Perry,
You may have noticed morality has changed in society over the generations. That's why I don't feel it is set in stone. Take slavery - the Bible says it's fine, and for the first 1800 years of Christian history Christians thought it was fine. Do you think slavery is fine? I hope not. Why not? Is it because it can cause suffering? Yes, that's probably why you don't agree with it. The same reason I don't agree with it.
How about the rights of women? They're treated as second class citizens in the Bible, yet today women can hold the same positions as men, vote, etc. Our outlook changed. The words in the Bible didn't. Wouldn't you agree women should have the same rights as men?
And you think this is superior to the Ten Commandments?
Most definitely. Having one god takes away the rights of other cultures to worship how they want. Imagine if you were forced to worship another god. Not nice, is it?
No idols? What about the rights of other religious people who use idols in their worship? A totem pole, a statue of the Virgin Mary, whatever it is, forcing someone to stop is wrong. Not everyone follows your religion. Try to see the big picture. Do some travelling.
Who suffers if I say 'Oh my God!'? It's my right to say that if I like. If you feel you may cry about it, just think about how insignificant it is when you get to live forever and it becomes a distant memory.
Sabbath day? I'm all for taking a break from work, but if everyone did that things would go horribly wrong. How much suffering would there be if hospitals had to close, emergency plumbers couldn't work, police took the day off, nursing home staff left the elderly to fend for themselves, etc? I'm glad most people ignore it.
Honour your father and mother - good advice, as long as they're not trying to make you go through with a forced marriage, abusing you, etc. Even in the good rules there are areas of grey.
Don't murder - that's a good way to stop suffering and keep our species safe. What about if a police officer has to shoot to kill someone who may kill others? That fits in with my morality. Causing the least amount of suffering while keeping in mind our need to survive... Where does it fit in with the rule 'Don't murder'? It doesn't. There's more at work in your brain when you consider situations like this than what you read in the book.
Adultery - I agree with this one to an extent. If both partners want to be in a swinging relationship, that hurts no one. However, it can cause suffering if one of the couple don't know about it or if children are involved.
Don't steal - sure, good advice for the most part. How about if a father has to steal a loaf of bread to feed his starving family? That's allowed by my morality. Is it allowed by the rule 'Thou shalt not steal'?
Lying - I see nothing wrong with white lies. 'Do I look fat in this?' Try to be honest when faced with that question! We don't like to hurt people's feelings. Lies that can cause suffering are less acceptable. 'Your car engine needs three extra parts costing $2000' is a horrible thing to say if the engine is fine.
Don't covet what others have - If you steal it, that's bad. But simply wanting something someone else has? Well, that's how trade was born! You covet everytime you go shopping!
That's one version of the 10 commandments. Another version says not to cook a goat in its mother's milk. I'm sure I could think of much better rules than that jewel!
How do you determine if your species is threatened? Is it from scientists like Dawkins that determine this for you by fighting for the supression of certain thoughts and words like design? Surely he feels that words like "designer" threatens our species in the long run. But how does he know this? Where does he get this knowledge?
Mostly I know because it's common sense.
Teaching children to ignore facts is harmful to our species. Understanding evolution has allowed us to develop cures. As bacteria evolve to overcome antibiotics, we have to develop new antibiotics to combat the bacteria. That's just one example. The knowledge comes from evidence.
If politicians said something was a threat, I'd look at the evidence for their assessment. Based on that evidence, I could decide for myself whether I agreed or not.
how would you determine if you were causing suffering to others? Illegal drug dealers view themselves as providing pleasure to their customers. Their customers equally view the drugs they push into their veins as a source of pleasure. No suffering there as far as they are concerned.
I could see how they react or I could consider how I would feel in their shoes. If I understand I'd feel suffering, then it's likely they do too.
I would say drug dealers are more concerned about the money they get, but regardless, using drugs can lead to suffering. They can damage the body, even if there are short term benefits of pleasure. Some drugs relieve suffering with minimal effects to the welfare of the body - e.g. paracetemol.
What about just walking by someone in need and letting them die when you could help? I mean there is no species wide crisis here. And, you certainly would not be "causing" suffering. I guess it would not be your problem eh?
Imagine if everyone had that attitude. Suffering would be widespread! I'm a cog in the machine and most of us do our part to ease suffering in our little corner of the world. Imagine if every ant in the nest decided to stop working!
Also, I would suffer personally with guilt if I did leave someone in need, so I'd be helping ease my own suffering.
Hope that helps.
