Ethical Culture

Comment

Comment by The Nerd on December 27, 2011 at 8:44am

A reminder that Ethical Societies are classified as religious organizations and, as such, are not allowed to do "politics from the pulpit".  While members of any political party are welcome, none may be endorsed by leadership.

Comment by Steph S. on December 9, 2011 at 10:24am

Moral without god.

Comment by Steph S. on December 8, 2011 at 6:02pm

Thanks for that article link.

Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on November 16, 2011 at 9:09am

   
Distrust Feeds Anti-Atheist Prejudice - Miller-McCune
Research finds atheists are widely perceived as untrustworthy, which may be a factor in why they're disliked more than other minorities.

http://www.miller-mccune.com/.../distrust-powers-anti-atheist-preju...

"People use cues of religiosity as a signal for trustworthiness," the researchers write in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Given that “trustworthiness is the most valued trait in other people,” this mental equation engenders a decidedly negative attitude toward nonbelievers.

There is no actual evidence backing up the assumption that atheism somehow leads to a decline in morality. In a 2009 study, sociologist Phil Zuckerman argued that "a strong case could be made that atheists and secular people actually possess a stronger or more ethical sense of social justice than their religious peers," adding that they, on average, have "lower levels of prejudice, ethnocentrism, racism and homophobia" than the much larger population of believers.

Comment by Ken Karp on September 24, 2011 at 6:35am

Live in or near northern New Jersey?

Come hear Dave Silverman speak about American Atheists' assertive (can you say, "in your face"?) advertising campaign that uses phrases like "You Know It's a Myth" in reference to belief in a god. You can also ask him about his organization's WTC cross lawsuit.

Talk about controversy!

Comment by James Smith on July 27, 2011 at 12:04pm

Interesting that you were also a vegetarian.  I did try it for quite some time but didn't do well.  Then I learned that the human digestive system is more like that of a pig (omnivores) than that of apes.  Apes are not strict vegetarians either, but are not well-equipped to catch and kill other animals.  I did conclude that most people eat far more meat than our bodies were evolved to do.

 

Yes, I agree that cruelty demeans us.  A Robert A. Heinlein quote I like rather well is, "There is only one true sin, hurting someone else unnecessarily.  Everything else is invented nonsense."  That can easily be extended to all living things, I think.

 

Yes, bringing out the best in oneself is certainly enlightened self-interest.  When you consider how it also helps others to do the same, how can it be wrong?

Comment by James Smith on July 27, 2011 at 11:34am

You pose a good question.  I have to admit I have not personally thought about it to other species.   I am opposed to being callous to suffering of anything.  While not a vegetarian by any means, I do appose animal testing, am for the humane treatment of all creatures. 

 

I cannot understand people who abandoned any animal, pet or otherwise that has come to depend upon humans for care and shelter. 

 

Mostly, I feel that, when you do what is truly best for yourself, mentally, physically, and socially, you will also do what is best for others.  Being kind and honest with others is ultimately best for yourself.  I doubt that any of us have a spotless record in that ideal, but it is certainly a goal for all of us.

Comment by James Smith on July 27, 2011 at 9:20am

Here is my take on ethics and religion.  From my blog at:  http://slrman.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/ethics/

Enlightened Self-Interest

A popular theist argument for religion is “Without religion (god) we would have no morality or ethics.”  So without religion can there be morality?  Morality based upon fear of punishment or seeking rewards isn't really morality at all.  Perhaps what they are saying is that they would be evil without fear of hell.  Then they project that lack of moral courage upon everyone else.  I say to them, “Don’t judge others by yourself.  Your lack of ethical backbone is not universal." 

True moral behavior is based upon simple self-interest.  The guiding ethic is to truly act in your own best interest.  That would mean treating all people fairly, honestly and, as it says in the Hippocratic Oath, “Cause no harm.”  Religions invent all other “sins” to increase their control over people.

People can practice what I term enlightened self-interest.  An individual’s self-interest is best served by doing no harm to others except in defense of themselves or those in their care.  This thinking does not need threats of eternal punishment to follow, It only requires thinking about what will ultimately yield the best results for yourself.  Treating others fairly and generously is always better for yourself, personally, financially, and socially.   Those that co-operate and adapt have always been more successful.  

For example, robbing a bank may yield temporary wealth, but at the expense of either a prison term or a life of fear, running from the law.  Similarly, cheating others in business dealings may increase profits for a time.  Eventually, your reputation will be so poor that your business may fail.  This is a simple principle that, “It’s always cheaper to make a customer happy than it is to make him angry.”  This same idea can pay dividends in ordinary human relations.  For reasons I don’t understand, few businesses or people appreciate this idea.  Maybe it’s because they operate on deist principles?  Everything is forgiven if you repent before you die. Although that wouldn’t seem to help those you cheated, treated badly, or even murdered.

So should nothing be discouraged?  Should everything be permitted?  Capable, informed individuals could engage in any activity that interests them even if it puts them personally at risk. 

An example would be an automobile race.  It is certainly dangerous to drive at racing speeds and it is equally dangerous to stand near the race course to observe or record this event.  Two people may choose to do these things if they understand and accept the risks involved. 

One question that arises from this would be, what if one or both of these people have a spouse and children that depend upon them for financial and emotional support?  Should they still do this knowing that if they are injured or killed it will cause some degree of harm to these dependents?  If they choose to do so, does anyone else have the right to prevent them? 

Those are ethical questions that can and should be debated, but each person must be free to choose his own answer.  No other person, religion, or government should have the right to make these choices for us.  If you are keeping in mind that humans are often in error and thus prepared for all possible consequences, no matter how remote the possibility, you can do what you think best.

Comment by Allena Weber on July 27, 2011 at 9:02am

I am as moral and good as any christian-anyone who thinks morality comes from comes from God is mistaken.It makes sense to behave in a ethical way.

Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on April 22, 2011 at 10:29am

DO YOU HAVE CHILDREN?
Do you want to send them to summer camp without God?
Check out Camp Inquiry
http://campinquiry.org/
OR
Camp Quest
http://www.campquest.org/

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 6
• Next ›
• Page