Pardon me for indenting. 'You people' on both sides of this discussion need to grab a Webster's and look up the word moral. My book doesn't mention religion anywhere in the lengthy definition, nor is secular in the definition.
"Principles of right and wrong in behaviors, actions. Ethical. Expressing conceptions of right behaviors. Capable of right and wrong actions.
Nobody, no collection of bodies (government), no being can make decisions without at least a lightning quick snapshot of what is right or wrong and that requires having his or her own moral framework, unless of course that person incapable of forming a moral framework, which is to say, retarded, or developmentally delayed.
So, an immoral person acts without regard to right or wrong and an amoral person has no concept of right or wrong. You don't have to be Southern Baptist to be moral or even Baptist or even a Christian or even, in fact, have ever heard of any religion.
And Ray, I don't want to hear some fundamentalist, Bible thumping, Evangelical diatribe.
I don't see where religion was really a focal point in this discussion other than Whatever saying her religious beliefs guided her sense of morality - which is at is should be.
Do, you understand what a Fundamentalist really is? Do you have a clue what Evangelical means?
I think I do, but I'm sure you'll find a need to correct me. I know what a preachy zealot is and I know many people who hold with a strict, literal interpretation of The Bible (once they define which Bible they are interpreting). But at the end of the day, if you're one, you're the other as well. Perhaps you should have a thread on the subject if you feel we need to enroll in religion 202.
Much to your dismay, one need not be either a fundamentalist or an evangelical to be a moral person, and, as I have already said, I believe one need not even have a religion to have morals. And it is quite true that there are thousands of so called evangelicals and as many fundamentalists who are as immoral as "Hell" itself. Maybe a Jimmy Swaggart thread would be interesting. Or Jim Baaker. Those should cover the waterfront.
My dismay?? Don, reread my post 27. To save you the effort here it is: "There are moral and immoral people throughout the political spectrum." In other words, I am saying neither the right nor the left nor the center has a stranglehold on morality.
I did not bring religion into the discussion, so I don't quite understand your diatribe and your personal insults.
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 11-10-04 AT 01:12PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Don: Hear, hear! (Or is is "here, here"? I sure wish someone would clear that up for me.) Anyway, what I mean is that I agree. Maybe there's hope for world peace after all! x:-)
Ray, this is not a facetious request: I really would like to know the meaning of fundamentalist and/or evangelical. I'm trying to learn stuff, and I'm finding that this Forum is a great place to gather a wide variey of perspectives.
(Edit: It might not be obvious from the sequence, but this is meant as a response to 28 and 29.)
Comments
"Principles of right and wrong in behaviors, actions. Ethical. Expressing conceptions of right behaviors. Capable of right and wrong actions.
Nobody, no collection of bodies (government), no being can make decisions without at least a lightning quick snapshot of what is right or wrong and that requires having his or her own moral framework, unless of course that person incapable of forming a moral framework, which is to say, retarded, or developmentally delayed.
So, an immoral person acts without regard to right or wrong and an amoral person has no concept of right or wrong. You don't have to be Southern Baptist to be moral or even Baptist or even a Christian or even, in fact, have ever heard of any religion.
And Ray, I don't want to hear some fundamentalist, Bible thumping, Evangelical diatribe.
Do, you understand what a Fundamentalist really is? Do you have a clue what Evangelical means?
Much to your dismay, one need not be either a fundamentalist or an evangelical to be a moral person, and, as I have already said, I believe one need not even have a religion to have morals. And it is quite true that there are thousands of so called evangelicals and as many fundamentalists who are as immoral as "Hell" itself. Maybe a Jimmy Swaggart thread would be interesting. Or Jim Baaker. Those should cover the waterfront.
I did not bring religion into the discussion, so I don't quite understand your diatribe and your personal insults.
Ray, this is not a facetious request: I really would like to know the meaning of fundamentalist and/or evangelical. I'm trying to learn stuff, and I'm finding that this Forum is a great place to gather a wide variey of perspectives.
(Edit: It might not be obvious from the sequence, but this is meant as a response to 28 and 29.)