Freethought & Rationalism Archive

crazyfingers · 02-23-2002, 07:13 AM

This is a letter to the editor that I plan to send to the Boston Globe. I've put it here because of the moral issues discussed.

Any comments or corrections before I send it?

Quote:

It’s unfortunate, during his visit to China, to see Mr. Bush once again demonstrate his own bigotry regarding faith. Bush said, “faith points to a moral law ... and calls us to duties higher than material gain” “...faith gives us a moral core and teaches us to hold ourselves to high standards, to love and serve others, and to live responsible lives,''

Bush implies that religion and faith in a deity necessarily direct someone toward moral behavior. However, it should be clear from human history that Faith/religion and moral behavior are independent of one another.

Those who have no faith or religion are just as likely to act with good morals as anyone else is. Alternatively, the faithful are just as likely to act immorally. Indeed, when one believes that god is on one’s side, one can rationalize any immoral act.

It is the values that we are taught, regardless of whether they are based in religion or not, that lead to moral behavior. It’s unfortunate that Mr. Bush too often misunderstands this fact.

Also interesting is the quotation attributed to President Jiang, which the Boston Globe improperly attributed to the New Testament: Do “not do unto others what you would not like others to do unto you.''. While it does appear in the New Testament, Confucius, an atheist, said it 500 years before Jesus. Analects 15.23 "Tsekung asked, Is there one word that can serve as a principal of conduct for life? Confucius replied, It is the word shu -- reciprocity: Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you."

The Golden Rule, perhaps the best human expression of moral living, has nothing to do with faith.

Thanks to Pantera for the item on Confusius.

This is the story that prompted the letter.
<a href="http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/053/nation/Bush_encourages_Chinese_to_pursue_religious_freedo m+.shtml" target="_blank">Bush encourages Chinese to pursue religious freedom</a>

Darwin's Finch · 02-23-2002, 08:11 AM

Nice work, crazyfingers! I wouldn't change a thing. Let us know how this plays out.

I'm not that familiar with the Globe and its editorial bias. Do they have a track record of printing letters such as yours? Boston has never struck me (from afar, I admit) as a nest of conservatism or fundamentalism. Perhaps I'm wrong?

crazyfingers · 02-23-2002, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darwin's Finch:
<strong>Nice work, crazyfingers! I wouldn't change a thing. Let us know how this plays out.

I'm not that familiar with the Globe and its editorial bias. Do they have a track record of printing letters such as yours? Boston has never struck me (from afar, I admit) as a nest of conservatism or fundamentalism. Perhaps I'm wrong?</strong>

Thanks DF,

The Globe is very liberal. I'm sure they will run it.

I just want to be sure there are no errors.

E_muse · 02-23-2002, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Do �not do unto others what you would not like others to do unto you.''.

The confucius quote appears in the negative, 'do not do unto others...' whereas Jesus' command appears in the positive and appears more proactive.

Quote:

[/b]All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the Law and the Prophets.[/b]

It is the epitomy of the command, "Love thy neighbour as thyself".

However, Jesus went further to say that we should love one another, including our enemies - and that we should do good to those who harm us.

As far as I'm aware, the earliest recorded example of this is found within Hindu writing (3200 BC, From the Hitopadesa) - but still finds its roots in theism.

crazyfingers · 02-23-2002, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by E_muse:
As far as I'm aware, the earliest recorded example of this is found within Hindu writing (3200 BC, From the Hitopadesa) - but still finds its roots in theism.

Is this correct?

manhattan · 02-23-2002, 01:13 PM

I think you've gone about it the wrong way. As his intro the the faith spiel, he made it (semi) clear that faith is not necessary to have a moral grounding. Specifically, <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/20020222.html" target="_blank">he said</a>:

Quote:

People take responsibility for helping others, without being told, motivated by their good hearts and often by their faith.

(emphasis added, of course).

Then, he said that "faith leads us, blah blah blah..."

I think a better tack for the letter would be something along the lines of 'faith, alone, can lead us to good or evil, and it's important to remember that. It's what is in a person's heart, faith or no, that counts.'

Just my USD 0.02

Bill Snedden · 02-23-2002, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crazyfingers:
<strong>Is this correct?</strong>

It is correct that the "rule" appears in Hindu writings. It is incorrect to say that it has its "roots" in theism.

The so-called "golden rule" is a part of nearly every philosophy and religion devised by man. Some of these philosophies are non-theistic (Buddhism, Taoism, etc.).

Regards,

Bill Snedden

E_muse · 02-23-2002, 05:40 PM

Quote:

The so-called "golden rule" is a part of nearly every philosophy and religion devised by man. Some of these philosophies are non-theistic (Buddhism, Taoism, etc.).

This is certainly true, but the earliest account of the rule which I have come across dates around 3000 bc and is found in Hindu writings.

Obviously, repetitions of the rule which came later could have been inspired by the previous mention of it.

abe smith · 02-25-2002, 07:55 AM

Rabbi Hillel's version: a parishioner asked him to sum up the Law while standing on one foot. Hillel said "What you do not want done to yourself do not do to another." All the rest is commentary. Now go & study Torah."

Boshko · 02-26-2002, 08:27 PM

I wouldn't assert that Confucious was an atheist, first off its hard to tell what Confucious thought and what others attributed to him and there's definite references to the supernatural in the Analects (tian which is usually translated as heaven for instance).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-23-2002, 08:11 AM	#2
Darwin's Finch Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Gardnerville, NV Posts: 666	Nice work, crazyfingers! I wouldn't change a thing. Let us know how this plays out. I'm not that familiar with the Globe and its editorial bias. Do they have a track record of printing letters such as yours? Boston has never struck me (from afar, I admit) as a nest of conservatism or fundamentalism. Perhaps I'm wrong?

02-25-2002, 07:55 AM	#9
abe smith Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: springfield, MA. USA Posts: 2,482	Rabbi Hillel's version: a parishioner asked him to sum up the Law while standing on one foot. Hillel said "What you do not want done to yourself do not do to another." All the rest is commentary. Now go & study Torah."

02-26-2002, 08:27 PM	#10
Boshko Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Wesleyan University Posts: 361	I wouldn't assert that Confucious was an atheist, first off its hard to tell what Confucious thought and what others attributed to him and there's definite references to the supernatural in the Analects (tian which is usually translated as heaven for instance).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.