Hey Not_Now.Soon,

It must've been well over a year now I watched the first part of that video.
Your comments on it remind me it did get kind-of heavy going.
The type of stuff you need to be in the right mood to take it all in.

I remember there was a few times where I questioned his line of thought and wasn't entirely sure where he was going with it.

Some people think that 'ethics' and 'good morals' etc only comes from scripture.
For me I think for every religious based ethic, there's a non-religious counterpart.
For example:

'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
That's the religious version, yet there's nothing about God or sin in there.
The non-religious counterpart to that statement is 'Treat others how you'd like to be treated'

"He who is without sin shall cast the first stone"
That's the religious version,
"People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"
That's the non-religious counterpart.

So you see being a good person isn't necessarily reliant on religion.
You don't need to be a Christian to learn the same ethics and to be a good person.
(Though the Christians themselves would disagree)
The counter argument to that statement is that plenty of people claiming to be Christian aren't necessarily good people.
(Though they would consider themselves so)

There's other non-religious things too;

'Everybody has the right to live however they choose so long as it doesn't affect others in an adverse manner.'

That's my version of JS Mills 'Harm principle'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_principle

I could now argue it's ethically wrong for Muslims to throw homosexuals off the top of buildings.
That doesn't necessarily mean I support gays or the imposition of their views onto the rest of us, but I know murdering them is wrong.

I don't know what the difference between morals and ethics are, and maybe there is no technical difference, but for me 'morals' are like 'guidelines for conduct and behavior' where 'ethics' are more like 'rules for conduct and behaviour'.

[Cont.]
Someone might argue they treated someone 'fairly'.
But they might mistaken 'fairly' for 'decently'.
They've got morals.

But 'Fairness' actually means 'What you do for one you do for the other'
Ethics is rules.

"However as of now the concern is that the author's preference that there is no God, that the rationalizations of God are delusions or something else as well, might just be another "middle truth" something that isn't true but instead is a logical perspective that harms the approach as a whole for finding an ethical standard on observations and experience."

Your argument is valid, and holds merit.
As previously mentioned to runner, my official position is 'I don't know'.
I'm not going to say God exists and I'm not going to say God doesn't exist.

On the whole though, the 'bigger picture',
I feel like on some level it would be a good thing to have a good look at the religions;
However I do feel that there might be some danger in doing so.
It might be like opening Pandora's box.

I had another comment which I wrote yesterday with a heap of links which followed on from the few links on religions I posted previously but I accidentally deleted it.

If anyone is following my comments and links and wants me to write them out and post them again I will.

Israeli and US Neoconservative foreign policy;
Zionist Plan for the Middle East
A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.
Modern War on Terror Started in 1979 at Jerusalem Conference.
Wesley Clark '7 wars in 5 years'

Links to Kabbalah within Freemasonry (and Hollywood);
'Albert Pikes 3 World Wars'

Clash of religions:

* I'm not sure if the person Muslims call 'Dajjal' is the same person Jews call 'Moshiach'.

Global Geopolitics
How do religious ideology play into modern geopolitics?
Is UN 2030 agendas and One World Government ideology in any way aligned with other religious views of ruling over mankind?

To Armchair Critic.

I don't know where I conveyed that a person can't have ethics unless they are religous, or unless they are Christian. However, secularism isn't a philosophy any more then atheism or agnostic is an active philosophy. They describe an absence of belief in God or at least that they are unsure about God, gods, or other wise spiritual things.

There are many forms of ethics, and morals that don't have a view on God, nor are attributed as coming from God. I think Confucianism is a secular type of ethics (though I could be wrong). With that in mind when I asked for what are secular ethics, I'm not asking if they can exist, but more so about what they are. The book you referenced about universal ethics seems to be on the line of developing and testing one's own ethics, more then it is about an active standard of ethics. It however does have a strong sense of rejecting religions, and counting that rejection as a default position to go off of from.

My views on God and religion isn't just about ethics. And I think finding God is important for reasons outside of ethical grounding, as well as to help a person strive with good ethical values.

I hope this clears up the position I'm presenting. Basically, I would say any standard to measure the other ethical standards and world views would also be the ones investigated to see the aspirations, beliefs, and dangers that lie within them. This would include secular models as well, so long as they are actually identified.

There may well be secular ethics, but what is missing is a serious incentive to follow them... unless of course one is religious without recognising it.

Hey Not_Now.Soon,
"I don't know where I conveyed that a person can't have ethics unless they are religous, or unless they are Christian."

Sometimes I generalise regards the feeling I'm getting from all forum members combined when I'm on a rant and forget that I'm addressing my reply to a single forum member rather than the entire group.
- Sorry If I said or implied that incorrectly.

I don't know how many are still following this thread;
Or if anyone has actually looked at my links...

But if you had, now I've got a real doozy for you all.

WW3, Iran, & the Two Moshiachs w/ Christopher Jon Bjerknes
http://youtu.be/HtOmWImPcDM

This is a fairly informative video;
But more importantly I want you to compare what Sheikh Imran Hosein said in the 'Beyond September 11' video I posted earlier with what is said in this video with the link above.

The question you want to ask yourself is if there's any correlation between what the Muslims say and what these guys said.

Ethics is just one small piece of making the world a better place.
If you want some kind of explanation as to why everything in the world is turning upside down and is drastically needing of ethics in the first place, then watch or look up all the links I've shown, especially the last one.

I implore you not to believe me.
You have to instead want to look up and find out for yourselves.

- You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink -

And remember everyone I'm an agnostic, I've got no dog in this fight.
I'm just trying to figure out where the 'believers' might be taking us.

Hey Yuyutsu,
I've heard you speak about your beliefs before but I'm not sure what religion it is?
Feel free to give us a rundown, and why it works for you.

To ArmChair Critic.

This might be a new idea or an old one you've come in contact with. But for me, my perspective on Christianity is more then a foothold for ethics. It is for finding God. With Jesus saying He is the way, and no one can come to the Father (to God) except through Jesus, then that is a very important aspect of Christianity. One of the most important aspects of Christianity. Because God is worth finding and we all need Him (for at least a few reasons that I can see).

There are two reasons that I think are commonly addressed when Christianity is approached, sometimes they are addressed by nonbelievers first, because these two reasons are what they stand against. One reason is that Christianity promises an afterlife, and that if you're not saved and believe in Jesus, then you aren't going to heaven, but instead are going to hell. The other reason I see brought up is that without God we can't be moral. It's worth stressing that these are two commonly addressed and argued points for and against Christianity, but they are not the only reasons to search for God. There have been several conversations I've tried online about Christian subjects, that instead get routed to one of these two points to argue against from an atheist, or a nonbeliever of some other kind (usually is a self proclaimed atheist). With this in mind I would stress that in any investigation of religion, there needs to be a presence in the investigation that comes from a that religion. For Christianity a Christian should be the starting standard to investigate the faith from to remind them what is important in that Christian's journey of faith. It's a starting place and a reminder along the way of the invesitigation.

(Continued)