Defining Values - A Moral dilemma.Who should decide what is right and what is wrong?

I would add the following terms to the list on the poster:

• "Afro-American",

• "Gay Americans",

• "Irish American",

• "Chinese American",

• and any other terms that specify a particular group in this country.

We all have our own personal definitions of "morals" and "values", based on what we were taught, not what is right, logical, and best for every person.

Do we have the right to impose our values on others? Absolutely not.

Those who believe we do - Who gave us that right?

There is a fine line between right and wrong, and who should decide on who should decide - where that line is drawn.

By defining ourselves in this manner we set ourselves apart from the average American citizens, and thereby proclaiming ourselves as either lesser than the average American or trying to elevate ourselves as better than the average American citizen.

We are all ''American citizens'' first, our family heritage is secondary to this definition.

By setting ourselves apart from other Americans we open ourselves up to attacks by others, promote dissension, division, and set ourselves up as something "special" in the eyes of others and perhaps giving the impression that we deserve something more than the other "American citizens" do.

Defining "values":

The relative worth, or importance, of anything, from tangible to psychological.
"Value judgments" are individual and cannot be imposed onto others. There are major (and subtle) differences between right and wrong and there must be laws to protect every person from others who do bodily and/or psychological damage to another person (violence toward others).

But morality is personal and cannot be mandated by any religion or government.

Personal, harmless, or victimless, preferences must be respected by others above all else. These are called equal "rights", "civil" rights and/or ''birth'' rights.

The following as an email conversation i was having with a now "former friend" about religion's stance on same sex marriages, who wrote:

Hey, Dave
Finally was able to get on your web site [meaning hub pages].

Very scholarly and you are obviously a student of the issues. I cannot claim the same.

I do have a value system that works for me.I don't find a need to add to the complications we have in today's world.

It is very intriguing to you and that is obvious. It is very complex and lends itself to endless contemplation.

I personally intentionally keep it simple. God , the Ten Commandments, and the values this country was founded on.

As long as we have people we will have dissension.

We have differences with family members, neighbors and the good folks on the other side of the road. At best we can only hope to agree to agree to live and let live. Not likely ! ! !

My final reply was:

Hey. Please do not take offense to this email, or take it personally. This is strictly meant on a generalized basis:
Although i can understand the desire to keep our lives simple, it is, in itself, [religion] undermining the foundation of our country.

Our country was based on diversity, separation of church and state (the main reason for the pilgrims to migrate here was the religious oppression they suffered in their own countries), plus the promise of freedoms that are guaranteed in our very constitution.

And also to escape the rule of tyrannical dictators who are trying to control the lives of all their citizens to reflect their own limited and narrow beliefs. (Whether it is personal, political or religious).

When people join one political party and adhere to their principles at the expense of dismissing all other alternatives, we are backing ourselves up against a wall, in a way that is undermining the very foundations that our country was built on.

By the virtue of merely belonging to any party, does not make their principles absolute, or even more correctly, nor reflective of ALL citizens of this country.

And the majority cannot be trusted to rule when it comes to "equal rights" based on uneducated views and biased values imposed by religion or politics when those who are the oppressors, are themselves corrupted, and limited, by lack of knowledge, education, common sense, or basic logic.

Religion has no place in politics, and politics (government), as well as religion, has no place in our private lives.

The concept of morality is subjective and individualized. Those that will argue otherwise base their views on clumping murder, rape, abuse, etc.., in with their justification for projecting and imposing their own values onto others.

That is never a valid argument, as the differences between crimes against each other, or society itself, are not the same as morality based on personal preferences, or a result of natural attractions by birth.

When the republican party turned its back on the American people in favor of big business they did a great disservice to the American people in general.

So, when i criticize supposed "moral" political posturing by the GOP that is going on today, it does not mean that i am a staunch democratic party member following blindly their entire agendas, nor does it mean i do not believe in laws that protect others from harm, or abuse, by another person, or groups of people.

The point i try to make is to show just how silly each party is in attacking each other strictly to show party loyalty at the expense of those who are independent thinkers, or middle of the road in their political thinking (like me).

Even Christianity was not built on altruistic values. It was a creation of the state of the Roman Empire to take the growing movement of the followers of Jesus (a political rebel who was executed for his stance against the roman government - not his religious beliefs) and adopt its forward direction for its own gain (the control of the people) through the use of an abstract promise of rewards after death, and current control over their lives.

We tend to get lost in the current religious/political infighting and base our opinions on whatever those beliefs might be, instead of what is right and just for all citizens of this country - and even the world.

These are the concepts that i base all of my writings on in my web pages:

Reality, logic, historical content, and common sense that applies to all people, not just to those parties i choose to follow blindly, and our God given equal rights of choice, pursuit of happiness and individuality.

Religion has indeed influenced every facet of our lives over the past 2,000+ years and longer. Both good and bad.
When people become more educated and learn to actually think for themselves they tend to drift away from those ancient superstitious ideas that all religions seems to cling to.

We can blame social problems on lack of religious influence; and conversely put the blame back on that religious influence itself. It depends on who is making that judgment call.

The lack of religious upbringing in itself, has nothing to do with whether a person is 'good' or 'bad', but rather on how they are treated in their formative years.

I have known many avid church goers who say they are 'Christians' and are the chosen few who so berated and mistreated their children that those children grew up to be social piranhas (and pariahs).

I have also known many gay couples who maintained their respective faiths; and those who had no religious affiliations at all, that brought their children up to be successful, happy, healthy, 'normal', and productive citizens.

The point is that one cannot blame inappropriate behaviors on lack of religious teachings.

But one can certainly blame much of those bad behaviors and mental disorders on religious teachings when they imprint negativity on the innocent children at much too early an age for them to understand what is happening to them - ergo, many grow up with unfounded guilt, unfounded fear, and tenuous beliefs of what is right and what is wrong, emotionally bound to superstitious beliefs out of fear of reprisal from wrathful gods if they dare to even question those teachings.
The definition of the "family unit" is certainly changing, but fighting those changes by trying to destroy them serves no purpose at all, except to add to the social unrest.

So, we can only pray that religions will bring themselves into the 21st century and be an asset to those inevitable changes instead of being the cause of that unrest, hatred and intolerance.

by: d.william 11/07/2012