I have nothing against your beliefs, m&b, but your idea of what makes humans different from animals is simply wrong.

What about the gorilla who rescued the baby who fell into her cage, for example? And haven't you seen how dogs have emotions just like ours? Of couse they're much simpler, but they're no less good or bad than we are.

It seems to me that most people (well, maybe not Jeremy) believe that human beings have "spirituality." How come? Probably because of reasons similar to mixandburn's rant. The idea of a morally relativistic society is abhorrent to most of us.

But most of us shy away from defining our spirituality. How come? Is it because we think it sounds goofy?

It kind of leaves us Christians hanging in the wind. We're attempting to define something that is ultimately undefinable, and it's really easy to say it's a crock without offering any alternatives. You may think that spiritual issues can't be defined, so what's the point? But then you can carry on about your "own" version of sprituality without, again, defining it. And somehow this makes it superior. If you believe in some kind of greater truth, please share it with us.

How about this - If there is a human spiritual truth, isn't it universal? Why would you want to keep it secret?

To those that don't believe in spirituality, how do you answer mixandburn?

I for one have already answered how I feel about that. Yes, despite all the competition and apparent separation when you zoom in, there's a universal connection between everyone and everything, and that's what "God" is for me: an inherent "force."

Every religion has a different way of interpreting that - which is why I find the "and you're not" aspect of religion so ludicrous (e.g. you won't share the afterlife with me if you have a different orientation).

Another way of putting this: I don't believe in a creator outside the universe, I believe in a universe that's constantly creating itself. It's an organism that we're all part of, in other words.

And just because I'm not religious and don't believe there's anyone listening when you pray, that doesn't mean I think my viewpoint is superior to anyone else's.

Dorkus, eather you can't read or havn't read any of my posts.

M&B, I don't agree. I think animals do have a consience (especially my dog!). There are many, many examples in which this loyalty and compassion is documented. Remember the elephant that saved the Tsunami survivors, or the turtle that took the baby hippo in?

http://www.rhsager.com/photos/uncategorized/hippo_turtle.jpg

I think what is even more astounding is the utter lack of respect and compassion we have given animals.

As I posted earlier, I completely agree with that (what Fiery says).

What does that really mean, dorkus? We all agree on lots of basic things - it's not cool to kill people, etc. etc. etc. - but ultimately we all make up our own values as we go along. Yes, morals are fluid, they're ultimately individual, and they have to do with the likelihood of getting caught. Look at how many different viewpoints there are among just the Christians on this board!

If you only look at what the words mean, the term "moral relativist" is a description of what we all are - Christian or not, whether or not you or even TLiX admit it. However, the term is loaded in a repulsive, offensive way to mean "anyone who's not Christian is probably immoral. Jesus says 'one way' and that's the only way." That just plain sucks, in fact it's morally reprehensible and has been at the root of countless evil throughout history.

That's why we have a legal system, warts and all: there is no "universal standard" of behavior.

Have you ever heard, say, a Jewish person talk about moral relativists?

In response to M&B: as others have already said, a continuum exists with regard to the mental abilities of animals. A great example is Koko, the gorilla who was taught sign language. She exhibits traits of love, affection, jealousy, desire, happiness--in short, most of the spectrum of emotions that humans feel. Coincidentally, I took sign language classes from a deaf man who got the chance to "talk" to Koko once. He said that it was completely uncanny to be able to converse with an ape, and that her grammar and skill reminded him of a deaf child. Weird!

How many of you have pet dogs which seem to exhibit happiness, shyness, or embarassment? I have a pet parrot, and damned if he doesn't show emotions in his own little way.

Remember the episode of "The Simpsons" where Homer is mistaken for a sasquatch? His captors eventually release him, saying that what they thought was an intelligent beast was really just a below-average human. That's sort of what we're trying to define here: when does a smart beast become an intelligent being? Humans are obviously the latter, and it's my belief that our use of language is what separates us. Incidentally, dogs, parrots, whales, and apes all communicate through what can be called proto-language, but so far no other species has managed to do what we have done with it.

It's our language which makes us special, because it allows us to communicate complex as well as simple concepts to others. With this ability to communicate comes what I believe to be the foundation for replacing religious ethical standards, namely, the ability to recognize all other beings as independent and self-deterministic.

What this means is that because I recognize that other people have their own viewpoints, I know that it is completely unethical for me to force my views on them, or force my desires on them, or for me to limit their ability to live their lives the best way they see fit. That is the foundation of my ethical framework: do unto others as I would have them do unto me. I will not limit the freedoms of others, or infringe on the rights of others, because I would not want my rights limited or revoked.

From this single axiom come many corollaries. Help those in need. Be just. Avoid excess.

I disagree with your claim that a lack of adherence to traditionally religious values causes chaos and self-righteousness. In fact, I would contend that the type of religious belief you support causes self-righteousness, because one who follows those principles did not have to come to any conclusions on their own, and is not taught to respect the soverignty of every individual. Instead, they rely on the inherent "rightness" of their beliefs, and trust that "The Lord will judge."

I find that too fatalistic. In a universe with no intrinsic ethical framework, it's up to us to respect others, help others, and learn about others.

It goes back to nature versus nurture. I believe that we all the capacity and are meant to be sensitive, loving, compassionate human beings.

It would be an interesting experiment to see what would happen if you played "Bambi" to 500 four year olds from all over the world (except maybe Johnnie Rotten's kids, if he has any) and poll the emotional reaction.

My guess is that when Bambi's mother dies, the predominant feeling would be sadness and compassion. I don't believe such a response would necessarily come from how the children were raised, but is innate.

Great post, Audiorigami. You reach the same conclusions I do without getting mad.

"In fact, I would contend that the type of religious belief you support causes self-righteousness, because one who follows those principles did not have to come to any conclusions on their own, and is not taught to respect the soverignty of every individual. Instead, they rely on the inherent "rightness" of their beliefs, and trust that "The Lord will judge."

I believe that you would be hard pressed to find any of the above behavior taught in the New Testament anywhere. Jesus never taught that nor did he display that. That type of behavior never fits into "love the lord your God with all your heart and your Neighbor as yourself." Part of the challenge is that most people never see "true biblical behavior". What most people experience is the wacked extreme and that is too bad.

As you state that they "trust in the RIGHTNESS" of their beleifs" I'd say everyone is guilty of that here on both sides of the discussion. If no one thought they in themsleves were right, there would be no discussion - and what fun is that?

Merry Christmas... I mean have a good day!

just trying to get the discussion over 300!

J