Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Of Moral Equalizers

Commenter Warren Isleib says:

Original religions and ancient wisdoms advocate a peaceful mind, and actions intended to promote the welfare of those around us. A casual observer can see the common philosophies at the root of these beliefs.
Casual observers can see a lot of things, many of which are not actually present, others of which rise to nothing more than trivial truths. By contrast, the aspects of religions that are most compelling to believers and to filthy infidels such as myself are the differences -- the boundaries they insistently draw dividing sacred from profane, good from evil, saved from damned, ours from theirs, and so on.
Anyone with an agenda beyond their God and family is at risk. If I lose focus I will get caught up in self-promoting desires, and eventually make the conscious choice against the greater good.
"The greater good"? Just one sentence before, the focus needed to stay on "God and family," but now you're making demands on behalf of the greater good? One's family is not to be confused with the greater good, and god is no more tantamount with the greater good than is any anthropomorphized animal character from Aesop's fables.
There is no excuse, exception, or escape from our human condition. We have two choices (it is that simple); love of self or of others. Denial of this is merely an attempt to avoid responsibility. Every human makes the same basic choices daily, regardless of nationality or lifestyle. This is the moral equalizer.
Sure, suppose we call that good enough and run with it. On second thought, no, I simply have to sex it up by noting that pretending to follow a god is just another means by which people try to avoid the fundamental, inescapable, moral responsibility of our shared human reality.

No comments: