My apology, it's a long post but they are my final thoughts.
Eliezer: "Robin, I would indeed put someone who called themselves a Unitarian in a different class from someone who called themselves a Zoroastrian or Christian. It's still a big blatant mistake, but so long as the person is willing to take strict personal responsibility for their own moral judgments, it's a less urgent matter."
I'm not really clear as to why? Do you not think Unitarian has some affiliation to Zoroastrian or Christianity? Where do you think moral judgements come from? ...
You seem so.
The claim "I believe because I believe" is the same as if I would state "5 + 5 = 20 because it is". If you make a claim like that you have to give a reason, and prove it, and that's exactly what these people didn't do.
I've thought about the Jesus Camp video you presented to me. I am curious, why those particular examples to get your point accross regarding the post?
Just Curious Anna
Joe: When you think about the commercialization of Christmas, is the perpetuation of Santa and presents still a noble lie? Or does it now become a perverse destruction of what was supposed to be a religious celebration of the birth of Christ?
Just a thought. Maybe the initial story behind "The Clause family" was created to help people understand about generosity. Feeling grateful of family and friends. Taking the time to appreciate and celebrate.
I'm not sure how it literally became a man in a red suit and reindeer when in turn it has been clearly ...
I asked: "What happens if you take faith out of the equation, will people be more or less inclined to want to be moralistic and can ethical behavior exist without the rules and regulations that have been governed by faith?"
Kevembuangga: My point was, ethical behavior is not "governed" by faith, it is endorsed by faith.
For you. A religious person may feel that their ethical behavior is governed by their faith.
suppose you are a theist, aren't you?
I believe in Something as opposed to Nothing but I am not a theist. I don't believe i...
Weirder and weirder, why would this thread have been titled "Consolidated Nature of Morality?"
Weird because I apologized for bringing up faith when the thread was about Morality?
On top of that idiosyncratic cultural traits have been built which sometimes run counter the "basics"....
I have no idea how this reflects the question I was asking regarding that if faith is taken out of the equation will people be more or less inclined to want to be moralistic. I guess this weird one is not smart enough to grasp your intellectual ideas. Thanks for your time, it has been interesting.
Kevembuangga: Aren't you confusing morality with fear of retribution? I am curious to know what you think morality is about!
For me, morality is about the ethical behavior of individuals or groups.
Many people associate morality with faith. The example of the fear of retribution is what makes them strive to be moralistic. I was curious to know what happens when you take faith out of the equation? Will people no longer strive to be moralistic? Can ethical behavior exist without the rules and regulations that have been governed by faith?
I know these questions don't fit into the main discussion of the thread, my apology.
Benquo, question #6 was too easy.
Bruce thank you for your point 8, it made me think.
Hal: Individual morality looks at the net impact on oneself as well as the group.
Thanks. Your answer regarding question 4 made me think.
Robin: It is striking to me that people who want to think more carefully about moral issues seem to feel little inclination to read the academic literature on this subject. There are in fact specialists who consider these issues; why reinvent the wheel?
Sometimes even the specialists need to be reviewed:)Maybe law and moral have many things in common?
If anybody has a moment, I am curious to know how morals can exist without faith?
Anna