Thieving Magpie

This is in reply to Admice, and wildernesse...

Let me clarify: I don't have ethics in the way that I recognize some things as being inherently 'good' or 'bad.' Some things are 'advantageous' and 'disadvantageous' but I do not think something like 'stealing' is good or bad. However (and here is where I do have what some may consider ethics, so I do agree with you somewhat Admice) in a society such as ours it is advantageous to us if everyone does not steal. It is for this reason that I do not steal - it is not because I think it is bad, rather, it is because I think that progress within our society would be stalled if everyone just stole from one another. I don't see such a state of affairs as being desirous, but it certainly is not 'bad' or 'evil.'

I ought to reiterate that I am not a Christian, and do not believe in, or relate to any organized religion that I have yet encountered. As such, it is important not to presume that being religious would make me more ethical, because though I may act according to rules I have set for myself, I do not feel bound to them for any 'higher' reason such as Yahweh, the Bible, et cetera.

An example of a religion that did not require 'ethics' per se is that of the ancient Egyptians. They believed in a god named 'Ma'at' and according to their 'ethics' was that if you felt bad after doing something (read: if your conscience causes a ruckus) then what you did was in fact, bad. Now, I don't believe in the principle of Ma'at, but it is an example of relative ethics which is what I believe in.

As for snap judgements, I should say that some are better suited at making them than others, but that does in no way make them altogether inaccurate. I personally abhor groups that promote ideologies such as that purported by the AEU, and due to my experience with other groups of it's nature I feel I can justly dismiss it. In a practical sense, I must make a judgement on the AEU if I hope to answer Admice's question, and I ought to make it as soon as I believe I can. This does not mean that I have to read every little thing on the website and e-mail it's members for more information. Rather, I must use what knowledge I already have of organizations that present themselves as the AEU does and through the magical powers of association, realize that the AEU is not only a waste of my time, but everyone else's who bothers to drag themselves through it's trifling wasteland of an ideology.

Radorth

From your cite:

And the Christian missionaries so generously supported by the Christian middle class have been doing what exactly, and for how many years?

Glad to see the skeptics are doing something similar. Who knows? Maybe Atheists United will build a private hospital one day.

Rad

admice

Magpie, I, also, don't believe in 'good' and 'bad'. Took issue with that, too (and a couple other things). Though am learning more and more about how non-relative humans morals can be. It's fascinating. Would be interested to know why you 'abhor' such ideological groups.

Rad-thank you for your posts. Just this morning I was thinking how much negativity there is here and at other 'secular' sites toward 'organized religion'. Though I realize many people are justifiably angry at having been victimized in such groups, for people who espouse critical thinking, they are being selective in overlooking the long history and massive social reforms and activism done by religions. Religions HAVE HELPED the world, too, unquestionably. I would REALLY like to see more cooperation between secular and religious groups (while still thoroughly maintaining separation of church and state. I want my freedom to be an atheist protected!).

Thanks Rad and Wild (what a group) for pointing out what concrete action theye taken. I hadn't found that on the site and was like Magpie in that sometimes there's too much ideology (by many) and not enough action.

(btw, thought most here knew, I'm a (somewhat cynical) Secular Humanist by philosophy.)

Thanks to all again for posting.

admice

btw-if you find out about a secular organization that isn't too ideological or too angry, that does do social service, lemme know.

Thanks,
Admice

Thieving Magpie

I agree with you whole-heartedly on the 'idea' that human 'morals' are fairly non-relative. As I mentioned earlier, I find things 'advantageous' or 'disadvantageous.' I am a person. Other people generally share my goals, or some variation thereof so I do not expect people to have radically different 'moral' systems than I do (all told I'm very socially conservative).

...Keep in mind here that I do not actually describe what I mean by 'radically different' or 'socially conservative'...

My point is, people are people, and as such, we all share certain characteristics which are inherent to our species specifically, as well as to living beings generally. What these characteristics are exactly is a matter for debate, and, eventually, science - however, I think it is safe to point out that people are more prone to adaptation according to circumstances, than to create and adhere to some strict standard (no matter how nobly concieved it may seem) such as that found in Christianity. In fact, the sheer diversity of the modern day Church is an example of this, I believe. But I digress..

Why do I abhor such ideological groups? I don't trust absolutists. Anyone who says they know the truth, or have some semblance of it in their possession are suspect. That does not mean that they are wrong, necessarily, though - they are just common enough to fill me with a small level of contempt for those who try to sell their 'wisdom' as opposed to those who just let others find it for themselves. I am not implying that there is different truth for everyone, but those who spread good works without effort to do so are much better than the alternative, I believe. I hope that made some sense to those interested.

Mad Kally

This is an excellent non-religious charitable organization. The only difference with this one is that they don't try to convert people to Christianity (or any other religion)

http://www.childreach.org It's been around since the 1930's.

Shake

Thanks, Kally! That looks like a real good organization. I'll check it out further when I'm not at work!

admice

Thanks Kally, looks pretty good at 1st glance. On another thread someone came up with the idea for starting (if there isn't one already) a secular chaitable organization, known specifically as atheistic or secular. I think it's agreat idea. We need to give atheism a good name and not just known for CSS issues. Anyone here know of one/some? I'll check out what the AEU is doing thanks to Wildernesse's help.

admice

Amos

It must be a sad when you feel guilty for human suffering and have no place to send your money.

Kally are you OK?