beliefs, and lots of sects that all claim they are the true path, and the others are heretics, as you mentioned above.

It's also one belief system that the west has adapted and improved upon, taking the good parts, like the meditation and self improvement, and ditching the bad parts, like the belief that there is a hierarchy to life and your actions in one life affect the next life you have, and that whatever comes to you is deserved through your actions in a past life.