Examples of non-Christian Moral systems.

There is another side to the problem and that is changing morals -- the christian model beng fixed is not able to change with the times without some slight-of-hand interpretations.As an example, there is no place I am aware of where one is told not to sexually molest a sister, or even children in general.I also go with morals being social conventions that can change with the society. This is the essence of rational behavior and enlightened self-interest.The "golden rule" exists in virtually every culture in one form or another and can be derived from first principals.See: Universality and the Golden Rule, where universal applicability of the behavior is a test of it's moral value.Also see Rousseau, The Social Contract (on-line version) as a basis for rational moral structures.Finally, I find the "8 fold path of enlightenment" of Buddhism more universal than the 10 commandments (the first commandment in specific not being universal): and I cannot see anyone having any problem with them.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

None of which is even a comment on my post or adding anything to the debate topic of the thread.Animals have shown the ability to distinguish between good and bad, what does that prove?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

pure unadulterated opinion.unless you can show which version of religion is true.enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

It is fixed to the extent that it refers to actual written passages in the bible. It is not fixed where it tries to reinterpret passages or to disregard passages that modern christians find distasteful because it doesn't fit with modern social morality.heh.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

In other words there is no specific "thou shalt not" passage but it needs interpretation? And where does it prohibit sexual molestation (which does not necessarily involve sex ... cigars come to mind) ... and last time I checked a sister is not a neighbor. No, I think it is becoming more inclusive, more universal and more rational as time passes in civilized societies. How typical. This of course explains why the prison populations are overrun with atheists ... oops! They have basically the same breakdown inside prison as outside. You also need to brush up on why rational behavior and enlightened self-interest work: because people can think about consequences and realize what is universally good for people is ultimately in their interest. Parents that don't teach their children this are short-changing them. The reason it is so universal is (1) it is a universal rule (the primary requirement of a moral code) and (2) it can be derived from first principals (including enlightened self-interest). Why does it have to become immoral rather than superceded? Try a google on "the platinum rule" ... you may learn something. Truth is objective. The more you learn, the more you know. Why do you need someone to tell you how to behave? One could say the same of all laws and regulations, but those that cross them find that the rest of society gets upset and that there are consequences. Wrong. This is small child thinking rather than moral. The first rule of morality is universality -- this make white supremacy or any other supremacy immoral, and it also makes self-gratification thinking immoral. You ignore the basic principals in your rush to discredit rational morality and enlightened self-interest: have you read the Rouseau? You should also look into The Ethics of Humanism without Religion and Atheist Morality as sources of further information. You may want to acquaint yourself with Deism as well. What this shows is an inability to conceive of rational morality and enlightened self-interest ... you need someone to hold your hand. Your examples are rather pathetic (they fail the test of universality) if not simplistic, as they do nothing to redefine good or bad morality, but just assume that no rules apply. Enlightened self-interest means thinking through the consequences of your actions, applying universality to them - it needs to be equally applicable for anyone to be moral, and it must contribute to improved social and individual life. Learn. Apply rational thought and study. And you have failed to demonstrate that.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

So those that can do this are better than you? Thanks. Because you can think through the consequences.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

good point.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you can be sexually molested and still be fully clothedWoody Allen: "copeth a feel of the royal tomatoes"

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Nor have we gotten to the issue of verbal abuse, while physical abuse almost seems to be endorsed by the bible.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

A "new age philosophy" that predates the supposed birth of jesus? Little confused about "new age" as well as Buddhism it seems. Tell us where does Buddhism say there is no god? There is no evidence that jesus was not just another "philosopher" of a "false religion" and any claims to know otherwise is groundless opinion.Seems people that want special treatment for their faith cannot keep from dissing other religions. When push comes to shove it seems that the most anti-religious people are some christians. This may come as a shock, but it is the overall hatred of the other religions that is telling. Think of someone who says "I'm not racist, I like whites" and displaying hatred of other races.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

(1) Christian ethics are fixed and cannot evolve with the society. More modern concepts like prevention of spousal abuse, verbal abuse are not covered. We can also get into the field of big business treatment of minimum wage workers too. Certainly these would be included in a more humane society. A social system that evolves with the society as it grows can always become more than what it was when it started.(2) It has not been demonstrated that other ethics systems result in any less free OR less humane ethics.QED, twice.enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

One of the curious things about abuse situations is that the people involved often still claim to love each other. Somehow that 'love' doesn't prevent the abuse, though, and it certainly does not prohibit the physical abuse. There are also passages that say when it is okay to stone to death ... rather extreme physical abuse. Then we don't need to gossip, malign, judge, slander or engage in other evils of the tongue when it comes to other systems of religions, ethics, morals, beliefs, knowledge, social structure, any individual behavior, etcetera ...Does it qualify as gossip, slander, evil, judgmental if you think it is the truth? Verbal abuse is not intentionally lies and misrepresentations or even consciously malicious when it is given as the abusers usually think they are pointing out the faults of the other to help them meet a standard.All those different sections need to be brought together and interpreted to specifically apply to these aspects, while the Buddhist admonition "Work in such a way that you do not hurt others" is immediately applicable.Notice that whenever you go from actual specific quote from the bible to an interpreted application of it, what you are really applying is an evolved social convention ethic rather than a specifically christian one. Doing this supports evolved ethics more than specifically christian ones.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Looks like you lost out on the hate generation prediction so far, and have no answer to my other reply to this post?OR is the bible {following \ finding} ethics from other sources? That such ethics can be derived from first principals and the need for ethics to be universal, it is not surprising that different people would come to similar conclusions given the same degree of mental capabilities. A convergent pattern rather than a divergent one ... and wouldn't one expect a divergent one if only one was divinely inspired and the others corrupted, especially by the forces of evil, eh?Here's a question for you: If a man is all alone in the middle of a forest, is he being ethical and moral?
(especially when we already know he's still wrong ... )If it requires social interaction for ethics and morals to apply then it becomes obvious that ethics and morals are social conventions.ps: And yet that is just what some people think the bible is. Curious that, eh?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Sorry, you need proof of that statement, else all you can say is that you believe they are quotes. As noted the 10 commandments are woefully inadequate to cover modern ethical needs (in vitreo fertilization, DNA repair, etc.), there is a definite sexist lean that makes it fail the universality test, to say nothing about the similar problem with the 1st one on the list and people of other faiths.The failure of universality means they just don't work for everyone, and that means they don't work for society. Logic. Universality is one that is critical. See Rousseau's THE SOCIAL CONTRACT
http://www.constitution.org/jjr/socon.htm it will cover the development of morals from a logical philosophic basis Seems you have some data you're not sharing ... or just another opinion. What are the bad moral systems? Convergent means independently arriving at the same point, divergent would mean moving away and not returning. Convergent tendencies correct for occasional divergences in the long term trend. Divergent tendencies would not correct or even actively accelerate differences. The divergent pattern would be predicted if there was only one correct system... the convergent one if it was independently derivable from first principles. All of these judgments are based on your social conventions.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

It is not a war -- there is no opposing army to fight and there is no one enemy. Terrorists are the trolls of international society, criminals that need to be caught by police work and international cooperation. They can be defused by taking away their weapon of fear.We know that the response of Israel to the ongoing terrorism there has been completely ineffectual in stemming the tide of violence, and likewise the much publicized "War on Terror" has done little to the trend of terrorism, in fact it looks like terrorism has increased in the aftermath of the war on Iraq according to the revised report on terrorism.The primary way to deal with terrorists is the same as the primary way to deal with internet trolls: lack of attention. Without publicity there will be no draw for new recruits, the cycle will be broken. Deprived of hands and feet the head will be useless.Clean up, carry on, let the police do their work. Work to spread justice, equality and freedom throughout the world, and take away the recruitment draw of perceived injustice, lost freedoms and equality.Is terrorism a threat to any nation? Not really, for there is no way it can take over a country by force without making itself a target that can be attacked. The only weapon it has is fear.Take away the fear and there is no threat.Anything else feeds the trolls.those are my thoughts

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}