To All God's Children,
-->My beliefs are moderate for a reason. I’m in the middle on many issues such as abortion. It’s unfortunate when a baby dies, but we have to think about when and in what situation it happens. Perhaps a mother was too young and reckless and could not offer the baby a good life. Perhaps it’s a woman whose very life depends on having the child and to abort her baby is the only way to live. If she found this out after she was already pregnant can you really blame her?
Abortion is a dichotomy to many pro-life versus pro-choice. However, there are too many conditions that result in a person to change their mind on an issue. Having strong believes in either brings nothing but death to the baby or death to the mother in extreme cases. Regardless, I believe that the government and other people should stay out of the rights of another person to choose what they want to do with their body and their child. I would rather die than to see my baby aborted, but that's my will and that may not be the will for someone else.
Showing posts with label morals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label morals. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Where to Draw the Line
To All God's Children,
--> -->My beliefs are similar to the Taoists also that the forces of evil and good are conflicting. To this end, they conflict so prevalently that it’s difficult to separate the two. Like Spinoza's monism, there is no separation between the sacred and secular. And contrary to what many believe I don’t think there’s a separation between what we perceive as male or female.
There are too many exceptions to the rules or “on conditions” for there to be a distinct dichotomy between these concepts. To have good we must have evil because in order to define an act as evil you must have a good act of which to relate. But does either one exist? What’s seen as good for one person may be evil for another. This means that what is evil is relative to the perceiver. There is no good or evil just the choices we make from our limited free will.
However, our choices are influenced by our lifestyle and where and who we were born to and as. So once we are let loose into the world we have a limited amount of freedom influenced by our experiences. In many ways we are trapped, so an “evil man” may have just been born with an anti-social personality developed in a bad neighborhood or abusive family. Is he really evil, or is it just circumstance?
Just to make it very clear, this is an argument against what is considered evil, not whether a criminal should be punished for his crimes or not. I believe that a person who has done wrong by another should be held accountable and held from doing the act to another.
--> -->My beliefs are similar to the Taoists also that the forces of evil and good are conflicting. To this end, they conflict so prevalently that it’s difficult to separate the two. Like Spinoza's monism, there is no separation between the sacred and secular. And contrary to what many believe I don’t think there’s a separation between what we perceive as male or female.
There are too many exceptions to the rules or “on conditions” for there to be a distinct dichotomy between these concepts. To have good we must have evil because in order to define an act as evil you must have a good act of which to relate. But does either one exist? What’s seen as good for one person may be evil for another. This means that what is evil is relative to the perceiver. There is no good or evil just the choices we make from our limited free will.
However, our choices are influenced by our lifestyle and where and who we were born to and as. So once we are let loose into the world we have a limited amount of freedom influenced by our experiences. In many ways we are trapped, so an “evil man” may have just been born with an anti-social personality developed in a bad neighborhood or abusive family. Is he really evil, or is it just circumstance?
Just to make it very clear, this is an argument against what is considered evil, not whether a criminal should be punished for his crimes or not. I believe that a person who has done wrong by another should be held accountable and held from doing the act to another.
Freedom within Limit
To All God's Children,
-->Freedom within Limit: Free will – do we have it? The philosophical debate in psychology is that we have the opposite of free will called “determinism”. When people are told that they have no free will then they tend to abide by fewer morals. Isn’t it their will that allows them to act immorally? On the other hand, it may be my will to fly, but I am limited by my physical state. I believe there is freedom within limit. Individuals born with full consciousness, or the capacity to make their own decisions, possess free will. Those with partial or no consciousness (e.g. mentally handicapped or people resting in a vegetative state) have no or very little free will. Free will is relative to our consciousness.
-->Freedom within Limit: Free will – do we have it? The philosophical debate in psychology is that we have the opposite of free will called “determinism”. When people are told that they have no free will then they tend to abide by fewer morals. Isn’t it their will that allows them to act immorally? On the other hand, it may be my will to fly, but I am limited by my physical state. I believe there is freedom within limit. Individuals born with full consciousness, or the capacity to make their own decisions, possess free will. Those with partial or no consciousness (e.g. mentally handicapped or people resting in a vegetative state) have no or very little free will. Free will is relative to our consciousness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)